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 been thinking about Tau as my second choice for an army. They fit the role as my first army is heavy CC and tau are obviously heavy shooty. I have yet to see any tau at the local gaming store though. There is also very few army lists that I've seen on the forums for tau. Are they that unpopular? Perhaps considered to be a sub-par army? Or I could just be crazy.
Thoughts?

No, no, they're fine and got a pretty huge boost in 6th.

Tau were my first army, and GK my second (way, way before the most recent codex, thank-you-very-much).

Generally speaking in 6th edition, shooting is more important, and Tau are pretty good at that. They remain a little overcosted, like most older codexes, but now FW can shoot at 30" all the time and Str 5 can be used to kill AV11, so that helps them a great deal.

The two main weaknesses for Tau were assault and psychic defense, and you can solve both those with allies, now.

What is your first army? I would think that would affect your choice.

Tau aren't that bad. There's a MEAN tau player at my FLGS, so let me tell you, they can certainly still be competitive.

The biggest problem with tau right now is their players. Tau players have been in a woe-is-me self-pity death spiral for the past couple of years. I've almost never seen an entire player base with lower morale. Groupthink that tau is terrible has set in so hard that threads that come up about tau tend to turn into "it's hopeless and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" nerdrage parties.

Other than that the fan base has more or less shoved everybody else out before shelving the models themselves, probably the biggest reason you don't see a lot of tau at the moment is because their codex is kind of old now. Older codices tend to get less play, and xenos codices tend to get less play. Ergo, an old, xenos codex is going to have relatively few players using them.

Tau where competetive before but they had some very slim army lists during 5th edition and you needed to know what you where doing. If you did, you vere where though to beat.

In 6th edition they got mutch better. I now think they can be very good, even if you are just "fooling around".

Also, the models look very good.

I've been playing them for a couple months now in tournaments and such and they definately are competitive with the boost they got in 6th edition.

However, I have to ally them with Necrons to make them really solid though (Overlord with MSS jumps on enemy getting too close to my Firewarriors!) and get an NS and Doomscythe for anti-air support.

My MVPs are usually the new Stealth Suit squad(s). They JSJ into cover for that 2+ save and really annoy the enemy units. I always DS them with an 'O with VRT just in case they get assaulted (which they usually do) so they can Hit n Run out of trouble.

3 Broadsides with Blacksun filters really make em shine. Dont bother with the overcosted fragile AV13 Hammerhead, just get more Broadsides on the table.

I don't know much about Tau as an army but i'll let you know i can't read their codex for poop. The units, wargear and points are all over the place.
I'm fairly new to the game so i have no experience with the older codexes but if you do i'm sure you can follow it.

I'm at a loss how GW managed to go so long with the old layout*

*I'm not advocating the limitation of wargear options newer codexes present just that the layout of the units, wargear and their points value is difficult to follow.

Peace Out!
Jonny!

nanaki658 wrote:
I have been thinking about Tau as my second choice for an army. Or I could just be crazy.

I'd suggest that you build a tau list and then add allies to it... don't make Tau your allies.

Reason for tau is shooty, and thier army does work but it kinda relies on, well shooty, in the way a squad of boyz relies on boyz. Probably not making sense. But trust me a Tau list with Necron/SM/CSM or whatever you want really works better than taking Tau in the allied spot.

My first army is space wolves if that makes a difference for choice. Personally I just really love the tau fluff, backround and especially the look of their models. Who wouldn't love a massive railgun?

It will probably be awhile yet before I can really start collecting them as my SW army is still pretty lacking but I like to think in advance. From what my friend tells me they are getting a new codex the start of 2013.

I very much noticed the whole emosquad of tau players moping about inadequacies, hence why I decided to ask on their effectiveness.

Like the models and fluff etc. or not, I do also enjoy playing the game. So if they were a much weaker army it's really not fun to get your butt kicked all the time. From what you say though apparently I have nothing to worry about!

Yea they can pack a serious wallop now. The rules to rapid fire make their standard guns pretty mean, meaning Firewarriors have a purpose now. And all the goodies that Stealth Teams have, again with 6th edition updates, can make them a real PITA when used right. AND over watch as well, they are better then they have been in years

Tau are deeply affected by what armies the rest of your local sphere of fellow gamers play. With the worst being large numbers of horde armies (I know a guy who fields 300 or so cadians, I cry deep down for a 10 ft long board is needed to field it all) with SM's being GW gravy train the Tau can hold their own and even excell at times.

