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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:BS4 is not the "basics" of a shooting army. BS4 is a boring way to try to "fix" something that isnt an issue right now.

Firewarriors are not amazing shooters, they are well trained with some tech enhancements - BS3. thats it.

They do not "need" BS4. It makes naff all difference to the utility of a FW team.

It is an issue. Namely, that people don't buy FW's more than they have to and hide them in a Fish. The design goal nees to be that A) people consider spending points on FWs a sensible alternative to mech and other things (otherwise one might as well remove them from the Codex entirely) and B) provide them with an incentive to disembark them from the Fish within rapid-fire distance of, say, 10 Assault Marines and open fire.

Of course there are other ways. You could beef up the FW to stand up to the inevitable counter-charge of those Assault Marines even if they do little damage to them in shooting.Or you could give Fish Fire-Points like Chimeras. Or whatever. But those strike me as unfluffy solutions. The "fluffy" solution would be to up their shooting so that it is good enough to be worthwhile risking them in the open in the heat of the battle as fairly fragile, low LD, no HtH troops that they are. For that, their shooting needs to be fairly amazing. Better by far, most likely, than, say, Grey Knights, Grey Hunters or Necron Immortals would be my guess, because those units compensate with massively more resiliance and, usually, far better special weapon access.

BS4, with Tau being largely a shooty army, seems a good start. Hell, BS5 or BS6 as basic Tau stat wouldn't necessarily be bad game design either. Neither would be sufficient. Both would be a step in the right direction.


Also, the spread of Markerlights, special and basic weapon across multiple FoC is one of the reasons Tau scale so badly these days. On comparions, a Space Marine player buying a Tac Squad with a Razor can target as many 3 different targets (or concentrate fire on on). To provide the equivalent of basic infantry and special weapon fire at the same accuracy, the Tau player must dedicate as much as three different units from different FoC-slots. Pathfinders to up the accuracy, Crisis Suits to add a smattering of plasma/melta-etcc and FWs for basic fire for example. That just doesn't cut it against 5th edition armies, especially in games over 1500 points where FoC-constraints start to become the bigger issue for Tau than point-contraints. The Space Marine player could beat the Tau simply by Target Saturation, even if FW's were only 1 point each and Pulse Rifles Str. 10.

Tau need to become more FoC-efficient more than they need to become more point-efficient.

For one thing, fluff should never be a major point when making rules. Just saying.

Fire warriors should stay BS 3, because if you increase the BS and keep marker lights the same, then they would have BS 5 (plus other effects the mark lights have). FW also come in larger squads that units than already have BS4. plus it's incredibly lazy (the same reason why I also disapprove of FWs getting special/heavy weapons) Suits and pathfinders should have BsS4 because they are vets, but almost because they're elites you pay a lot for and come in smaller squads and such don't get as much of a massive boost.

I think that a better way to solve it would to allow better access to markers lights and change the way units use them.

Edit: Oh and, just saying this as a precaution, people who say tau need to be better in melee are not going to be taken serious

People dont take FW because theyre only BS3, BS4 wouldnt do anything to fix why people dont take FW. So not only do you have something that belies belief (that a 6yr old poor depth perception creature is as good a shooter as a space marine - or, in your mind, should be better than a captain or as good as a GKGM) but it also would not make any difference whatsoever to the likelihood of people taking non minimum sized units for scoring.

It is also a boring way to not-fix the issue.

Oh, and with 12 FW firing at 10 marines 6 still come and beat you up, even with BS5. You still die like, well, Tau and you have killed an extra 2 marines.

I think I said in every post that BS alone will not fix the issue. And of course BS4 is a rather plain change. That is the point.

But upping BS avoides the redundant rule design where you have "flashy" and "fun" rules like markerlights that, ultimately, just dublicate what could have easily been done with a much more simpler mechanic that already exists for determining accuracy with ranged weapons: Ballistic Skill. Which, as in the current codex where markerlights do just that 90% of the time, is simply bad game design.

You up Ballistic Skill to get a good basis. You add "flavour and fun and ulitility" over and above BS4 or 5 with fluffy rules like markerlights, Mont'ka, whatever.

And, as has been pointed out - a shooty army does not NEED BS4 to function perfectly well. You're picking the wrong aspect to try to fix

It isnt redundant rule design, it makes you make a choice between better BS, reduction in cover (which is where i mostly see markerlights being reduced - reducing SMF / smoke cover saves to pop transports) and leadership (very useful) and requires some elements of synergy between units.
The big issue is ML availability and maneuverability, and tactical flexibility in the FW squads. I'm not sure they shoudl be so flexible, given they are modelled on their progenitor (well, uplift) race of Eldar where you focus on one ability to the exclusion of others, but a couple of melta's would make people see them in a different light. I just dont think its a good change, given the way Eldar are supposed to be organised, to have yet another SM clone.

Better BS is neither desirable from a background and, quite frankly, sense perspective, but its also just such a dull way to try to fix it, given even with BS5 i still wouldnt take FW. You dont start with something that wont help and then tack something on afterwards.

Tau should not be the "premier shooting army" because each model has a high BS as a base.

Well, from the "sense" perspective we evidently disagree. I think it makes perfect sense.

From a "background" perspective it likewise makes perfect sense if you stop trying to impose a "IG/Space Marine" logic on the Tau.

