Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have played games with the new codex and won against armies that would have whooped my ass before. Less crying and more playing IMO.

Backfire wrote:

 gr1m_dan wrote:
Gpfunk has it spot on.

Instead of spending the last week moaning Backfire why don't you actually get loads of games in and post the reports and how you felt units did instead of "this sucks because of this" etc.

I don't need to. I can read rules, you know. Honestly, you just don't get it: this is not about some stat nerf or price increase, this is about missing rules which were essential in playing the vehicles. It's like if Orks lost Furious charge and Mob rules. You don't NEED to take test games to realize that the army has become something totally different and does not work like the old army and if you loved playing Green Tide, then it does not matter how good Killa Kans or Big Gunz had become, the army you liked is unviable.

"Get over it and play the Codex" aside, what exactly was nerfed or removed that made it unplayable?

I think my tally is Tau vehicles can no longer move at full speed and fire their main gun, the loss of the networked marker light, and the nerf to disruption pods. Is it possible that you could just house rule those back in for your local group? Or did you play mech tau competitively with the last codex?

 gpfunk wrote:
and the nerf to disruption pods

The change on disruption pods is actually a +/-. Yeah, they only give +1 cover, but the loss of the 12" minimal range counterbalances it nicely.

So is this your argument about Tau being a gakky codex? Or are you just trying to troll? I can show you a list of all the CSM entrants to a major tournament. 3/4 of them run triple helldrakes. It's competitive because point for point the Helldrake offers the best value for power. Markerlights and suits offer the best point for point power in the codex, therefore they are the most competitive build.

It's list optimization. The optimized Tau list is markerlights and suits with firewarriors to support.

I'm not really seeing your point.

Sure tons of people BRING triple Helldrakes but none of them WIN. That's because it's too skewed in one direction to successfully win Tournaments, which are about objective capturing and holding, not tabling your opponent in 5 turns (which is difficult against good lists).

mono-Tau do not have strong Troops options for seizing opponents objectives and holding them, and that's why they are weak. Fire Warriors are glass cannon that die to a stiff breeze. The codex hasn't addressed any of their weaknesses... and made it worse in some areas.

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

mono-Tau do not have strong Troops options for seizing opponents objectives and holding them, and that's why they are weak. Fire Warriors are glass cannon that die to a stiff breeze. The codex hasn't addressed any of their weaknesses... and made it worse in some areas.

I can talk about one weakness that it corrected. Weakness in assault. Ability to have multiple units overwatch and many pieces of wargear that improve your ability to inflict brutal casualties in CC do a lot to make Tau more of a prospect to assault. They'll still fold but they'll cause more loses to units that do it. Very fun, fluffy, and effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 gpfunk wrote:
and the nerf to disruption pods

The change on disruption pods is actually a +/-. Yeah, they only give +1 cover, but the loss of the 12" minimal range counterbalances it nicely.

I didn't think it was a nerf. I think other people did.

 gpfunk wrote:

"Get over it and play the Codex" aside, what exactly was nerfed or removed that made it unplayable?

I think my tally is Tau vehicles can no longer move at full speed and fire their main gun, the loss of the networked marker light, and the nerf to disruption pods. Is it possible that you could just house rule those back in for your local group? Or did you play mech tau competitively with the last codex?

Loss of Multi-tracker and Target lock, primarily - these were simply essential when playing with Tau tanks to full effect. Loss of Targeting array hurts too. Disruption pod is not actually that big a deal - in fact balance-wise, I think the new Pod is better. I've explained my grievances to great detail in other thread, no point repeating them there.

Just one example of how little attention vehicles received in the new book: what are the Burst cannon in Hammerhead for?
-they cost same as SMS, same firepower, both are Twin-linked, but SMS has more range and better rules. So what's the point of BC?

I think we should all go and play a few games before we make any major decisions. There are things i love, there are things i questioned. I ran alot of TA builds, obviously i wont now, but i think the synergy of markerlights might be more dynamic and fun compared to the old non-markerlight builds i used to run. Sadly, the death of the overly stupidly powerful DP was obvious, i just wish i could fire as a fast vehicle, but hey i can improve my BS on snapshots for the other vehicle weapons.

