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.

Not what you said before. You said it was up to luck. Again it is easy to say things. Doing is much more difficult. This is because the Tau are running out of Tactics to"adjust" with.

Sanchez dude, your coming off as failrly arrogant with the, well if they can beat me then they must be ok statements. You sound like this to those of us that have been playing tau ever since they came out: Behold, the Mighty Sanchez, if an army wins against him it must be fine....Priceless.

Provoking me does nothing but change my tone to one more hostile.

I have been Playing vs. Tau for many years, 3rd ed. 4th ed. and now 5th ed. Only a few things change, the games become interesting and fun when playing buddies. And your right about my negative attitude... Apart from my friends, I have had a bad exsperience with Tau players... Living in WA they were all crybabies and blaimed their codex for their loss... In TX they were smug and sore winners/losers, in MD they were just annoying as can be... So from one end of the US to the Other, they were all the worst people to play... (Ork players always had the best attitudes imo) But this is not the point here... The point is Tau are a good army, Yes 5th ed. changed some things. but so what, learn to deal with them... You say it helps CC armies alot... really? Can they jump from squad to squad now? No. So my guys are stuck there, and chances are they get shot up...

You realise that your talking to the guy that before the old tactics stop working that he starts working on the next set of tactics as apposed to just shifting to another army. The number of armies that you claim would tend to support that you are the latter. I only have Tau and Eldar. I've borrowed other peoples armies and when I do I usually win. When I stick to my Tau, I usually win.

So because I have many armies I am a shifter? Well if you must know, each army has a story to it. My eldar was just too good a deal to pass up, 1k point army for 50 bucks... then about 25 buck to get it up and running sounds like a good deal. But when it comes to terni games, local games, I play my IG or DE, my other armies are there to give a variety to my games... or if the buddies get bored.

Maybe you would have a better track record against the Tau if you took the time to learn what you are trying to talk about.

My track record with Tau? Apart from my one friend, I have a great win record vs tau with my Guard and DE. But playing the local kid, the serious gamer, or the good friends... its about having fun... and playing people who complain about their army just pushes the buttons.

We already had the 4+ save unlike the IG and others I mentioned. Their was no real benefit to the 4+ cover other that when facing ordinance. Your inability to understand the concept shows a certain lack of experience.

really? you really find it necessary to continue to make this personal... I have ordinence and yes that 4+ is annoying when trying to kill them, but so what, It is what the game has become... crying over this is pointless as it effects others too.

Oh yeah, calling something cheesy tends to lead us to believe that you "are" the Type to blame the rules. That is because if the"MIGHTY SANCHEZ" loses it must be cheese. Your way of blaming a rule

Calling something cheesy has nothing to do if 'I' win vs. it or not... Not once have I blamed a game on a Cheesy unit... I either blame the loss on my mistake, my gamble, or he was just that much better, and on a rare occasion, he got lucky.

Funny, sure sounded that way when your stating how your friend can beat your IG.

Yeah he has beat me many times, and so have ork, eldar, chaos, other guard, nids, and so on... I mey not have a perfect record, but I am very happy with my results... and my results have nothing to do with this at all. This is about how you are complaining about your lack of options or tactics now because of how 5th ed limit you with the boost to cc... that is blaming the rules.

The Tau had one year where they were competitive, so they must have been OP

They are still competitive. and the OP remark... yeah they were a bit powerful in some parts... don't think I ment totaly OP as we both know that is not true

It is because this is the proposed rules forum.

You are proposing rules for something that is not broken

The point was that the IG underwent a major overhaul from the command structure dowm and you can't even admit such

your point is? I already said I was happy... and what does the New IG have to do with the Tau? Noting, The fact that the new Oders system aids them has noting to do the "broken" ness of what you claim the Tau have recieved in 5th ed. They way now that my cammond squad and do far more then before... so what, I was winning with my old codex, and I am winning with my new one too. Attacking me about my army has no point, and has no reason to be used. You bash my tactics and say I am unable to play my army... yet I am not the one complaining about the new rules... Just Deal With Them.

putting Sanchez on ignore

Lacross wrote:putting Sanchez on ignore

Agreed.

Back to the topic:

I personally think that shortening any Tau weapon range is a bad idea. The Ion Cannon has a comfortable range; no need to risk going into multi-melta range. A possibility is making solid shot railguns ordinance to reassert them as the long range anti-tank gun.

focusedfire wrote:

The Tau don't run a lot of Blast weaponry and I don't wan't to violate that. If any of them were to get a blast it would be the CIB.

