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.

Medium of Death wrote:The necrontyr are clearly evil.

1: Start war with an advanced benevolent race out of jealousy
2: Give form to god like beings in the hope that they help defeat the old ones
3: Become servants of their new gods, help harvest the galaxy

The necrons sealed their own fate. They are fueled by their bitter and twisted natures, driven forward by insane vampiric gods. The necrons want to extinguish life as we know it because they no longer have it.

Thank you. I was getting worried that people were giving Necrons a write-off as if they didn't choose the path they went down.

The Tau aren't good, they just have a great PR team. But the cracks in the "official story" are beginning to show, as we are getting more and more evidence that the Tau have some skeletons in their closet too - like the Nimbosa Crusade and the circumstances surrounding the assimilation of the Vespids.

winnertakesall wrote:

Medium of Death wrote:
Lastly, I'm going to pitch in (once again) to say the T'au, at this moment in time, do not use 'concentration camps'.

I can't remember where i read it, but this quote about a Tau invasion of an Imperial World (I have the passage saved on my pc, along with lot's of other fluff, why I am not sure, but ahh well)

'The Tau forces under the command of O'var (Commander Brightsword), began the invasion with a landing of overwhelming numbers. They soon controlled most of the world and started a systematic extermination of the populace.'

You seem to be referring to the Nimbosa Crusade (see my link in previous post).

Kilkrazy wrote:Well, they didn't, so your point is irrelevant.

It's all very well saying "But if this", and "Suppose that", but in the Background forum you are supposed to look at the actual fluff.

What if the IM was jolly hockey sticks? What if Grey Knights were made of blancmange?

I agree with Kilkrazy. We have "actual fluff" sources that show how the Tau respond to worlds that do not submit to their authority, and we should ignore those if ever a question is raised about how a world that submitted would have been treated if they had resisted instead.

Alternatively, can anyone point me out a Tau invasion force that went all "aww shucks, we'll go home if it means that much to you" when they encountered resistance? Because that would certainly disprove the whole "I'm up in your planet, violating your self-determination" thing they've got going on, and we can put the matter to rest.

Darth Bob wrote:Not really. It's entirely relevant that the Tau are imperialistic, tryannical bigots who resort to violence when they don't get their way. Not the image of "good guys" in any way, shape, or form.

This. Did Imperialism somehow come back into vogue, morally-speaking? I thought we were on that whole "national sovereignty" kick (*does not include nations in Northern Africa or the Middle East).

I will never understand why people use an objective moral criterion with the IoM and a relative moral criterion with all of the other races. If you aren't the IoM, you get one of the following passes for everything you do so you're not "the bad guys":
- you don't know any better
- you were made this way
- your morality is different
- you think you're doing the right thing

Interestingly enough, none of these arguments stand when you take the IoM out of the picture.

Why don't we use the same scrutiny with the Tau as we do the IoM? Why do we judge Tau based on their PR campaign (intentions/goals/different morality/etc) instead of on the actions they take?