Different armies follow a different schtick in how they "rise" above average.

IG do so through "combat experience and veteran status"
Space Marines through "genetically advanced physicality"
Eldar through "experience of age and ritualized combat tradition"
Tau through "technological progress that covers their physical limitations (and lack of experience)"

One isn't "better" or more plausible than the other. It's just fluff. And it would further set Tau apart from their Alien allies (who have less access to "Tau Technology" in the "technology-based" logic of the Tau Codex and hence lower BS):

And I know that markerlights ought to represent a tactical choice. That is the problem. They don't. Statistically (if applied to FWs), it is nearly always the best option to raise BS to 4 above all other. Hence, the need to move this "bad internal balance" out of the markerlight sub-system and straight into the statline, which (to say it for the nth time) hasn't yet "fixed" Tau but just recreated the (still-subpar) performance of current Tau FW, but with a far more streamlined system that "liberates" the markerlight system to be used to actually make FW a sexy option to choose for your army.

And yes, there might be other options to make FW's more attractive. Base 4 attack perhaps? Fearless and T5? Whatever. But working with the shooting side of things appears to be the most fitting.

Trouble is basic infantry in 40k, just in general, aren't very effective at killing things. How many armies do you see taking basic guard without their heavy/specials? Thats where most of the killing is done. Since crisis suits have most of the kit then it makes the Tau fire warriors superfluous. I still use them, two squads with a pathfinder squad in tow. It is good. But...

Its far too expensive points wise-nearly 500+ points

Its easy to target the pathfinders and cause the squads to flee on shooting casualties

Very few armies take mass troops to make it effective (at least at my gaming club where cost is a factor you usually only face 30 or so models at 1500pts and thats guard) so you have a great anti-horde formation but one that is rarely effective. Unless you're lucky like me and kill 10 terminators and a chaplain in one turn of shooting with them.

I think that Tau FW should probably stay BS3 (maybe with a vet squad in elite and crisis/stealth suits BS4) but that they should create a form of force organization like the guard platoon where you can attach unmounted pathfinders/heavy drone squads to the firewarriors unit. You could even make attached drone squads with racks of seeker missiles/missile pods that could be hid behind cover and the Shas-ui can then designate them to let that squad shoot across the map. This would cut the amount of force organization slots taken up. They would also need a price cut to maybe 8 or 9pts a model. Possibly stay 10 if they got their defensive grenades for free.

Crisis suits need to be cheaper (esp the weapons) and BS4. Paying 90pts for a plasma rifle and meltagun totting soldier is outrageous.

Kroot have chameloen skin so should just gain the stealth ability and become able to infiltrate anywhere. They should also get frag grenades (on the actual models no less) and maybe a 'feral leap' ability that counts as furious charge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zweischneid wrote:Well, from the "sense" perspective we evidently disagree. I think it makes perfect sense.

From a "background" perspective it likewise makes perfect sense if you stop trying to impose a "IG/Space Marine" logic on the Tau.

Different armies follow a different schtick in how they "rise" above average.

IG do so through "combat experience and veteran status"
Space Marines through "genetically advanced physicality"
Eldar through "experience of age and ritualized combat tradition"
Tau through "technological progress that covers their physical limitations (and lack of experience)"

.

That doesn't make any sense. Tau are themed a 'young' race but have been fighting the Imperium for several centuries. A Tau may only live 40 years, but all of those are at the peak of youth and a guardsman starts to become old and infirm by that age. Whereas a Tau will simply die of old age quite suddenly without a long period of aging. They have plenty of time to become veterens, which simply means you are a survivor of several battles that might have killed you so 25-30 age range. Also Eldar have some of the best technology out there, even their armour is designed to offer no impediment to their speed hence they all have fleet.They do not 'lack experience' if that were the case then Tau wouldn't have any knowledge of how to wage war. If you read background like the Imperial Armour Taros it makes it pretty clear that they have far greater knowledge and ability at waging war than the Imperium.They're not amatuers by any measure.

Totalwar1402 wrote:

That doesn't make any sense. Tau are themed a 'young' race but have been fighting the Imperium for several centuries. A Tau may only live 40 years, but all of those are at the peak of youth and a guardsman starts to become old and infirm by that age. Whereas a Tau will simply die of old age quite suddenly without a long period of aging. They have plenty of time to become veterens, which simply means you are a survivor of several battles that might have killed you so 25-30 age range. Also Eldar have some of the best technology out there, even their armour is designed to offer no impediment to their speed hence they all have fleet.They do not 'lack experience' if that were the case then Tau wouldn't have any knowledge of how to wage war. If you read background like the Imperial Armour Taros it makes it pretty clear that they have far greater knowledge and ability at waging war than the Imperium.They're not amatuers by any measure.

You are mistaking "theme" for a pseudo-realistic comparison that does not exist in 40K.

IG veterans are not "comparable" to Tau veterans, even if they fought the same number of battles. IG veterans are a "movie clichee". A hardned, tough-as-leather guy with scars all over his face who toughes it out. It's not a theme that applies to Tau or that they try to cover or appeal to in a Tau Codex.

Similarly, Eldar, Space Marines or Necrons might be more "technologically advanced" if you try to deduce what technology would be required to "re-create" the often short fig-leaves of techno-babble explanations that Codex Writers left to make them work.