It is funny that the Tau have Blasters that don't Blast. I noticed this and had toyed with the idea of making them all blast weapons but it just didn't fit in any way shape or form. I may even back off of the Vespid Blaster having the Blast template like I originally designed. Will let you know soon.

That's the whole point mate. Tau don't have that many Blast weapons.

Why shouldn't the second biggest Tau weapon have a blast option?

It's perfectly valid ingame and fluff wise it's a perfect addition as the Tau could have improved their Ion Technology and come up with a variable focus cannon that can either fire a stream of shots, or a blast.

Also, just because a Blaster says Blast in it's name, it shouldn't always have blast in it's type. Look at Star Wars - none of what they call Blasters have what 40K calls Blast. It represents a large powerful shot or stream of shots, which is usually close range.

Damn - I think my Scriptwriting and Film Knowledge actually transcended from work to my hobby

Sanchez, Sanchez, Sanchez for someone who has been playing form 3rd ed you still have a lot to learn, lesson 1 lets start with manners, if you talk civilly with someone and don't insult them that is how they will speak to you.

Tau are still a viable army just like Necrons and DE what focused is trying to point out it that they just have a lot of wrinkles to be ironed out although you are right about the devilfish 2 KP and 80pts is worth the above average transport armour and the ability to have the ONLY scoring vehicle in the game (it is a troops choice not a dedicated transport).

5th edition rules state that only non-vehicles are scoring units


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although they do sit in the troops section

Sanchez, Sanchez, Sanchez for someone who has been playing form 3rd ed you still have a lot to learn, lesson 1 lets start with manners, if you talk civilly with someone and don't insult them that is how they will speak to you.

In forums it is very hard to understand the poster's true attitude when typing. I did start off calm, Inquisitive at some points, but mostly neutral until they started to insult me. If you read what I post, well it is up to you, if you read it thinking I meant negative, then yeah, it is going to sound very negative, but if you read it with more of a loose tone, my questions were questions, and my statements were statements.

Now, I am here saying the Tau are fine as they are now. Could they use a new codex? Yes, all armies not with a 5th ed. codex should get a new one. But until then why complain about a still very powerful army. Trying to Fix the Tau is just a waste imo, why fix something that is not broken. Complaining about CC armies vs Tau... Do you really think GW would make it easy for a Shooty Army to destroy the CC army before it even had a chance? I sure hope not, That would get alot of CC players unhappy. In a new Tau Codex there should be lots of new toys, but the rules... well there is no real need to change them.

radiohazard:

The reason that the Tau do not use many blast weapons seems (to me anyway) to be a focus on the careful application of directed firepower, a scalpel if you will, rather than an instrument of blunt force trauma (big, but scatterable pie plates of AP doom). It is more of a philosophical difference than anything.

Edit:

Sanchez:

We are just going to have to disagree then on whether or not the Tau are "fine." This will just have to be a difference of opinion that will not get solved with either side yelling at anyone (no blame to anyone in this thread BTW.) Many Tau players have reason to believe, and statistics back this up, that the Tau get out-shot in 40k. Our niche in the game, outshooting the opponent, is not ours anymore. We are not asking for it to be "easy" to destroy a CC force, nor do I think we are asking for rules changes for the base parts of the game. However, we do need to have new options available to us to help level the playing field when it comes to Tourney level play, or competitive friendly play for that matter.

Dwerth:

You hit the nail on the head with that last statement.

RadioHazard:

I picture this from a fluff perspective as the Tau are intent upon colonization of the worlds they conquer and want the colonies up and productive without a mass clean up effort. If they use a blast weapon it does very little collateral damage. The Tau would use the Neutron bomb rather than thermonuclear warheads.

It is this thought why I was thinking of giving the Neutron blaster a blast template but may back off of this. Every Tau blaster does have a special rule so Blast may stay as the special rule for the much smaller Vespid Squads. It will be either that or Assault 2 and the strain matron getting a blast/large blast template. I'm doing this as a way of tying in the fluff about their wings setting up the resonance and harmonics that allow the weapon to fire.

The only other blast weapon I'm looking at adding is a new missile for the Sky Ray. It does no damage but follows the idea of shock and awe and has some cool effects. It is a multi-warhead cruise missle where each warhead does photonic concussion air-bursts.


Currently, the Tau have 2 other blast template weapons and both are discribed as sophisticated or intelligent. This also seems to fall into the keeping collateral damage to a minimum thought process.
IMO, It seems the Tau may have this philosophy because their empire is small and they don't have worlds to waste. This plays into the Tau not recognizing attrition warfare as a valid or desirable style of war for such a small empire in a very large galaxy.

all that seems nice, but i'd like to see your WIP codex so that I, at least, can be on the same page as to how this fandex is put together. I'd be grateful for that.