If you want a godly challenge join the 1k sons, we can always use another one!

I wasn't actually planning on taking Tau as an ally for my SW. I was going to get that as my next full army. The need for allys kind of makes me sad since that would be a third army I would have to collect.

As for my local armies that I face...my gaming buddy plays GK primarily with necrons and nids now and then. My FLGS (that i only recently discovered) apparently has 3 SW players, 2 GK players, a splash of chaos and i THINK eldar.

That means I will mostly be facing GK and SW armies. In such a small community the swarm of SW players makes me sad and makes me want to start another army even sooner. (I like having something different as it makes for more interesting games)

EDIT; my roommate (whom I coerced into joining in on 40k fun times) is starting an orc army and a friend is starting Dark angels as well.

 Ailaros wrote:
The biggest problem with tau right now is their players. Tau players have been in a woe-is-me self-pity death spiral for the past couple of years. I've almost never seen an entire player base with lower morale. Groupthink that tau is terrible has set in so hard that threads that come up about tau tend to turn into "it's hopeless and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" nerdrage parties.

And Tau players are a bit...funny ?

The ones that are into anime, I get. The ones that aren't, there's something...something in the eyes...

Rawrgyle wrote:
I'd suggest that you build a tau list and then add allies to it... don't make Tau your allies.

This is very important. Tau really need the elite- and HS-slots. You will not get very far with just 3 crisis-suits and a single broadside, as you need (sometimes very small) teams for all kind of tasks. Sadly the Firewarriors will not win you games, for this you need your suits, who have to specialize do get their job done.

Imho the learning curve of the Tau is extremely high (I got crushed nearly all the time when I played them). You have to learn your hardcounters, the distances where your units are the most effective, which things can your kroots charge (nearly nothing), how close can you allow the enemy to get to you and hundreds of other things, but if you are like me and really like it when your plan comes together, than you will enjoy the Tau even if you lose your first games.

they are not verry popular, but certanly not weak

I say go for it. Youll probably have no problem scoring an army off eBay for cheap due to their unpopularity. That way, when the new codex comes out you wont be with everyone else scrambling for the new Tau hotness!

I have to disagree here: Tau are really weak. As a Tau player, you have one remotely competitive army list. It's a good list in 6th edition, granted, but 90% of the units/upgrades outside of that list are garbage. Even small deviations from the standard Tau list will cost you heavily, so your entire strategic decisions will consist of slight variations in the point ratios spent on Broadsides and missile/plasma crisis suits, and you will have few variations in tactics besides target priority choices as you sit and shoot from maximum range. Meanwhile you have massive holes in your list: you have no AA, your token "assault" unit can barely do more than stall a tactical squad for a single turn, you have no ability to take and hold objectives outside your deployment zone, and you can't even go for the final-turn contest with Piranhas. The end result is a cookie cutter list/strategy with minimal flexibility, the exact opposite of a modern codex where you have useful options in every FOC slot.

Sure, various FW units can do a lot to help with these problems, but then you have to deal with your opponents whining and crying about how it's "not official" as they table you with their all-codex flyerspam army, if they don't refuse to play you entirely.

Coming from a Tau purist player:

Unpopular? yes.

Weak? harder to answer.

In 5th edition Tau were god-awful and generally unplayable, leading to the downward spiral of Tau moral. they were weak, had no way to compete in large games (2000-3000 points) due to filled out elite and HS where their troops are meh, and generally lacked hope due to dominance of assault and ease to cross the field in even a single turn for many units, not to mention outflankers and deep strikes gave them nightmares.

In 6th, things have changed. the rules support shooting more, assault is not first/second-turn melee any more, and outflank cant come out and tear your face apart instantly (in most cases at least), not to mention overwatch being a pure boon to an army that does not assault.
Yes, they are still weaker then most codecies, as a fact, but no longer in a crippling way. you CAN reliably win with tau, it won't be easy, but now it is possible. some things to keep in mind though:
Your best units are still at elite and HS, but at over 2000 points you get extra slots to fill them up.
You lack any air or dedicated anti-air, but your general anti-armor tends to be twin linked, so they got a fair chance.
Rapid fire changes effect everyone in an equal way-except Tau, fire warriors have that 6' more range, meaning 3' more rapid fire, so now they WILL reliably shoot first against any other rapid-fire basic infantry, and can skirt around 18' or less guns pretty good, with casualties from the front you might be able to completely negate an enemy squad form getting a chance to shoot back on their turn. they got viable.
The way most rules now transfer to the entire squad made alot of previously useless wargear options pretty damn good now.

Moral will take some time to recover, but I believe it will. Tau are not as strong as GK, or cron, or wolves-but they can stand up against them and give them a proper fight, and even win it if done right. its an uphill battle, but its not a mountain.

 Ailaros wrote:
The biggest problem with tau right now is their players. Tau players have been in a woe-is-me self-pity death spiral for the past couple of years. I've almost never seen an entire player base with lower morale. Groupthink that tau is terrible has set in so hard that threads that come up about tau tend to turn into "it's hopeless and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" nerdrage parties.

 Peregrine wrote:
I have to disagree here: Tau are really weak. As a Tau player, you have one remotely competitive army list. It's a good list in 6th edition, granted, but 90% of the units/upgrades outside of that list are garbage. Even small deviations from the standard Tau list will cost you heavily, so your entire strategic decisions will consist of slight variations in the point ratios spent on Broadsides and missile/plasma crisis suits, and you will have few variations in tactics besides target priority choices as you sit and shoot from maximum range

I would generally say less popular over the last while, but I wouldn't say weaker, although I could probably clarify this better.

Tau haven't gotten any weaker nor any stronger, I feel that they've come out pretty balanced after the introduction of 6th.

Assault has become a lot trickier and harder to be good at I'd say, which plays well into the Tau's hands, the inclusion of things like over-watch, snap fire, the new rapid-fire rules have led to some vast improvement for the Tau, also the fact that 15" is now their rapid fire range. There are a myriad of factors both good and bad that have come from 6th edition but Tau in general I feel have gotten several great benefits and some less advantageous new rules so they came out pretty balanced.

However in terms of the current Tau codex as it stands just now I'd personally say it isn't terrible, it's just slightly weaker than it should be in my opinion. There are a large host of completely useless rules/wargear and some units could do with some upgrading or changes to make them genuinely useful.

Tau are as good as ever in my overall opinion, however could do with a wave from the 'magical shiny new codex wand'. (Hopefully Phil Kelly is the 'Shiny New Codex Fairy' )

 Jihallah wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
The biggest problem with tau right now is their players. Tau players have been in a woe-is-me self-pity death spiral for the past couple of years. I've almost never seen an entire player base with lower morale. Groupthink that tau is terrible has set in so hard that threads that come up about tau tend to turn into "it's hopeless and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" nerdrage parties.

And Tau players are a bit...funny ?

The ones that are into anime, I get. The ones that aren't, there's something...something in the eyes...

Personally, I like Tau because I like shooty armies and I am not crazy about painting up infinite guardsmen (I have a hard time doing a decent job when I have to paint non-Ork skin, thats why all my marine sergeants wear helmets).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rysaer wrote:

Tau are as good as ever in my overall opinion, however could do with a wave from the 'magical shiny new codex wand'. (Hopefully Phil Kelly is the 'Shiny New Codex Fairy' )

Honestly, as long as it's not Cruddace, I'd be happy. Yes, even with Ward. Say what you like about his marine codexes, the man does a damn good job with Xenos.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sure, various FW units can do a lot to help with these problems, but then you have to deal with your opponents whining and crying about how it's "not official" as they table you with their all-codex flyerspam army, if they don't refuse to play you entirely.

I think this is very, very important. A Tau army without XV-8 upgrades, XV-9's, Tetras, Remoras, Barracuda, comm towers, and / Shas'O R'alai is hardly a Tau army at all. The codex is weak and GW has implicitly admitted that by producing a number of competitive Forgeworld units... especially Fast Attack options.

RegalPhantom wrote:
Honestly, as long as it's not Cruddace, I'd be happy. Yes, even with Ward. Say what you like about his marine codexes, the man does a damn good job with Xenos.

I heartily agree with you there man. To be fair I don't think his marine codexes are even that bad to be honest, Phil Kelly is just my preferable choice as he does consistently good works.

I'd still play Tau if I hadn't sold them a few years ago, I think they are just as viable and reliable as ever, it's just a simple matter of needing a little bit of love. (I also don't understand why people think they were so bad in 5th ed, it didn't seem to bother them that much..... but maybe thats just me.)

And Cruddance did the current imperial guard codex. Just because he botched Tyranid doesn't mean his work is consistently bad.

Sorry we're taking this a bit off topic here but don't get me wrong Cruddace has done fine work with the Guard, and while he did screw up the Tyranids pretty badly I would say that he is a more than adequate and does do fine works (Tomb Kings was also good.)

I personally want Phil Kelly to do it as he seems to write good codexes which can last in terms of fluff, fun and competitiveness. For example the Ork codex.

The Ork codex is a book that has remained competitive despite being released at the very beginning of 5th. It Is still easily playable, as even the "poorer" units mostly aren't really that bad compared to other new codex units that are bad.

That book is one of the few that still really pushes a large variety of playstyles without forcing players into a single style. It also still has a good variety of models, as everything is useful and has a great background to boot.

If he were to do something of this nature with Tau I think we'd see something really special that could last until 7th Ed.

Just my 0.02 USD though.

Rysaer

Rawrgyle wrote:

nanaki658 wrote:
I have been thinking about Tau as my second choice for an army. Or I could just be crazy.

I'd suggest that you build a tau list and then add allies to it... don't make Tau your allies.

Reason for tau is shooty, and thier army does work but it kinda relies on, well shooty, in the way a squad of boyz relies on boyz. Probably not making sense. But trust me a Tau list with Necron/SM/CSM or whatever you want really works better than taking Tau in the allied spot.

Uh....you're right, but that was a very....odd way to explain it. It's pretty simple in that Tau use up force org slots pretty voraciously (Elite and Heavy, primarily) while a lot of the newer codexes can fit good stuff in either troops, or just a few slots. (like GK). So you need Tau to be the base detachment so you have all the slots you need.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ailaros wrote:

The biggest problem with tau right now is their players. Tau players have been in a woe-is-me self-pity death spiral for the past couple of years.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
I have to disagree here: Tau are really weak.

Hey......I think I was warned about you!

As a Tau player, you have one remotely competitive army list. It's a good list in 6th edition, granted, but 90% of the units/upgrades outside of that list are garbage. Even small deviations from the standard Tau list will cost you heavily, .

Bull-pucky. They don't have the hugest unit list, but almost every unit except vespids, and the two non-farsight SCs have good uses. (drone squadrons......meh, but they still work, technically).

I've been playing around with my Tau+GK, gotten strong use out of stealths, hammerheads, sniper drones, 3 or 4 different crisis builds, kroot, almost all of it. OK, I haven't played with the skyray this edition, but people made unfair fun of that in 5th, too, but it was alright.

I agree, after going from Cruddance's IG codex to Phil Kelly's Ork codex, I found myself liking the ork one a lot more. IG has strong options, but there are several must takes, and several god awful choices.

In the ork codex, just about anything can be made to work if you feel like. Plus, the writing in it fluffwise is a millions times better.

Back on topic, we used to have a nasty Tau player at our store, but he moved away. He would absolutely wreck anybody, and won 3 local tournaments in a row with them back in 5th. If he could make them win in 5th, I'm sure there are ways to win in 6th.

Also, Tau may be "weak" right now, but the "tiers" (god I hate that stupid term) are always changing. No army will remain awesome forever. Just because IG is amazing right now doesn't mean that'll be true 3 years from now. Same goes for Tau. Just because they "suck" right now, doesn't mean they'll stay that way. If you get into them now, you'll have time to practice with them, get a decent army built up, and by the time a new codex comes out, you'll be set up and good to go. Plus, nobody can call you a flavor of the month player, as you were playing them long before they became good.

And besides, if they look cool and appeal to you, then they're the army for you. That's how most people pick their armies anyways

Sir_Prometheus wrote:
Bull-pucky. They don't have the hugest unit list, but almost every unit except vespids, and the two non-farsight SCs have good uses. (drone squadrons......meh, but they still work, technically).

Unless by "have their uses", you mean "it's better to have them than nothing at all", no, they really don't. How many good units do we have in each slot?

HQ (1/2)
Ethereals suck and make half your army run off the table when they die.
Crisis suits are good.

Elite (1/2)
Crisis suits are good.
Stealth suits cost too much for shooting your troops can bring.

Troops (0.5/3)
Fire Warriors are adequate in 6th, as long as you have something else to hold objectives outside your deployment zone. Call it 0.5.
Kroot are just IG meatshield platoons that cost more per model and can't take heavy weapons. Take IG allies.
Devilfish are bad. They're too expensive, disruption pods (the only reason they were good in 5th) suck now, and you don't have target saturation to keep them alive.

Fast (1/4)
Piranhas are overpriced, but they're the only movement blocker you've got. You'll use them, but you won't like it, so 0.5.
Pathfinders are only "good" because your shooting units aren't good enough to work on their own. Another 0.5 since they shouldn't be necessary.
Gun drones are worthless. Take scoring units if you want more pulse carbines, but give them pulse rifles so they don't suck.
Vespid are an "assault" unit with no save to get them into combat, and barely enough combat ability to kill a tactical squad.

Heavy (1/4)
Broadsides are awesome.
Hammerheads are mediocre at best, for the same reason as Devilfish. Single shot railguns are too unreliable, and without target saturation from other tanks you can't keep it alive.
Sky Rays are a strong candidate for the worst tank in the game.
Sniper drones have weak, inefficient firepower and the entire unit dies when a random bolt pistol shot kills the controller.

Characters (0/3)
Aun'va is by far the worst character in the game, and has the "honor" of being the single unit in the entire game that you wouldn't take even if it cost zero points and didn't occupy a FOC slot. And you pay over 200 points for him.
Farsight is a close second for that worst character award. Why would any sensible Tau player want to put 0-1 or "not at all" restrictions on their key units in exchange for a single power weapon?
Shadowsun is the "best" of the three, in that she's just significantly overpriced and not actively harmful to your army, but still terrible.


So, notice anything here? You have very few options in each slot compared to a modern codex, and most of them suck. You can win by spamming Broadsides and crisis suits, but it's a one-dimensional list with minimal flexibility to choose your own options. In other words, the textbook example of a weak codex. FW units help a lot, but too many people are WAAC {censored}s and are afraid to let you use them.

I've been playing around with my Tau+GK, gotten strong use out of stealths, hammerheads, sniper drones, 3 or 4 different crisis builds, kroot, almost all of it. OK, I haven't played with the skyray this edition, but people made unfair fun of that in 5th, too, but it was alright.

And have you been playing against competitive opponents, or people who also like to use terrible units for "fun"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Back on topic, we used to have a nasty Tau player at our store, but he moved away. He would absolutely wreck anybody, and won 3 local tournaments in a row with them back in 5th. If he could make them win in 5th, I'm sure there are ways to win in 6th.

The problem isn't that Tau can't win (especially if you're a better player than your opponent), it's that they start with few options in each FOC slot and are limited to a small portion of them if they want to have any chance of winning. This is fine if you decide that the "standard" Tau list is a good idea for your local metagame, but if you're considering the Tau as a whole they're a weak army with an obsolete codex (a 3rd edition book in all but name).

Also, Tau may be "weak" right now, but the "tiers" (god I hate that stupid term) are always changing. No army will remain awesome forever. Just because IG is amazing right now doesn't mean that'll be true 3 years from now. Same goes for Tau. Just because they "suck" right now, doesn't mean they'll stay that way. If you get into them now, you'll have time to practice with them, get a decent army built up, and by the time a new codex comes out, you'll be set up and good to go. Plus, nobody can call you a flavor of the month player, as you were playing them long before they became good.

I disagree with that. IG have been amazing since their release in over three years ago, and they show no sign of getting any weaker (in fact the opposite is true, with the IG flyers getting a massive boost). SW were awesome since their release almost three years ago, and they're still a top tier army. It's nice to think that the Tau codex won't be another Tyranids disaster, but it's not exactly impossible.

Also, "just build your army up" isn't such a good idea when you're talking about an obsolete codex and models. Just look at the changes Necrons and DE got, and imagine how the Tau (another 3rd edition army) could change. What if crisis suits get different weapon/upgrade options and a new kit that doesn't suck? What if Kroot get moved to an "allies" expansion and you have to choose between keeping your Kroot or the SM allies you've invested in? What if you get completely new units than send half your existing models to a permanent home on the display shelf?

IG fliers are a single thing in the codex. Given that 6th killed power blobs and made chimeras flimsier, I'd hardly say that IG as a whole got a "massive boost".

I do agree, though, that as a codex ages it tends to collapse down somewhat with regards to what you can take and still be competitive. As tau is an older codex, yeah, they're just not going to have as much options. To say that there is A ONE THE ONLY tau list and that if you're really lucky, you just might win with it is just silly. What's more likely is that you just haven't run across a good tau player yet. Like Moustaffa said, my FLGS also had a tau player that DESTROYED 5th ed, always placing in the top 3 at local tournaments. Seeing him utterly dismantle a DoA blood angels player back at their height was priceless.

You're just having a needlessly negative view of tau. They're better than you think they are. Dismissing good units literally out of hand doesnt' help this perception.

 Peregrine wrote:

Sir_Prometheus wrote:
Bull-pucky. They don't have the hugest unit list, but almost every unit except vespids, and the two non-farsight SCs have good uses. (drone squadrons......meh, but they still work, technically).

Unless by "have their uses", you mean "it's better to have them than nothing at all", no, they really don't. How many good units do we have in each slot?...............

Your entire post is stuck in 5th edition.

and the entire unit dies when a random bolt pistol shot kills the controller.

Se what I mean? That doesn't happen anymore. Pro-tip: Put the controller in the back, he'll be the last to die.

Devilfish are bad. They're too expensive, disruption pods (the only reason they were good in 5th) suck now, and you don't have target saturation to keep them alive

.

There you go again. 5th ed. You realize you have a 5+ cover all the time now, regardless of the range to the opponent, for free? I suppose being replaced by the same benefit for free does make them "suck" and "too expensive".....but you complain about odd things.

Also, it's nothing to write home about, but a Devil fish can damage a rhino, while the reverse is never true. I'd call them a little too expensive, but the truth is rhinos and chimeras are too cheap.

Kroot are just IG meatshield platoons that cost more per model and can't take heavy weapons.

Right. WS 4, Str 4, 2 attack guardsmen, with bolters. And forest ninja skills. For 1 pt more. Those silly IG players would never buy that! And gawd knows, Tau needed more big guns.

Hammerheads are mediocre at best, for the same reason as Devilfish. Single shot railguns are too unreliable, and without target saturation from other tanks you can't keep it alive.

I'm sorry, how many AV 13 tanks with a persistent 5+ cover save did you need to reach "saturation" exactly? How many do you think most other armies get?

Second Pro-tip: Don't bring the hammerheads for the single rail shot, use them for the blast.

Farsight is a close second for that worst character award. Why would any sensible Tau player want to put 0-1 or "not at all" restrictions on their key units in exchange for a single power weapon?

For the record, I have totally ruled people with Farsight. And it's not a "power weapon" it "ignores armour saves" which means it can take out 2+ saves, key difference. He's not exactly the beatiest beatstick out there but with Str 5, 4 attacks, 4 wounds and invo, he'll kill most characters in his weight class. (and he can still shoot straight) There's a little less need for him now that Tau can take fighty allies, but he can do just fine.

What are you worried about the 0-1 selections? You just said all of them suck, except for Broadsides! . Seriously, though, if you're willing to admit broadsides and Hammerheads are best used together, it's not such a big deal.

And have you been playing against competitive opponents, or people who also like to use terrible units for "fun"?

Heh, yeah. I'm a pretty serious player. Have you checked out my blog, Prometheusatwar.com?

Are you referring to the kroot as useless just this edition. or in 5th as well? Just curious because back in 5th our tau player was eaither really lucky with them or very clever, and I'd like to know which . He was very annoying with them. I remember that much, always outflanking them to mess with fire support units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: holy crap they're only 6pts a piece for their stats?

Where can i get some of those. Thats what i wish penal legion were