A Black Templar Power Armour is not a "piece of technology". It's a medieval knight's armour that has been given a faux-technology explanation to transplant it into 40K's kitchen-sink setting. But "advancement of technology" is not how a Templar Codex is structured. The "hierarchy" of the Templar Codex follows the logic of a medieval knightly order with new initiates to knight brothers to sworn brotherhood of elite knights.

Likewise, Necron are often described as the "most advanced army". But they are equally not a "technology-race". They are a mix of tomb kings, 1980s Arnold, Star Gate and a few other clichee mixed into 40K, again with some faux-tech-babble given to explain the common tropes of the army (like scary green bzzzzzz beams). Again, the "hierarchy" of the Necron Codex does not follow technology, but the logic of Egyptian royalty and ancient courts, etc.. .

In contrast, the Tau are a "technology-themed" army. They don't strife for the "grizzled-veteran-schtick" of IG, nor for the "royal hierarchy-schtick" of the Necrons. Their codex-internal "hierarchy" is clearly written to reflect a progress of technology with the Elite getting the funkiest gadgets (including "experimental tech"), the common Tau troops somewhat more basic, yet still "awsome" tech and the alien allies the most "primitve" weapons of all.

This, the logic by which "Elites" and "Troops" are differentiated in a Tau Codex is "technology", which is the overriding theme of the Tau army, but not the theme of a Necron, Eldar or Space Marine army in the same degree.

Speaking of drones, the way drones interact with morale needs an overhaul. Why would the Tau flee when their drones are killed? Isn't that the point? No living soldier - even Kroot, Vespid, or Gue'vesa - is expendable, so we have drones.

Drones should be Ld: Fearless. Drones in a unit should not count for morale purposes in any way. Tau don't flee when their drones are killed, wounds allocated to drones don't count for close combat, and drones don't count for purposes of seeing if a unit can regroup.

Every race has some way of ignoring the leadership rules - drones are the Tau's.

You could give Firewarriors BS4 and they would still suck. With no special weapons they offer nothing but highly vulnerable anti infantry firepower which goes largely wasted because everyone and his grandma is sitting in a Rhino.
Still, BS4 ( explain it with super advanced targeting technology if you wish ) + some good special weapons and assault 1 markerlights would help. After all the only shooty armies which can live with a low BS make up this flaw with a huge volume of fire from lots of super cheap units, something that the Tau probably shouldn't be able to do, at least not if we wish to stick to their fluff.

Zweischneid wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

That doesn't make any sense. Tau are themed a 'young' race but have been fighting the Imperium for several centuries. A Tau may only live 40 years, but all of those are at the peak of youth and a guardsman starts to become old and infirm by that age. Whereas a Tau will simply die of old age quite suddenly without a long period of aging. They have plenty of time to become veterens, which simply means you are a survivor of several battles that might have killed you so 25-30 age range. Also Eldar have some of the best technology out there, even their armour is designed to offer no impediment to their speed hence they all have fleet.They do not 'lack experience' if that were the case then Tau wouldn't have any knowledge of how to wage war. If you read background like the Imperial Armour Taros it makes it pretty clear that they have far greater knowledge and ability at waging war than the Imperium.They're not amatuers by any measure.

You are mistaking "theme" for a pseudo-realistic comparison that does not exist in 40K.

IG veterans are not "comparable" to Tau veterans, even if they fought the same number of battles. IG veterans are a "movie clichee". A hardned, tough-as-leather guy with scars all over his face who toughes it out. It's not a theme that applies to Tau or that they try to cover or appeal to in a Tau Codex.

Similarly, Eldar, Space Marines or Necrons might be more "technologically advanced" if you try to deduce what technology would be required to "re-create" the often short fig-leaves of techno-babble explanations that Codex Writers left to make them work.

A Black Templar Power Armour is not a "piece of technology". It's a medieval knight's armour that has been given a faux-technology explanation to transplant it into 40K's kitchen-sink setting. But "advancement of technology" is not how a Templar Codex is structured. The "hierarchy" of the Templar Codex follows the logic of a medieval knightly order with new initiates to knight brothers to sworn brotherhood of elite knights.

Likewise, Necron are often described as the "most advanced army". But they are equally not a "technology-race". They are a mix of tomb kings, 1980s Arnold, Star Gate and a few other clichee mixed into 40K, again with some faux-tech-babble given to explain the common tropes of the army (like scary green bzzzzzz beams). Again, the "hierarchy" of the Necron Codex does not follow technology, but the logic of Egyptian royalty and ancient courts, etc.. .

In contrast, the Tau are a "technology-themed" army. They don't strife for the "grizzled-veteran-schtick" of IG, nor for the "royal hierarchy-schtick" of the Necrons. Their codex-internal "hierarchy" is clearly written to reflect a progress of technology with the Elite getting the funkiest gadgets (including "experimental tech"), the common Tau troops somewhat more basic, yet still "awsome" tech and the alien allies the most "primitve" weapons of all.

This, the logic by which "Elites" and "Troops" are differentiated in a Tau Codex is "technology", which is the overriding theme of the Tau army, but not the theme of a Necron, Eldar or Space Marine army in the same degree.

This is basically correct.

However, I think we should stay focused on suggesting potential fixes for the mechanical problems the Tau face on the table. Frankly, the Tau are so underpowered that it barely matters exactly what justification is used for a change - a change is necessary.