FocusedFire wrote:

It is this thought why I was thinking of giving the Neutron blaster a blast template but may back off of this. Every Tau blaster does have a special rule so Blast may stay as the special rule for the much smaller Vespid Squads. It will be either that or Assault 2 and the strain matron getting a blast/large blast template. I'm doing this as a way of tying in the fluff about their wings setting up the resonance and harmonics that allow the weapon to fire.

What type of weapon profile are you considering for the Vespid?
R=12", Assault 2, AP 3 would seem to me to be the way to go, especially if you have a smaller squad size (3-5). This change from the current codex would make me seriously consider taking them as a FA choice in a take all comers list. If pathfinders, revamped Vespid, and piranhas are all good choices for FA, this would make deciding what to use a wonderfully difficult choice. Currently, for me, its a no brainer deciding what to use.

Ian1138- 48" range isn't shabby and you can't put something that powerful out there without playing down another aspect. Shortening the Ion cannons range while boosting its effectiveness is a nice balance and helps the players to define its uses. Too many people make the Railgun vs Ion cannon argument when they shouldn't. One is anti-heavy tank and the other is light vehicle squadron killer.

Lacross:

Will be working on typing up the wargear today&tomorrow, Then the Army list after that. It is all down in handwritten notes and now just need to be transcribed. I'm a little hesitant releasing it peicemeal because somethings won't make sense until the army is viewed as a whole with some of the fluf their to back up the changes.

Dwerth: Again you are dead on. That is exactly what I am looking at with the Vespids. They are written up on the old thread along with the kroot. Both are in the last 2-3 pages.

Dwerth wrote:radiohazard:


Sanchez:

We are just going to have to disagree then on whether or not the Tau are "fine." This will just have to be a difference of opinion that will not get solved with either side yelling at anyone (no blame to anyone in this thread BTW.) Many Tau players have reason to believe, and statistics back this up, that the Tau get out-shot in 40k. Our niche in the game, outshooting the opponent, is not ours anymore. We are not asking for it to be "easy" to destroy a CC force, nor do I think we are asking for rules changes for the base parts of the game. However, we do need to have new options available to us to help level the playing field when it comes to Tourney level play, or competitive friendly play for that matter.

Putting it that way, I agree. I guess being on the receiving end of Tau fire with both a CC army and a shooty army I have learned to respect Tau firepower... More options in a future codex should be something to ask for, but I do believe that current rules for current choices have strong points and weak points but they balance out.

I didn't know about you adding blast to vepid blasters.

I think it's a bad idea myself - but hey ho.

A small powerful blast like an Ion Cannon with a small blast template is quite focussed compared to the sub-shot of the Rail Cannon.

BTW, pls change the name of the Hammerhead rail gun to the Rail Cannon. It sounds better.

@Radio- Rail Cannon would work nicely, I'll have to kick it around.

You see, I'm trying to work within the existing framework as much as possible. GW has it own nomenclature for weapon families and I'm not going to buck that system. It would just confuse people.

Current progression seems to follow 2 tracks:

1)Pistol, Carbine, Rifle, and Gun

2)Blaster, Cannon

Sometimes there will be a cannon built from the Rifle or Gun but there seems to be limitations.

With GW, Cannons built from rifles are usually multi-barreled gatlings.
Cannons built from guns is more common but only when the gun was a small infantry weapon. For some reason GW doesn't often do more than 3 of any weapon type in an army.


As far as the Blast weapons for the vespids. I liked the idea of 12" blast weapons on a small 3-5 creature unit. GW's fluff behind the Neutron blaster is that the weapon uses a crystal from the Vespids home world that only they can use. Something about the vibratory frequency off of their wings modulates the energy that is channeled through the crystal into cohesive energy bursts.

From this point I started playing with the concept of why the weapon was short ranged and came up with the cohesive resonance deteriorates quickly. When energy is suddenly or quickly losses containment it usually does so in an explosive manner....hence the the idea of blasts.

Game balance may force me back down to an assault 2 with only the Strain Matron getting the ability for a blast. I want to play test it both ways before I completely decide.

try the vespid with flamer based weapons - I think it would be better TBH.

It is OP. Even with only 5 templates it is still a S5 AP3 weapon. I don't want to back off of the weapons strength and ap profile because it helps to set them apart while stayin Tau with the S 5.

I'll keep working on it.

