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.
TheNewBlood wrote: Tau have always been a powerful army on the tabletop. With the release of their new codex, they are most definitely a top-tier army, even with some tournament groups nerfing their Combined Firepower rule.
Except during 5th edition where they were entirely skipped over like most of the non-Imperial armies were that edition.
TheNewBlood wrote: Tau have always been a powerful army on the tabletop.
They really haven't been, though, and I don't know why people keep saying that. Tau have always been complained about because of their annoying "tricks" like JSJ (which Eldar have always been able to do as well, and better), things like that which are admittedly annoying or not fun to play against, and other stupid things like S5 proliferation (because that's somehow worse than the masses of S6 firepower and super Rending Eldar have), but they've never really been that good on the table, usually a middling army if anything. There was a time during 4th edition where they were doing okay because of the infamous "Fish of Fury", but as soon as that got fixed with the changes to the core rules in 5th edition they were kinda meh, and kept getting worse as new armies got released. Being able to spam split-firing broadsides with S10 railguns and dual missile pod crisis suits in 5th was the crutch that kept them relevant in the vehicle-dependent meta but they were never really a top tier army. You could do well if you knew what you were doing with them, but if you didn't you were fethed, and making a single mistake even at deployment could cost you a game.
It really was just the 6th edition update, and now the new codex, that vaulted them up to the top. Now Tau are overpowering, but it's mostly just the new stuff and formations that have pushed them over the edge, so a clear case of GW making stellar rules to push sales of certain kits (but not the flyers, for some reason). Now if you want to talk about an army that almost literally has been top tier for every single edition of the game since the first, then look no further than Eldar. The only time Eldar were ever in trouble was during 5th, the only edition where they didn't get an update. I argue that almost everything Tau can do, Eldar can do better. Also, Eldar still have "bad" units like any army does, but the worst Eldar units are still better than the worst Tau units, or Space Marines, etc., which makes them the top army overall. Tau are probably a close second when built optimally.
Desubot wrote: Why isnt Slut Wars: The Sexpocalypse a real game dammit.
"It's easier to change the rules than to get good at the game."
TheNewBlood wrote: Tau have always been a powerful army on the tabletop.
They really haven't been, though, and I don't know why people keep saying that. Tau have always been complained about because of their annoying "tricks" like JSJ (which Eldar have always been able to do as well, and better), things like that which are admittedly annoying or not fun to play against, and other stupid things like S5 proliferation (because that's somehow worse than the masses of S6 firepower and super Rending Eldar have), but they've never really been that good on the table, usually a middling army if anything. There was a time during 4th edition where they were doing okay because of the infamous "Fish of Fury", but as soon as that got fixed with the changes to the core rules in 5th edition they were kinda meh, and kept getting worse as new armies got released. Being able to spam split-firing broadsides with S10 railguns and dual missile pod crisis suits in 5th was the crutch that kept them relevant in the vehicle-dependent meta but they were never really a top tier army. You could do well if you knew what you were doing with them, but if you didn't you were fethed, and making a single mistake even at deployment could cost you a game.
It really was just the 6th edition update, and now the new codex, that vaulted them up to the top. Now Tau are overpowering, but it's mostly just the new stuff and formations that have pushed them over the edge, so a clear case of GW making stellar rules to push sales of certain kits (but not the flyers, for some reason). Now if you want to talk about an army that almost literally has been top tier for every single edition of the game since the first, then look no further than Eldar. The only time Eldar were ever in trouble was during 5th, the only edition where they didn't get an update. I argue that almost everything Tau can do, Eldar can do better. Also, Eldar still have "bad" units like any army does, but the worst Eldar units are still better than the worst Tau units, or Space Marines, etc., which makes them the top army overall. Tau are probably a close second when built optimally.
....you're seriously not suggesting that Eldar never get bashed on, are you? Trust me, in terms of most hated/bashed on army, it goes Eldar, then Tau, then Necrons/SM.