Zweischneid wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

That doesn't make any sense. Tau are themed a 'young' race but have been fighting the Imperium for several centuries. A Tau may only live 40 years, but all of those are at the peak of youth and a guardsman starts to become old and infirm by that age. Whereas a Tau will simply die of old age quite suddenly without a long period of aging. They have plenty of time to become veterens, which simply means you are a survivor of several battles that might have killed you so 25-30 age range. Also Eldar have some of the best technology out there, even their armour is designed to offer no impediment to their speed hence they all have fleet.They do not 'lack experience' if that were the case then Tau wouldn't have any knowledge of how to wage war. If you read background like the Imperial Armour Taros it makes it pretty clear that they have far greater knowledge and ability at waging war than the Imperium.They're not amatuers by any measure.

You are mistaking "theme" for a pseudo-realistic comparison that does not exist in 40K.

IG veterans are not "comparable" to Tau veterans, even if they fought the same number of battles. IG veterans are a "movie clichee". A hardned, tough-as-leather guy with scars all over his face who toughes it out. It's not a theme that applies to Tau or that they try to cover or appeal to in a Tau Codex.

Similarly, Eldar, Space Marines or Necrons might be more "technologically advanced" if you try to deduce what technology would be required to "re-create" the often short fig-leaves of techno-babble explanations that Codex Writers left to make them work.

A Black Templar Power Armour is not a "piece of technology". It's a medieval knight's armour that has been given a faux-technology explanation to transplant it into 40K's kitchen-sink setting. But "advancement of technology" is not how a Templar Codex is structured. The "hierarchy" of the Templar Codex follows the logic of a medieval knightly order with new initiates to knight brothers to sworn brotherhood of elite knights.

Likewise, Necron are often described as the "most advanced army". But they are equally not a "technology-race". They are a mix of tomb kings, 1980s Arnold, Star Gate and a few other clichee mixed into 40K, again with some faux-tech-babble given to explain the common tropes of the army (like scary green bzzzzzz beams). Again, the "hierarchy" of the Necron Codex does not follow technology, but the logic of Egyptian royalty and ancient courts, etc.. .

In contrast, the Tau are a "technology-themed" army. They don't strife for the "grizzled-veteran-schtick" of IG, nor for the "royal hierarchy-schtick" of the Necrons. Their codex-internal "hierarchy" is clearly written to reflect a progress of technology with the Elite getting the funkiest gadgets (including "experimental tech"), the common Tau troops somewhat more basic, yet still "awsome" tech and the alien allies the most "primitve" weapons of all.

This, the logic by which "Elites" and "Troops" are differentiated in a Tau Codex is "technology", which is the overriding theme of the Tau army, but not the theme of a Necron, Eldar or Space Marine army in the same degree.

No, Tau go for the, we are the only people who think rationally and have an actual well trained army. Most guard armies amount to throw lasgun in direction of soldier or give them a few days of useless training like in WW2 to get cannon fodder; if he actually survives he gets BS4. Tau are themed as an actual modern army, that goes to great lengths to train its soldiers, to care about their welfare and ensure their support from other branches of the army. They are also themed as 'the elite shooting army' but you're saying the Stalingrad cannon fodder army should not only have better weapons but shoot better than the army which cares about its own troops and trains them accordingly? One theme does not wipe out all other considerations. Crisis suit drivers are specifically described as being 'veterans' and 'elite'. It has nothing to do with the amount of crisis suits. Are you also saying the repeated allusions and references to Tau having better trained troops than guardsmen does not count as GW theming their own army? The only reason they have crap BS is because that codex was from an old edition where everything was toned down and high priced compared to 5th edition. Just look at basic guard infantry. They got orders like first rank fire, second rank fire, frag and krak grenades and actually got cheaper which had nothing to do with army theme at all. They just randomly became massivly better than before.

^ Wrong. Or at least the comparsion is wrong. The Imperial Guard is an elite force. They are pretty much the IoM's version of the Rangers or the Marine Corps. They are well trained, equipped with weapons that can do the job, and bascially have all the support elements the IoM can provide. You mistake the guardsmen with conscripts.

How's this: all drones can be upgraded with any battlesuit weaponry (except railguns). They can also be fielded in squads with any kind of weaponry. Deep striking gun drone squadrons with twin-linked fusion blasters would ruin any mech player's day, and imagine twin-linked flamers deep-striking against a horde army.

Keep on imagining that....

I don't play Tau, but here a few thoughts I've had.

1) Suits. BS4 and slightly cheaper. I mean, they are vets, they should have decent BS. They also are kinda overpriced right now, so could use a point-cut.

2) Firewarriors- keep 'em BS3, but make them cheaper. They are just the basic troops, after all. Allow pulse Riffles to Rapid fire up to 15". Upgrade squad leader to BS4, so his markerlight will actually hit.

Next, give them an option to add Drone controllers (say 1:5 models), who may take up to two Drones equipped with the following:
-Rail Rifle
-Marker Light
-Twin-linked pulse Carbine
Drones should be BS3 and relentless. They are designed to shoot things. Also, they shouldn't count towards squad size, panic, or break tests.

3) Add more options to markerlights. For example, tank hunters.