@Radio: No, it is called a railgun because of its caliber compared to weapon size (which is pretty small)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

I know you said on the first page "No Powerfists" but I am quite partial to the idea of them.
I'll just list my reasons, starting with:
* The latest GW releases seem to be promoting the ability to create an army based on particular aspects of the background that you like, without resorting to appendix armies. Allowing powerfists (or some other type of CC weapon), in perhaps limited quantities, would allow players to build a Farsight-esque army.
* Your army could tote a maximum of 15 power fists, if you took 15 crisis suits and give up their ranged weapons. This would be crippling to the Tau army, as Crisis suits are the primary source of low AP firepower, and as such you would see perhaps 3 PF's in a 'farsight' army.

Overall I think allowing a powerfist /powersword / CC weapon of some kind would not in any realistic way enhance the CC ability of the army as a whole, but would go a long way to the goal of creating themed armies for players.


I would also like to see some major overhaul of a leadership system. Tau seem to have the least leadership modifying rules out of any army which I think is a major setback for an army with low model count.

Toying with the idea of Ethereal giving +1 leadership to all units with LOS to him along with a few other things.

About power fists, If the weapon won't help the army then why include it?

I'm approaching farsight with the thought of him, just not getting several of the high tech units. But, he will get unrestricted access to units that fit with his army. He will also have access to kroot and human allies but not both at the same time.


What do you guys think about the pulse carbine being changed from pinning to causing difficult terrain tests in yout opponents next movement phase?

Just something I'm playing around with

What counts as Hi-Tech? Hammerheads and Broadsides are too integral (imo) to be restricted.

Are you thinking that carbines could somehow lay down grenades around the enemy and slow them down? I think that the basic premise is ok, but I think carbines are too prevalent in the army for them to have additional special rules.

Perhaps a different gun could use that rule: it would greatly help out Tau on the CC front without actually making them any better at it, per se.

By high-tech I'm refering to miniturazation and A.I.

Farsight's army has no access to the following units or wargear:

Independent drone squadrons
Piranhas
Vespids(Limited number and loyal to the Tau)
Special issue wargear(Farsight should not get the latest Earth caste experimental gear)
Rail Rifle Drones
Remora Drone Jetbikes

His army has limited access to these units:

Only one model per squad may take drones.
Can only take Aun'shi for an etheral choice.(This was covered in the old thread and everyone approved of the fluff)
Can take only one Pathfinder/Sky Ray squads
Can take only one Stealsuit squad

Farsights army is allowed the following additional squads:

May take buy one squad of crisis suits as a Fast attack

May buy one additional squad of Shas'Ui "Skirmish" suits in the troops section.

This is still loose and will be tweeked but you should get the idea


About the carbines. Don't think it would be OP. The FW unit has to be within the threat range of of many assault units in order to use the weapon. It would only affect their next movement phase and only if it causes an unsaved wound upon the targeted unit.

Could make it a buyable upgrade. I could see GW doing something like this to drive sales by forcing Tau players to re-"arm" their troops.(Sorry for the pun, Just ..coluldn't....help...myself)

If Big Red (Farsight) can take a lot of XV8s why not have a heavy support choice of XV8s that can have 4 weapons, drop the Jet Packs and be able to fire all 4 if they don't move and up to two if they did move.

Would make a good alternative to XV88s for Big Red.

Big red now gets XV-88s without restriction in this fan-dex

He will be looking for alternative to the sniper drones though.

BTW, The sniper drones are being a pain. Have been looking at a battlesuit as the controller with 2 drones per controller and 3 suits a squad. The suit would be equipped with a marker light and one other weapon.

Problem is I want them able to shoot and move but not able to Deepstrike or JSJ.

focusedfire wrote:Big red now gets XV-88s without restriction in this fan-dex

He will be looking for alternative to the sniper drones though.

BTW, The sniper drones are being a pain. Have been looking at a battlesuit as the controller with 2 drones per controller and 3 suits a squad. The suit would be equipped with a marker light and one other weapon.

Problem is I want them able to shoot and move but not able to Deepstrike or JSJ.

Put a XV15/25 in the squad with Sniper Drones instead of the regular spotter and have 2 Sniper Drones with him.

That is how they are currently written in my fan-dex but I have concerns about this being OP.

First thing I would change is give the firewarriors, pathfinders, suits, and all other vehicles BS4. THey are a race that has entirely forgone H2H for shooting, I would think they would be just as efficient as a SM who focuses on both. Next thing I would change would be to give pathfinders some sort of stealth or camouflage rule, as they are PATHFINDERS aka forward scouts and would employ by sensibility some sort of stealth technology. It doesnt make sense to me that they dont. Stealth suits could use a very slight price drop, I would give all crisis something like FnP: I would think with all that battlesuit around them, they would have a life support system in there that would be able to heal them to some point, I mean they are the elite of the elite.