Despite the fact that Eldar are way better and usually have been, I've consistently seen more Tau hate in my two years of play and I only play Tau since me DE army isn't up and ready. Even before I was into 40k as a hobby and just casually followed it people hatred Tau. Even in DoW 1 people hated Tau and still hate them. In DoW2 everyone bitched about how OP the Tau Commander was when added to the co-op aspect of the game. Yes they bitched about how powerful the Tau was in a non-competitive format. Only with Eldar new codex do I see them being complained about like Tau. When I walked into the FLGS I asked about several factions, and got looks from the owner when I said I wanted to play Tau even more so when I dove right in with a Firebase Support bundle box. On frontlinegaming and a few other sites and youtube video series there is a small bias against Tau. Though usually they do their best to remain impartial. On seedier sites of the internet I shall not name they almost despise all things Tau and merely hate Eldar for being cheesy.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/11 23:51:47
Tau fire power seems to have been cranked up a notch or two. It will be interesting to see how they fare this year at major events. Obviously lack of h2h prowess is still the Achilles heel for them.
TheNewBlood wrote: Tau have always been a powerful army on the tabletop.
They really haven't been, though, and I don't know why people keep saying that. Tau have always been complained about because of their annoying "tricks" like JSJ (which Eldar have always been able to do as well, and better), things like that which are admittedly annoying or not fun to play against, and other stupid things like S5 proliferation (because that's somehow worse than the masses of S6 firepower and super Rending Eldar have), but they've never really been that good on the table, usually a middling army if anything. There was a time during 4th edition where they were doing okay because of the infamous "Fish of Fury", but as soon as that got fixed with the changes to the core rules in 5th edition they were kinda meh, and kept getting worse as new armies got released. Being able to spam split-firing broadsides with S10 railguns and dual missile pod crisis suits in 5th was the crutch that kept them relevant in the vehicle-dependent meta but they were never really a top tier army. You could do well if you knew what you were doing with them, but if you didn't you were fethed, and making a single mistake even at deployment could cost you a game.
It really was just the 6th edition update, and now the new codex, that vaulted them up to the top. Now Tau are overpowering, but it's mostly just the new stuff and formations that have pushed them over the edge, so a clear case of GW making stellar rules to push sales of certain kits (but not the flyers, for some reason). Now if you want to talk about an army that almost literally has been top tier for every single edition of the game since the first, then look no further than Eldar. The only time Eldar were ever in trouble was during 5th, the only edition where they didn't get an update. I argue that almost everything Tau can do, Eldar can do better. Also, Eldar still have "bad" units like any army does, but the worst Eldar units are still better than the worst Tau units, or Space Marines, etc., which makes them the top army overall. Tau are probably a close second when built optimally.
My mistake. I've only been playing since halfway through 6th edition, so I have only known Tau as a powerhouse army. It does sound a lot better than having another faction that was totally unplayable!
carldooley wrote: tau players are only top tier in the amount of hate that we get.
That's always been the case since their inception and all the way up to their low point in 5th before even the Riptide was a concept. I mean, what self respecting person hasn't already thought and discussed that anime inspired jetpack robots are the pinnacle of terminal-disease for the eyes.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/12 02:05:54
carldooley wrote: tau players are only top tier in the amount of hate that we get.
That's always been the case since their inception and all the way up to their low point in 5th before even the Riptide was a concept. I mean, what self respecting person hasn't already thought and discussed that anime inspired jetpack robots are the pinnacle of terminal-disease for the eyes.
The initial hate was that they were weeabooo, and being too noble-bright for the grimdark setting, which is fair enough, given that they were essentially space-communists living in peace and harmony across different races.
They weren't initially an OP army, other than JSJ being a massive annoyance.
Either way, the asthetic and fluff for tau has gotten way darker than what it initially was, with concentration camps, sterilisation programs, forced indoctrination, brainwashing and chaos tau/farsight. The new mechs inhuman looks make them more like mechwarrior than gundam/macross (ironically, mechwarrior stole from macross, so everything is anime fan in the end)
Contrast to eldar who appropriates yinyang symbols, Chinese bagua symbols, Japanese patterns, is heroic noble-bright, with Mary Sue plot armour, and I wonder why Tau gets all the hate...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/12 03:12:50
As a former Tau player I feel I can say Tau get hate because when they are played correctly your opponent will not have fun. During 3rd and 4th when I played them it was all about avoiding interaction with your opponent's army on his terms. Strike at range and be gone before the counter. In a real fight its an excellent tactic, but in a game it sucks the fun right out of it. Tau are exceptionally good at making your opponent feel frustrated and powerless.
Not only tau can do That, I can imagine the jsj is annoying but tau still have two main weakness cc, psychic if used correctly these things will win you games against tau.
Nonetheless top tier for sure with eldar, necron sm
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/12 18:28:17
arthorn wrote: Not only tau can do That, I can imagine the jsj is annoying but tau still have two main weakness cc, psychic if used correctly these things will win you games against tau.
