Switch Theme:

Where do Tau stack up?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Newcastle, NSW ,Australia

Are Tau just OP and even a novice can win a game with them?

Apparently the is no strategy or skill required. Don't even have to think about my list or what moves I make. Tau are cheesy as heck and that means auto win. I keep getting told that by my regular opponents.

Where do they fall for you? I think their maybe above average, but auto win! surely not.

For The Greater Good - Desert Tau Painting Blog!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/670437.page#8273427
Chaos Space Marines 4100 Points
Tau Empire 3000 Points

Blood For The Blood God !!!
 
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Not quite that cheesy Also depends on what ruleset you use. House rule ITC? Not as hot but then again in ITC anything but marines struggle. Using official scenarios marine domination isn't as bad and tau have been doing good several years.

They do rely on riptides though so if you are winning all the time and want to make games more even less of those.

Biggest issue probably is they are rather static one dimensional army generally...Couple riptides, drones that make them near invulnerable, sit and shoot with overwatch making assaulting them pretty much impossible without overwatch negating ability.

Valorous heart sisters will pretty much hard counter tau though.

https://middleagedstrategybattlegamers.home.blog/2020/02/24/tneva82-winter-war-tournament-report/<- lotr painting blog

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in au
Sneaky Sniper Drone




In my experiance T'au are a high tier army, below the top Space Marine lists and maybe the top Craftworlds lists, though their cheese pretty much lies in a single mono-build (T'au Sept, Triptides, more Shield Drones than God) so outside of that nobody should really complain about T'au being OP, they're good, but not auto-win good.

Now complaining about them not being fun to play against is a whole other story.
   
Made in de
Fresh-Faced New User




It mainly depends on your list and the lists of your opponents.



Some Tau lists are highly competetive. Triptide and Drone spam may be their strongest assets right now.

Especially if you play in a more casual environment.
   
Made in au
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Newcastle, NSW ,Australia

I have never run more than two riptides, and will only run one under 1500 point. I wont lie, I usually accompany each one with 4 shield drones. but to be fair they die to bolt gun real easy, i dont hide them i jump out into the board to spread out. I also do like standing still. so i do a lot of manta strike of infiltrating with stealth suits. use Farsight enclave every now and again.
Just this week Farsight and three crisis suits with burst cannon and missile pods took down a full squad of thunder wolves with shooting and melee. the look on my opponents face was priceless loosing a dedicated assault unit to a Tau charge.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/07 08:30:35


For The Greater Good - Desert Tau Painting Blog!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/670437.page#8273427
Chaos Space Marines 4100 Points
Tau Empire 3000 Points

Blood For The Blood God !!!
 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





the complainers might also just be stuck in 6th/7th edition where Tau where for a time an OP nightmare if memory serves. people have long memories, I'm sure somewhere there are people who call grey Knights "OP trash thats no fun to play against"

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?
   
Made in au
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Newcastle, NSW ,Australia

mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.

For The Greater Good - Desert Tau Painting Blog!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/670437.page#8273427
Chaos Space Marines 4100 Points
Tau Empire 3000 Points

Blood For The Blood God !!!
 
   
Made in gb
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.


Tau really only have one thing they do - which is shooting moderately well. They don't even shoot exceptionally well.

So the other thing they have in their locker is that they are good at negating what other armies want to do to them. They are a PITA to assault, they can mitigate incoming shooting very well with shield drones. A lot of players do find it frustrating to play against an army that does not so much do anything as to be good at preventing them from doing what they want to do.

Of course it is only the most extreme Tau army builds that are really like this - and especially the case in ITC where kill-denial is a winning strategy all by itself.

You can build Tau lists at all levels of being competitive other than the absolute very top - right now there is literally nothing Tau do that Iron Hands cannot just do better. At any point short of top competitive lists there are plenty of interactive Tau lists that are perfectly fun to play with and play against. As for top competitive lists - well they are utterly unfun and a drag to play against regardless of faction: honestly how many people are having fun against the Brohammer IH list or a Possessed bomb? Part of the point of tournaments is that they are an environment where it is socially acceptable to take toxic lists and play with them.
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


40k is a game with a LOT of moving parts, balancing it's not going to be easy. warhammer 40k has 23 distinct codices if you assume that there are 20 units per codex that's 460 units, each with their own unique abilities, war gear etc. then you add stratigiums, chapter tactics etc. thats a LOT of moving parts. It'd be hard to get totally well balanced from that alone. then you factor in studio meddling, which we know does occur on occasion and yeah, it's going to have areas of imbalance. that said once you elimnate a few obvious outliers I don't think it's as bad as some say

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in de
Chalice-Wielding Sanguinary High Priest






Germany

 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
Are Tau just OP and even a novice can win a game with them?

