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.

Hello, I am returning to 40k after a two year break. Ill be playing with three friends. Their armies consist of Ultramarines, Eldar and Imperial Guard. All play rock hard lists (competitive). My question is, out of the two chocies (tau or necron) which will put up the best fight . And how bad is the secondary choice going to be? Because if it wer my choice id run Necrons because its what I like the looks of. Thank you in advance.

Truth be told Necrons are a higher tier than Tau, but both will likely be more than sufficient.

If you like the look of Necrons they are easily the second best strongest codex's right now. Tau are the 5th. Eldar are top tier by a mile. Space Marines are usually third or fourth with Chaos Deamons. It all depends on where you rank them.

If your armies are the most bleeding edge competitive like ITC level and use their rules then Tau are merely a tier 1.5 race. They can crush anything lower tier, but the best of the best of the top tier will defeat them time and again.

IG are.... not usually played "competitively" anywhere and are among the weakest factions in the game with such poor codices as the Dark Eldar (worst), Orks, and IG.

Hi there Table, since you want to play competitively, I would recommend Necrons, plus the fact that you love the look of them as well, means you'll enjoy building, painting and playing them (which is kinda the point xD). However, Tau can be quite competitive if you now how to build a really strong Tau list you can win most games against even Eldar and Necrons (they have the best codices atm), but that takes quite some time, it's simple with Necrons. Besides, I highly recommend you play Necrons as you like the look of them

Hope I helped,

DarkShade1999

Both Tau and Necs can be very strong. But if you prefer the look of the Necs go for them! you will enjoy it much more to build paint n play with them

These guys have hit it on the head for you. You have your eye on two armies that are both very competitive, as such you're not going to go wrong either way really. They're both primarily shooty with hitty options.
It's going to come down to which you're goin to enjoy more. You're already naturally drawn to necrons so personally I'd go with your gut on that one and choose them.

If you really want to be sure, just grab some models you have and do some proxy games to get a feel for them and list creation and play style.

Necrons have some really fun models to assemble and nice and easy to paint which is great when you want to jump into games quickly. Got 100 warriors to paint? Easy couple hours and look good.

Whichever one you like the look of more, really. And you could always buy the other army later, lol.

For competitive, I'd run a necron decurion:

Nemesor Zahndrek (easy to just proxy using an overlord and a bit more flashy paint job)
some lychguard for him to hide in (if you want you can run Orikanstar, but that's a bit of a points sink)
Immortals in a night scythe
2 units of warriors in Ghost Arks (possibly the best transport in the game, currently)
Tomb blades (2nd best bikes in the game)

That's your base, then you add a supporting formation, I personally like the canoptek harvest:
Canoptek spyder
Wraiths (5 or 6)
Scarabs

Many players run judicator battalion or destroyer cult as these formations are excellent shooting units against marines.

Necrons lack range but are lethal vs. vehicles and MC's because of the Guass rule, they are also the most durable army in the game - a unit of lychguard with shields, orikan, and zahndrek attached is night on unkillable in a decurion (T5, 3++ rerolling 1's, 4+++ rerolling 1's with the ability to tank on a 2+ or Orikan when he turns into a MC...)

Both are top tier armies and quite capable of winning games against any opponent. Pick the one you like the most.

 Vankraken wrote:
Both are top tier armies and quite capable of winning games against any opponent. Pick the one you like the most.

Tau and top tier are to be used loosely. They are the top of the middle tier, sure

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
Both are top tier armies and quite capable of winning games against any opponent. Pick the one you like the most.

Tau and top tier are to be used loosely. They are the top of the middle tier, sure

So in the current ITC standings a Tau player is #1 and there is another in the top 10. Clearly mid tier

You're judging the random statistics of dice over a period of a few matches to play an army in a tier slot due to its first time doing good in a tourney since rd release? Sad

Nothing I have seen leads me to believe that Tau are not in the top tier with Eldar, Space Marines, Crons, and Daemons. They have an incredibly strong codex and the tools to handle any threat. I don't see what would make Tau less than top tier.