Nonetheless top tier for sure with eldar, necron sm
I can personally say psychic scream really hurts ghostkeel..
Crimson Devil wrote: As a former Tau player I feel I can say Tau get hate because when they are played correctly your opponent will not have fun. During 3rd and 4th when I played them it was all about avoiding interaction with your opponent's army on his terms. Strike at range and be gone before the counter. In a real fight its an excellent tactic, but in a game it sucks the fun right out of it. Tau are exceptionally good at making your opponent feel frustrated and powerless.
Very well put. If played right, there are games where you can be dead before having a chance to strike back.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
When Tau first came out, they weren't that good, survive the shooting, hug cover and then club them like the baby harp seals they were. But over the years and certainly now? Yeah they are vicious.
My beloved 40K armies:
Children of Stirba Order of Saint Pan Thera
Cytharai wrote: I would say that depending on people not bringing what's best in their codex, and using that as a benchmark of what codex is strong or weak is an iffy comparison. Most people who play 40k now look objectively through their codex, and build lists with what is the best value for their points. Even friendly games now have to be semi-competitive lists (unless you talk it out with your opponent pre-list building phase), because there's such a wide gap between what units/formations are good and what's garbage. Not saying that's how I like the game to be (I would really rather 1850 points of X army to be roughly equivalent to 1850 points of Y army) but that's just how 40k plays now.
I agree completely.
I do think 40k is best enjoyed where you talk it out with your opponent before you decide your list, even if it's in the most general terms. I don't think most people play 40k just to curb stomp their opponent, but there's always the problem if you're meeting up with a stranger that your two armies might be unintentionally at different power levels, even given similar point values.
My mistake. I've only been playing since halfway through 6th edition, so I have only known Tau as a powerhouse army. It does sound a lot better than having another faction that was totally unplayable!
Well I would never say Tau were "totally unplayable" or anything, just that being successful with them on the table top used to be a lot harder than it is now. Especially during 5th edition, every army with an aging codex was having problems staying relevant, although the 5th edition core rules were so good that even weaker armies could still be played competitively...it just required very specific, limited builds most of the time (the "Best Of" lists) and got kinda boring after a while for the guys stuck with an old, gakky army. And like I said, winning was way harder, although still possible.
Literally the only thing Tau had going for them before that was the "Fish of Fury" tactic, which was more like an exploit of poorly thought-out rules than it was a legitimate tactic, since the only reason it worked was because you were forced to walk around the tank to get at the fire warriors in the back who could shoot underneath it, so you got an extra bit of precious time to shoot before the inevitable melee (which was important in 4th for an army that can't participate in HtH at all, as there was at least one army list or two out there that could drop assault units right in your damn face), and people fething hated that. All you needed to do to stop the tactic though was make it possible to assault the tank, which they did in 5th if I'm not mistaken. After that they were painfully "meh".
Crimson Devil wrote: As a former Tau player I feel I can say Tau get hate because when they are played correctly your opponent will not have fun. During 3rd and 4th when I played them it was all about avoiding interaction with your opponent's army on his terms. Strike at range and be gone before the counter. In a real fight its an excellent tactic, but in a game it sucks the fun right out of it. Tau are exceptionally good at making your opponent feel frustrated and powerless.
Yeah, that's basically it, I think. You'll still see people bitch about the aesthetic (because everything in 40k is supposed to look the same, I guess...that's not boring or stupid at all) or "ANIME IN 40K, EWW!", but what it mostly comes down to is that the army just wasn't designed to be fun to play, with or against. Which is the fault of GW and not the ones playing them. I can't speak for anyone else I guess, but I had absolutely no idea how 40k worked on the tabletop, and picked Tau because that's what I played with in Dawn of War and they looked the coolest to me. As I've said before, had I known even a little bit what I was about to get myself into I probably never would have started 40k at all, or I might have picked an army like Tyranids instead, but since I liked Tau so much I likely wouldn't have bothered if I was told I wasn't really "allowed" to play them.
Tau get hate even when they're "low-tier" because even when the army sucks as a whole, as it was said, mechanics like JSJ are still annoying to play against. It's not fun spending most of a game chasing things around the board and losing all your models as you try to close the distance, even though the game is basically over as soon as you do...and then it stops being fun for the Tau player as you're rendered just as helpless as your opponent was in the previous shooting phases, and now you're just rolling pointless dice and putting models back in the case while your opponent has all the fun. You can try, you can attempt to gimp yourself and deliberately play like an idiot or make bad decisions, but there really isn't much you can do as a player to make games involving Tau fun. Except just not playing the game, but I've spent too much at this point to just quit...no matter how badly some people would like me to, as it means it's one less "dirty Tau player" to refuse to play against.