Apparently the is no strategy or skill required. Don't even have to think about my list or what moves I make. Tau are cheesy as heck and that means auto win. I keep getting told that by my regular opponents.

Where do they fall for you? I think their maybe above average, but auto win! surely not.


I refuse to play Tau at casual games, because of SP. Thats the worst rule in the entire game. A single shield drone should be 50 pts., not 10.
   
Made in au
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Newcastle, NSW ,Australia

happy_inquisitor wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.


Tau really only have one thing they do - which is shooting moderately well. They don't even shoot exceptionally well.



When I Think about it, I imagine the monotony of Tau could be frustrating. The problem is we really only have two great choices for damage output in our dex, Commanders, Riptides and Broadside. Further fuelling peoples frustration with Tau. All you see is those three and drones in every list. same old same old i guess, but without it you army feel like it cant hurt anything reliably.

But in all honesty the worst thing for your opponent is declaring Kauyon. If you do that first turn they are at such a huge disadvantage, because they take such heavy loses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 p5freak wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
Are Tau just OP and even a novice can win a game with them?

Apparently the is no strategy or skill required. Don't even have to think about my list or what moves I make. Tau are cheesy as heck and that means auto win. I keep getting told that by my regular opponents.

Where do they fall for you? I think their maybe above average, but auto win! surely not.


I refuse to play Tau at casual games, because of SP. Thats the worst rule in the entire game. A single shield drone should be 50 pts., not 10.


Its completely ridiculous that all drones get it. And I agree, shield drones should be more expensive however they are not part of the unit now. They are such easy fodder for small arms fire because they can target them independently. They should go back to shield drones when they were purchased on a per unit basis, two per battlesuit. They should stay a unit with their parent model and that should be that. buying tactical drone units of shield drone is dumb. two shield drones behind a riptide is not a big deal. but units of 8 is just utter bs. And this is coming from a Tau player.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/07 11:01:45


For The Greater Good - Desert Tau Painting Blog!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/670437.page#8273427
Chaos Space Marines 4100 Points
Tau Empire 3000 Points

Blood For The Blood God !!!
 
   
Made in gb
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
happy_inquisitor wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.


Tau really only have one thing they do - which is shooting moderately well. They don't even shoot exceptionally well.



When I Think about it, I imagine the monotony of Tau could be frustrating. The problem is we really only have two great choices for damage output in our dex, Commanders, Riptides and Broadside. Further fuelling peoples frustration with Tau. All you see is those three and drones in every list. same old same old i guess, but without it you army feel like it cant hurt anything reliably.


I would say this is a problem more with players than with the faction. A player decides whether they want to take the strongest units available to them, or something more thematic. I fall into the second camp in this respect. I'd much rather lose a game with models I enjoy using (bikes, buggies, fast stuff in my case) than win with models I find boring and tedious.
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 IXLoiero95XI wrote:


Its completely ridiculous that all drones get it. And I agree, shield drones should be more expensive however they are not part of the unit now. They are such easy fodder for small arms fire because they can target them independently. They should go back to shield drones when they were purchased on a per unit basis, two per battlesuit. They should stay a unit with their parent model and that should be that. buying tactical drone units of shield drone is dumb. two shield drones behind a riptide is not a big deal. but units of 8 is just utter bs. And this is coming from a Tau player.


One issue with drones is that while in theory you can target them in practice they hide behind ruin or other LOS blocking terrain and then magically intercept lascannons when needed. That can frustrate people.

https://middleagedstrategybattlegamers.home.blog/2020/02/24/tneva82-winter-war-tournament-report/<- lotr painting blog

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
happy_inquisitor wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.


Tau really only have one thing they do - which is shooting moderately well. They don't even shoot exceptionally well.



When I Think about it, I imagine the monotony of Tau could be frustrating. The problem is we really only have two great choices for damage output in our dex, Commanders, Riptides and Broadside. Further fuelling peoples frustration with Tau. All you see is those three and drones in every list. same old same old i guess, but without it you army feel like it cant hurt anything reliably.

But in all honesty the worst thing for your opponent is declaring Kauyon. If you do that first turn they are at such a huge disadvantage, because they take such heavy loses.


I know, Kauyon right! Its like having a Chapter Master but actually worse in every way.