Lets take a hypothetical Fire Warrior Squad with these changes. Say, 12 Fire Warriors, including squad Leader with Markerlight, Two Drone Controllers with four Rail rifles Drones, and nine normal Firewarriors. Lets say, turn one with two markerlights, shooting at a Rhino.

BS4
9 Shots from pulse riffles, 6 hits. Use the second markerlight to give them Tank Hunters, and thats a pen and a glance. The Drones shoot. 3(ish) hits, lets say 1 glance, 1 pen.

In total, 2G 2P. Thats not to bad.

We need more defensive, anti-CC wargear; denying CC rather than being good at CC.

Give the Ethereals a reason for being anything more than fluff.

I havn't used Vespids enough to judge properly, but I think that they are too weak even for a 'glass cannon' type unit.

Don't make Firewarriors/Suits BS 4; instead, make marker lights more useful/viable.

I'm not necessarily saying that they're underpowered, but 18" range for a heavy machine gun seems pretty poor for a dedicated shooting army.

FW Tetras!

Better unique characters, and Farsight Enclaves having a Doctrine system if not being a separate Codex (Space Marines get all the fun... ). You can't be the Enclaves under 1500pts without using normal Empire rules.

AtoMaki wrote:^ Wrong. Or at least the comparsion is wrong. The Imperial Guard is an elite force. They are pretty much the IoM's version of the Rangers or the Marine Corps. They are well trained, equipped with weapons that can do the job, and bascially have all the support elements the IoM can provide. You mistake the guardsmen with conscripts.

i wouldnt call them rangers though...

I'll agree, In theory, the guard are forged the best 10% of a worlds armed forces when they're called for a tithe. thats how the propaganda machine will spin it. I'll disagree that this what actually happens.
the imperium is nothing if not wasteful of its resources, and platetary governors are nothing, if not dodgy, selfish, and self-serving. giving the best 10% of your forces away? when you've got eldar raiders, ork infestations, cultists, rival governors, etc all over the place, on every home front? when the imperium comes acalling, you'll give some good troops to shut them up, and mix in some chaff... And maybe, those undesirables. you can purge your planet of what you dont want to have there.
And anyways, as mentioned, the imperium is incredibly wasteful of its soldiers. So they're thankful for that they can get. In the end, what about those soldiers? they're throwaway, and expendable to a degree that would shock even ww1 generals. so once the top 10% of a planets armed forces are wasted and chewed up by the meatgrinder in this way, and the next tithe is demanded? what then? you give the next 10% best of your forces. and then they're torn up. its all but impossible to maintain those "top" standards, and to keep giving the "best", in significant numbers, unless youre ruling a fortress world like Cadia. what happens in hive worlds, where the top soldiers are gutter trash, and thugs by any one else's definitions? what happens if you've got a world stuck in the stone age? Or a medieval world? with your population armed with bows, rocks, and swords?
And what happens when a world is demanded to supply a tithe that is beyond it, if it intends only to give its best? you dont get to pick and choose. you're demanded to supply, and if you dont, you're bombed to atoms. the IG codex has an example of a world that was forced to enroll 80% of its population into the Imperial Guard. men, women, children, the old, the young, the weak, the infirm. they're all in there. top forces? maybe a percentage of what was given would count as that.

as for the support elements, thats not strictly true. worlds are meant to supply their own troops with basic equipment.

the guard represents everything, including those "best" tithes, as well as the fodder that they're thankful for getting. its all mixed up in there.

AtoMaki wrote:^ Wrong. Or at least the comparsion is wrong. The Imperial Guard is an elite force. They are pretty much the IoM's version of the Rangers or the Marine Corps. They are well trained, equipped with weapons that can do the job, and bascially have all the support elements the IoM can provide. You mistake the guardsmen with conscripts.

Only works if you apply it to Cadian Shock troops; even then its heavily hinted that you represent such a force with veterans. If you look at Valhallens, Steel Legion and other WW2 themed guard its quite clear that GW is not angling for them to be an elite force at all. They are a fodder army. In fact they even wrote a book where they emphasised that a guard spent 4 months in training, another 4 to reach a warzone and was quite dead after 48 hours. The guard are not an elite force. If you want to have a Tanith army the codex expects you to take vets with camo cloaks. If you want heavy infantry then you take vets with carapace armour. Basic guard troops are fodder in every sense of the term.

Let the markerlights go over BS 5 (though making them generally more useful/viable is a more pressing issue..). Unless I'm mistaken, the 'BS 5 limit' was created in a version of 40K where there was no BS 6*, stopping people from saying "I get BS 6, that means I always hit."

*Though the Archon in the ye olde DE codex had BS 6......odd.

Avatar 720 wrote:@Juniperius

...Which is why Fire Warrior Veterans bought with an Ethereal are BS4.

Cadian Guardsmen are BS3 and are trained from birth as soldiers.
Fire Warriors are BS3 are are trained from birth as soldiers.
Cadian Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.
Fire Warrior Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.

Why do the run-of-the-mill soldiers need BS4?

FW Veterans are an HQ choice, and only if you take a useless Space Pope.

Though having said that, I agree that the normal FWs shouldn't have BS 4 standard.

On the BS 4 issue just a quick comparison.

On a Toughness 3 target in rapid fire range, a unit of 6 Tau Firewarriors delivers 6 hits which leads to 5 wounds. On the same target 6 Space Marines with BS 4 will get 8 hits and 5 1/3rd wounds.