I'm not really sure what to do to fix it, either. The only way I can see to make Tau fun is for GW to completely redesign how the army works and plays on the tabletop (probably just making them play more like a Guard army with built-in Marine allies [batltesuits] and grav tanks), and maybe make some huge changes to the fluff as well so they aren't hamstrung by the whole "disdain for melee combat" thing, which opens up ideas for new models down the line with the kind of tired gak you'd expect from other high-tech "enlightened" aliens from other sci-fi properties, like energy swords and space ninjas. That's probably never going to happen, and if it did I'm sure it would be disastrous as GW's design studio is just pitiful nowadays, and they just don't have the talent available to make good rules or games anymore. Hell, in my opinion they can barely even design a good model kit, and when they do it's usually ruined by a ludicrous price tag anyway. The new crisis suits and fire warriors are okay, but when they design something completely new, like the riptide, sun shark or the stormsurge, it's laughable how bad they look. Like they're producing glorified Fischer Price toys and then pricing them like they're Sideshow Collectibles or something, just fething stupid.
kburn wrote: Contrast to eldar who appropriates yinyang symbols, Chinese bagua symbols, Japanese patterns, is heroic noble-bright, with Mary Sue plot armour, and I wonder why Tau gets all the hate...
Yeah, exactly. When it comes to aesthetics or fluff that doesn't "fit in", with gak like curvy, brightly-painted vehicles adorned with hearts and stars with blonde, long-haired bishi boys with tight, form-fitting spandex armor running around them, and their "tragic past" essentially just being the fact that they were such huge perverts that they birthed a god of porn and doomed their own fething race (which sounds like it's intended to be more of a joke than anything), I'd say Eldar take the cake over Tau every time.
No one else seems to agree, though. Tau aren't allowed to exist because they have mecha and that's too "anime", basically...even though more than half the factions in the game have mecha, Tau are different and that's bad.
Also, @jreilly89, I'm not saying there's no Eldar hate, just that from what I've personally observed there seems to be a lot more Tau hate than Eldar hate, or that the Tau hate is a hell of a lot stronger. Eldar get their fair share, but it seems more often than not that after the initial surge from a codex release, people just kinda shrug their shoulders and think "Oh well, that's Eldar for you!" and get on with the game, if they haven't quit playing. Tau hate is persistent and never really seems to die down.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/14 21:09:31
Desubot wrote: Why isnt Slut Wars: The Sexpocalypse a real game dammit.
"It's easier to change the rules than to get good at the game."
You are seriously laughing on the "everything must look the same" notion, while supporting the "everything must play the same" notion? irony much?
Yes, tau play a different game than most 40k armies do. and thats GOOD. the game would be boring as feth if everyone played the same. heck, that's why I hate 30k despite it being the "mature, better balanced game"-ofc its better balanced, there is effectively one army! you gotta derp real hard to be unbalanced with one option.
Tau hate is not because of how they play, nor because of how powerful they are. even in 5th when tau were as weak as it gets (far worse than modern CSM for example) and didn't play quite the same as it simply didn't even have the tools (no overwatch and supporting fire=castling is suicide, crisiswing was not even a thing, big suits didn't exist, etc)
Tau are hated, for being tau. for "not fitting in my grimdark" idiocy. and its idiocy because anyone actually knowing anyhting about their fluff knows they fit perfectly well in the grimdark. the enclaves are semi-decent, but the empire? the "best" of communism combined with the "best" of feudal japan castes. this is NOT a good place, its just a better at pretending than the rest of them.
Now going back to the "not fun for the other to chase, not fun for the tau once caught"-what? you high?
The thrill of the hunt is everything! the hard choices of what can I save, what to sacrifice to slow down the enemy, trying to keep a balance of keeping a safe distance, killing the enemy force and ranking points-the enemy gets on the other hand the tactical challenge of an enemy not playing directly into your hands, making decision of what to chase, what to let go, and the little victories along the path when they finally take down that elusive unit that bugged them, or breaching the tau lines in case of casteltau (if anyone still plays that?)
