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.

So since 7th dropped a fair nerf on skimmers I've been thinking about dropping the tanks from my army.
Just on the face of it our tanks have gotten worse (so have others) and I don't think they now bring enough to the table to warrant the slots with limited ability to move and shoot now.

I'm not including the devilfish in this because it now has more purpose when transporting firewarriors.

What are you opinions on Tau Tanks now?

Hammerhead became worse. I'd use the Ion Cannon variant, but a Barracuda does the same and it's more survivable.

Skyray is still good, but depends on Markerlights to fire its missiles with some kind of accuracy.

The light vehicles are quite okay with the changes

I tried Devilfish spam on an Eldar player. The fish are very survivable, but you do need some firepower in support. I think the Tau are now a totally hit and run army. I need to play them more, but next time I am going to try some Piranha and a skyray or Hammerhead. I was using two Riptides and they really helped, one survived the whole game. I think list building is vital to the success of Tau, but the Fish/FW secure objective is still a good choice. Sensor Spines and Disruption pods made my jink a 3+, really survivable IMHO.

Try some combined arms and bring the Riptides.

Well, look at it this way:

a Hammerhead is still a front AV 13, 3 HP tank that, for similar points cost as a Predator Annihilator, has +1 side armor, doesnt take dangerous terrain checks, has far more range, never has its firepower diminished in part due to LoS shenanigans, and has a solid secondary weapons system as well.

These points already continue to make it a better tank than the Pred.

In previous editions, the HH was ridiculously overpowered due to it constantly having a 4+ jink when it moved.

Now it is more in line with Imperial tanks for its points cost.

The HH can't really take advantage of jink anymore... but since it's turret is located so high up on the model, it can still easily get cover saves from terrain, which can be just as good as jink saves if you find a piece of ruins to hide behind. That, combined with the vehicle damage table changes, has made them better.

Devilfishes have gotten significantly better, since jink doesn't affect their ability to disembark troops, and can give them 3+ cover saves out in the open without having to flat-out.

Skyrays are largely unchanged, since they're mostly an immobile firing platform.

 Sir Arun wrote:
These points already continue to make it a better tank than the Pred.

In previous editions, the HH was ridiculousness ly overpowered due to it constantly having a 4+ jink when it moved.

Now it is more in line with Imperial tanks for its points cost.

Two flaws there.
1-HH railgun beats lascannon, not three.
2-Predator is unimpressive to begin with.


Hammerheads were fine. No way in he'll OP. They never quite showed up in turnies for a reason.

As for using them now, I'd probably barebone them to try and keep prices lowish.
They still work, but static rather than mobile.

The Predator is the main AT tank for the Space Marines. Yes, it is unimpressive, but so are most non-LR imperial tanks to begin with, which already proves that xeno tanks were objectively better for their points cost.

And I'll take a S10 AP1 72" solid shot that can double as a S6 AP4 anti infantry pie plate over 2 S9 AP2 48" sponsons that often end up with one out of LoS and a TL S9 AP2 gun any day - especially because you lose 2/3rds of the firepower if you move, compared to the HH that does not.

Predators are fine, they give you three lascannons shots on an AV13 platform. Hammerheads have a great gun on a great tank, but they still only have that one shot each turn.

Yep, and that one shot is PAINFUL. it means you got very little reliability.
The pred you at least know it will probably hit.

And considering how thin he is, proper positioning will allow you to fire all three, you just need the target's "flat profile" to be bigger then your front "flat profile", and that means nearly anything not a small transport that you are not staring directly at its face, or a really tiny team that is clustered up/lined up with you staring at the edge of the line.

BTW, that 72" range people fuss about? the long table edge is 72", how often you think that kind of range is even relevant in game? how often is more then 48 really an issue?
Its really nice in a proper poc table where the sides are far off each other on the start, but does not come into play in a normal game. even the 60" of the ion variant does not really come into play. not often I want to shoot at something that isn't within 48" anyway.

They are rather equal to each other. each has his own benefits and downsides.