On a Toughness 4 targets the same Tau unit gets 6 hits and 4 wounds while the same Marine unit gets 8 hits and 4 wounds.

The Strength 5 compensates for the BS 3 and puts Tau shooting around the same as Marine shooting overall.

SDFarsight wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:@Juniperius

...Which is why Fire Warrior Veterans bought with an Ethereal are BS4.

Cadian Guardsmen are BS3 and are trained from birth as soldiers.
Fire Warriors are BS3 are are trained from birth as soldiers.
Cadian Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.
Fire Warrior Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.

Why do the run-of-the-mill soldiers need BS4?

FW Veterans are an HQ choice, and only if you take a useless Space Pope.

Though having said that, I agree that the normal FWs shouldn't have BS 4 standard.

No, not every guardsman is a cadian. They and Catachan are really distorting examples about what generic guard are like. Both are meant to be the cream of the crop in terms of guard regiments. Your joe guardsman is little better than a piece of meat told to shove his bayonet into a maniqin for four months before he is sent off to war and is then left to huddle up in a trench and shoot anything that he sees.

What you're saying is that Tau. Despite being 'the elite shooty army'; shouldn't have

1-Decent BS

2-Guns that are even marginally better or cheaper than those in other armies

3-Troops that can survive being shot at without running at the drop of a hat

4-Oh and bad enough in CC that SOB can table them unless you use suicide units like kroot that eat into your points and hand kill points away

Battlesuits are a good example. You're paying through the nose for units that have, what, basic special weapons available to everyone. For one BS4 battleusit with plasma, melta and multi you could buy a vet squad with 3 plasmas or even a long fang squad. Nearly double the firepower and with more ablative wounds to soak up fire.

I've been playing Tau for a little while now, they have such amazing strengths and dreadful weaknesses. I've spend a long time looking at the codex wondering how certain tweaks wound possibly help the army to be competitive nowadays. Obviously some of it is wishfull thinking but I'll let you guys judge for yourselves.

1) I think the points costs for most of the units in the Tau codex could be improved quite a bit, compare them to other armies and their elite slot upgrades. Just by reducing most of the units costs down by 5 has such a dramatic effect of making the unit composition far more appealing. Example:
Crisis Shas'Ui become 20 points
Plasma Rifles become 10 or 15points

2) The "sergents" for squads such as Shas'Vres for Crisis Teams and Shas'Uis for firewarriors dont seem to have great purpose other than racking up the cost of the entire unit. I propose that the "sergents" are mandatory similar to how SM need to take them. Example :
Firewarrior Squad
Shas'Ui 1
Shas'La 5
Then add up to 6 Shas'La costing X per model.

For firewarriors the Shas'Ui should just be the same points as the normal Shas'La, allowing for wound allocation to the normal firewarriors and keeping your upgrades and higher Ld for a while longer.
Also they should already have photon and emp grenades included. It gives them more versatility for other targets such as assaulters and vehicles.

Similar for Pathfinders (with the Shas'Ui), make them the same points as Firewarriors because they are the same in all respects. I think Markerlights should remain Heavy Weapons, they are so incredibly useful but there certainly has to be a downside to them.

3) Kroot are a great troop choice but they lack just a few thing in order to give them flexibility on the field. I always imagined Kroot were agile warriors that could be a match for some tyranids. Again, Making the Shaper compulsary in order to give them the higher Ld which is really needed. And give them a 5+ Invulnerable save for purposes of being so agile as well as fleet in order to give them better movement along the board. This would make more sense because with their Rapid Firing rifles, they would not be able to assault after firing so it would make more sense that if they traded off shooting to be able to run then assault instead.

4) The vehicles of the Tau are great, and the vehicle upgrades even more so. The costs of some of the vehicles are a little outrageous like the devilfish, making it 45points instead would means that you're still paying for the higher AV values than normal transports and still get some reasonable firepower for your points cost. Remember thats before upgrades, so the transport ends up being around 70 points after upgrades. The hammerhead also needs a small reduction in points cost BEFORE it is upgraded with weapons.

5) The problem with Tau that I find is most of our weapons seem to be cut short, like burst cannons being 18" instead of 24". Like someone snipped the tail end off our ranges. This extra range for some(not all) of our weapons means that most of the time we are struggling to pick our targets as a shooting army. Whereas most other armies are reaching 24"-48" on most of their heavier weapons. This is really crucial because we were meant to have this ability (target priority in last editions) to be able to pick our targets and threats before they get within asaulting range. Reducing the enemies transports and mobility is key to stopping the merciless assault of most armies. Perhaps if our missiles ( which are already weaker to the IoM equivalent) were 48" instead or markerlights 42", would have a huge impact of how well we can reach the targets we want to.

Thats mostly what I think and feel should be improved but what do you guys think?

Jefffar wrote:On the BS 4 issue just a quick comparison.

On a Toughness 3 target in rapid fire range, a unit of 6 Tau Firewarriors delivers 6 hits which leads to 5 wounds. On the same target 6 Space Marines with BS 4 will get 8 hits and 5 1/3rd wounds.

On a Toughness 4 targets the same Tau unit gets 6 hits and 4 wounds while the same Marine unit gets 8 hits and 4 wounds.

The Strength 5 compensates for the BS 3 and puts Tau shooting around the same as Marine shooting overall.