Whats even the fun when both players do the same dumb-ass "march everything forward" tactics? you know exactly how the game is going to go before you even got started.
The problem some players have, is that they don't even TRY to be rational or follow a decent game plan, literally all they do is "match fowrad" with point-blank or pure assault units with zero fire support like in 5th and expect it to work.
You know why SoB players do well despite a meh codex? why they are one of my hardest matchups? they naturally gravitates for a properly balanced force-some point blank "up yours" units in dominions, some "match forward" basic infantry and some "fire support" with that freaking piano and rets.
And it works. it works like a charm. because once the elusive player can't just keep evading and has to take care of the fire support elements, mind the super fast strikes and still pay attention to the bulk units that march up field-you create a dynamic game, a back and forth where both players are simultaneously on the attack and on the defense.
Games against a mixed force opponent are the best. I've had games ending in the silly outcome where I've got multiple unit in his clensed deployment zone, and he and my opponent had multiple units in my own clensed deployment zone. I've had game that ended in mutual decimation with the last survivors of one side claiming victory, games that ended in both hold up in our areas unable to make real progress, games with one sided wins to either side, games that it just turned into a mess of small units racing for objectives as nobody has a coherent strike force any more-anything you can think of, happened. it just does not happen against silly "got one plan" armies.
Nothing needs to be fixed with tau (except a few minor issues like the HYMP being too good, rail weapons not good enough, the IA broken, the ECPA not usable right now and a few formations going haywire, but these are all very easy to fix with a minor adjustment)
The problem is in the classical marine player mindset, who expect for some reason that everything always go their way, that the enemy for some reason will follow their game plan without them doing anything to force his hand, and that easy wins are their share as the "chosen poster boys" of the setting. work for it damnit. you have the tools, you just refuse to use them.
LD attacks, artillery units, maldictions-all them things that are "never worth taking as they never work" are exactly the things that hurt tau. we got little defense against pinning, most our units rely on hiding so indirect fire hurts like hell, we got no psyker defenses around, USE these things.Big units of massive point investment that ruin everything in their path? tau excel at killing, and you don't need anything big and hard hitting to ruin tau, even lousy vanilla assault marines will probably do it. MSU a lot of smaller units, and tau focus fire can't quite catch them all, and with no high quality targets, the whole focus fire goes to waste.
The tools are all there, most armies can use them with little to no alteration to their lists, but for some reason so few people do.
And I can clearly see it, using the same army some people stick to "march forward" tactics and gets oblivirated (and complain about tau being OP) and others mix units and sneak around with mixed forces and tactical units, and have a blast, with very close games where both players get to get things done.
Stop blaming the tau for taking advantage of your own insistence to stick to just one (failing) battle plan. if you fail to diverse your army, you are bound to hit rock-paper-scissors scenarios. and when superunits and deathstars are the go-to action, don't act surprised when the tau, who are above mobility of shooting army are a preparation army-prepares the tools to punish your obvious and repeating choices.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/16 10:15:03
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now.
BoomWolf wrote: Tau are hated, for being tau. for "not fitting in my grimdark" idiocy. and its idiocy because anyone actually knowing anyhting about their fluff knows they fit perfectly well in the grimdark. the enclaves are semi-decent, but the empire? the "best" of communism combined with the "best" of feudal japan castes. this is NOT a good place, its just a better at pretending than the rest of them.
Stop blaming the tau for taking advantage of your own insistence to stick to just one (failing) battle plan. if you fail to diverse your army, you are bound to hit rock-paper-scissors scenarios. and when superunits and deathstars are the go-to action, don't act surprised when the tau, who are above mobility of shooting army are a preparation army-prepares the tools to punish your obvious and repeating choices.
Exalted!
'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
BoomWolf wrote: You are seriously laughing on the "everything must look the same" notion, while supporting the "everything must play the same" notion? irony much?
No,, I'm not, actually. I don't mind Tau playing differently (every army should play differently, or there isn't a point in having so many armies in the first place, is there?), in fact I don't really think they'd be a problem now if GW put the effort into ensuring armies are all on an even footing; but the majority of the people who play the game (who are probably Space Marine players) don't like how Tau play, regardless of whether the codex is weak or strong (it's just louder and angrier when it's strong), and for them, being different isn't very fun.