The last few codex releases everyone cried about certain units and now you see people using them all the time. case in point, people actually whined that they didnt like helldrakes, people didnt like all kinds of DA units. Then they played them, then they found out they arent that bad, its all about personal play style and your local meta. Everyone tells me the DA flyers are terrible, yet it has produced nothing but trouble in our local game group. Everyone moaned about how terrible daemons were going to be with all that odd variability. Now it seems alot of people actually like it. Its fun, the new Tau seems like it will be alot of fun, and I for one will try everything to see what works for me.

So dont forget the golden rule of combat, just because something seems like a good idea on paper dosent mean it will perform on the field.

Threads like these are so cute. I see the EXACT same type of thread with every new codex release. And people wonder why GW ignores the fans? I'll give it another few weeks before people stop complaining and actually learn to make good Tau lists.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Threads like these are so cute. I see the EXACT same type of thread with every new codex release. And people wonder why GW ignores the fans? I'll give it another few weeks before people stop complaining and actually learn to make good Tau lists.

I agree wholeheartedly, i still think people are in the Necron/GK state of mind with all the new 6th edition codexs and they are not adapting to the idea that the new paradigm is balance over all. Ironically enough the idea of balance is what we have been asking for forever, and now that we have its all "bring back the cheese!" "we want dreadknights that can throw vendettas" I for one welcome the balance, as i have been tired of people steam rolling me with cheese builds instead of defeating me with tactical ability.

Backfire wrote:

 gr1m_dan wrote:
Gpfunk has it spot on.

Instead of spending the last week moaning Backfire why don't you actually get loads of games in and post the reports and how you felt units did instead of "this sucks because of this" etc.

I don't need to. I can read rules, you know. Honestly, you just don't get it: this is not about some stat nerf or price increase, this is about missing rules which were essential in playing the vehicles. It's like if Orks lost Furious charge and Mob rules. You don't NEED to take test games to realize that the army has become something totally different and does not work like the old army and if you loved playing Green Tide, then it does not matter how good Killa Kans or Big Gunz had become, the army you liked is unviable.

When 6th came out, I was really annoyed that my mechanized assault-based Space Wolves army wasn't going to work anymore due to the limitations on disembarking + assaulting. As a result, I lost a good deal of my early battles with the Codex because I was sticking to my old playstyle.

Around 6 months in, I began adapting more. I still run Rhinos, but I play them differently than I did before. They're now mobile cover platforms, tank shocking units, etc. And the units inside are still being used to assault, but I now have compensated to get in a turn of shooting beforehand.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if you are not beholden to a single, unbending playstyle, then you need to learn to adapt. However, if you insist on only playing Tau with fast tanks shooting at everything on the move, then unfortunately that's probably not going to work nearly as effectively as it did before. You might find something else to compensate though. Who knows. We'll see in the coming months.

Whine, whine, whine.

The codex is plenty good and before posting knee-jerk negative reactions you oughtta get some real testing under your belt.. I'd like to ask how many total games you've gotten under your belt with the new codex.

There are plenty of good units in the new dex and plenty of buffs, as well as some nerfs. I'd say with confidence that this is the most balanced 6th book to come out. I really don't see any terrible choices and aside from the Broadsides I don't see too many auto-takes. You should be happy that almost every unit is functional and be super happy that you were fortunate to get a unit as good as the Broadsides.

Markerlights are great, but from where I am sitting they aren't absolutely necessary. The best unit in the book, IMO, is the Broadside (dual purpose with ignore cover/homing Str5 and Str 7) BS3 TL isnt half bad (Vendettas anyone?). Fire Warriors are nice backfield campers and Ethereals can make them quite painful for opponents at RF range.

As for allies, Orks are amazing allies for Tau, they shore up your biggest weakness (flimsy troops) and add a nice counter-attacking element.

I doubt we will see as much complaining once people have settled in and realize that Tau/X ally, is one of the more formidable armies around.

I do think the OP has some valid criticisms of the codex. Whether those problems add up to a bad codex is another point entirely.

Especially the point about the codex being incomplete, I think is spot on. The Tau should not have to rely on allies to take far away objectives, but it appears that they will need to in a competitive environment.

I am sure that Tau players will find lots of ways to win but it will probably involve allies. Allies are the escape hatch for poor codex design as well as a mechanism to sell models, its the new reality and I expect it to persist long into the future.

I hope lots of people buy Tau as main or allied forces and shoot everything out of the sky, that would be a great contribution to 6th edition.

Allies are needed for almost all codices. SM almost always take a blob. Crons are usually seen with CSM/GK. CSM/Daemons or vice versa. GK with IG.

It is necessary in 6th to fill in your weak spots with allies. Thankfully Tau have access to almost everyone and can therefore do a great job filling in the cracks.

JWhex wrote:
I do think the OP has some valid criticisms of the codex. Whether those problems add up to a bad codex is another point entirely.

Especially the point about the codex being incomplete, I think is spot on. The Tau should not have to rely on allies to take far away objectives, but it appears that they will need to in a competitive environment.

Taking far away objectives is typically not required in this game. Contesting them or knocking your opponent off them is sufficient, and Tau have ample tools for that. Besides, if you want to take far away objectives, Devilfish carbine squads are always available (and IMO damn scary!)-- all in all, I think anyone claiming the Codex is dead in the water without testing needs to take a few deep breaths and calm down.

LVaix wrote:Allies are needed for almost all codices. SM almost always take a blob. Crons are usually seen with CSM/GK. CSM/Daemons or vice versa. GK with IG.

It is necessary in 6th to fill in your weak spots with allies. Thankfully Tau have access to almost everyone and can therefore do a great job filling in the cracks.

In my experience, that hasn't been the case. Tyranids do fine without allies. I often find that taking allies is more limiting than useful, especially in lower points games. Obviously, your mileage may vary, but allies seem far from mandatory at this stage of the game.

 gpfunk wrote:

No, we really don't. We have Hammerheads (which suck) and melta guns. That's it. Otherwise we have autocannon spam in an edition where autocannon spam is a terrible strategy.

Didn't you favor autocannons over lascannons with imperial guard? Why is guard autocannon spam suddenly more effective than tau autocannon spam? Volume of shots certainly strips hull points. And your suits are pretty mobile so they can try to get favorable armor facings. And since when are meltaguns bad? Especially when you can deepstrike without scatter or just come in on the board edge you want with certain wargear.

That was me lad, Peregrine was always in favour of lasplas IS over the AC IS. After the mathshammer the AC, in efficiency terms, is better, but the LC kills big things better. However this isn't an IG thread.

If I could find a way to reliably and cheaply increase the BS on missile drones whilst still bringing tank hunter I'll think about bringing Tau as an ally. Can't really think of much that fills those criteria.

 Blaggard wrote:

That was me lad, Peregrine was always in favour of lasplas IS over the AC IS. After the mathshammer the AC, in efficiency terms, is better, but the LC kills big things better. However this isn't an IG thread.

If I could find a way to reliably and cheaply increase the BS on missile drones whilst still bringing tank hunter I'll think about bringing Tau as an ally. Can't really think of much that fills those criteria.

Gotcha. My fault. There's always a flurry of posts in those threads so it's very hard to distinguish after the fact who said what...once it goes off into the depths of the dakka system of course.

I really think Orks and Tau can be real super buddies now. Take orks for hardy troops choices and maybe a beatstick warboss commander then take a support tau commander with some marker drones and the ignore cover wargear and puretide chip. Plop that sucker in a squad of three missile sides and you can have a pretty scary tank hunting unit.

 Kingsley wrote:

JWhex wrote:
I do think the OP has some valid criticisms of the codex. Whether those problems add up to a bad codex is another point entirely.

Especially the point about the codex being incomplete, I think is spot on. The Tau should not have to rely on allies to take far away objectives, but it appears that they will need to in a competitive environment.

Taking far away objectives is typically not required in this game. Contesting them or knocking your opponent off them is sufficient, and Tau have ample tools for that. Besides, if you want to take far away objectives, Devilfish carbine squads are always available (and IMO damn scary!)-- all in all, I think anyone claiming the Codex is dead in the water without testing needs to take a few deep breaths and calm down.

LVaix wrote:Allies are needed for almost all codices. SM almost always take a blob. Crons are usually seen with CSM/GK. CSM/Daemons or vice versa. GK with IG.

It is necessary in 6th to fill in your weak spots with allies. Thankfully Tau have access to almost everyone and can therefore do a great job filling in the cracks.

In my experience, that hasn't been the case. Tyranids do fine without allies. I often find that taking allies is more limiting than useful, especially in lower points games. Obviously, your mileage may vary, but allies seem far from mandatory at this stage of the game.

Your point is kinda moot cause Nids can't take Allies. I'm sure if they could people would be all over them in a heartbeat.

 Kingsley wrote:

JWhex wrote:
I do think the OP has some valid criticisms of the codex. Whether those problems add up to a bad codex is another point entirely.

Especially the point about the codex being incomplete, I think is spot on. The Tau should not have to rely on allies to take far away objectives, but it appears that they will need to in a competitive environment.

Taking far away objectives is typically not required in this game. Contesting them or knocking your opponent off them is sufficient, and Tau have ample tools for that. Besides, if you want to take far away objectives, Devilfish carbine squads are always available (and IMO damn scary!)-- all in all, I think anyone claiming the Codex is dead in the water without testing needs to take a few deep breaths and calm down.

LVaix wrote:Allies are needed for almost all codices. SM almost always take a blob. Crons are usually seen with CSM/GK. CSM/Daemons or vice versa. GK with IG.

It is necessary in 6th to fill in your weak spots with allies. Thankfully Tau have access to almost everyone and can therefore do a great job filling in the cracks.

In my experience, that hasn't been the case. Tyranids do fine without allies. I often find that taking allies is more limiting than useful, especially in lower points games. Obviously, your mileage may vary, but allies seem far from mandatory at this stage of the game.

Nids cannot take allies, but as a Nid player, I wouldnt mind some extra FMCs or DKs if I could have em.
At lower pts I agree because then you have to take 2 HQs, at 1750 and up I disagree completely. I think GT results will mostly support that as well. All the codices, including GK and Crons, have weak spots and Allies can usually help with them.

I'd only trust pure Crons and Nids to do well above 1750, though I think Crons are more formidable with GK/Ork/CSM buddies.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Basically, what I'm saying is that if you are not beholden to a single, unbending playstyle, then you need to learn to adapt. However, if you insist on only playing Tau with fast tanks shooting at everything on the move, then unfortunately that's probably not going to work nearly as effectively as it did before. You might find something else to compensate though. Who knows. We'll see in the coming months.

But "fast tanks with shooting everything on the move" is one of the most original ways of playing Tau, and fluffy way. Tau like to be mobile, because they don't have raw numbers for static warfare, and their military culture goes around it. I liked Tau tanks because they were flexible and capable, sure they did not have as much armour as Imperial tanks, or weren't as fast as Eldar tanks. But they were unique in the game and conveyed a feel of high-tech force. Now, Tau tanks are basically just floating versions from Imperial tanks. Their mobility is gone and flexibility is gone, thus exposing their not-that-great firepower.

Why did that paradigm had to change? It's not because it was too powerful, quite the contrary. It did not preclude anyone playing Tau in some other way. The fact whether tanks stayed good, or became rubbish is completely irrelevant from the perspective of a player who cared about Tau suits or infantry. There was simply no POINT making those changes, other than force people off from that playstyle. This, folks, is poor Codex writing. It's exact same thing which was done to Tyranids. Ask Nid players whether they think 5th Edition Carnifex is awesome. Are they crybabies too? If you have read around, I'm not alone with my opinions. Plenty of Tau veterans have expressed their disappointment. New players will probably like the book, however, as they don't know what they have missed and think that Tau are supposed to be that way.

Now, this does not mean that the Codex is weak, in fact I think it's probably pretty powerful when it's played the right way. I'm also sure that other people who like other aspects of the Tau will like the book. However, I don't really care about other people, so the book blows.

To be quite honest i might be a little hypocrite about this but:

Instead of burning down cities and rage about how the tau got weaker or different, why not dicuss how their tactics are different and how they can deal with things they couldnt do before and what things they cant do now after their codex is out?...

The reason to why i call myself a hypocrite is that i wanted to start out with Tau because they were the 2nd favorite race in 40k after tyranids, but currently the tyranids is forced to go with a single build and is lackbuster at best ( in my opinion ) and to "fix " my tyranids i need to use like 2,5k NOK ( norwegian currency ) to buy the models i need to make it "viable" so instead i decided to toss those money into Tau instead, and luckily a new codex popped up as i decided to switch.

 gpfunk wrote:

 Blaggard wrote:

That was me lad, Peregrine was always in favour of lasplas IS over the AC IS. After the mathshammer the AC, in efficiency terms, is better, but the LC kills big things better. However this isn't an IG thread.

If I could find a way to reliably and cheaply increase the BS on missile drones whilst still bringing tank hunter I'll think about bringing Tau as an ally. Can't really think of much that fills those criteria.

Gotcha. My fault. There's always a flurry of posts in those threads so it's very hard to distinguish after the fact who said what...once it goes off into the depths of the dakka system of course.

I really think Orks and Tau can be real super buddies now. Take orks for hardy troops choices and maybe a beatstick warboss commander then take a support tau commander with some marker drones and the ignore cover wargear and puretide chip. Plop that sucker in a squad of three missile sides and you can have a pretty scary tank hunting unit.

Problem with the commander w/ marker drones in the missileside group is that the unit that fires the markerlights doesn't benefit from them. What else is going to shoot at the target, your mandatory 6 fire warriors?
I think the solution is either:
Have the commander with markers in a fairly decent sized firewarrior blob as additional wounds, foregoing tank hunter, or:
Have the commander with shield drones and missile pods in the missileside group and get 12 BS2 S7 shots, with 12 TL BS4 S7, 4 BS5 S7 and 12 TL BS4 S5 shots, all with tank hunter.

With the second option you can try find a way to cheaply and reliably get markerlights on an elite FOC slot, but then you're starting to pay out the nose for the S7 spam, possibly reducing efficiency.

Edit:
Or drone squads with a commander with drone controller. Overlooked that.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
OK, This will not be a popular post. Fine.

Are you sure? People sure seem to love complaining usually.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
First, The first couple of 6th ed Codices seemed *meh*

Really? I've seen a variety of whinging but then people seemed to get over it and enjoy their new codices well enough. I've thought they were all very good, covering the armies well with a variety of options in general (though some very popular options too...)


Most complaints for each codex, all of which seemed to die down really quickly once the codex had been out for a week or two, seemed to sum up as: 'They made my favourite things not as powerful anymore!'

This reminds me of the argument being made in another thread for keeping as many separate marine codices as possible.

People, have none of you realised that by reducing the power levels in general across the board (which I would claim is what is happening), we are left with more balanced and generally more fun to play armies? Armies that require more skill to win with, as they have less 'one-click' wonders? But also armies that allow you to choose options that you like to use and still have a fun game, instead of armies that might be fluffy or in some sort of character but get trounced by someone with only the slightest edge?

This is why I'm fine with the idea of many marine codices being combined into some form of big codex. It would require the differences in the characters of the various Chapters to be winnowed down to a few core rules or units, rather than pages and pages of rules that are not really necessary to define the established character.

I have quickly learned, if someone on Dakka argues that a unit has been 'nerfed', it probably means that the unit was really a bit too good for a fun, fair game and has been brought into line.

Are tau really that bad at getting stuff into the back field?

-kroot infiltrate and scrore, and (imho) got alot better.
-shadowsun can infiltrate anything she joins, and give the whole squad stealth+shrouded
-darkstrider can outflank anything he joins, which can be firewarriors.
-ethereals can let you run and shoot at the same time, combined with a marker drone squad jsj behind to keep up, can allow you to run anf still fire at BS5. Then when you get where you are going the thereal cranks up the volume of fire.

Even without devilfish, tau can get around.

Speaking of infiltrate, stealthsuits can be taking out rear parked armor on turn one with melta attacks, and with the extremely cheap marker drones can also be calling in seeker missles to hammer said armor.

Farsight and bodygaurd can also deepstrike in and wrek armor. Infact, amusingly enough, the turn after they pop in they can start assaulting armor and, between the dawnblade and the new fist, they can do pretty good job at it.

Tau flyers suck, which is disappointing. But longstrike in a hammerhead is ridiculously awesome, and piranas are more viscious than then before the codex:
-precise fusion blasters to wreck your opponent's day
-overwatching drones even if you moved all out
Devilfish got some nice toys as well:
Tankshock with fltchette dischargers and point defense relays after disembarking it's squad and get several rounds of firing in from supportive fire and overwatch before they can deal with the squad. They might be expensive, but they are also pretty powerful.

With all battlesuits gaining free multitrackers and blacksun filters, and the cheap marker drones you can fill thier squads with, crisis suits got a huge upgrade and can be purposed to fill almost any role. While the broadside's railgun might have gotten a nerf, they basically have two free extra slots to make up for it. The widespread access to intercepter that the tau army gets, infact covers a weakness I always ran into: drop pods and mycetic spores. Or for a couple points a suit you can make them all precise, allowing you to pick out enemy warlords from 60" away, first blood anyone? And a nearby ethereal can let them do that while running.

I think Backfire has a really valid point. Now, I haven't actually seen the codex yet, just read all the threads, but I don't think his complaints are necessarily about the codex itself.

From where I'm standing, it seems like in order to play the new Tau he'd have to buy all new units and ditch his old playstyle. Now think about if that happened to your favorite army: it's not just that you have to change things up, you have to essentially start a whole new army.

If they took my Eldar and made everything I use not viable/not play in a way I like anymore, I'd be pretty peeved. It'd be like they took the reason I play my army and get rid of it. So yeah, you may say the way to go is suits, but if you have a ton of tanks and have to buy an army's worth of suits, then you might as well consider starting something other than Tau, since the Tau you do have aren't much of a Tau army anymore and you have to start almost from scratch.

That sort of got away from me towards the end, but I hope you get my general point, that getting rid of old playstyles is bad for the hobby even if the book is good.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
I have quickly learned, if someone on Dakka argues that a unit has been 'nerfed', it probably means that the unit was really a bit too good for a fun, fair game and has been brought into line.

Yeah, those old-codex Hammerheads (which hardly anyone ever took in a competitive list) were just too good for a fun, fair game and needed to be brought into line...

I agree with some of whats being said on both sides but i definitely agree with the Grow up and adapt approach. I laugh every time i see a codex review and people say "new" character Aun'Shi rather than returning.

The only true gripes I have with this codex comes completely from fluff perspective mostly.

I really dont like how they screwed with the seeker missile system. Being able to fire without the ML is nice but I'd rather be able to call in my missiles from my pathfinders or FW squads that work their way into a good position....you know the way they are supposed to work? I also dont like the fact that targeting array is gone completely because of my stealthsuits which are usually in the backfield where they wont have markerlight support. Getting those fusion shots to connect is already a pain lol

The only other thing that makes me laugh and annoyed is the allies chart. Everyone keeps saying "ally with orks!" but the fluff of the entire codex says no way jose. Im gonna lose it when i see farsight and orks on the same side.....shouldnt happen...but will be hilarious when it does


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and why is this thread in Tactics as opposed to General? A whine n complain about how you cant use a tactic is not a tactic in itself

Wolfnid420 wrote:

The only true gripes I have with this codex comes completely from fluff perspective mostly.

I really dont like how they screwed with the seeker missile system. Being able to fire without the ML is nice but I'd rather be able to call in my missiles from my pathfinders or FW squads that work their way into a good position....you know the way they are supposed to work? I also dont like the fact that targeting array is gone completely because of my stealthsuits which are usually in the backfield where they wont have markerlight support. Getting those fusion shots to connect is already a pain lol

Yeah, there are lots of little blurbs like this which to me show that Vetock really did not know, or care about, Tau "military lore" very well. In "real life" (sic), Pathfinders are actually one of the most important Seeker Missile users. They do ambushes on enemy columns with them, by sneaking up & unleashing their Markerlights and calling Seeker missile strikes on them. Mantas carry sizable battery of Seeker missiles for this very purpose.

But no infantry no longer can call Seeker Missiles. Now, in game terms, this is a small nerf, because lets face it, that ability was not really good, or often used. But the solution for that should have been to improve the mechanic to better match the actual fluff! Not to take it off completely.

Cant wait for my dex to show up in the mail. From what i have been hearing my tactic with them as allies for my orks is dead as i used them to punch what my lootas couldnt.

If i cant find an alternative w/o going Tau as main race and orks as allies, i probably wont be very happy with this new dex either. Time will tell though, i got a couple theories at least but i need the dex to test'm with actual numbers lol.

Backfire wrote:

Loss of Multi-tracker and Target lock, primarily - these were simply essential when playing with Tau tanks to full effect. Loss of Targeting array hurts too. Disruption pod is not actually that big a deal - in fact balance-wise, I think the new Pod is better. I've explained my grievances to great detail in other thread, no point repeating them there.

So your tanks will have to abide by the same movement and targeting restrictions everyone else does. QQ more.

Never mind that you have the only tanks that can fire Overwatch, can snipe specific models, ignore night fighting, and still retain the ability to fly through all terrain with no danger.

And using markerlights, you can still move and fire with Tau tanks - they just need markerlight hits to up their snap-fire BS.