Tau are a mid-range shooting army for the most part. Anyone daft enough to deploy within the range of their guns is just being punished by turn 1 Kauyon for deploying badly. Unless they had the terrible luck to get seized on. I will concede that Tau are one of the worst armies to get on the wrong side of seizing the initiative.

I played competitive Tau for most of last year, I never had more than one Riptide or Broadside on the table and never had more than 8 shield drones in any of my lists. I also never lost a game with them. Of course that was CA18 and CA19 missions so that has a huge amount to do with my list choices. I did always run the maximum possible number of commanders, preferably Coldstar Commanders, so I am not claiming I did not cheese my tournament lists; just that the Riptide/Broadside/Shield Drone spam is not the only way to play in that format.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




BrianDavion wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


40k is a game with a LOT of moving parts, balancing it's not going to be easy. warhammer 40k has 23 distinct codices if you assume that there are 20 units per codex that's 460 units, each with their own unique abilities, war gear etc. then you add stratigiums, chapter tactics etc. thats a LOT of moving parts. It'd be hard to get totally well balanced from that alone. then you factor in studio meddling, which we know does occur on occasion and yeah, it's going to have areas of imbalance. that said once you elimnate a few obvious outliers I don't think it's as bad as some say


Although I agree that it’s complicated I don’t agree that it is not possible and as customers of a rather expensive hobby I think it is reasonable to expect a well balanced game.

At the end of the day the game play comes down to maths where certain variables are determined by chance but within certain parameters. Tree fore they should be able to establish a game engine that balances out armies by establishing consistent units points cost. A wide variety of troops with battlefield roles then allow player to choose their method of of play. I’ll repeat that I know it’s not easy, but it is doable.

However I think it’s easy to see that something is wrong with the way GW are do this which led me to assume that overpowering a new army for profit has over ruled product quality.

Which is a shame because I would be happier to have a wider collection of armies if I had confidence that I wouldn’t regret the investment because they are rubbish to play. Or that I wouldn’t have to pay £25 to get some new rules to fix a something that was crap in the first place.

Imagine if a new call of duty can out that was quite badly balanced and buggy, you wouldn’t expect have to pay for the code to be changed to improve the gameplay

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/07 11:54:56


 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





I think the biggest dividing factor of whether tau are mid tier or high tier is whether the player hides their drones out of line of sight (which is why they perform so much better in ITC, where basically all terrain can be used to block line of sight)

If they don't, I've never had a problem with stripping the drones away from a unit and then killing the unit. A shield drone is marginally tougher than a single ork boy if you shoot it directly.

Should savior protocols be changed to make it less powerful? Yeah, it could be for sure. I'd say the quickest fix would be that a drone absorbs a single point of damage instead of a wound, so if you hit a riptide with a lascannon and roll a 6 to wound you basically strip all the drones. That is how a lot of other bodyguard effects work in the game and I think it's less easily abused, and might shift the army away from just bringing the big mondo suit units to seeing the more medium and light stuff more often.

But I also think there's a lot of room for buffs in the tau codex as well. All their short range "high risk, high reward" units are kinda just high risk. A breacher 3" away from an enemy unit has +1S and +2AP compared to a fire warrior with a carbine 24" away, that's it. If GW really wants Tau to have "Long range shooting or bursty short range shooting" instead of other codexes' shooting vs melee, the short range shooting really has to be stronger than it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
happy_inquisitor wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think Tau are, in their current incarnation (and in previous editions, to be fair), utterly miserable to play against. They take all agency away from the opposing player that leaves them feeling powerless.

This probably comes out as "Tau are broken" when the frustrated opponent has enough of killing only drones.


Tau really only have one thing they do - which is shooting moderately well. They don't even shoot exceptionally well.



When I Think about it, I imagine the monotony of Tau could be frustrating. The problem is we really only have two great choices for damage output in our dex, Commanders, Riptides and Broadside. Further fuelling peoples frustration with Tau. All you see is those three and drones in every list. same old same old i guess, but without it you army feel like it cant hurt anything reliably.


I would say this is a problem more with players than with the faction. A player decides whether they want to take the strongest units available to them, or something more thematic. I fall into the second camp in this respect. I'd much rather lose a game with models I enjoy using (bikes, buggies, fast stuff in my case) than win with models I find boring and tedious.


Anecdotally of course, Tau and Marines seem like the two factions most prone to people taking whatever is the "competitive standard" units whenever the meta shifts and not really having any theme to their army. Followed by Guard players and Eldar players.

