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.

I have played some power blob and centurion death stars but I usually go with a TAC list. I have just as much success with TAC list as I do with the death stars but I don't really see that many TAC list in top 8's.

So my question is do you think TAC list are weak?

What is your definition of a TAC list?

Do you think its harder to win with a TAC list?

I would define a TAC list as one which can deal with anything an opponant throws at them, i.e. hordes, flyers, tanks etc.

In my opinion both TAC lists and death star lists are about equal; a TAC list can attack any part of an opponants army, therefore the tactics for such an army are more flexible but, not being a death star, individual units are more vunerable; on the other hand death stars are more likely to survive but they tend to just one unit (or two): so the tactical options are reduced.

Power lists tend to show up more than TAC lists because what they can deal with: they deal with more effectively than TAC lists, and what they can't deal with: they just ignore.

Also, I personally don't use TAC (or CAD for that matter) because I find games are more fun with fewer, hard hitting, tough models: it generally means games turns are faster. This might be the case with other people but I don't know.

The problem with TAC lists is that they can't deal with an emey that specializes against the TAC's army.

Let's say a TAC Dark Eldar army. They can deal with many stuff, but an army with Ignores Cover and AP5 will obliterate them.

Let's say a TAC Marine army. They can deal with many stuff, but an army with AP3 and mobility will obliterate them (it'll be harder than the aforementioned DE list, though)

Of course, specialized armies will have problems with their own counters, but if there are hammers to your list than anvils, you'll do better than having a TAC list.
The ideal scenario would be everyone having TAC lists, but this would demand codexes with internal and external balance. While this doesn't happen, TAC lists will generally lack behind specialized ones.

A TAC lists is a list that could expect to perform well against any type of army. There are two types of TAC lists, Apex predators, and generalist. Apex Predators are list that don't have a counter, and have a central gimmick that is effective bordering on broken. A few examples are the SM Bike stars, and the Tau/eldar Giant robot lists. They generally have one tactic, which revolves around exploiting their central gimmick.

Generalist armies don't specialize in one thing and instead focus on being able to do a bit of everything. To do this they need to have units that can function in each role, Good shooting, good CC, and good mobility. A few examples are battle companies for space marines, and decurions for necrons. That's not to say they don't have their gimmicks, but their gimmicks enhance a well rounded offensive plan. The idea is that since they can do everything, that they try to play to their opponents weakness, meaning they have a reactive play style. Use CC against a shooty army, and shoot up a CC army.

In a better balanced game that might even work, but as gimmicky as 40k is now, it's actually a hard sell. Tournament level CC armies will be built for second turn assaults and to take Tau levels of fire power, which a generalist army will struggle to match. Shooty armies will have lots of tricks to deal with CC, which means having to shoot it out with them if your CC units aren't on point. Basically it takes a codex as strong as necrons or space marines to be a capable of succeeding as a generalist.

Take All Comer lists in my opinion is just a list that can deal with anything for most scenarios or literally shrug off almost everything a opponents throw at them. I don't feel Tau lists are very TAC, they are still just very much a gun line army.

Right now probably the top TAC are the different top Eldar CADs with a WK. SM BikeStar is up there but if this new GW FAQ draft becomes official, they might not be very TAC anymore. Then we got SM Gladius lists are probably one of the better TAC for both NOVA and ITC.

The scope of 40k has eliminated a true TAC army.

For example, I can't build an army at, say, 1500 points that can handle 3 IK or Hordes of Orks / Nids. I just can't. You can't have that many High Strength, Mobile attacks to deal with an IK that leaves you enough High ROF, Cheap attacks.

So that concept is no longer functional, in a true sense.

Without decrying any particular codex, few have weapons with appropriate platforms that can work against all comers. Eldar have Scatter Bikes, D-Weapons [particularly Scythes] and WK. Marines have Grav, Bike-Stars [for now]. Necrons have weapons that can technically hurt everything, plus Tesla Destructors that are damned close. Tau have super-suits and tons of guns. Really, they aren't best as gunline, but more of a fluid wave. Their best results are very accurately portrayed in their fluff... but I digress.

Daemon-stars can do it as well, I'm told, but never face them.

Most armies can't do that, so most armies are better off with a heavily skewed list.

I think a lot of people confuse the idea of a 'Take all comers' list with a 'bring all comers' list. Ie, taking one each of a ton of different units with the idea that each is bringing a new capability to your army.

But that's not really how it works.

If you bring a little bit of everything in your force, and your opponent brings a little bit of everything in their force, you can have a decent and balanced game.

But maybe you start thinking. Hey... my opponent is taking a little bit of skyfire, a little bit of anti-infantry, a little bit of anti-tank. What if I bring a ton of flyers? He only has enough skyfire to deal with one flyer easily... and if I bring 5, then 4 of them will probably survive the game, and his anti-infantry and anti-tank gets rendered fairly useless. So you build an all-flyer army that has anti-infantry and anti-tank capability (so you are TAC) while overwhelming your opponent's AA capability. And you end up with 5 Flyrants or Daemon Flying Circus.

So many the tournament winning armies are Take All Comers lists, by virtue of a) having the offensive capability to deal with all enemies, and b) skewing hard to having only a certain type of target.

I think you are mistaking a balanced list for being a TAC list. a TAC list literally takes on all comers som you can figth 2++ rerollable deathstars and swamrs of hords and IK only lists and Flyer spam so on and so forth. As you can believe true TAC lists don't exist anymore really. But balanced lists do and they are still functional

Take all comers lists cary in terms of power faction to faction, for example:

Scatpacks, Ranged D platforms, Wraithknight, Spiders, a couple of Farseers and Voidshield Gen is a pretty damn strong take all comers list and I'm pretty sure Tau (without ITC restrictions) can do something similar in terms of raw fire power.

A Guard or DE TAC will almost inevitably be worse... That said I would advocate watching 'Tabletop Tactics on Demand' and their list building tactica, really quite good for building TAC lists