I wouldn't call what I suggested "supporting" the idea, more like coming to a sad realization that the only way you could make Tau "acceptable" on the table top is to basically make them a clone of Marines or Guard. 30k is hugely popular and often praised for its balance...but how does it achieve balance? Damn near every fething army is a Space Marine variant with one or two unique units and rules to set them apart, and then there's steampunk Guard and Ad Mech for everyone else. So like I said, Tau need to be fixed to stop the bitching, and the quickest and easiest way GW could probably "fix" them is to turn them into Marines, since that's practically all they know, and it's the only thing they can produce with some semblance of balance.
BoomWolf wrote: Yes, tau play a different game than most 40k armies do. and thats GOOD. the game would be boring as feth if everyone played the same. heck, that's why I hate 30k despite it being the "mature, better balanced game"-ofc its better balanced, there is effectively one army! you gotta derp real hard to be unbalanced with one option.
Exactly. It's why I don't like 30k either and have almost literally no interest in playing. The alien and oddball factions in 40k are what make it so interesting to me, take all that gak away and leave nothing but SPEHSS MAHREENZ and...well, clearly it appeals to some people and their inner 12-year-old or it wouldn't sell, but I'm not interested in spending massive amounts of money investing in a game that basically only has one faction that's painted different colors. And I've never had this "Marines are SO COOL!" mindset that everyone else has, to the point where they stare in disbelief at you if you say you aren't fond of them.
BoomWolf wrote: Tau hate is not because of how they play, nor because of how powerful they are. even in 5th when tau were as weak as it gets (far worse than modern CSM for example) and didn't play quite the same as it simply didn't even have the tools (no overwatch and supporting fire=castling is suicide, crisiswing was not even a thing, big suits didn't exist, etc)
Tau are hated, for being tau. for "not fitting in my grimdark" idiocy. and its idiocy because anyone actually knowing anyhting about their fluff knows they fit perfectly well in the grimdark. the enclaves are semi-decent, but the empire? the "best" of communism combined with the "best" of feudal japan castes. this is NOT a good place, its just a better at pretending than the rest of them.
It's both. The way they play is most certainly a factor or it wouldn't be one of the things I see people bitching about the most. True, they were never very good before 6th edition and I said as much, but what did you see complaints about on forums then? 1.) JSJ and "Fish of Fury", being able to hit hard and avoid reprisal is super frustrating and has long been one of the top complaints, 2.) too much S5, and S5 troop weapons in particular (which is an issue for Marine players apparently, who think the mighty bolter should be the best infantry weapon in the game because fluff says Mahreenz is the BEST, even if fire warrior shooting is about the same as equal points of tactical Marine shooting, without markerlights or other support), 3.) markerlights, specifically not being able to take saves against them and the ability to boost BS (I've seen it suggested that Tau would be "okay" if they were forced to rely on BS3, but being able to increase accuracy with Tau firepower is considered "broken"), 4.) weapons that ignore LOS (even though it used to be just the SMS, people still hated it), 5.) adaptability, especially with crisis suits in particular which can be kitted out for nearly any role, which is considered a bad thing since no other army in the game can build specialist squads like that, and some struggle to even find answers for certain things (like vehicles, flyers or GMCs).
There were probably other minor issues, mostly boiling down to having weapons better than Marine equivalents or weapons that ignored Marine saves, because the majority of players are Marine players and they don't like it when armies can counter them, but I think that was pretty much the gist of it.
BoomWolf wrote: Now going back to the "not fun for the other to chase, not fun for the tau once caught"-what? you high?
Not right now, no.
BoomWolf wrote: The thrill of the hunt is everything! the hard choices of what can I save, what to sacrifice to slow down the enemy, trying to keep a balance of keeping a safe distance, killing the enemy force and ranking points-the enemy gets on the other hand the tactical challenge of an enemy not playing directly into your hands, making decision of what to chase, what to let go, and the little victories along the path when they finally take down that elusive unit that bugged them, or breaching the tau lines in case of casteltau (if anyone still plays that?) Whats even the fun when both players do the same dumb-ass "march everything forward" tactics? you know exactly how the game is going to go before you even got started. The problem some players have, is that they don't even TRY to be rational or follow a decent game plan, literally all they do is "match fowrad" with point-blank or pure assault units with zero fire support like in 5th and expect it to work.
Obviously "fun" is subjective. I imagine there are people out there who do have fun playing with/against Tau, even now in 7th. But it clearly isn't fun for everyone, and "Not fun for them to chase, not fun for Tau once caught" is almost the perfect way to describe the situation I've observed over all these years.