You ignore the armour save which is the game changer. Most armies in the game have a 3+ or better save and you rarely have armies filled with ork boyz or gaunts to shoot at. With that, the marines can ignore the Tau shooting and will lose only one man next to the Tau losing two men. What you're really saying is that every army has terrible basic infantry shooting and everything is decided in assault. Marines would really just assault the FW and pulverise them in a single turn rather than pelt them until they ran. I only see marines shoot if its a MC or stealers that they'd rather not charge, or SW that can just counter-attack and even then its usually the two plasma guns that do the damage. This game does not want you to take basic infantry in general. They are not worth the points; even marines in terms of shooting. They are just ablative wounds for heavy/special weapons.

For example, my uber anti infantry unit (that I killed 500pts of terminators in one turn by fluke) is maths wise really poor.

24 shots at BS5

20 hits

14 wounds

4.44 marines dead

At rapid fire that goes up to 9 dead marines

Now think what you could take with those points even if I neglect the fish's firing). Two Lemman Russ. Two Trygon. Three Hammerheads. Two decently equiped squads of crisis suits. Five veteran squads with three plasma rifles a shot. Four long fang squads. 30 genestealers. A hundred guardsmen. etc etc. Its not a good deal and it doesn't work in the current meta. I only take it because thematically I like the idea of taking FW and think they're cool. Even my Gue Vesa can get lucky now and then; FW squads are no different!

Jefffar wrote:On the BS 4 issue just a quick comparison.

On a Toughness 3 target in rapid fire range, a unit of 6 Tau Firewarriors delivers 6 hits which leads to 5 wounds. On the same target 6 Space Marines with BS 4 will get 8 hits and 5 1/3rd wounds.

On a Toughness 4 targets the same Tau unit gets 6 hits and 4 wounds while the same Marine unit gets 8 hits and 4 wounds.

The Strength 5 compensates for the BS 3 and puts Tau shooting around the same as Marine shooting overall.

Noone buys Space Marines for the damage output of their Bolters. You miss quite a few crucial features which make Marines so much better as a troop choice.

A) Special and Heavy Weapons. Especially Special Weapons. Want to bust tanks? Melta. Want to kill infantry? Flamer. Want to kill elite infantry? Plasma. Have you ever seen anyone field Marines without those, just Bolters and nothing else?

B) Decent to good HtH. Some, like Grey Hunters or CSM are better, regular Marines less so. Still, the odd Serg with a PF or a PS, along with some basic HtH capabilties lets them perform well in a clinch, support dedicated assault units if needed and stand their ground against most things that are not explicitly dedicated to killing stuff in HtH.

C) Multiple Targets. With Combat Squad and/or Split fire, Marines get even more milage out of their Special and Heavy Weapons.. as well as engage two enemy FoC-entries with only one FoC-choice on the Marine side.

D) Good LD, ATSKNF, good Armour Save. As scoring troops, they bring the survivability to hold/contest objectives in a clinch.

Honestly, if you could save points on Marines by not giving them Bolters, just the Special Weapons and ablative wounds, I think quite a few people would do so. You don't buy Marines for the Bolters. Period. You don't even buy Heavy Bolters on Infantry (the Str. 5 equivalent). It just doesn't cut it.

If Tau Firewarriors dont get A to D as outlined above, and are much more focussed on the "basic, high AP, anti-infantry shooting", they need (at equal point values) to be exponentially better than Marines at the one thing they can do, as to make up for the lack of A to D as outlined above.

Totalwar1402 wrote:

SDFarsight wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:@Juniperius

...Which is why Fire Warrior Veterans bought with an Ethereal are BS4.

Cadian Guardsmen are BS3 and are trained from birth as soldiers.
Fire Warriors are BS3 are are trained from birth as soldiers.
Cadian Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.
Fire Warrior Veterans are BS4 because they're battle-hardened veterans.

Why do the run-of-the-mill soldiers need BS4?

FW Veterans are an HQ choice, and only if you take a useless Space Pope.

Though having said that, I agree that the normal FWs shouldn't have BS 4 standard.

No, not every guardsman is a cadian. They and Catachan are really distorting examples about what generic guard are like. Both are meant to be the cream of the crop in terms of guard regiments. Your joe guardsman is little better than a piece of meat told to shove his bayonet into a maniqin for four months before he is sent off to war and is then left to huddle up in a trench and shoot anything that he sees.

What you're saying is that Tau. Despite being 'the elite shooty army'; shouldn't have

*snip*

Indeed they aren't all Cadian, which makes it even more strange that the Tau don't see base BS 4 outside of HQ choices.

Gameplay wise, markerlights should be made more viable instead of giving XV8s or even regular FWs BS 4, as the fluff and gameplay of the Tau is that they are highly tactical, carefully selecting their quarry which is then disposed of using the most efficant weapons- rather than going 'dakka dakka' everywhere- that's more like Dark Angels or shooty Orks.

On a side note, it was only recently that I found out that "Cadian" means the veteran defenders of the Fortress World, rather than "any Guardsmen who isn't Tallern, Death Corps, Tanith etc". I think it's because Cadian is the standard uniform.

