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.

Martel732 wrote:

Bobug wrote:
Lets be fair tactical marines really dont suck, theyre actually right in the "balanced" zone of unit power I think. They have decent survivability, decent weapons, and a good statline. Theyre effective against all targets in some way (very few troops units have this advantage) and they cost the same as a dire avengers, which while being stronger close range than tacticals, are not as flexible and far weaker. Also the argument for cover is actually a bit of a moot point when discussing eldar infantry due to their short weapon ranges.

Yes wave serpents are overpowered, and they make eldar infantry very good, everyone knows this and itll stay this way until the next eldar codex which hopefully puts the serpent shield back to something like it was in 4th ed.

Tacticals though, are not bad units. Infact I think armies with large numbers of tactical marines actually fare rather well. I think maybe some of it is the SM oriented metagame still, which means people plan their armies around killing space marines. This is starting to die out now which is a good thing, but definately around 4th and 5th, you would specifically build your army and rate weapon choices on "how good is this at killing space marines"

If you want to talk about a bad space marine unit lets bring up the subject of assault marines

Yes, they do suck because they overpay for being generalists. This is not a game of generalists.

"Oh no, you guys, don't get me started on Wave Serpents. I'm neither blind, nor stupid, I know where the overpowered piles lie smelling in my own codex, I'm railing against the fact that someone actually had the gall to claim that 1 AP2 wound out of 6 from a 10 man 130+ point unit of Dire Avengers would somehow make for a good example of how Space Marines in Power Armour was underpowered. In a straight up fire fight, Dire Avengers will slowly lose against Tactical Marines, with a slight evenness if assuming the same point cost, unless the Space Marines make it into close combat at which point they will slaughter the Dire Avengers. The only hope Dire Avengers have against Tactical Marines is to stack the odds, meaning bringing far superior numbers/points to bear to eliminate key targets.

Dire Avengers are nice, but they are on the same level as Tactical Marines.

The problem you have with Dire Avengers is, again, Wave Serpents. Which are with their Serpent Shield and the interaction of Scatter Laser, a pile of gak as far as game balance is concerned. Wave Serpents are not the same as Dire Avengers nor do Wave Serpents benefit much at all from Bladestorm. Bladestorm is there to make Eldar infantry NOT SUCK, since otherwise their weapon would be a heavily nerfed Bolter (which you guys seem to hate).'"

In the current meta, I'll take DIre Avengers everytime. They can put wounds on any toughness value, and rend though any armor. And run after the fact. Yes, maybe in a vacuum, the tacticals slowly kill them, but in the bigger picture, DA are way better.

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Do you know what has bladestorm other than Dire Avengers? Shuriken Cannons. Do you know what platform Shuriken Cannons come on? I'll give you a hint: I never mentioned Dire Avengers, that was you.

Also, for the record, you still missed the 1204162371254609125460125402184658021652401625402.5 shots that I mentioned.

I'll just direct you to earlier parts of the thread where we pointed out how troops that don't overpay for their armour save is much better than those that do, because cover is free.

Oh, skip the exaggregation, please.

10 Dire Avengers kill 1,42 Space Marines without Rending and 2,2 with Rending shots.
7 Space Marines kill 3 and a slightly larger fraction of a Dire Avenger in return fire.
6 Space Marines kill 2,61 Dire Avengers

Assumptions:
1. Space Marines do not have a heavy weapon.
2. Dire Avengers are not able to Battle Focus out of Rapid Fire range.
3. Space Marines do not have cover.
4. Dire Avengers actually got lucky and didn't miss

Bladestorm on Shuriken Cannons are nearly a no-factor. On three shots you are lucky to get a single rend. It's when you mass this fire that things start get interesting, but you don't really see this unless it's on Cheap Walkers/Vypers in which case I beg to ask the question why the hell you didn't shoot them down. It's not like Shuriken Weapons have decent range. And if we're looking at those vehicles we're really starting to go off topic, really damned hard. Shuriken Cannons are weapons that are meant to be a threat against just about everything, but it's not a good solution to anything. You will optimally kill Space Marines better with Starcannons, or Scatter Lasers if they are in cover. Shuriken Cannon is what I'd categorise as a fun weapon, not an awesome weapon.