Maybe it does just boil down to people not wanting a more challenging game than "march everything forward, get into close combat as soon as possible, whine about 'cheese' if I don't make it", I used to think as much myself and have even literally seen people argue that 40k is "supposed" to be all about the Assault Phase (with guns only "supposed" to be used on the way into melee) and that Tau don't play the game the way it's "intended", but regardless there's an issue people have with Tau that they don't seem to have with other armies, and it isn't just the background or aesthetic. And the one thing Tau do differently from every other army? They don't have assault units, and they generally don't get in your face unless they can run the feth away right after. Eldar have the most powerful shooting in the game and even they can bring dedicated assault units to the table to engage people with. Tau just can't, and the closest thing we even had to that got turned into snipers and got stripped of everything that even could have made them okay in assault.
BoomWolf wrote: Nothing needs to be fixed with tau (except a few minor issues like the HYMP being too good, rail weapons not good enough, the IA broken, the ECPA not usable right now and a few formations going haywire, but these are all very easy to fix with a minor adjustment) The problem is in the classical marine player mindset, who expect for some reason that everything always go their way, that the enemy for some reason will follow their game plan without them doing anything to force his hand, and that easy wins are their share as the "chosen poster boys" of the setting. work for it damnit. you have the tools, you just refuse to use them.
I agree with you on some points, but I still think the Tau codex needs a lot of fixing. Some units are just garbage, some are broken, and some rules and formations are legitimately overpowered. Personally I'm convinced we don't even need Supporting Fire at all, for example, and being able to ignore cover with a measly two markerlight tokens is too much. While some people have always bitched about Tau regardless, I think it's pretty clear that the codex is a little too strong, and that even if other armies have the tools to deal with Tau, it's always an uphill struggle and sometimes it just isn't enough.
And yeah, needless to say, some people will bitch no matter what just because Tau.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/16 15:00:06
Desubot wrote: Why isnt Slut Wars: The Sexpocalypse a real game dammit.
"It's easier to change the rules than to get good at the game."
You are seriously laughing on the "everything must look the same" notion, while supporting the "everything must play the same" notion? irony much?
Yes, tau play a different game than most 40k armies do. and thats GOOD. the game would be boring as feth if everyone played the same. heck, that's why I hate 30k despite it being the "mature, better balanced game"-ofc its better balanced, there is effectively one army! you gotta derp real hard to be unbalanced with one option.
Tau hate is not because of how they play, nor because of how powerful they are. even in 5th when tau were as weak as it gets (far worse than modern CSM for example) and didn't play quite the same as it simply didn't even have the tools (no overwatch and supporting fire=castling is suicide, crisiswing was not even a thing, big suits didn't exist, etc)
Tau are hated, for being tau. for "not fitting in my grimdark" idiocy. and its idiocy because anyone actually knowing anyhting about their fluff knows they fit perfectly well in the grimdark. the enclaves are semi-decent, but the empire? the "best" of communism combined with the "best" of feudal japan castes. this is NOT a good place, its just a better at pretending than the rest of them.
Now going back to the "not fun for the other to chase, not fun for the tau once caught"-what? you high?
The thrill of the hunt is everything! the hard choices of what can I save, what to sacrifice to slow down the enemy, trying to keep a balance of keeping a safe distance, killing the enemy force and ranking points-the enemy gets on the other hand the tactical challenge of an enemy not playing directly into your hands, making decision of what to chase, what to let go, and the little victories along the path when they finally take down that elusive unit that bugged them, or breaching the tau lines in case of casteltau (if anyone still plays that?)
Whats even the fun when both players do the same dumb-ass "march everything forward" tactics? you know exactly how the game is going to go before you even got started.
The problem some players have, is that they don't even TRY to be rational or follow a decent game plan, literally all they do is "match fowrad" with point-blank or pure assault units with zero fire support like in 5th and expect it to work.
You know why SoB players do well despite a meh codex? why they are one of my hardest matchups? they naturally gravitates for a properly balanced force-some point blank "up yours" units in dominions, some "match forward" basic infantry and some "fire support" with that freaking piano and rets.
And it works. it works like a charm. because once the elusive player can't just keep evading and has to take care of the fire support elements, mind the super fast strikes and still pay attention to the bulk units that march up field-you create a dynamic game, a back and forth where both players are simultaneously on the attack and on the defense.