No, Tau go for the, we are the only people who think rationally and have an actual well trained army. Most guard armies amount to throw lasgun in direction of soldier or give them a few days of useless training like in WW2 to get cannon fodder; if he actually survives he gets BS4. Tau are themed as an actual modern army, that goes to great lengths to train its soldiers, to care about their welfare and ensure their support from other branches of the army. They are also themed as 'the elite shooting army' but you're saying the Stalingrad cannon fodder army should not only have better weapons but shoot better than the army which cares about its own troops and trains them accordingly?

The problem is that the fluff of the Imperial Guard codex actually says that the Imperial Guard is a damn good and well trained force. A BS of 3 is actually VERY impressive for a human to do. They are able to accomplish this BECAUSE of their harsh training. The reason why the Guard on TT seem like gak shooters is because they are fighting things lik Genetically engineered warriors.

Most Guard units support massive training to install disipline and order. What you are describing is conscripits which is an incredibly different thing. A Guardsman needs to survive years or a decade of constant warfare before he is a BS4.


Oh by the way, the Soviet in army in Stalingrad did have better weapons and had some excellent shooters. However they had poor leadership on both the strategic and tactical levels.

What I believe most people are saying is that an army that relies on harsh displine and high standards of training (Cadia, Mordian, Steel Legion, Krieg, Vostroyan) or natural skill because of harsh worlds (Catachan, Valhalla, Tanith) bult around a training program by a faction engulfed in war, should be equal to an army in shooting quality of the invdividual soldier as the that of a well trained soldier with aid of technology.

A Tau Grunt fresh out of bootcamp should not have the same accuracy as a battlehardned soldier with decades under his belt, an elite stormtrooper, or a Super engineered man designed to be a killing machine with decades or more of combat experience under his belt on top of heightened reflexes.




We arnt saying Firewarriors are perfect, they just should have different changes besides a simple raise of their BS levels

Galdos wrote:
The problem is that the fluff of the Imperial Guard codex actually says that the Imperial Guard is a damn good and well trained force. A BS of 3 is actually VERY impressive for a human to do. They are able to accomplish this BECAUSE of their harsh training. The reason why the Guard on TT seem like gak shooters is because they are fighting things lik Genetically engineered warriors.

Again, humans receive BS3 or even 4 because of harsh training.

Space Marines because of genetic engineering.

Eldar because of ancient martial traditions.

Necrons because of robotic bodies.

Tau, most likely, because of technology.

Statlines are abstract numbers. They "represent" entirely DIFFERENT things in different factions or even units. There is no rule the stat X must be justified by one reason, but cannot be justified by another. Indeed, if it were, we would just need one Codex for all 40K factions with entries for "newbie unit"; "trained unit" and "veteran unit".

The entire point of different factions with different fluff using the same system of rules is, after all, that different justifications and themes can be represented by the same set of numbers.

Galdos wrote:

No, Tau go for the, we are the only people who think rationally and have an actual well trained army. Most guard armies amount to throw lasgun in direction of soldier or give them a few days of useless training like in WW2 to get cannon fodder; if he actually survives he gets BS4. Tau are themed as an actual modern army, that goes to great lengths to train its soldiers, to care about their welfare and ensure their support from other branches of the army. They are also themed as 'the elite shooting army' but you're saying the Stalingrad cannon fodder army should not only have better weapons but shoot better than the army which cares about its own troops and trains them accordingly?

The problem is that the fluff of the Imperial Guard codex actually says that the Imperial Guard is a damn good and well trained force. A BS of 3 is actually VERY impressive for a human to do. They are able to accomplish this BECAUSE of their harsh training. The reason why the Guard on TT seem like gak shooters is because they are fighting things lik Genetically engineered warriors.

Most Guard units support massive training to install disipline and order. What you are describing is conscripits which is an incredibly different thing. A Guardsman needs to survive years or a decade of constant warfare before he is a BS4.


Oh by the way, the Soviet in army in Stalingrad did have better weapons and had some excellent shooters. However they had poor leadership on both the strategic and tactical levels.

What I believe most people are saying is that an army that relies on harsh displine and high standards of training (Cadia, Mordian, Steel Legion, Krieg, Vostroyan) or natural skill because of harsh worlds (Catachan, Valhalla, Tanith) bult around a training program by a faction engulfed in war, should be equal to an army in shooting quality of the invdividual soldier as the that of a well trained soldier with aid of technology.

A Tau Grunt fresh out of bootcamp should not have the same accuracy as a battlehardned soldier with decades under his belt, an elite stormtrooper, or a Super engineered man designed to be a killing machine with decades or more of combat experience under his belt on top of heightened reflexes.




We arnt saying Firewarriors are perfect, they just should have different changes besides a simple raise of their BS levels

The Tau are part of a warrior caste- like Spartans (shooting-wise, at least).

IMO They're only BS 3 because their eyes are too slow to focus* and for gameplay reasons.

*in the codex IIRC, it says that the Tau's eyes are exelent, being able to see in better detail and wavelengths (Predator?) that the human eye can't, but the slow reaction-focus times of their eyes makes their shooting roughly equal to a human's.

Infact it doesn't say anything about their helmet being an advantage, as much as I wish it did. I guess the helmet optics are for their Darksun filters etc. Or like the Space Marines- just for protection.

*** post deleted by me.

Zweischneid wrote:
- More Special Characters showing off the rich Tau background

The rich background of being the galaxy's redshirt ever since the 3rd sphere expansion. XD