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 had to make huge changes when a new edition comes out or my own armies codex comes out but never had to make huge changes for another armies codex. Like I said some changes but tau was like getting a new codex for my own army the changes I have to make. That is my issue with it. I do think Tau needed an update and a buff in power (although 6th did buff them a little on it's own but not what was needed) I just think they could have taken a different approach.

I just think that the reason for the change is how old the army was. It really had no affect on the meta since any standard list for 5th or 6th was well suited to hurt Tau without having to change things around at all and Tau lists didn't change because they had so few options and items left to cut.

But Tau were always supposed to be an army that access to a lot of AP3 and lower weapons or a large volume of high Strength fire power. This edition just made those options more easily accessible and the fix to markerlights means they actually get some use. If Tau could have taken dual weapons in the last codex and marker drones were reasonably priced then we probably wouldn't have seen that much of a meta change. Everyone was already adapting to the increase in MC, and the Riptide wouldn't have been any different.

XenosTerminus wrote:
The combination of random charge distances, overwatch/supporting fire, interceptor, and general TAU mobility makes dedicated assault elements pretty unreliable as a 'hard counter' to the supposed weakness the army has.

It really doesn't make it a hard counter. What it forces you to do is assault with everything. If you're depending on 1-2 assault units in your "a little of everything" army getting to charge then Tau will block you, out-maneuver you, and kill you with overwatch while all you can do is charge Kroot meatshields. But having 1-2 units is a bad strategy no matter who you're playing, you should be throwing 90% or more of your army into assault on turn 2 and overwhelming the Tau counters. And of course you'll do much better against all the other armies as a nice bonus.

Drop Pods are great, but you would literally the majority of your army right in their face to do any reasonable amount of damage, and even then you have to survive a round of shooting before you can charge.

Dropping the majority of your army is exactly what you do with pods. Pods are all or nothing (outside of suicide melta units), no matter who you're playing against. You either send your entire army in at once and overwhelm them or you don't bother. Sending 1-2 tactical squads just means 1-2 tactical squads get to die before the rest of your army can support them.

XenosTerminus wrote:
This is the list I have crafted. Feel free to comment or offer suggestions:

Much better focus. It's not perfect, but I don't know DA well enough to fine-tune your weapon/upgrade choices. My suggestions:

1) Change the tactical squads to 5-man squads with special weapons instead of 10-man with special and heavy, that way you can use a 5-man squad to draw overwatch and then charge safely with the "other half", as well as shooting all of your weapons on the turn you arrive.

2) Same with the terminators. A 5-man squad is enough to get the job done against Tau, so bring two separate threats instead of one.

2) Trade the assault squads for more tacticals in pods. Why wait until turn 2 to arrive when you can drop everything on turn 1?

3) Buy pods for the devastator squads. You won't actually use them (other than to block LOS), but it will allow you to bring more units in on turn 1 when you choose half your pods.

With these changes you'll have a lot of threats arriving on turn 1 at close range. The Tau player will be surrounded with nowhere to run, and has one turn to shoot you off the table before you charge.

Thank you for the constructive criticism. Let me try to explain some of my choices from a DA perspective, since you mentioned you aren't terribly familiar with them.

Squads of 10 can only take one special/one heavy. Right now I only have 4 drop pods in my collection, so I am making due with what I currently own. I could split these into 4 5-man squads, but I would be concerned with survivability. My thought was to use at least 3 pods so 2 can arrive on turn one (probably the two tac suqads- between the plasma guns/plasma pistols that is 6 plasma shots right away.

Regarding the Terminators- Belial not only makes them scoring, but offers them the ability to DS without scattering. Deathwing Assault also allows you to pick turn 1/2 to come in automatically (most people do 1, and this lists goal is to get in my opponents face as fast as possible). The 'blob of terminators' makes for one nasty unit appearing on your doorstop without scatter that can threaten anything in the game. It can't be ignored either since it can take an objective and hold it with impunity.

As for the Assault Squads- I tried to keep them cheaper by excluding Pods- I like your idea of shoving pods down their throat, but I ran out of points/pods in my collection. I put locater beacons on the pods that ARE in the list so anything arrive on turn 2 or later can DS without scattering if need be. These guys are more so harassment for infantry in cover/hunting back tank armor or MC's.