In terms of people I see who select their faction, build their army to a theme and just stick with that theme no matter what the meta does, that's most often ork players or people who play the more themed sub-marine factions like space wolves and blood angels.

That definitely inflates the perceived power of Tau in a lot of gaming groups I think.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/07 12:36:59


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.

   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.


yeah the idea that every new thing is OP simply isn't born out, Primaris Marines at the start of 8th wheren't all that great. and if GW wanted NEW armies to be the OP, we'd be seeing a meta dominated by Admech, Custodes and GSC.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





What gw wants is changing what is op all the time. Often. Make people buy new plastic constantly. Change balance upside down and watch tryhard's rush to buy new army. Rinse and repeat

https://middleagedstrategybattlegamers.home.blog/2020/02/24/tneva82-winter-war-tournament-report/<- lotr painting blog

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in au
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Newcastle, NSW ,Australia

The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.

By new I just mean recent releases


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.


yeah the idea that every new thing is OP simply isn't born out, Primaris Marines at the start of 8th wheren't all that great. and if GW wanted NEW armies to be the OP, we'd be seeing a meta dominated by Admech, Custodes and GSC.


I never said all new stuff is OP , just that 99% a new release are good. Theres nothing wrong with that. GW are just artificially making there protect more desirable to increase sales. It very smart by them. I remember when 5th edition grey knight came out. They were super strong and so was the new (at the time) dreadknight which every one wanted a piece of.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/07 13:41:27


For The Greater Good - Desert Tau Painting Blog!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/670437.page#8273427
Chaos Space Marines 4100 Points
Tau Empire 3000 Points

Blood For The Blood God !!!
 
   
Made in no
Regular Dakkanaut




As a mobile Tau player who doesn't play even a single Riptide I do see how they can be annoying to play against in their copypasta form. But to call tau "mono list" is bs. There are many viable ways to play Tau, hell just before christmas a Tau army with nothing but Stormsurges and Broadsides took 4th place in a big tourney. (Not that that is any less stupid of a list than triptide)

Especially after the recent CA, Triptide isn't even the best way to play Tau anymore. The Stealth Suits, Vespid and Ghostkeel spam is better, especially because of how the top armies are abusing bubblewrapped buff characters, which is exactly what this list counters. I doubt we will see this in any tournaments though, as the poor Triptide pilots would have to buy an entirely new army. Especially because it's still not top tier, it just beats top tier. It can still struggle with freak IG entries for example.

The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.


3rd edition*

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/07 14:29:51


 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

I play a full Vior'la assault weapon army with only a couple of drones. Breachers, devilfish, vespids, piranhas, stealth suits. Everything is ultra fast and punchs hard. They play like Eldars should play.

Obviously is not the most competitive form of playing Tau but I have found 0 people that has said that playing agaisnt it was not enjoyable. Many people is surprised when I move towards them, specialyl when they are playing a meele army. Is when I start to shoot that they realize why I did that. Is always great.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





Spoiler:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.

By new I just mean recent releases


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
The Newman wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


100% my dude, I think a lot of people don't realise that Warhammer 40'000 is just a marketing ploy. GW are a model company, that's where they make there money. people will always buy the new stuff with the best rules to increase their chances of winning. that's just how people are. GW got us good lol big new expensive models that play well get GW lots of $$$ 8th edition actually feels like the first edition in a long time where GW actually seem to care about the state of the game with regular updates, erratas and FAQ's.


Sorry, but Tau came out in 4th edition. They're not exactly a new army.


yeah the idea that every new thing is OP simply isn't born out, Primaris Marines at the start of 8th wheren't all that great. and if GW wanted NEW armies to be the OP, we'd be seeing a meta dominated by Admech, Custodes and GSC.


I never said all new stuff is OP , just that 99% a new release are good. Theres nothing wrong with that. GW are just artificially making there protect more desirable to increase sales. It very smart by them. I remember when 5th edition grey knight came out. They were super strong and so was the new (at the time) dreadknight which every one wanted a piece of.


But you're just like...wrong, man. 99% of new releases absolutely are not good.

The latest new model releases have been:

-Sisters stuff. Generally mid-tier, from the reviews I've seen. Not anywhere near marines level. There's a ton of units so I'm not going to dig in too much here, but Sisters generally seem like they're in the middle with some good and some bad units and some mediocre ones.

-New Drazar, New Jain Zar, New Banshees, New Incubi. All objectively bad units. you might see Drazar in some HQ slots in competitive Drukhari armies because Drukhari HQs in general are really really REALLY bad and he's like, a reasonable footslogging smash-captain type unit.