I also think either seeker missles should gain a price drop, or a seeker missle battery could be a weapon option on a any tau vehicle, like 4 missles for 20 points, yes they have unlimited rang at BS5, but they are only S8 AP3, one shot for 10 pts... there is a reason why almost no one uses hunter-killer missles...

Broadsides should be able to DT move and fire regardless. Ion cannon should be S8, carbines should be assault 2, rapid firing pulse rifles should have 15" range. Almost all vehicles should get a price drop. Kroot need some sort of upgrade, whether its access to scavanged weapons for shapers like eviscerators in the merc codex, or a meltagun or something... More kroot units could be cool, like hunters, or knarlacs or something.

Stealthsuits should be troops: I know Im going to recieve flak for this one, but I think it is neccessary...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh yes, sniper drones as another upgrade drone type, there is a great weapon to put in a firewarrior squad...

A bit about my Tau experience, I've played Tau since 3rd edition, won a few tournies with them and "mod" on another Tau site.

I'm pretty well versed in playing between the 2 codex and while I agree that 5th universally made some of the Tau lists more of a hindrance it certainly didn't cripple them as a race in 5th. At a big tournament here in DC a tau player came in 9th out of 32 players with a 3-1 record... his one loss being due to overuse of the Positional Relay. So a Tau player having a chance to win the whole thing definitely speaks to the codex still being a very competitive one.

That being said, I find some of the suggestions a little outlandish as they definitely way out of line with where they(GW) are currently going with their codex(codices) in general.

I think one of the issues when comparing most Codex(codices) in 5th is that we have 3 that are built for 5th edition with some pretty significant points drops. That, in my eyes, is where a lot of the discord stems from. You see a 6pt Ork with Furious Charge and a good statline, a 5pt guardsmen w/ frag&krak grenades and a 15pt marine and you start to scratch your head when you look at units in the Tau codex AS WELL AS codex like the Chaos Marines, Daemon Hunters, Witch Hunters and the seriously, seriously neglected Dark Eldar, who in my humble opinion, are easily one of if not THE weakest codex, especially when you consider their fluff to rules execution.

5th edition has revised a good chunk of our choices in competitive play but you still rarely see players run some of the traditionally "weaker" units in the Tau codex.
For example:
Krootox - The removal of "Relentless", and the restrictions on Infiltrate make this awesome concept pretty null and void, combine that with a slightly over priced cost and unless you are a die hard model and fluff fan they NEVER make it into a competitive list.
Vespids - The first addition to the Tau auxiliary, and the cost to ability ratio and this unit just gathers dust
Sky Rays - One of the more under used vehicles that pales when compared to the Broadside or Railhead
Fire warriors - the supposed staple of the codex that have taken a back seat to Kroot due to cost
Ethereals - With 1 slot mandatory it's hard to justify these beautiful models.

Now, the only issue with a list like mine above is that you can literally do the same for almost any codex. Not every unit in a codex is going to be phenomenal or "cost effective" or even competitive. That being said, I still take issue with the fluff to execution in Codex: Tau Empire.

If I were to be allowed to edit Codex:Tau Empire #2 this is what you would see:
<snip>
Replaced with PDF per request.

paidinfull wrote:

That being said, I find some of the suggestions a little outlandish as they definitely way out of line with where they(GW) are currently going with their codex(codices) in general.

I think one of the issues when comparing most Codex(codices) in 5th is that we have 3 that are built for 5th edition with some pretty significant points drops.

I agree with FocusedFire in keeping the Tau as a higher-priced, low model count army. Dropping the points will just further Tau as that "Xenos Guard" army, and quite frankly a lower model count is more in line with the Tau fluff. Small, mission specific, elite units.

What GW is doing with their codices in general, is trying to sell more models. They are succeeding, but gladly enough, FocusedFire is free from that economic constraint.

I agree with FocusedFire in keeping the Tau as a higher-priced, low model count army. Dropping the points will just further Tau as that "Xenos Guard" army, and quite frankly a lower model count is more in line with the Tau fluff. Small, mission specific, elite units.

Well if you make them too elite and small then would then not come off as a Xenos Smurf army? And yeah, a Xenos guard army would not be so fun, we do have orks and nids already. Now would you agree with me that the Tau are now in a good zone? Just under guard and still above Marines?