The fact that tau falls behind all the mentioned armies, you just named. You can't just continue adding armies to a top tier simply because it's "almost" as powerful as current top tier. It falls just shy, as the top of the middle tier. It wants to be there, it really does. And tau players beg and cry for it to be there... It just isnt

Lets agree to disagree then because nothing good will come from arguing about it (there is enough of that on these forums every month as it is). I will stand by my statement that the Tau have the tools and the efficiency to take on any army in the game and have a good chance to win.

 Vankraken wrote:
Lets agree to disagree then because nothing good will come from arguing about it (there is enough of that on these forums every month as it is). I will stand by my statement that the Tau have the tools and the efficiency to take on any army in the game and have a good chance to win.

Fair enough, I can agree to that term. Either way, it does sound like OP is more towards necrons

Both Tau and Necrons are super strong. Would you rather shoot your opponent off the table or be a nigh unstoppable wave, grinding down your opponent?

Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

 EnTyme wrote:
Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

This isn't true, but okay.

 Jaxler wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

This isn't true, but okay.

What makes you say that, I think EnTyme is spot on.

To the OP, I would go for Necrons just on the amount of interaction for your opponent and not sitting in the back to point and click. Personally I think they are more engaging than Tau for the opponent (having faced both multiple times).

Table wrote:
Hello, I am returning to 40k after a two year break. Ill be playing with three friends. Their armies consist of Ultramarines, Eldar and Imperial Guard. All play rock hard lists (competitive). My question is, out of the two chocies (tau or necron) which will put up the best fight . And how bad is the secondary choice going to be? Because if it wer my choice id run Necrons because its what I like the looks of. Thank you in advance.

Go with Necrons if you like their looks better. Currently, they are not at a loss for competitiveness, and anyway these things are fleeting because Games Workshop tinkers with the rules frequently, so you might as well collect the models you like.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

This isn't true, but okay.

What makes you say that, I think EnTyme is spot on.

To the OP, I would go for Necrons just on the amount of interaction for your opponent and not sitting in the back to point and click. Personally I think they are more engaging than Tau for the opponent (having faced both multiple times).

Unless interaction with your opponent translates to assaulting, I can promise you that tau can have interaction. The static gunline lists are the worst tau have to offer and if you plan on winning any event It's necessary that you be able to take objectives.

Also as a person who plays tau, I can say that when comparing top level army builds, tau do no out do eldar space marines or demons, and to claim otherwise is to ignore evidence. Tau may be good, and one of the best armies, but when someone says they are worse than space marines then they are completely wrong.

 Jaxler wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

This isn't true, but okay.

What makes you say that, I think EnTyme is spot on.

To the OP, I would go for Necrons just on the amount of interaction for your opponent and not sitting in the back to point and click. Personally I think they are more engaging than Tau for the opponent (having faced both multiple times).

Unless interaction with your opponent translates to assaulting, I can promise you that tau can have interaction. The static gunline lists are the worst tau have to offer and if you plan on winning any event It's necessary that you be able to take objectives.

Also as a person who plays tau, I can say that when comparing top level army builds, tau do no out do eldar space marines or demons, and to claim otherwise is to ignore evidence. Tau may be good, and one of the best armies, but when someone says they are worse than space marines then they are completely wrong.

Tau don't outdo Eldar or Space Marines, but are at least on par. Also, point and click gunlines do work, as per the recent ITCs. Riptides and Stormsurges have huge movements to claim objectives, as well as JSJ moves for the suits.

Plus, why bother going for objectives when you can table your opponent?

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Several people consider Tau to be weaker than they are based on the ITC nerfs, but if we're talking about the GW rules from the books, they are every bit as strong as the Necrons, SW, SM, etc. Only the Eldar are definitively stronger.

This isn't true, but okay.

What makes you say that, I think EnTyme is spot on.