Games against a mixed force opponent are the best. I've had games ending in the silly outcome where I've got multiple unit in his clensed deployment zone, and he and my opponent had multiple units in my own clensed deployment zone. I've had game that ended in mutual decimation with the last survivors of one side claiming victory, games that ended in both hold up in our areas unable to make real progress, games with one sided wins to either side, games that it just turned into a mess of small units racing for objectives as nobody has a coherent strike force any more-anything you can think of, happened. it just does not happen against silly "got one plan" armies.
Nothing needs to be fixed with tau (except a few minor issues like the HYMP being too good, rail weapons not good enough, the IA broken, the ECPA not usable right now and a few formations going haywire, but these are all very easy to fix with a minor adjustment)
The problem is in the classical marine player mindset, who expect for some reason that everything always go their way, that the enemy for some reason will follow their game plan without them doing anything to force his hand, and that easy wins are their share as the "chosen poster boys" of the setting. work for it damnit. you have the tools, you just refuse to use them.
LD attacks, artillery units, maldictions-all them things that are "never worth taking as they never work" are exactly the things that hurt tau. we got little defense against pinning, most our units rely on hiding so indirect fire hurts like hell, we got no psyker defenses around, USE these things.Big units of massive point investment that ruin everything in their path? tau excel at killing, and you don't need anything big and hard hitting to ruin tau, even lousy vanilla assault marines will probably do it. MSU a lot of smaller units, and tau focus fire can't quite catch them all, and with no high quality targets, the whole focus fire goes to waste.
The tools are all there, most armies can use them with little to no alteration to their lists, but for some reason so few people do.
And I can clearly see it, using the same army some people stick to "march forward" tactics and gets oblivirated (and complain about tau being OP) and others mix units and sneak around with mixed forces and tactical units, and have a blast, with very close games where both players get to get things done.
Stop blaming the tau for taking advantage of your own insistence to stick to just one (failing) battle plan. if you fail to diverse your army, you are bound to hit rock-paper-scissors scenarios. and when superunits and deathstars are the go-to action, don't act surprised when the tau, who are above mobility of shooting army are a preparation army-prepares the tools to punish your obvious and repeating choices
So you used a lot of words to say Marine players hate Tau because they are stupid and lazy.
I would say the top 5 armies go something like this: Eldar, Tau, Necrons, White Scars, Most other Space Marines. In that order from strongest to weakest. Tau have been in the top tier since 6th for sure.
Twinkle, Twinkle little star.
I ran over your Wave Serpents with my car.
NorseSig wrote: I would say the top 5 armies go something like this: Eldar, Tau, Necrons, White Scars, Most other Space Marines. In that order from strongest to weakest. Tau have been in the top tier since 6th for sure.
that is simply not true. Tau have been mid tier for all of 6th. Their win ratio in tournaments was around 52% if i am not mistaken, which is hardly top tier.
NorseSig wrote: I would say the top 5 armies go something like this: Eldar, Tau, Necrons, White Scars, Most other Space Marines. In that order from strongest to weakest. Tau have been in the top tier since 6th for sure.
that is simply not true. Tau have been mid tier for all of 6th. Their win ratio in tournaments was around 52% if i am not mistaken, which is hardly top tier.
Maybe. It could be my local meta gave me the impression tau were better. The local tau player won 75% of the time. Now he wins about 55% of the time. Mostly because there are more eldar players now.
Twinkle, Twinkle little star.
I ran over your Wave Serpents with my car.
NorseSig wrote: I would say the top 5 armies go something like this: Eldar, Tau, Necrons, White Scars, Most other Space Marines. In that order from strongest to weakest. Tau have been in the top tier since 6th for sure.
that is simply not true. Tau have been mid tier for all of 6th. Their win ratio in tournaments was around 52% if i am not mistaken, which is hardly top tier.
Tau just on their own were lower top/top middle tier in 6th yes.
Eltau/Taudar however were not only a fluff abomination, but a complete and utter travesty of the game in 6th!
Tau have always felt top tier to me. Granted I play Orks so I am immediately at a big disadvantage when I play them. I have 2-3 Tau players in my area and every single game I play against 1-2 Riptides and 3 Missilesides. Always a great game when my orks rely on cover because of our poor armor and Tau have tons of ignores cover.
I generally don't have a problem with Space Marines but Tau/Eldar just kick my butt without much effort. And Necrons i have yet to face.
~1.5k
~3000 (Fully Painted)
Coming Soon!
the incessant bitching 
Children of Stirba 
Order of Saint Pan Thera 
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. 
2500 
2200 