I made a few changes to the list, but that is what I am thinking overall. Currently I can have 20 tactical marines and 10 terminators in my opponents face right on turn 1, with 3 more units to assist the following turns where needed. Since a list like this tends to force opponents to spread units out, or retreat from a threat zone when things get hairy, my other thought was having a few 'late' deep strikers could be helpful to cut off escape routes.

Does that make sense? I could have holes in my strategy, but I am trying to play a very aggressive list that is also reactionary combined with back-field fire support.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Had the "honor" of finally playing a Tau with Riptide spam. Uhm...yeah. I mean, I am used to GW selling overpowered, $-expensive models on purpose but the Riptide's gotta be a joke I somehow missed.

180 points for the Riptide. Uhm. How is this even borderline close to being balanced? Its rules are overpowered compared to even other 6th codices. Even the oh-so-overpowered-Necrons pay at least 205 pts for a C'tan shard that is vastly inferior to it in all regards. And its double-fire ability just takes the cake. Not suprised that the 3x Riptide list at ETC did so well.

Goddamnit GW, you dun goof'd. Again.

I'll just pass playing such lists and if in a tournament, 0 comp or sportsman and move on.

A bare bones Riptide will only get you so far. Granted the upgrade from Heavy Burst Cannon to Ion Accelerator is undercosted. For 180pts you're getting a WS2 BS3 T6 W5 Jetpack Monstrous Creature with a souped heavy bolter and your choice of ignore cover heavy bolter, plasma, or melta. Sounds similar to the Dreadknight which you can take for 130pts. Those 50pts buys you 1-3 chance to take a wound or charge your weapons, shield, or thrusters.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Commissar Benny wrote:
Why bother taking the time to think & advance kroot through cover to assault when you can just sit back with battlesuits, drones, riptides & put no thought into the game?

See, this is your problem. You think that Kroot are an assault unit because they used to be in the old codex. They aren't anymore, now they're a shooting unit (often with snipers, to deal with MCs) and cheap meatshield. Taking them or not taking them is just a choice between shooting units, no more or less "fun" than any other shooting unit in the codex, not a sign that the Tau player is "creative" or whatever and going to find a way to assault you.

Which is utterly stupid. Why are the melee choice now suddenly a 24" Sniper Choice?

It's probably the worst lore thing I've seen done to a unit in the longest while, utterly non-existent towards what kroot do!

To be fair, Kroot weren't even a real melee unit in the first place. There were worse in close combat than Tactical Marines. As to the sudden introduction, the Kroot were always portrayed in the fluff as hunters. When hunters are chasing their prey themselves, they often bulleyes them from range.

Kroot were the "melee choice" with Old Tau because... well... what other option did you have? Vespid? They were better than Fire Warriors. That, really, was their "selling point"... "We're better than Fire Warriors".

Decently tough, too, but not compared to the melee troops of armies that really made assault and CQC their "thing". They were bubble-wrap with feathers.

They did get AP5 melee weapons. So they're are still some things they are able to win CC against.

Honestly I think the whole 3 attacks on the charge with S4 was a huge trap for new players. I remember the first time I lost a game because I actually charged a small unit of Space marines. Their attacks reduced my numbers significantly, my attacks all bounced off armor, and then crumpled thanks to a terrible leadership reduction. At least now it's like pointing out that these guys can only take GEQ and even then aren't especially good at it.

 acekevin8412 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Had the "honor" of finally playing a Tau with Riptide spam. Uhm...yeah. I mean, I am used to GW selling overpowered, $-expensive models on purpose but the Riptide's gotta be a joke I somehow missed.

180 points for the Riptide. Uhm. How is this even borderline close to being balanced? Its rules are overpowered compared to even other 6th codices. Even the oh-so-overpowered-Necrons pay at least 205 pts for a C'tan shard that is vastly inferior to it in all regards. And its double-fire ability just takes the cake. Not suprised that the 3x Riptide list at ETC did so well.

Goddamnit GW, you dun goof'd. Again.

I'll just pass playing such lists and if in a tournament, 0 comp or sportsman and move on.

A bare bones Riptide will only get you so far. Granted the upgrade from Heavy Burst Cannon to Ion Accelerator is undercosted. For 180pts you're getting a WS2 BS3 T6 W5 Jetpack Monstrous Creature with a souped heavy bolter and your choice of ignore cover heavy bolter, plasma, or melta. Sounds similar to the Dreadknight which you can take for 130pts. Those 50pts buys you 1-3 chance to take a wound or charge your weapons, shield, or thrusters.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Commissar Benny wrote:
Why bother taking the time to think & advance kroot through cover to assault when you can just sit back with battlesuits, drones, riptides & put no thought into the game?

See, this is your problem. You think that Kroot are an assault unit because they used to be in the old codex. They aren't anymore, now they're a shooting unit (often with snipers, to deal with MCs) and cheap meatshield. Taking them or not taking them is just a choice between shooting units, no more or less "fun" than any other shooting unit in the codex, not a sign that the Tau player is "creative" or whatever and going to find a way to assault you.

Which is utterly stupid. Why are the melee choice now suddenly a 24" Sniper Choice?

It's probably the worst lore thing I've seen done to a unit in the longest while, utterly non-existent towards what kroot do!

To be fair, Kroot weren't even a real melee unit in the first place. There were worse in close combat than Tactical Marines. As to the sudden introduction, the Kroot were always portrayed in the fluff as hunters. When hunters are chasing their prey themselves, they often bulleyes them from range.

You mean aside from the kroot hounds, the krootox, and generally the 24" rapid weapons while they had 2 attacks rather then one? Also not sure how hunting your prey involves standing still for one turn in order to actually take it down, when the kroot prefer getting up and close with their melee weapons so they can devour their prey and absorb the genes.

I never said they were effective at their choice, but they were designed to be the melee "counter-assault" for tau, not the snipers.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Also not sure how hunting your prey involves standing still for one turn in order to actually take it down, when the kroot prefer getting up and close with their melee weapons so they can devour their prey and absorb the genes.

Hunting from range is actually the smart thing to do. They might want to absorb those genes, but it's stupid putting yourself in harms way to do it.

Kroot were a ranged speedbump before this codex. All they did was make them slightly better at what they were used for already.

XenosTerminus wrote:
Regarding the Terminators- Belial not only makes them scoring, but offers them the ability to DS without scattering. Deathwing Assault also allows you to pick turn 1/2 to come in automatically (most people do 1, and this lists goal is to get in my opponents face as fast as possible). The 'blob of terminators' makes for one nasty unit appearing on your doorstop without scatter that can threaten anything in the game. It can't be ignored either since it can take an objective and hold it with impunity.

The issue here is that the Tau solution to assault units they can't handle immediately is to throw a meatshield in their path and deal with it next turn. With a 10-man terminator squad + HQ character you're bringing massive overkill against anything you will be charging, so the Tau player can stall you with speed bumps effectively. With two separate units you're still killing everything you charge in a single turn of combat, but now you're killing two squads at once and making it a lot harder to keep your threats away from the important stuff.

XenosTerminus wrote:
This is not the point that is the primary topic of discussion at this point. The issue is not that Tau is OP or unbeatable- it has always been that they are not enjoyable to fight against for the majority of people, especially casually.

Let me reiterate the primary points here again, although I know people will still continue to reply with the same arguments that are irrelevant to the point (especially peregrine):

1) Are Tau enjoyable to face?
This is an opinion, but I do not believe so (nor do a lot of people, especially form a casual perspective- and honestly, who enjoys seeing 3 riptides on the other side of the table)
.

Well, to be fair, 3 riptides is a "power build", not a casual build. Just like with helldrake spam, vendetta spam its, its going to cause problems unless your list is also optimised. Im just curious here - why are you putting 3 riptides on the level of "casual" play?

XenosTerminus wrote:
2) Are Tau unbeatable?
Of course not, but the book is very good at shooting most 'unfocussed' or 'fun' lists right off the table, which is an issue for casual metas where nobody really brings optimized lists on a regular basis.
Anyone can bring a very optimized list and do well, but Tau is an entirely different beast. Like I mentioned before, even if people like Peregrine refuse to believe it, I have not had nearly as many issues until the new Tau book with the lists he constantly calls bad/unfocused to either win or have a legitimately good game, regardless of what my opponent brings.
.

a "focused" list can be the same as a "non optimised" one. a random collection of models/list with poor cohesion and internal synnergy is neither.

XenosTerminus wrote:
3) Are Tau Cheesy?
As is the trend with every army, the people that play them defend them to death. Tau has, on the other hand, seen an increase in the admittance even by people that play them that they sometimes feel cheesy. The issue comes with the books ability to play on 6e's strengths while simultaneously ignoring core rulebook rules (this is just bad design). The riptide is indeed the flavor of the month and is ridiculously cheap for what it does when you compare it to say, Nid MC's. The book is also poorly designed because unlike IG, the other king of shooting, all of the 'weaknesses' the book exhibits can easily be countered or outright ignored. High mobility, supporting fire, JSJ, Interceptor, etc... Allies further compound the issue, but really that stands for every army.

So marines being able to ignore the whole part about morale in the big rule book is OK? all armies have things that break core rules of the game. its what gives flavour.

And to be fair, the nid codex is horrendously designed, and has severe issues within its pages in terms of balance, power and options. I do not think it is a fair comparison to compare anything as "overpowered" when compared against a badly designed codex like tyranids.

XenosTerminus wrote:
This is pretty similar to how Tau players play gunline. The difference, however, is that Tau has a multitude of special rules and abilities, on top of far superior mobility, to mitigate anyone that survives long enough to get in their face. Proper internal balance/design suggests that extreme strengths should have corresponding weaknesses to compensate. This is not the case with Tau, which is why the book is poorly designed. Mix with allies for more lulz

.

^
Well Said

similarly, tau dont have "extreme" strengths. they have good shooting - but lets be honest, they "match" other shooting builds. necrons, eldar, dark eldar, guard and marines are all equally functional at that game. Tau have great guns, backed up by "average" statlines. Now, factor in tau squishiness, their average-at-best morale and their complete and utter irrelevance in cc, and you can see where they are not overpowered.

Excuse me? Necrons equally functional at that game? At shooting?
My Warriors aren't 9 points, nor are they S5 at 30"; My Doomsday doesn't have a 2+ save.
There is a good reason why our top list spends over half their points on melee-squads and it is NOT because our shooting is "equally functional" to Tau.

Not true. covering your weaknesses is a part of list design and has been since the dawn of 40k.

Where is the design in taking whatever you want since "covering your weakness" is already included in the unit?
If Marker-drones were only available in Drone-squadrons from the FA-slot, you'd have a point.
I would also agree with you if Supporting Fire and Jet Packs were optional and if you had to buy them.

With respect, 'better' lists is not mutually exclusive from 'fun' and 'fluff'. better lists are better lists. nothing more, nothing less.

For many people and codices it is mutually exclusive.
It sucks when you start to play with an army because you like unit/strategy 'X' and get beaten because you don't want to play unit/tactic 'Y'.
I did a little calculation for you: I play with Blood Angels and I have 4k points of models.
But when I want a chance at beating Tau, I need to spend another 300-350 Euro.

Kangodo wrote:

Excuse me? Necrons equally functional at that game? At shooting?
My Warriors aren't 9 points, nor are they S5 at 30"; My Doomsday doesn't have a 2+ save.
There is a good reason why our top list spends over half their points on melee-squads and it is NOT because our shooting is "equally functional" to Tau.

Necron shooting can be very nasty I dont see this as being very outlandish, what with the Tesla (I believe) shinanigans where shots can bounce, a laser you can point in any direction on top of any vehicle that I have can get glanced to death by your guys standard troops. Also 9pt. Fire Warriors dont get the chance to stand up after going down, different strengths but Necron shooting can be just as if not more nasty.

So wait. Necrons troops get very versatile weapons, LD10, a better statline, RP, an AV13 open topped transport, and a flying transport.
And you're complaining about Firewarriors being 9 points. You can't have been serious about that.
And all of those bonuses help with a shooting army since a more durable troop gets to stay out longer and fire more.

I am not complaining.
I am laughing at the idea that Necron-shooting is on the same level as Tau-shooting.

It's almost as bad as the idea that you need 'clever list design' to cover the melee-weakness.
Good list design is when you have to ask yourself: "Do I want to spend these points in more shooting or do I want to make them more durable against melee."
List designing doesn't even come in the picture when your anti-assault stuff is already included in the base cost.

Kangodo wrote:
I am not complaining.
I am laughing at the idea that Necron-shooting is on the same level as Tau-shooting.

It's almost as bad as the idea that you need 'clever list design' to cover the melee-weakness.
Good list design is when you have to ask yourself: "Do I want to spend these points in more shooting or do I want to make them more durable against melee."
List designing doesn't even come in the picture when your anti-assault stuff is already included in the base cost.

Necron shooting is certainly not on the same level as Tau shooting, not even close. Unless you spam Annihilation Barges/Night Scythes, the majority of your shooting is only coming from Warriors- and even then at limited ranges. Bolter's that are better against vehicles are not going to do much against the majority of targets unless you have a lot of shots/are within rapid fire range. The problem with that? You are moving CLOSER to your opponent, which is not something a shooty army that is weak in melee particularly wants to do.

I am in agreement with you, though. Not that I would likely ever want to play AS Tau, I doubt that I couldn't do so after a quick read through the codex and a semblance of decent 40k experience.

If you understand basic deployment and target priority principles, the book basically plays itself for you.

Kangodo wrote:
I am not complaining.
I am laughing at the idea that Necron-shooting is on the same level as Tau-shooting.

It's almost as bad as the idea that you need 'clever list design' to cover the melee-weakness.
Good list design is when you have to ask yourself: "Do I want to spend these points in more shooting or do I want to make them more durable against melee."
List designing doesn't even come in the picture when your anti-assault stuff is already included in the base cost.

Its hard to actually compare Tau shooting to Necron. Gauss and Tesla weapons absolutely benefit from 6th edition changes and the ability to take flying and skimmer open topped transports helps mitigate the army's shorter range. You can't honestly compare the base Firewarrior to an extremely survivable unit like Necron warriors and say that it's better.

But do you honestly think that Supporting Fire is adequate protection from CC? It would be useful if I was going to castle up, but if not then it's probably not going to have any significant effect on a CC. That and if you are castling up then it puts you at greater risk for CC since if one unit gets into combat, it can be in range to charge any other unit that assisted in overwatch. It's a risk vs. reward scenario and it's far from eliminating the weakness in CC. Honestly I'd rather have the Necron's super FNP and better statline since that probably helps out a lot more in CC.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
I am not complaining.
I am laughing at the idea that Necron-shooting is on the same level as Tau-shooting.

It's almost as bad as the idea that you need 'clever list design' to cover the melee-weakness.
Good list design is when you have to ask yourself: "Do I want to spend these points in more shooting or do I want to make them more durable against melee."
List designing doesn't even come in the picture when your anti-assault stuff is already included in the base cost.

Its hard to actually compare Tau shooting to Necron. Gauss and Tesla weapons absolutely benefit from 6th edition changes and the ability to take flying and skimmer open topped transports helps mitigate the army's shorter range. You can't honestly compare the base Firewarrior to an extremely survivable unit like Necron warriors and say that it's better.

But do you honestly think that Supporting Fire is adequate protection from CC? It would be useful if I was going to castle up, but if not then it's probably not going to have any significant effect on a CC. That and if you are castling up then it puts you at greater risk for CC since if one unit gets into combat, it can be in range to charge any other unit that assisted in overwatch. It's a risk vs. reward scenario and it's far from eliminating the weakness in CC. Honestly I'd rather have the Necron's super FNP and better statline since that probably helps out a lot more in CC.

Don't forget the MSS which breaks down any super combat characters you have prepared, not to mention standardized MEQ stats with various crypteks and lords that can buffer CC. The +2S AP1 blade is pretty much a good deterrent as well.

Tau only have like 4 options for CC buffing.
The Onager Gauntlet: S10 AP1 at initiative, but one shot.
The Repulsar field: Useless.
Grav inhibitor drone: Reduces charge by d3", expensive and extremely situational while being limited to a scout unit with longer ranged weaponry. Kind of silly in all regards and I wouldn't take someone seriously if they fielded them.
And standard flamers for overwatch.

XenosTerminus wrote:
If you understand basic deployment and target priority principles, the book basically plays itself for you.

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I can see that you are frustrated with the book, and that you are frustrated with the new units. I can even understand being frustrated with a player that was playing markerlights incorrectly. I would smack them upside the head for either trying to cheat or not reading the rules thoroughly. I do not see the book as playing itself for you though. Just like all armies there are some questionably bad units and then some super ultra fantastic units. The problem seems to be people who are playing Tau are fighting an uphill battle because of fear of the new shiny robot suits and not recalling base game mechanics.

Secure the objectives
Focus on units that can be taken
Ignore units that take more than 2 turns to bring down

For every argument that you have against Tau I can use a counter argument from another armies codex.

The Riptide is a unit I always suggest waiting until turn 3 to try and take down. Let it have 2 chances to lose a wound to a nova charge and 2 chances to Get hot. After the main targets are down, such as warlord and marker units, then you can focus some additional weaponry to the Riptide. But with a T6 and 2+ I know it can be difficult and sometimes won't be on your side.

 acekevin8412 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Had the "honor" of finally playing a Tau with Riptide spam. Uhm...yeah. I mean, I am used to GW selling overpowered, $-expensive models on purpose but the Riptide's gotta be a joke I somehow missed.

180 points for the Riptide. Uhm. How is this even borderline close to being balanced? Its rules are overpowered compared to even other 6th codices. Even the oh-so-overpowered-Necrons pay at least 205 pts for a C'tan shard that is vastly inferior to it in all regards. And its double-fire ability just takes the cake. Not suprised that the 3x Riptide list at ETC did so well.

Goddamnit GW, you dun goof'd. Again.

I'll just pass playing such lists and if in a tournament, 0 comp or sportsman and move on.

A bare bones Riptide will only get you so far. Granted the upgrade from Heavy Burst Cannon to Ion Accelerator is undercosted. For 180pts you're getting a WS2 BS3 T6 W5 Jetpack Monstrous Creature with a souped heavy bolter and your choice of ignore cover heavy bolter, plasma, or melta. Sounds similar to the Dreadknight which you can take for 130pts. Those 50pts buys you 1-3 chance to take a wound or charge your weapons, shield, or thrusters.

Except it only costs 5 points to upgrade the Heavy Burst Cannon to a S8 AP2 pie plate with practically infinite range.

A LR Demolisher costs literally 20 points less. Lets weigh the differences there, shall we?

Lose 2 strength for infinite range and the ability to switch to 3 solid shots
Can't ever be killed in one lucky shot save for very rare things like JOTWW.
2D6 jump in the assault phase
12'' move and fire in the movement phase
Nova Reactor
Practically impervious to anything that isn't AP2
Twinlinked meltagun, 'SMASH' ability
Massive height and ability to jump on buildings to extend it even further for LOS purposes.
Can't be killed by Tactical Marines or equivalent in an assault with krak grenades unless he has a miracle
Requires about 2 or 3 times the amount of firepower to reliably kill

And you're telling me that the Riptide isn't underpriced?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
I am not complaining.
I am laughing at the idea that Necron-shooting is on the same level as Tau-shooting.

It's almost as bad as the idea that you need 'clever list design' to cover the melee-weakness.
Good list design is when you have to ask yourself: "Do I want to spend these points in more shooting or do I want to make them more durable against melee."
List designing doesn't even come in the picture when your anti-assault stuff is already included in the base cost.

Its hard to actually compare Tau shooting to Necron. Gauss and Tesla weapons absolutely benefit from 6th edition changes and the ability to take flying and skimmer open topped transports helps mitigate the army's shorter range. You can't honestly compare the base Firewarrior to an extremely survivable unit like Necron warriors and say that it's better.

But do you honestly think that Supporting Fire is adequate protection from CC? It would be useful if I was going to castle up, but if not then it's probably not going to have any significant effect on a CC. That and if you are castling up then it puts you at greater risk for CC since if one unit gets into combat, it can be in range to charge any other unit that assisted in overwatch. It's a risk vs. reward scenario and it's far from eliminating the weakness in CC. Honestly I'd rather have the Necron's super FNP and better statline since that probably helps out a lot more in CC.

Don't forget the MSS which breaks down any super combat characters you have prepared, not to mention standardized MEQ stats with various crypteks and lords that can buffer CC. The +2S AP1 blade is pretty much a good deterrent as well.

Mindshackle Scarabs is one of the dumbest rules ever written and Matt Ward should be hanged by his feet from the gallows for even thinking about it.

Its like the Riptide. Ridiculously underpriced and while incredibly fun for the Necron player the guy who just had to watch the mini he spent hours painting do a spectacular dose of nothing without any defense except pure luck is not having any fun at all. It literally sucks the fun out of the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

XenosTerminus wrote:
Thank you for the constructive criticism. Let me try to explain some of my choices from a DA perspective, since you mentioned you aren't terribly familiar with them.

Squads of 10 can only take one special/one heavy. Right now I only have 4 drop pods in my collection, so I am making due with what I currently own. I could split these into 4 5-man squads, but I would be concerned with survivability. My thought was to use at least 3 pods so 2 can arrive on turn one (probably the two tac suqads- between the plasma guns/plasma pistols that is 6 plasma shots right away.

Regarding the Terminators- Belial not only makes them scoring, but offers them the ability to DS without scattering. Deathwing Assault also allows you to pick turn 1/2 to come in automatically (most people do 1, and this lists goal is to get in my opponents face as fast as possible). The 'blob of terminators' makes for one nasty unit appearing on your doorstop without scatter that can threaten anything in the game. It can't be ignored either since it can take an objective and hold it with impunity.

As for the Assault Squads- I tried to keep them cheaper by excluding Pods- I like your idea of shoving pods down their throat, but I ran out of points/pods in my collection. I put locater beacons on the pods that ARE in the list so anything arrive on turn 2 or later can DS without scattering if need be. These guys are more so harassment for infantry in cover/hunting back tank armor or MC's.

I made a few changes to the list, but that is what I am thinking overall. Currently I can have 20 tactical marines and 10 terminators in my opponents face right on turn 1, with 3 more units to assist the following turns where needed. Since a list like this tends to force opponents to spread units out, or retreat from a threat zone when things get hairy, my other thought was having a few 'late' deep strikers could be helpful to cut off escape routes.

Does that make sense? I could have holes in my strategy, but I am trying to play a very aggressive list that is also reactionary combined with back-field fire support.

I think your list is alright, but I'd still reccomend picking up some extra drop pods for the assault squads.

 Mr.Omega wrote:

12'' move and fire in the movement phase

*6"

Reading through the last few pages, it seems as though the common argument is that the riptide is undercosted/too survivable as a T6 MC. Here is my question for those against Tau:

Would you still consider the Tau OP if the riptide didn't exist?

I know markerlights and some of the high str low ap weapons are something people have an issue with too. However, it sounds like its a combination of markerlights and the riptide running around that has people upset.

As a Tau player I want to come to the army's defense, but I'm starting to wonder if this thread's anger is targeted particularly at the cheese Tau players.

I run zero riptides (the model just doesn't fit IMO), do not run a gunline, and have 8 markerlights at 1500-1750 pts.

Does this thread's hate apply to myself and similar players?

Woah woah woah. We have to draw a line right now.
Lets talk a second about broken rules shall we if you think tau are almighty.
Necrons get back up if they die (where is that fun for the opponent or fair
Space marines (50% of all armies) cannot be swept and regroup automatically acting as normal all the time and cost as little as 13 points each (if DA codex is a true representation)
Tyranids can spawn additional models that don't count for you points (although I like this rule as it makes sense)
Daemons are all invulnerable and fearless with so many powers to buff them.

And people are complaining about supporting fire (6" range) hits on 6.
Markers that cost either 11 or 16 points each with 5+ or 4+ save at bs 3 or 2 I.e. 4+ or 5+ to hit.
And Jsj which means 2-12" average 7".

I don't see what the big deal is really.
Maybe if we had all of the above.
People put it out like all our weapons are s8 ap1 36" range or something.

I think it literally stems from players going "ergh I have to change my list"
I would have thought hobbyists would enjoy painting more models.

This turned into list making but can't you put a 10 man squad in a drop pod that has been combat squaded, thus actually putting 4 x 5 units in turn 1? Also why not just DS 5 termies with Belial turn 1 and the rest turn 2 as you are going to have beacons in place?

You can combat squad 10 guys you can still deep strike together then separate them.

2 squads = 4 targets (6 if you include the pods).

A LR Demolisher costs literally 20 points less. Lets weigh the differences there, shall we?

So you compare a Riptide to a unit from an old book that hasn't gotten its update yet and that's your standard for it being over-priced?
Unless I missed an FAQ (which is very possible as I'm always behind on those) then ...

This thread is divided by those that do not like the Tau and believe the army is a horrible abomination to the game and then those that are trying to defend the army it is rather ridiculous. Has the OP had his game with the DA versus Tau? I am curious to how that went.