To the OP, I would go for Necrons just on the amount of interaction for your opponent and not sitting in the back to point and click. Personally I think they are more engaging than Tau for the opponent (having faced both multiple times).

Unless interaction with your opponent translates to assaulting, I can promise you that tau can have interaction. The static gunline lists are the worst tau have to offer and if you plan on winning any event It's necessary that you be able to take objectives.

Also as a person who plays tau, I can say that when comparing top level army builds, tau do no out do eldar space marines or demons, and to claim otherwise is to ignore evidence. Tau may be good, and one of the best armies, but when someone says they are worse than space marines then they are completely wrong.

Tau don't outdo Eldar or Space Marines, but are at least on par. Also, point and click gunlines do work, as per the recent ITCs. Riptides and Stormsurges have huge movements to claim objectives, as well as JSJ moves for the suits.

Plus, why bother going for objectives when you can table your opponent?

Because if your going to go without any losses at an event, your list should be resilient enough to not be shot off the board in 2-3 turns. And if the opponent is static and can't shoot you off the board before you can hurt them back you just won via objectives.

Tau are probably the easiest to play army in the game - if you want to be challenged occasionally go Necrons.

Tau are nowhere near on par with Space Marines let alone Eldar. Go look at ANY tournament since the Tau got updated and you'll see Eldar and Space Marines all in the top 25 as far as the eye can see and some Necrons and Chaos Deamons.

One of two Tau players to make the top 25 in the last major tournament was listed as having Tau in error. So only one man made it into the top 25 with them. Prior to him the bext largest tournament only seen them get two in the top 25. Every single time I get some dumb excuse as to why the Tau nerfs are justified. Oh this player won by a single random roll, or it favor objective secured, or x y z. I'm sick of the bs misinformation. The FACTS clearly paint the picture better than any biased person can and they say the Tau aren't winning gak. I would be amazed to see a Tau list crack the top 10 this year as Space Marine power creep sets in.

Tau are their own separate tier alongside Chaos Renegades that is between top tier and mid tier. Can crush anything lower, but will struggle against any competent player of the top tier armies.

What do tournament rankings have to do with how easy the army is to play?

Oh I wasn't responding to you. They appear to be easy to play for simple strategies, but if you want to truly master them they are a moderate amount of skill needed I find a lot of players just can't quite get.

Easy to pick up, but there's some advanced tricks to really up your game if needed. Not the highest skill army though definitely.

 Gamgee wrote:
Tau are nowhere near on par with Space Marines let alone Eldar. Go look at ANY tournament since the Tau got updated and you'll see Eldar and Space Marines all in the top 25 as far as the eye can see and some Necrons and Chaos Deamons.

One of two Tau players to make the top 25 in the last major tournament was listed as having Tau in error. So only one man made it into the top 25 with them. Prior to him the bext largest tournament only seen them get two in the top 25. Every single time I get some dumb excuse as to why the Tau nerfs are justified. Oh this player won by a single random roll, or it favor objective secured, or x y z. I'm sick of the bs misinformation. The FACTS clearly paint the picture better than any biased person can and they say the Tau aren't winning gak. I would be amazed to see a Tau list crack the top 10 this year as Space Marine power creep sets in.

Tau are their own separate tier alongside Chaos Renegades that is between top tier and mid tier. Can crush anything lower, but will struggle against any competent player of the top tier armies.

As I said, the ITC nerfs took a heavy toll on Tau, but per the actual GW rules, they are pretty strong. And as I also said, Eldar a far and above better than Tau. What makes Tau so good is that they have a hard counter for just about any strategy their opponent can throw at them. Skyhammer Annihilation Force? Our EWOs would like a word with you. Necron RP? Tau can throw out enough RoF to ensure failures. TWC? See Necrons. They are not better than the top tier armies, but they are definitely among the top tier armies. It's not the game's fault that ITC hates your race.

Do the Irontide March with 100 Necron Warriors.