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.
Tell your opponent(s) that you're looking into possibly starting a new army. Ask them to let you play their army, with a list they build, against yours with a list you build. The experience will be enlightening to both of you as the swap will lead you to focus properly on the weakness of your original army (since you know them so well) while learning the strengths and weakness of your opponents army (since you normally don't play them). You'll also get to possibly learn a few things about your own army if your opponent shows you things you weren't in the habit of doing. Here would be the opportunity to show your opponent what he could do to defeat your army.
It'd also be a good look into whether the scenario's are one-sided, the terrain is skewed, your Tau army is too strong, or your opponent is clueless.
Really, the answer is to start playing scenario based games. That means the side smay nto always be equal, or the victory conditions could be very different.
Of course, the downside is that no one want sto take the extra time to create, explain, set-up, and play a decent scenario.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
My favorite recommendation for 40k, Since we are recently looking to start playing again. We will be playing Flames of War Missions. Complete with objectives and ambushing. Complete with delayed reserves. I'm looking forward to our first game of "Breakthrough" or "Hold the Line". Hell I even thing Cauldron would be fun, and I fething hate that mission.
Edit: I forgot to add, but you'll need to follow flames special rules for this to work. Especially with reserves. And defining platoons as something smaller. I recommend defining a "platoon" as a single force org slot as that is essentially how a platoon works in flames.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/09 14:17:28
I sometimes play a 1,500 point army against two opponents, each with 1,000 points.
Having to plan a joint strategy can make folks look at their tactics in a different way. Plus it makes them discuss their choices,how to deal with objectives, and maybe both give and receive advice.
Being outnumbered takes the sting out when I do lose, and I can still boast 'It took two of you to beat ME!' (I imitate Brian Blessed while boasting.... )
Mind you, this is mostly for Kings of War these days, but I used to do it with 40K as well.
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* Plus, it is just more fun for me than facing an opponent that I know that I can beat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/09 19:30:15
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
Horst wrote:This is how trolling happens. A few cheeky posts are made. Then they get more insulting. Eventually, we revert to our primal animal state, hurling feces at each other while shreeking with glee.
Earlier I was going to suggest taking three riptides and literally no other models, but if the internet is to be believed then the Tau player would still win effortlessly.
Desubot wrote: Why isnt Slut Wars: The Sexpocalypse a real game dammit.
"It's easier to change the rules than to get good at the game."
Every time you play someone, write down your win:loss ratio. The next time you play them, take 10% less points against them per win you have over your total losses. So if you have 5 wins and 2 losses against an opponent, you get 30% less points.
The end result is that you'll have a handicap that will balance out the game individually against each opponent.
As an example, my game last night was against Chaos Space Marines. I took a fairly standard gunline tau force, he had plague marines in rhinos, a forgefiend, typhus with some zombies, a helldrake. I deployed first with guns bristling outwards... and he deployed directly opposite 24" away with only his forgefiend hidden by cover (there was plenty of cover on the board, we generally play about 33% terrain). After my first shooting phase I'd killed a squad of zombies, destroyed 3 out of 4 rhinos and immobilised another, blocking his forgefiend; and the rest of the game was similarly one sided. By the time I'd tabled him, I'd lost 4 fire warriors, 3 sniper drones and 2 crisis suits. His strategy was to line up directly across from a gunline, spend at least 2 of my shooting phases on foot, walking forward, and then assault facing a Tau overlapping overwatch. Not a winning strategy; yet he's not the first or even the tenth player to try essentially the same thing.
Not sure that he played badly. What would you have done if you had his army.
Maybe next game you play, you should offer to swap armies with your opponent and see if they are indeed really bad at playing.
Your army (tau) is designed to shoot your opponent to death. Your foes army has one shooter, one flier and some troops with guns. Over half of his army does not shoot. If he sits back, YOU WIN. if he advances into your guns you will most likey Shoot him to death YOU WIN. His army list didnt stand a chance against you even with one of the best gamers out there commanding it. I have seen threads like this over and over here on dakka. The new tau dex is simply designed to shoot you off the board and to beat it you have to tailor your list to play against it. Even a mediocre tau list with a mediocre general can line up his figures and roll dice till his opponents are all dead.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/13 05:45:14
As an example, my game last night was against Chaos Space Marines. I took a fairly standard gunline tau force, he had plague marines in rhinos, a forgefiend, typhus with some zombies, a helldrake. I deployed first with guns bristling outwards... and he deployed directly opposite 24" away with only his forgefiend hidden by cover (there was plenty of cover on the board, we generally play about 33% terrain). After my first shooting phase I'd killed a squad of zombies, destroyed 3 out of 4 rhinos and immobilised another, blocking his forgefiend; and the rest of the game was similarly one sided. By the time I'd tabled him, I'd lost 4 fire warriors, 3 sniper drones and 2 crisis suits. His strategy was to line up directly across from a gunline, spend at least 2 of my shooting phases on foot, walking forward, and then assault facing a Tau overlapping overwatch. Not a winning strategy; yet he's not the first or even the tenth player to try essentially the same thing.
Not sure that he played badly. What would you have done if you had his army.
Maybe next game you play, you should offer to swap armies with your opponent and see if they are indeed really bad at playing.
Your army (tau) is designed to shoot your opponent to death. Your foes army has one shooter, one flier and some troops with guns. Over half of his army does not shoot. If he sits back, YOU WIN. if he advances into your guns you will most likey Shoot him to death YOU WIN. His army list didnt stand a chance against you even with one of the best gamers out there commanding it. I have seen threads like this over and over here on dakka. The new tau dex is simply designed to shoot you off the board and to beat it you have to tailor your list to play against it. Even a mediocre tau list with a mediocre general can line up his figures and roll dice till his opponents are all dead.
So you're basically saying that the Tau army can be a TAC list yet those who fight them have to be min-maxed to be able to stand a chance?
List building is an important part of any wargame. Making sure you have the right tools for the job before you leave home is a necessity. His list was definitely not optimal - most of his points were spent on what are essentially survivable bolter marines in rhinos. So yeah, he did have that problem.
But the major problem he had was playing directly to my strengths. Putting deploying a bunch of AV11 vehicles within range and line of sight of a gunline. Attempting to walk directly towards said gunline while still in line of sight. Bringing on reserves in range and line of sight of the entire gunline...
On the previous page I did list a bunch of different ways that he could have played differently and survived a lot longer. There was line of sight blocking terrain that he didn't make use of, amongst other things.
He wouldn't have been likely to win, but he would have had a chance. Its the difference between a hard-fought loss and a 2nd turn tabling.
The mission was emperor's will. He would have conceded first blood, but it wouldn't have been that difficult for him to reach combat with the Ethereal and kill it. That would have achieved line breaker, slay the warlord, +1 for ethereal, contest the objective; and either keep Typhus alive or hold his own objective for the win.
I have been guilty of trying the hail merry rush against an army that was almost sure to beat me. Tau are so good at shooting now that to look across the table and see a gunline that is almost certain to beat you is very demoralizing. especially with the amount of time invested in a game of 40k.
Tau were my least favorite army to play against. because they are so good at shooting that a shooting war with tau is a loosing proposition. You have to try and get your less effective shooters within range to do some damage, and any melee troops you have are most likely just going to get ground down before they become effective. The fact that tau have so many move shoot move units, weapons that do not need line of sight, ignore cover, devestating overwatch fire, and interceptor means that alm ost all the tools that most armies have are useless against them. You know this.
From your posts I can tell that you are not TFG. Tau were down for a VERY long time. Now they are have ascended to a point where. without tailoring a list to face them, most armies are at a steep disadvantage. when the next edition of 40k comes out i expect them to shift back to a less shooting dominated game. However, until then expect to slaughter all codex that are older than yours.
@Blood ravens addiction
Yes, people are indeed playing against my army wrong. That's half the problem.
I had another game last Friday night. I conceded first turn on purpose so I could try being second. I gave my opponent a bunch of ideas about target and assault priority before the game, and taught him about tactical objective placement. However there is only so much you can do before you're essentially playing both armies on the board...
He did better than most people - getting one of those pesky instant death Archons into combat with the Riptide, but apart from that he didn't manage to take out any other full unit.
After the game I gae hum a bunch more advice about what he could have done differently. One thing I recommended was to turboboost his transports and get in to my lines ready for a turn 2 assault - as it was, he attempted some ineffectual shooting (killed 2 fire warriors) instead of using the opportunity to get closer to my lines and increase his survivability. I also suggested that he not try to engage every end of my gunline at once, and instead concentrating on a single portion of my line would have been better. As it was, he positioned himself and assaulted in such a way that he maximised the effectiveness of my army in all phases.
Eventually it was a tabling by my turn 4 - he had hidden some kabalite warriors way at the back behind a rock on an objective, so I had to run the broadsides closer before they could smart-missile them to death.
I'll try more next time I guess, but it's pretty easy to become a condescending jerk if you're giving out tactics advice for the entire game...
On the previous page I did list a bunch of different ways that he could have played differently and survived a lot longer. T
Survived, only to still lose, is how I'm taking this quote.
I said it would be difficult to win, but still possible.
I know the Tau are powerful... but that doesn't mean every opponent should reverse their tanks towards me and walk troops in the open the moment they see Tau across from them.
He could have survived the bulk of my first turn shooting if he had played just a little bit smarter, deployed just 2 inches further away - which means he could have gotten 18" towards me on his first turn, rather than having plague marines stuck in craters. If he'd survived just a little bit longer, he could have been in combat, which means he could have won. Even if the end is inevitable, I would prefer a longer battle where one person tries.
On the previous page I did list a bunch of different ways that he could have played differently and survived a lot longer. T
Survived, only to still lose, is how I'm taking this quote.
I said it would be difficult to win, but still possible.
I know the Tau are powerful... but that doesn't mean every opponent should reverse their tanks towards me and walk troops in the open the moment they see Tau across from them.
He could have survived the bulk of my first turn shooting if he had played just a little bit smarter, deployed just 2 inches further away - which means he could have gotten 18" towards me on his first turn, rather than having plague marines stuck in craters. If he'd survived just a little bit longer, he could have been in combat, which means he could have won. Even if the end is inevitable, I would prefer a longer battle where one person tries.
I'm sure you would prefer to drag out the game. In an inevitable match (which seems to be the tone you're taking), why would anyone subjugate themselves to a long drawn out battle if they already know the outcome? I'm not sure what the ratio is of people who enjoy losing, but my anecdotal philosophy to a game is, is: if I don't stand a chance, I'm not wasting the time. If you want to enjoy this game & truly care about the morale of the people you're playing against, shelve the army! There's a reason why the NOVA 2013 could have been renamed TOVA..
Trasvi wrote: Even if the end is inevitable, I would prefer a longer battle where one person tries.
Why would you want to play a game where you already know the outcome before the models are put on the table? Why not just tell your opponent what you're taking, shake hands and report it to the TO? Why even bother having an event at that point? Why not wake the participants up and show them a picture of an army?
In a game such as the ones we play, you have the premise that x points of your army is equal in power to x points of my army, but when we compare the individual variables (a, b, c) that comprise make up x and compare them to my variables (a, d, e, f) and we find out that your variables are better than mine, why should we play?
Also, by 'where 1 person tries' you mean to say, 'where my opponent puts effort into his loss, I still don't have to try harder.'
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/09/17 17:50:26
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
I think you're ganging up on the OP for no reason. It's not his fault that he is crushing his enemies, it's the game's fault.
At least the OP has some kind of a problem with the state of things, unlike many other players.
Shelving the army is the worst possible advice. I mean, if you like the army are you supposed to stop playing it because the game is not balanced? I don't think so.
Rustiga wrote: I'm sure you would prefer to drag out the game. In an inevitable match (which seems to be the tone you're taking), why would anyone subjugate themselves to a long drawn out battle if they already know the outcome? I'm not sure what the ratio is of people who enjoy losing, but my anecdotal philosophy to a game is, is: if I don't stand a chance, I'm not wasting the time. If you want to enjoy this game & truly care about the morale of the people you're playing against, shelve the army! There's a reason why the NOVA 2013 could have been renamed TOVA..
So you just refuse to play against a Tau player, period? If you saw me at a tournament you would just immediately concede the game?
If I wipe out your transports on turn one, you would just concede the game then and there?
If that's your attitude, then I'm quite glad you don't play in my area. At least my opponents have the courtesy to play a game.
There are many, many things my opponent could have done to make the game less one-sided - defeat certainly wasn't inevitable from the time we chose to play the game. My enjoyment of the game and the morale of my opponents is going to be much better if we end the game 5-4 in VP's rather than 6-0. And hopefully my opponent's enjoyment of the game doesn't come solely from them winning - mine definitely doesn't.
If Tau are truly, truly OP, then I may need to revisit my choice of army. But I can't actually know that until my opponents stop playing dumb and shifting the balance of power even more in my favour. I've been beaten 3 times now by another player's mech eldar, and once by a Tyranid tervigon horde. Those were fun games to play, and this entire thread is that I wish I had more games like them.
In all honesty, some armies will simply loose against tau.
I was playing a tourni against a tau player. I was playing a melee horde army. I didnt make it to melee with a single figure. He shot and shot and shot. Backed up and shot and shot. THen he started to advance shooting just to finish me off. He told me "no hard feelings, but this is a VP mission and if i table you i will win for sure". He tabled me and i think i killed one unit.
against almost any melee army, tau will win. some armies simply dont stand a chance against your army. If we played at the same shop i would either only bring lists with playing against you in mind (tailoring lists is cheesy so normally i would not do it), or i would simply look for games with someone else. Getting shot to bits without having any chance of doing anything is not all that fun.
BTW. I just want you to know that i dont think you sound like a bad guy. I agree with the above posters that tau's rather unbalanced game is not your fault. its just the way that the codex is written. When 7th ed comes out they will shift some rules so that it will be easier to deal with tau, like making assault from reserves legit again. Tau will suffer as a result. In the mean time play the fluffiest lists you can to mellow your army. take Vespids or some other unit that no onw ever plays. feed your opponent kroot so that they get to enjoy killing something. Otherwise, just do what i am doing with my Marines. Sell them or shelve them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/09/18 05:02:54
)
Blood Ravens, 1700pts
Astra Militarum 2250pts
Khorne 750pts
Space Wolves 1550pts
Orks 500pts