Even then the fact remains that you can use the HH in an alternating role of massacring infantry. S6 AP4 pie plate coupled with 4 S5 shots from the twin-linked SMS make it equally effective against GEQ. So if you have no armor to shoot at, your 150 point investment isnt sitting there doing nothing.

But your 145 pt Pred will be. The only time it does better than the HH is when shooting at MCs or a squad of terminators.

The fact still remains that if you move the Pred an inch, you just wasted a ton of its firepower, making it a relatively immobile firing platform, while the HH can skim 6" out and about and reposition itself with virtually no loss in firepower.

And finally the +1 side AV rating is also there.

So all in all, yes, the HH did indeed deserve the disruption pod nerf because a constant 4++ cover save on top of all this was just ridiculous in the previous edition. The reason why people dont take em is because the Tau codex is spilling over with extremely points worthy stuff.

ywp, you listed the HH's advantages.

The perd however, is far better focus-wise to deal with heavy threats, be it tanks, termis, bikers or MCs due to his multiple lascannons, even when one is snap firing.

Hammerhead won on defense and verastility to tackle QEK, predator won on focused anti-elite firepower and constancy, at slightly lower prices.

That's why I say they are about equal. each got his strong sides, but none is drastically better then the other. at some cases you'd prefer one, at others you'd prefer another.

Yeah, being able to scoot-and-shoot is a huge boon for the Hammerhead. 6e jink + disruption pods had incredible synergy on the hammerhead, giving 4+ saves in the open with no loss of firepower. Now, you have to rely on it's armor for survivability, since snap-shooting after jink totally screws the HH's firepower (but with AV13 and AV12 on the sides, and the new vehicle damage table, it's still quite tough out in the open).

Yep, and that one shot is PAINFUL. it means you got very little reliability.

It has great synergy with markerlights - spending just one markerlight token to bump your BS up to 5 makes the solid shot very reliable, and spending two tokens for ignores cover makes the submunitions brutal against infantry hiding in ruins.

Markerlights, like Dpods, are extra costs funneled into the tank.

Not bad investments, but costs extra.



And a single shot is the definition of not reliable, even at BS5, as rolling a single 1 to hit/wound means you lost your only shot.
Try the hammerhead once, see for yourself how painful is the chance to just whiff shots randomly.

And a single shot is the definition of not reliable, even at BS5, as rolling a single 1 to hit/wound means you lost your only shot.
Try the hammerhead once, see for yourself how painful is the chance to just whiff shots randomly.

I play Space Marines normally, but I use my friend's Tau army sometimes - the hammerheads are awesome. I don't buy the argument about it being unreliable - everything in the game can suck if you roll 1s, the hammerhead isn't different in that regard. If anything, being able to buff your BS with markerlights makes it MORE reliable than some of tau's other stuff (e.g., riptide pieplates).

To be able to buff stuff applies to nearly everything in the game nowdays with divination and all...

But the point is, having only a sinlge dice makes for no bell curves what-so-ever, and by such unreliable results.

It by no means make hammerheads bad, but it IS a disadvanatge they have, along with the fact multiple lascannons will nearly always do more damage then a single rail shot.

Pros and cons. predator and ahmmerhead has their own strengths and weaknesses compared to each other.

Both do their job pretty good by the end of the day when used properly, but in order to use your tank properly you need to be aware of the things he is good at, and the things he has problems with.

By simple comparions of the two:

Hammerhead (railgun) pros:
Can ID T5 models
Submunnition+secondary weapons help reduce against horde.
Better defenses.
Slow movement does not hinder firepower

Predator (triplas) pros:
Far superior average damage against most high-profile units (pretty much anything with 3+ armor and tanks up to av 13, with T5 multiwound the exception, even while moving the predator is still ahead in raw damage against most of them.)
More reliable and predictable results due to multiple dice (bell curving effect)


Naturally it does not cover all bases and things that come from the nature of their parenting codex, but its rather obvious that both have their stronger sides.
At no place I even stated the hammerhead is BAD. I think he's in a perfect stop on the balance curve. I only noted that he is not without his own downsides (like any proper unit should be.)