-New Shadowsun. Doesn't look amazing from previews.You're never gonna take her over a coldstar commander.

-New SM characters. Iron Hands dude was notoriously broken. Dark Angels, Imp Fists, Raven Guard, Ultramarines, Salamanders, and White Scars new dudes? Never hear about them, never see them in tourney lists.

This is just confirmation bias, my dude. You get some release where Iron hands Techmarine Mcbrokenstein is in the top 10% of units in the game...and then you ignore the other 9 marine characters who come out who are just nothing special. It's human nature.
   
Made in de
Chalice-Wielding Sanguinary High Priest






Germany

tneva82 wrote:
 IXLoiero95XI wrote:


Its completely ridiculous that all drones get it. And I agree, shield drones should be more expensive however they are not part of the unit now. They are such easy fodder for small arms fire because they can target them independently. They should go back to shield drones when they were purchased on a per unit basis, two per battlesuit. They should stay a unit with their parent model and that should be that. buying tactical drone units of shield drone is dumb. two shield drones behind a riptide is not a big deal. but units of 8 is just utter bs. And this is coming from a Tau player.


One issue with drones is that while in theory you can target them in practice they hide behind ruin or other LOS blocking terrain and then magically intercept lascannons when needed. That can frustrate people.


Yes, in ITC the ground floor of ruins is closed, and LOS blocking. Drones hide there, and cannot be shot, unless you have something that doesnt require LOS, which some armies dont have.
   
Made in us
Witch Hunter Undercover in a Cult







Tau are fundamentally badly-designed. Trying to build an army on the principle that you ignore three phases of the game and dominate in the last one seems to end up only producing games that feel bad for either the Tau player (because the other guy got to contact and they feel like they can't do anything while getting slowly chewed up) or feel bad for the other player (because they couldn't get to contact and feel like they can't do anything while getting leafblowered off the table). I've never had a close or interesting game playing as Tau or playing against Tau, only one-sided curbstomps one way or the other.

Your experience may vary, but your playgroup may just find that Tau feel bad independent of whether they're objectively powerful or not powerful.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using. 
   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Cobleskill

mrFickle wrote:
Do GW just suck at creating balance across all the codexes or do they intentionally make some armies better/easier to with. As Tau are one of the newer armies do they make the over powered at first to encourage sales?


In what sense is Tau a 'new' army? I was introduced to the game with them, in 3rd edition.

'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!' 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tau are fundamentally badly-designed. Trying to build an army on the principle that you ignore three phases of the game and dominate in the last one seems to end up only producing games that feel bad for either the Tau player (because the other guy got to contact and they feel like they can't do anything while getting slowly chewed up) or feel bad for the other player (because they couldn't get to contact and feel like they can't do anything while getting leafblowered off the table). I've never had a close or interesting game playing as Tau or playing against Tau, only one-sided curbstomps one way or the other.

Your experience may vary, but your playgroup may just find that Tau feel bad independent of whether they're objectively powerful or not powerful.


So, are Tau that army that set up on the battlefield in a giant reroll all hits and reroll 1s to wound bubble, and get to rapid fire their weapons at you at full 30" maximum range if they didn't move?

Or is that some other army I've been hearing about that works like that? Because it sure as hell sounds like that's the army that ignores all the phases except shooting.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




 IXLoiero95XI wrote:
Are Tau just OP and even a novice can win a game with them?

Apparently the is no strategy or skill required. Don't even have to think about my list or what moves I make. Tau are cheesy as heck and that means auto win. I keep getting told that by my regular opponents.

Where do they fall for you? I think their maybe above average, but auto win! surely not.

There is a lot more to Tau then just sit in a castle bubble and shoot and there is far more strategy available then just sit and shoot. Normally I have zero broadsides, zero Riptides. Often I advanced my entire army out of my deployment zone in turn 1. Tau can be very mobile and aggressively short ranged with surprising able Close Combat with the right build and strategy. In my last tournament it confused a lot of people when I advanced out of my deployment zone without a castle turn 1. It worked as well even won 1 match by charging and winning in close combat with my commander against there commander which pushed me into a win. Done correctly Tau at short range are far more deadly then Tau at long range. Anyone who thinks Tau have no strategy or skill required are blind to what is possible.

Anyone who thinks Tau are shooting phase only are wrong. Yes they can be played like that but they can strongly take advantage of movement and close combat phases if you use strategy and skill.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: