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.

 Kingsley wrote:

Backfire wrote:Hey, here's a crazy idea. What if somebody wrote a codex which would make new tactics viable, whilst still kept old staple units playable? No, that's just silly talk. You gotta nerf the old units and playstyles first. Never mind that all the changes fly straight at the face of estabilished fluff. After all, who reads it except old timers nobody cares about? Y'know, those people who kept buying the models and playing the army through dark times? They're not important!

I don't know what to tell you, man. I'm assembling two Hammerheads as we speak. I think they are substantially more viable under the new rules.

I can't possibly think of ONE thing which has made Hammerhead better in the new book. Not one. Everything is either the same, or worse, in some cases much, much worse. Sure it's cheaper (in basic configuration, not including upgrades) but what good is that since it can't perform in the old role.

I actually planned on buying more Devilfish or Hammerheads on belief that the new Codex would get better. I was looking forward to it, hoping that Mech Tau would once again become a viable tactic. There was no limit for my disappointment when I discovered that not only that aspect of the Tau army got no improvement at all, it was actually nerfed further to the point on unplayability. It's unbelievable. I can't believe that I am actually seriously considering selling off my Tau army - the army which got me to 40k in the first place! Because it's not the army anymore I started to play, or want to play at all.

Backfire wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
I don't know what to tell you, man. I'm assembling two Hammerheads as we speak. I think they are substantially more viable under the new rules.

I can't possibly think of ONE thing which has made Hammerhead better in the new book. Not one. Everything is either the same, or worse, in some cases much, much worse. Sure it's cheaper (in basic configuration, not including upgrades) but what good is that since it can't perform in the old role.

Twin-linked 30" range SMS instead of non-twin linked 24" SMS.

That said, I said "more viable," not better. An old Hammerhead, once you get it on the table, is certainly better than a new Hammerhead-- but in the context of the Codex and the game as a whole the old Hammerhead is less viable thanks to its cost and competition for its role from old Broadside battlesuits. Now Broadsides fill a different role so there is more space for Hammerheads, and the reduced costs make them easier to integrate into a list.

 Kingsley wrote:
Twin-linked 30" range SMS instead of non-twin linked 24" SMS.

Except that's actually a nerf, because non-twin-linked at BS 4 is better than twin-linked at BS 1 (if you move, which you usually will).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kingsley wrote:
How so? Dropping a hundred-point pod or DoA squad with two or three meltaguns seems pretty worth it if it kills 2 65+ point Broadside suits, or one 100+ point Commander (hey, Slay the Warlord!), or two 50+ point tooled up Crisis suits (forcing a morale check), etc.

But those targets tend to have expendable drones to take the shot. Vehicles can die to a single melta hit, while a single melta hit is unlikely to do anything to a crisis suit squad.

I hear this a lot, but really it typically isn't that much of a factor. The difference between a missile launcher and a lascannon is 5-10 points on top of a carrier unit that costs far more than that. The efficiency difference, while prevalent, isn't enough to make the lascannon not worth it.

You're misunderstanding. I'm not saying that lascannons can't kill crisis suits, I'm saying they're less effective than other anti-crisis-suit weapons at killing crisis suits (but better at killing Hammerheads). A list that takes lascannons will improve in effectiveness if some of its crisis suit targets are changed to Hammerheads. Again, not as much as a foot IG list suddenly gaining a Chimera for the LCs to shoot at, but it's still a difference.

I don't consider plasma all that good against Crisis/Broadside battlesuits, to be honest. Melta seems substantially better thanks to Instant Death, though the plasma is nice to have against a Riptide.

Plasma is much better. Both average the same number of wounds against un-wounded battlesuits (instant death vs. two shots), but when you consider one-wound drones and wounded suits plasma gets the advantage, and can still shoot from 12-24".

Except that Tau tanks, Devilfish aside, still have BS4? And vehicle multitrackers were silly and added to the homogeneity of the game. Every Xenos army except Orks had fast skimmers. Having non-fast skimmers is interesting and makes use of more of the design space. Units should be more unique.

Piranhas and (presumably once they get FAQed) Tetras are only BS 3. Going from BS 4 to BS 3 makes melta Piranhas a lot less effective.

And Tau did have something interesting: the shooting of a fast vehicle without the movement. They couldn't do the flat-out "move my whole army to the other side of the table in one turn" stuff like Eldar, but they had the ability to move a moderate distance every turn while shooting at full effectiveness. Now they're just like Necron skimmers.

(And "every army but Orks" isn't true. Necrons don't have fast skimmers either, so the only fast skimmers were Eldar/DE.)

And vehicle multitrackers were silly and added to the homogeneity of the game. Every Xenos army except Orks had fast skimmers. Having non-fast skimmers is interesting and makes use of more of the design space. Units should be more unique.

Actually, necron skimmers also lack the fast rule. So you have the two Eldar factions with fast skimmers, the Tau with can fire as fast but not actually fast skimmers, and the necrons with slow skimmers. That is about as inhomogeneous as it get, at least within the existing rules. The Tau vehicle multitracker was rules design par excellence, distancing the Tau tanks in functionality both from Eldar and Imperial tanks so fielding Tau tanks felt different from fielding their Eldar and Imperial counterparts. Now Tau tanks just behave like Imperial tanks with different weapons. An epic fail in my book.

That said, I said "more viable," not better. An old Hammerhead, once you get it on the table, is certainly better than a new Hammerhead-- but in the context of the Codex and the game as a whole the old Hammerhead is less viable thanks to its cost and competition for its role from old Broadside battlesuits. Now Broadsides fill a different role so there is more space for Hammerheads, and the reduced costs make them easier to integrate into a list.

Again I am going to have to disagree. The old hammerhead was able to keep pace with the Tau Crisis suits and participate in the maneuver warfare that made Tau such an enjoyable and rewarding army to play, while broadsides served more as a solid anchor, defining the direction engagement for the enemy (as your opponent never wanted to show side armor to the old broadsides). The two provided a clear trade-off between maneuverability and firepower. The new hangstrung hammerheads on the other hand will be taken largely because they are the only long range heavy AT option outside of the nova reactor charged Riptide main weapon, and little more than glorified and relatively static artillery pieces. Just another model forced on the Tau player do to Vetock's shoddy rules design.

The old hammerhead worked far better with the rest of the Tau army because it could keep pace with the rest of the army. The new hammerhead is their simply because the codex is laid out to require its presence.

Peregrine wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
Twin-linked 30" range SMS instead of non-twin linked 24" SMS.

Except that's actually a nerf, because non-twin-linked at BS 4 is better than twin-linked at BS 1 (if you move, which you usually will).

It's situational. Sometimes the smart missiles are superior to the main weapon and will fire at full BS-- sometimes Markerlights will bring their BS up despite Snap Firing. In either case though Smart Missiles are better when you need them.

Peregrine wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
How so? Dropping a hundred-point pod or DoA squad with two or three meltaguns seems pretty worth it if it kills 2 65+ point Broadside suits, or one 100+ point Commander (hey, Slay the Warlord!), or two 50+ point tooled up Crisis suits (forcing a morale check), etc.

But those targets tend to have expendable drones to take the shot. Vehicles can die to a single melta hit, while a single melta hit is unlikely to do anything to a crisis suit squad.

I find that drones are trivial to circumvent with 6th edition wound allocation, especially when dropping in. Your mileage may vary?

Peregrine wrote:

I don't consider plasma all that good against Crisis/Broadside battlesuits, to be honest. Melta seems substantially better thanks to Instant Death, though the plasma is nice to have against a Riptide.

Plasma is much better. Both average the same number of wounds against un-wounded battlesuits (instant death vs. two shots), but when you consider one-wound drones and wounded suits plasma gets the advantage, and can still shoot from 12-24".

But plasma also costs more, is hazardous to the user, is substantially worse against Command suits, etc.

Peregrine wrote:

Except that Tau tanks, Devilfish aside, still have BS4? And vehicle multitrackers were silly and added to the homogeneity of the game. Every Xenos army except Orks had fast skimmers. Having non-fast skimmers is interesting and makes use of more of the design space. Units should be more unique.

Piranhas and (presumably once they get FAQed) Tetras are only BS 3. Going from BS 4 to BS 3 makes melta Piranhas a lot less effective.

And Tau did have something interesting: the shooting of a fast vehicle without the movement. They couldn't do the flat-out "move my whole army to the other side of the table in one turn" stuff like Eldar, but they had the ability to move a moderate distance every turn while shooting at full effectiveness. Now they're just like Necron skimmers.

Piranhas and Tetras aren't tanks. That said, Tau can still do the shooting of a fast vehicle without the movement if you're willing to use Markerlights, which plays better into the combined-arms themes of the Tau anyway.

Peregrine wrote:(And "every army but Orks" isn't true. Necrons don't have fast skimmers either, so the only fast skimmers were Eldar/DE.)

Phanixis wrote:Actually, necron skimmers also lack the fast rule.

The most common Necron ground vehicle in my experience, the Catacomb Command Barge, does have Fast. The Scythes were also fast skimmers prior to 6e.

Phanixis wrote:The Tau vehicle multitracker was rules design par excellence, distancing the Tau tanks in functionality both from Eldar and Imperial tanks so fielding Tau tanks felt different from fielding their Eldar and Imperial counterparts. Now Tau tanks just behave like Imperial tanks with different weapons. An epic fail in my book.

You can use markerlights to do the same thing while emphasizing the combined-arms elements of the Tau, which is even better design-wise IMO.

 Kingsley wrote:
It's situational. Sometimes the smart missiles are superior to the main weapon and will fire at full BS-- sometimes Markerlights will bring their BS up despite Snap Firing. In either case though Smart Missiles are better when you need them.

How is the SMS better than a submunition or overcharged ion cannon shot?

And yes, in theory you can come up with situations where they're better. However as a general rule BS 4 SMS shooting at a separate target from the main gun is much, much better than BS 1 SMS twin-linked and forced to shoot at the same target as your anti-tank gun.

I find that drones are trivial to circumvent with 6th edition wound allocation, especially when dropping in. Your mileage may vary?

If you play against opponents who know that deep strike melta is coming and don't make any attempt to protect their important T4 multiwound models then sure, enjoy your easy wins.

But plasma also costs more, is hazardous to the user, is substantially worse against Command suits, etc.

How is it "much" more? Remember how you just said that LCs are not much more expensive than MLs? Well, plasma vs. melta is a smaller gap in price.

And yes, plasma does have the occasional drawback. But as a general rule it's better than melta for killing battlesuits.

Piranhas and Tetras aren't tanks. That said, Tau can still do the shooting of a fast vehicle without the movement if you're willing to use Markerlights, which plays better into the combined-arms themes of the Tau anyway.

Piranhas and Tetras aren't technically tanks, but they still fit the all-vehicle Tau army theme.

And yes, you can use markerlights to move and shoot. I'm so glad we replaced our powerful and interesting tanks with Codex:Magic Laser Pointers. Not that you'd ever do it, since spending all those markerlight hits to repair the BS loss from snap firing a Hammerhead is usually a complete waste compared to the other things you could do.

The most common Necron ground vehicle in my experience, the Catacomb Command Barge, does have Fast. The Scythes were also fast skimmers prior to 6e.

Really? Command barges are more common than Annihilation Barges and Ghost Arks? You have a pretty weird metagame then.

And sure, Scythes were, but only as a short-term solution to put flyers in the book before 6th edition was released. If you look at the Scythes as flyers instead of skimmers the default Necron skimmer is slow.

Phanixis wrote:You can use markerlights to do the same thing while emphasizing the combined-arms elements of the Tau, which is even better design-wise IMO.

Except that:

1) You have to want to lose the game by wasting your markerlights.

and

2) Codex:Markerlights is stupid design. Markerlights should be a nice bonus that gives you the last bit of synergy at a key moment, not an essential component in enabling basic functions of your units.

 Peregrine wrote:
How is the SMS better than a submunition or overcharged ion cannon shot?

Target is outside Line of Sight or in good cover without Markerlight support? Happens a lot in my experience-- that's why I'll be keeping the SMS on my Broadsides.

 Peregrine wrote:

I find that drones are trivial to circumvent with 6th edition wound allocation, especially when dropping in. Your mileage may vary?

If you play against opponents who know that deep strike melta is coming and don't make any attempt to protect their important T4 multiwound models then sure, enjoy your easy wins.

How many people even take drones on Crisis teams these days? I've killed quite a few teams via morale checks caused by picking off a Drone. Even if they do take Drones, how many angles can they really be protected from? And even if a drone is closest, what happens when I make them roll the basic weapon saves first?

 Peregrine wrote:

But plasma also costs more, is hazardous to the user, is substantially worse against Command suits, etc.

How is it "much" more? Remember how you just said that LCs are not much more expensive than MLs? Well, plasma vs. melta is a smaller gap in price.

I didn't say much more.

 Peregrine wrote:

The most common Necron ground vehicle in my experience, the Catacomb Command Barge, does have Fast. The Scythes were also fast skimmers prior to 6e.

Really? Command barges are more common than Annihilation Barges and Ghost Arks? You have a pretty weird metagame then.

The flyer armies run Command Barges as well, the non-flyer armies typically run both Annihilation and Command Barges. The end result is that Command Barges are the most common ground vehicle. Personally, I don't think they're that good and would go Destroyer Lords instead in that role-- synergizes better with Wraiths-- but a lot of players evidently disagree. I've never played against a Ghost Ark and have only even seen one on another table at a tournament on one occasion.

 Peregrine wrote:
Markerlights should be a nice bonus that gives you the last bit of synergy at a key moment, not an essential component in enabling basic functions of your units.

They, uh, are? Moving 12" and shooting is a nice bit of extra synergy that isn't fundamental to the Hammerhead's role. Similarly, giving a Fire Warrior squad extra BS is a nice trick that doesn't ultimately mean all that much. I suspect a fair number of Tau players will play without Markerlights as all-- configuring an army that doesn't need them is really rather easy.

 Kingsley wrote:
Target is outside Line of Sight or in good cover without Markerlight support? Happens a lot in my experience-- that's why I'll be keeping the SMS on my Broadsides.

How many targets do you really encounter that are 100% out of LOS, within SMS range, and so completely hidden that you can't move around the LOS-blocking terrain and get a shot with the main gun? I suppose it can happen, but it's going to be much rarer than the situations where the previous codex allowed you to shoot the SMS at full BS at a separate target and ignore LOS.

As for things in good cover, I'd rather take my chances with an AP 4 or AP 3 pie plate that wounds on a 2+ than a few pulse shots, especially since markerlights can remove cover entirely if I really need it.

How many people even take drones on Crisis teams these days?

Everyone. Every crisis suit that can have drones in the new codex will have drones. Gun drones are now twice as good, markerlights are essential, and the majority toughness problem is removed entirely with T4 drones.

I've killed quite a few teams via morale checks caused by picking off a Drone. Even if they do take Drones, how many angles can they really be protected from? And even if a drone is closest, what happens when I make them roll the basic weapon saves first?

Sure, but how many crisis suit teams are standing around in the open for a mishap-free deep strike in any direction you want? More realistically you're going to have a limited number of angles to shoot from, with a much greater chance of a wasted shot than if you'd been shooting at a tank.

The flyer armies run Command Barges as well, the non-flyer armies typically run both Annihilation and Command Barges. The end result is that Command Barges are the most common ground vehicle. Personally, I don't think they're that good and would go Destroyer Lords instead in that role-- synergizes better with Wraiths-- but a lot of players evidently disagree. I've never played against a Ghost Ark and have only even seen one on another table at a tournament on one occasion.

Metagame-specific frequency aside, if you look at the units in the codex the majority of Necron skimmers are not fast. The Command Barge is a special exception to the rule, probably because it's a special character transport instead of a gun tank like the others. So for the xenos armies we have:

Tau: shoot as fast skimmers, but can't move like fast skimmers.
Eldar: true fast skimmers.
DE: true fast skimmers.
Necrons: slow skimmers.
Orks: no skimmers at all.
Tyranids: no skimmers at all.

So even if you count Tau in the "fast" group that's only half the xenos armies. But Tau weren't really the same as Eldar, their "fast" vehicles were about constant shooting and movement not maximum flat-out speed across the table. That's a huge difference that made Tau unique, and now they're just generic vehicles.

Moving 12" and shooting is a nice bit of extra synergy that isn't fundamental to the Hammerhead's role.

Of course it's fundamental to the Hammerhead's role. That was the whole point of the Hammerhead, Broadsides had more raw firepower but the Hammerhead could move around freely looking for the perfect angle to shoot at while staying away from anti-tank threats. Now unless you bring tons of magic laser pointers Hammerheads are another boring static unit.

Maybe railheads aren't as good. But the ionhead is pretty solid now.

New tricks, new codex. The heavy slot is a must fill still, just a few bits needed.

Ever read about blocking units? If so, welcome to the Dfish. A little flatting out with a Dpod and watching your foe waste shots. A mech Tau list can work in tournament play, you just have to put more thought and less bitching like a brat into it. I except 40k players to not be such emotional/ mental wussies. Every now and then I get proved wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I'm ticked about the knee jerk Mdrone over nerf and screwing the kroot was just uncalled for, but this codex has some serious legs. Bombard GW with some professional and thought out emails on what you don't like and we might get a tweak or two. If not, this dog still hunts.

 Lobukia wrote:
Ever read about blocking units? If so, welcome to the Dfish. A little flatting out with a Dpod and watching your foe waste shots.

Too bad it was better before the new codex was released.

A mech Tau list can work in tournament play, you just have to put more thought and less bitching like a brat into it. I except 40k players to not be such emotional/ mental wussies. Every now and then I get proved wrong.

Yeah, it's just "bitching like a brat" if you're annoyed that the army you bought was suddenly nerfed for no apparent reason. Believe it or not some of us enjoyed playing an all-tank Tau army, now our tanks are much less effective and the solution is to buy the shiny new models like everyone else.

1850

150 HQ
Cadre Fireblade
Kitted out Ethereal

465 on Heavies (Dpods and a few points for whatever goodies float your boat)
Railhead Longstrike
Ionhead
Ionhead

355 Fast (few extra points for fun)
Sun Shark Dpod
Razorshark Dpod

780 Troops
9 FW with some bells and whistles in a Dpod Dfish
9 FW with some bells and whistles in a Dpod Dfish
9 FW with some bells and whistles in a Dpod Dfish
12 FW with some bells and whistles

ADL with Quad

...and that's just a skinny vannilla skeleton. Streamline things down and you can put in another flyer, ditch the ADL and the 12 FW squad for another Dfish troop squad... put the Cadre Fireblade and the Ethereal with whatever squad you want, or ditch one to build up more fast attack or add some suicide elites in... take two FW to 6 and another up to 12... add some Pathfinders or build up to 2k and add another Railhead and some Misslesides in, run two fish empty and use one to block everything but the Longhead turret, detach drones and let them pester enemy units into pouring valuable fire into them... etc.

A fully (or almost fully) mechanized Tau list can be pretty mean... if you can clear away the tears and subject yourself to adding a Riptide in or the like, then it can get some serious teeth. This runs strong, and with the incredible range the Hammerheads have and the amount of fish that can screen them, you can chew through an aweful lot of MEQ or GEQ lists. Have supported FW squads popping out here and there and maybe throw some FW units out and you'll do just fine.

None of the 6th ed armies are designed to be played without allies and the Tau are the worst yet.

Yes we got nice new shineys but just getting new stuff or better weapon profiles does not a viable army make.

I expect that once the newness wears of and our opponents start to exploit the glaring flaws of this dex, Tau players will realize that their new army is the Tyranids of 6th ed.

I say this because our army was designed to give Imperium forces neat anti-air tricks as allies, but not as a stand alone army. This is why the Tau were turned into a static xeno guard that has less mobility than the IG.

Before anyone starts berating me, I'd like to point out the biggest drawback of the Tau in competition was that we had no way of rapidly inserting objective claimers onto objectives deep in our opponents territories. AND we still do not have a way of doing this. Look at our options:

No Deepstriking Troops(Unforgivable considering the Tau fluff. This is as bad as a SM army without any power armour.)
No Fast Transports
No Flying Transports

And our transports got effectively slower.

The only thing we have are outflanking kroot that have reduced combat abilities and little to no survivability. Yes, they get sniper rounds that make their guns into 24" range heavy one weapon but they are not designed as objective claimers/holders..

This makes rear objective capturing practically impossible, which in turn means that the Tau start every objective related game at a massive disadvantage.
Basically we have to fight these battles from a defensive stance and hope that our opponent is dumb enough to give us an opening.

I like what Vetcock did with the fluff but his rules sucks more than a dyson.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
The only thing we have are outflanking kroot that have reduced combat abilities and little to no survivability.

And Darkstrider's outflanking fire warrrior unit.

And if we add allies we can do some interesting things. Wraithguard protecting Eldrad (divination and psychic defense) with Shadowsun attached to make them a T6/2++ unit? Scoring terminators/bikes (one of the FW Badab War characters/bike captain) with Shadowsun attached to out-flank them and give a 2++? C:SM squads drop podding in once no-cover-save Riptides have wiped all the "enemy" objectives clear? Vendettas or Night Scythes being overpowered as usual and then dropping squads wherever you want them? Sadly 6th edition is the edition of mandatory allies, but at least we have options.

Plus, Tau have absolutely terrifying objective clearing ability. 2-3 Riptides spamming pie plates that wound on a 2+ with no armor or cover saves will slaughter objective holding units (and if your opponent holds everything back on their 'home' objectives they aren't moving up to engage you), so claiming opposing objectives isn't really going to be that much of a problem. Hold your own securely and wipe out your opponent's scoring units.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plus, Tau have absolutely terrifying objective clearing ability. 2-3 Riptides spamming pie plates that wound on a 2+ with no armor or cover saves will slaughter objective holding units (and if your opponent holds everything back on their 'home' objectives they aren't moving up to engage you), so claiming opposing objectives isn't really going to be that much of a problem. Hold your own securely and wipe out your opponent's scoring units.

That's actually a pretty good point. You don't have to capture the enemy objectives, you just need to make sure he can´t claim them himself. Any list relying on an Aegis is in for some rough riding against Tau.

Kroot are much better now. They were never a good assault unit unless you fought orks, Tau or Necrons and even then, questionable and inconsistent results.

But as a firebase that infiltrates and scores? They are now pretty darn useful to supplement the shooting, at a low cost, the army can do. Taking out characters is a great boon with Tau.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
I expect that once the newness wears of and our opponents start to exploit the glaring flaws of this dex, Tau players will realize that their new army is the Tyranids of 6th ed.

In general, this has been said about every 6th edition codex. Because it does feel like GW is taking a step in the right direction and are balancing the books against each other, instead of what it out there already (like they're doing with 8th edition Fantasy). The books look pretty weak when compared to 5th edition powerhouse books, just like 8th edition Fantasy army books look weak compared to 7th edition powerhouse books. 6th edition books are looking pretty balanced against each other, just like 8th edition Fantasy army books.

Seriously, wait until everyone has their new codex - given the ramped up speed of release they've shown so far, it won't take long. And yes, this means that your favorite 5th edition books, like Space Wolves and Guard, are looking to get a very severe kick in the balls. Just a heads up.

I don't care what anyone says, 27 Sniper Drones and 60 Sniper Kroot all day every day.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
The only thing we have are outflanking kroot that have reduced combat abilities and little to no survivability.

And Darkstrider's outflanking fire warrrior unit.

And if we add allies we can do some interesting things.

*Snip*

Plus, Tau have absolutely terrifying objective clearing ability. 2-3 Riptides spamming pie plates that wound on a 2+ with no armor or cover saves will slaughter objective holding units (and if your opponent holds everything back on their 'home' objectives they aren't moving up to engage you), so claiming opposing objectives isn't really going to be that much of a problem. Hold your own securely and wipe out your opponent's scoring units.

A)Reading comp. The point was that the Tau are not a stand alone army as per the new codex. Thank you for proving my point.


B)You are over estimating the Dreadtide and the tau in generals objective clearing ability. 104s will be no better at clearing objectives than the dreadknight. Crisis Plas teams and TH/SS termies will take the 104 out without breaking a sweat

(Shakes head)....Stand and shoot /= mobility. The Tau are supposed to be about mobility, yet the IG has them beat hands down in this area. These issues that were around in 5th ed and 6th ed with the old dex but are worse in the new one. The new 'dex was supposed to break us out of the old gun-line, yet your main defense of this garbage is that we Stand and shoot.

Loki wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:
Captain Avatar wrote:
I expect that once the newness wears of and our opponents start to exploit the glaring flaws of this dex, Tau players will realize that their new army is the Tyranids of 6th ed.

In general, this has been said about every 6th edition codex. Because it does feel like GW is taking a step in the right direction and are balancing the books against each other, instead of what it out there already (like they're doing with 8th edition Fantasy). The books look pretty weak when compared to 5th edition powerhouse books, just like 8th edition Fantasy army books look weak compared to 7th edition powerhouse books. 6th edition books are looking pretty balanced against each other, just like 8th edition Fantasy army books.

Seriously, wait until everyone has their new codex - given the ramped up speed of release they've shown so far, it won't take long. And yes, this means that your favorite 5th edition books, like Space Wolves and Guard, are looking to get a very severe kick in the balls. Just a heads up.

My complaint is not about balancing, it is about GW not making each force viable unto itself. The things I describe as issues could be remedied without disrupting balance.

I also disagree that GW is going the right direction. Both 8th ed fantasy and 6th ed 40k suck balls. Worst rulesets I have ever had the misfortune to waste my time on.


Also, GW has made this promise of balancing everything before. At the end of 4th ed their excuse for the crappy Eldar, DA, Chaos SM and Chaos Deamons was that they were balancing the books. This turned out to be BS, they were just rushing out the last books to keep a commitment to the stockholders about properly supporting their IP. As soon as 5th ed dropped we saw that things went back to power creep for the favored armies. Now it is time for the non-favoured armies and lookie lookie, DA, Chaos SM, Chaos Deamons and Tau are all getting craptacular codices. Not holding my breath for IG and SM to get nerfed. You can believe it, just don't expect me to drink the flavor-aid with you.

And again, my issue is that each army should be a distinctive self sufficient army that can ally, not a half-assed list that "has" to ally in order to survive. This randomhammer where every army is a rag tag merc list just exacerbates the cookie cutter net list issues. It also has lowered the level of gameplay in the 8 states that I play in and most of my fellow veterans are leaving the game because of how much they detest this edition. Maybe I should join them and play Warmachine.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
The only thing we have are outflanking kroot that have reduced combat abilities and little to no survivability.

And Darkstrider's outflanking fire warrrior unit.

And if we add allies we can do some interesting things.

*Snip*

Plus, Tau have absolutely terrifying objective clearing ability. 2-3 Riptides spamming pie plates that wound on a 2+ with no armor or cover saves will slaughter objective holding units (and if your opponent holds everything back on their 'home' objectives they aren't moving up to engage you), so claiming opposing objectives isn't really going to be that much of a problem. Hold your own securely and wipe out your opponent's scoring units.

A)Reading comp. The point was that the Tau are not a stand alone army as per the new codex. Thank you for proving my point.


B)You are over estimating the Dreadtide and the tau in generals objective clearing ability. 104s will be no better at clearing objectives than the dreadknight. Crisis Plas teams and TH/SS termies will take the 104 out without breaking a sweat

TH/SS Termies are going to take out a JSJ Monstrous Creature? What? Que? Wut? Also, no bette at clearing objectives than the Dreadknight? Again, what, wut, que? You have a long-range high-strength low-AP blast that can ignore cover. Heavy Incinerators only have AP4 and the Dreadknight has to be close (relatively at least) to the enemy to clear them out.

Armies having weaknesses does not per default mean that they're not stand alone armies, it means they've got weaknesses to play around.

 Captain Avatar wrote:


Also, GW has made this promise of balancing everything before. At the end of 4th ed their excuse for the crappy Eldar, DA, Chaos SM and Chaos Deamons was that they were balancing the books. This turned out to be BS, they were just rushing out the last books to keep a commitment to the stockholders about properly supporting their IP. As soon as 5th ed dropped we saw that things went back to power creep for the favored armies. Now it is time for the non-favoured armies and lookie lookie, DA, Chaos SM, Chaos Deamons and Tau are all getting craptacular codices. Not holding my breath for IG and SM to get nerfed. You can believe it, just don't expect me to drink the flavor-aid with you.

Complaining about how Space Marines are the Devil and how unfair Power Creep is while calling the Eldar Codex crappy in the same sentence just makes me, and probably a lot of others, have difficulty taking you seriously. Because we all know that Eldar skimmerspam sucked during 4th edition, right? But whatever floats your boat, keep bashing Marines and IG (who had a genuinely craptacular 4th edition Codex, but that doesn't fit into your little rant, so you conveniently left that out...).

 Captain Avatar wrote:
My complaint is not about balancing, it is about GW not making each force viable unto itself. The things I describe as issues could be remedied without disrupting balance.

Well your complaint is about balance, because you say you can't build a force without relying on allies. That is an internal balance issue with the codex against the external balance of other codices. My argument was - wait for the rest of the codices. They're releasing them fast enough. The 6th edition codices seem pretty well balanced against each other.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
I also disagree that GW is going the right direction. Both 8th ed fantasy and 6th ed 40k suck balls. Worst rulesets I have ever had the misfortune to waste my time on.

Well you might as well quit because codices aren't going to change the core ruleset. Simply whinging about a codex when your main issue is the core ruleset is the definition of futile. You're just not going to like any codex for 6th edition.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
Also, GW has made this promise of balancing everything before. At the end of 4th ed their excuse for the crappy Eldar, DA, Chaos SM and Chaos Deamons was that they were balancing the books. This turned out to be BS, they were just rushing out the last books to keep a commitment to the stockholders about properly supporting their IP. As soon as 5th ed dropped we saw that things went back to power creep for the favored armies. Now it is time for the non-favoured armies and lookie lookie, DA, Chaos SM, Chaos Deamons and Tau are all getting craptacular codices. Not holding my breath for IG and SM to get nerfed. You can believe it, just don't expect me to drink the flavor-aid with you.

And yet they've managed it with 8th edition fantasy. Whether you like the ruleset, 8th edition narrowed the power curve significantly, and the 8th edition army books, compared to each other and not the remaining powerhouse 7th edition rulesets like Skaven, the power curve is relatively non-existant. This is the direction it looks like they're heading with 40k's codices.

Again, the direction of the codices is a good thing - whether you enjoy the core ruleset is where you should decide if you want to hang around. It looks like you've made up your mind. There's not much point hanging around whinging about something you're just not going to like.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
And again, my issue is that each army should be a distinctive self sufficient army that can ally, not a half-assed list that "has" to ally in order to survive. This randomhammer where every army is a rag tag merc list just exacerbates the cookie cutter net list issues.

And again, my issue is you're only looking at a small selection of 6th edition books. The 6th edition books seems to be decently balanced against each other, and given the speed that they're getting them out, you won't have to wait long to see the overall goal they're aiming for this edition.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
It also has lowered the level of gameplay in the 8 states that I play in and most of my fellow veterans are leaving the game because of how much they detest this edition. Maybe I should join them and play Warmachine.

I'd honestly ask why you haven't left already. You're obviously looking for a level of competitiveness GW is not catering for - which they have repeatedly said they're not doing. Continually expecting the next 40k or Fantasy book to be the edge of competitiveness is just going to infuriate you more, since they're not catering to your preferred style of gameplay.

 Peregrine wrote:

Of course it's fundamental to the Hammerhead's role. That was the whole point of the Hammerhead, Broadsides had more raw firepower but the Hammerhead could move around freely looking for the perfect angle to shoot at while staying away from anti-tank threats. Now unless you bring tons of magic laser pointers Hammerheads are another boring static unit.

Testify, brother. Nowadays, even IG tanks are more mobile than Tau tanks, because at least they have Heavy Vehicle rule! Am I the only one who thinks this is a travesty?

Markerlights have been ever steadily getting more important with each new Tau codex:

-In the first one, they were kind of a neat mechanic, but not really that great.
-in next one, they were pretty good but expensive, but you could build your army around them
-newest one, they are the core mechanic of the army and basically essential
-presumably in next Codex, all other weapons have been dispensed altogether and all you can take is Markerlights.

Backfire wrote:

Testify, brother. Nowadays, even IG tanks are more mobile than Tau tanks, because at least they have Heavy Vehicle rule! Am I the only one who thinks this is a travesty?

But do Tau tanks even need the fire&move capability? Two of them have only 2 weapons (Hammerhead and Devilfish), one has only one (Piranha) and one has 9 (Sky Ray, but out of the 9, 6 are Seeker Missiles and 2 are Markerlights). Do you really want that single TL Burst Cannon/SMS so badly? Other than that, the Tau vehicles are more mobile than the IG tanks, because they are skimmers.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
TH/SS Termies are going to take out a JSJ Monstrous Creature? What? Que? Wut? Also, no bette at clearing objectives than the Dreadknight? Again, what, wut, que? You have a long-range high-strength low-AP blast that can ignore cover. Heavy Incinerators only have AP4 and the Dreadknight has to be close (relatively at least) to the enemy to clear them out.

Armies having weaknesses does not per default mean that they're not stand alone armies, it means they've got weaknesses to play around.

So you are standing back and just blasting with the 104? Units on objectives that are out of sight seem to happen a lot when you play Tau. Many newcomers don't seem to realize that the opponents already know how to minimize the effectiveness of markerlights.
No marker light support and the 104 becomes a mobile basilisk that has a giant target on it. As to TH/SS termies catching a ginormous jump mc? Seen it happen plenty of times against tyranids.
And dread knights are usually dead by end of turn two thanks to my B-sides. Good thing that only Tau can take th....oh wait, allies means that all armies have no weaknesses unless you try to run some of them as standalone armies at which point they fall on their face...lolwut


Tau have enough weaknesses without being gimped by a codex that makes them non-competitice in half of the missions. But, apparently, you feel that it is ok for certain armies to get screwed while others get preferred treatment.
Do you really feel that it is ok to screw over some factions with fatal flaws when they trying to fight as an independent faction while others are not thusly handicapped? Do you really feel that the Tau are not deserving to get a stand alone codex?

You see, I do not think that allies means that it is ok for GW to releasing 2/3rds armies. I feel we should see full armies that have been balanced. By balanced, I mean that any faction should be able to perform as well when on its own as it does with allies.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:
Also, GW has made this promise of balancing everything before. At the end of 4th ed their excuse for the crappy Eldar, DA, Chaos SM and Chaos Deamons was that they were balancing the books. This turned out to be BS, they were just rushing out the last books to keep a commitment to the stockholders about properly supporting their IP. As soon as 5th ed dropped we saw that things went back to power creep for the favored armies. Now it is time for the non-favoured armies and lookie lookie, DA, Chaos SM, Chaos Deamons and Tau are all getting craptacular codices. Not holding my breath for IG and SM to get nerfed. You can believe it, just don't expect me to drink the flavor-aid with you.

Complaining about how Space Marines are the Devil and how unfair Power Creep is while calling the Eldar Codex crappy in the same sentence just makes me, and probably a lot of others, have difficulty taking you seriously. Because we all know that Eldar skimmerspam sucked during 4th edition, right? But whatever floats your boat, keep bashing Marines and IG (who had a genuinely craptacular 4th edition Codex, but that doesn't fit into your little rant, so you conveniently left that out...).

SM the Devil??? Not my words or inference, those are yours. Along with rest of your attempt at painting me in some bad light because I question GWs decision to sell a codex with 2/3's of an army in it, is quite "telling". Apologist much?


And yes, the Eldar codex was a bland rushed piece of crap that removed much of the flavour of the army.

In 4th ed they had a fatal weakness that was easy to exploit, it was the single rear access point(remember the old emergency disembark rules?).
You parked piranha or speeder x on rear door, blast with melta, and even if you didn't kill it you probably penetrated which forced emergency disembark, and when that happened the squad inside auto died because you were parked 1.5" off there back door and the whole unit could not disembark without coming within 1" of your unit.

Mech-dar didn't get decent until 5th ed and even then the army was more about the farseers and warlocks while the defining portion of their army(Aspect warriors) were limied down to two aspect units out of eight were ever used. I will stand by my assertion that the current Eldar codex was the forced turd that cleared the path for the diarrhea that followed. The only late 4th ed book that stood out was the orks and even then, ork players had issues with the one stat-line for all orks scheme that GW used.


But yeah, If you think the Tau are just dandy as is, I dare you to run them for the next year or two with no allied support.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:
Also, GW has made this promise of balancing everything before. At the end of 4th ed their excuse for the crappy Eldar, DA, Chaos SM and Chaos Deamons was that they were balancing the books. This turned out to be BS, they were just rushing out the last books to keep a commitment to the stockholders about properly supporting their IP. As soon as 5th ed dropped we saw that things went back to power creep for the favored armies. Now it is time for the non-favoured armies and lookie lookie, DA, Chaos SM, Chaos Deamons and Tau are all getting craptacular codices. Not holding my breath for IG and SM to get nerfed. You can believe it, just don't expect me to drink the flavor-aid with you.

Complaining about how Space Marines are the Devil and how unfair Power Creep is while calling the Eldar Codex crappy in the same sentence just makes me, and probably a lot of others, have difficulty taking you seriously. Because we all know that Eldar skimmerspam sucked during 4th edition, right? But whatever floats your boat, keep bashing Marines and IG (who had a genuinely craptacular 4th edition Codex, but that doesn't fit into your little rant, so you conveniently left that out...).

SM the Devil??? Not my words or inference, those are yours. Along with rest of your attempt at painting me in some bad light because I question GWs decision to sell a codex with 2/3's of an army in it, is quite "telling". Apologist much?

No, really, you complained about how unfair it is that some armies are favoured and when I point out how silly that is you call me an apologist. I'm not trying to paint you in a bad light because you question GW, I'm trying to paint you in a bad light because you're whining over issues that I don't agree exist at all, and because, the way I see it, your posts are filled with nonsense. You complain about how unfair it is that Space Marines and IG are "favoured" and then ignore the fact that Imperial Guard had a sub-par 4th edition Codex and that Eldar had a really great one. Admittedly we don't agree on the last, but that's where I'm coming from.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

And yes, the Eldar codex was a bland rushed piece of crap that removed much of the flavour of the army.

In 4th ed they had a fatal weakness that was easy to exploit, it was the single rear access point(remember the old emergency disembark rules?).
You parked piranha or speeder x on rear door, blast with melta, and even if you didn't kill it you probably penetrated which forced emergency disembark, and when that happened the squad inside auto died because you were parked 1.5" off there back door and the whole unit could not disembark without coming within 1" of your unit.

Mech-dar didn't get decent until 5th ed and even then the army was more about the farseers and warlocks while the defining portion of their army(Aspect warriors) were limied down to two aspect units out of eight were ever used. I will stand by my assertion that the current Eldar codex was the forced turd that cleared the path for the diarrhea that followed. The only late 4th ed book that stood out was the orks and even then, ork players had issues with the one stat-line for all orks scheme that GW used.

I think you'll find you're in an overwhelming minority in thinking that Skimmerspam wasn't powerful during 4th edition. If your opponents placed themselves in a position where you were able to simply waltz up and block them off before killing them then sure, it might not be much of a problem, but with Eldar's mobility that shouldn't be happening.

From a game mechanics perspective, the emphasis on markerlights does make sense. if the army is essentially gimped without markerlights, it plays different from every other army out there. Right now, Tau are "unique". And having varied mechanics in a game is usually considered good.

But on the other hand you might argue that nerfing units for the sake of emphasising other ones is not brilliant game design.

 AtoMaki wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Testify, brother. Nowadays, even IG tanks are more mobile than Tau tanks, because at least they have Heavy Vehicle rule! Am I the only one who thinks this is a travesty?

But do Tau tanks even need the fire&move capability? Two of them have only 2 weapons (Hammerhead and Devilfish), one has only one (Piranha) and one has 9 (Sky Ray, but out of the 9, 6 are Seeker Missiles and 2 are Markerlights). Do you really want that single TL Burst Cannon/SMS so badly? Other than that, the Tau vehicles are more mobile than the IG tanks, because they are skimmers.

No they're not. Because you can only shoot Snap shots if you move over 6", this means you're mostly limited to 6" movement - and that is usually insufficient to clear terrain pieces. Furthermore, that movement is often really important when trying to get side shots.

And it's not just what's good, it's what's playstyle. Tau are not meant to be sit & shoot army. If I wanted to start playing static gunline army, I would never have began to play Tau in the first place.

Backfire wrote:

No they're not. Because you can only shoot Snap shots if you move over 6", this means you're mostly limited to 6" movement - and that is usually insufficient to clear terrain pieces. Furthermore, that movement is often really important when trying to get side shots.

Take Sensor Spines, so you auto-pass dangerous terrain and thus go into terrain pieces without fear from immobilization. And hey, Space Marines are meant to be a rapid assault force, and they didn't get fast tanks either (except the hipster Blood Angels).

Backfire wrote:

And it's not just what's good, it's what's playstyle. Tau are not meant to be sit & shoot army. If I wanted to start playing static gunline army, I would never have began to play Tau in the first place.

You don't have to play a gunline with Tau if you don't want. You can always suit-up and play the kiting game.

Aren't IG tanks more expensive points wise than Tau tanks?

 AtoMaki wrote:

You don't have to play a gunline with Tau if you don't want. You can always suit-up and play the kiting game.

...and I'm going to do what exactly with my tanks?

Captain Avatar wrote:None of the 6th ed armies are designed to be played without allies and the Tau are the worst yet.

No Deepstriking Troops(Unforgivable considering the Tau fluff. This is as bad as a SM army without any power armour.)
No Fast Transports
No Flying Transports

And our transports got effectively slower.
.

well, there are ways of tweaking allies into something fluffy. i saw one poster complain about the lack of the human auxilia. considering we can take IG as allies, its got that base covered. want assault units. take a mob of orks with a warlord, and krootify them (krootork hybrids -apparently, orks are quite tasty!) it gives both great conversion opportunities and fits the background. Dont complain about the allies chart. frankly, its there to be used, so you might as well use it. i have little time for purists intent on martyrdom when options already exist.

I will also disagree on the case for deepstriking troops. thats never been a thing for tau.

Backfire wrote:
And it's not just what's good, it's what's playstyle. Tau are not meant to be sit & shoot army. If I wanted to start playing static gunline army, I would never have began to play Tau in the first place.

except that back in third edition, tau were a gunline army. that gunline thing? Well, sit and shoot was precisely what they did. the whole "mechtau" thinh only appeared in fourth edition thanks to skimmers moving fast, fish of fury and decoy launchers. dont think the one viable build from two editions prior to this one should define the factions entire playstyle.

tau will sit and shoot, and hold a line. tau mobility is strategic, not tactical. tau can rapidly redeploy their forces on a strategic level with their mass carrying orca transports and their mantas. it means tau can fight with far fewer troops than their opponents, because wherever the other guy pushes, the tau will fluidly redeploy and match them grunt for grunt. on the tactical level however, tau are no faster (nor should they be) than any other faction. they've never been about speed.

Also, bear in mind that there are plenty examples in the fluff (from the codex through to IAV3 etc) which show the tau modus operandi of moving in, making a "kill", moving to a new position, using said position to make the next "kill" and then retreating, or redeploying as necessary. tau are not about running around the place shooting from the hip. they move to a position. hold it. use it to make their strike. and then they redeploy or pull back, depending on circumstances. all of which makes sense on the scale of 40k with a few FW squads sitting squat and shooting. heck, they have a whole strategy called kauyon (the patient hunter) which involves luring the prey forward, and killing them via sitting and shooting.



my call?

GW probably decided to make tau unique by pushing their two aspects that are unique - markerlights and crisis suits. IG already play tank heavy. the fast moving armoured corps is covered already. they probably felt that they had to push tau as something different. maybe its hamfisted, but that is probably the intent. at the end of the day, you (and i) will have to drop the sense of entitlement as to what "our" tau should be. this is a brand new codex. forget what came before. embrace change. the wise adapt. im annoyed with the loss of 2attacks each and s4 for kroot more so than hammerheads. but i'll adapt. markerlights, fire warrior and suit spam, some supporting vehicles with heavy dakka. is this the new way? meh. at least it offers me something new to the 3xhammerheads, 2x shas'els, min fire warriors in a fish and kroot that has been the staple tau list for 3 editions now!