The bottom line is, Tacticals pay a lot of points for being able to do a lot of things. Yes, they are going to be worse than Howling Banshees in melee, they are going to be worse than Dire Avengers in a close ranged fire fight, yes they are going to be worse than Dark Reapers in a long ranged fire fight - but they can do all of those things. And not have to worry about morale. And combat squad. And Chapter tactic for extra tastiness.

You mean to say they shouldn't pay for being able to do those things? That specialist units should pay as if they could?

The issue is that while they can beat Avengers in melee and Banshees at range, they will never be allowed to choose. If the tacticals want to charge the Avengers, the Avengers can ensure that they are in the 12-18" range to fire at full effect and then Battle Focus away. The tacticals chase them but are still only in range to fire single shots, and if they run in order to try to catch them in melee, the Avengers can keep the dance up for quite some time.

Avengers are simply better. The vaunted T4/3+ is irrelevant when there's Ion Accelerators all over the place. A bonus point of Str and T in melee is irrelevant, since it won't save them against anything strong enough to reach melee at all.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bobug wrote:
Lets be fair tactical marines really dont suck, theyre actually right in the "balanced" zone of unit power I think. They have decent survivability, decent weapons, and a good statline. Theyre effective against all targets in some way (very few troops units have this advantage) and they cost the same as a dire avengers, which while being stronger close range than tacticals, are not as flexible and far weaker. Also the argument for cover is actually a bit of a moot point when discussing eldar infantry due to their short weapon ranges.

Yes wave serpents are overpowered, and they make eldar infantry very good, everyone knows this and itll stay this way until the next eldar codex which hopefully puts the serpent shield back to something like it was in 4th ed.

Tacticals though, are not bad units. Infact I think armies with large numbers of tactical marines actually fare rather well. I think maybe some of it is the SM oriented metagame still, which means people plan their armies around killing space marines. This is starting to die out now which is a good thing, but definately around 4th and 5th, you would specifically build your army and rate weapon choices on "how good is this at killing space marines"

If you want to talk about a bad space marine unit lets bring up the subject of assault marines

Yes, they do suck because they overpay for being generalists. This is not a game of generalists.

"Oh no, you guys, don't get me started on Wave Serpents. I'm neither blind, nor stupid, I know where the overpowered piles lie smelling in my own codex, I'm railing against the fact that someone actually had the gall to claim that 1 AP2 wound out of 6 from a 10 man 130+ point unit of Dire Avengers would somehow make for a good example of how Space Marines in Power Armour was underpowered. In a straight up fire fight, Dire Avengers will slowly lose against Tactical Marines, with a slight evenness if assuming the same point cost, unless the Space Marines make it into close combat at which point they will slaughter the Dire Avengers. The only hope Dire Avengers have against Tactical Marines is to stack the odds, meaning bringing far superior numbers/points to bear to eliminate key targets.

Dire Avengers are nice, but they are on the same level as Tactical Marines.

The problem you have with Dire Avengers is, again, Wave Serpents. Which are with their Serpent Shield and the interaction of Scatter Laser, a pile of gak as far as game balance is concerned. Wave Serpents are not the same as Dire Avengers nor do Wave Serpents benefit much at all from Bladestorm. Bladestorm is there to make Eldar infantry NOT SUCK, since otherwise their weapon would be a heavily nerfed Bolter (which you guys seem to hate).'"

In the current meta, I'll take DIre Avengers everytime. They can put wounds on any toughness value, and rend though any armor. And run after the fact. Yes, maybe in a vacuum, the tacticals slowly kill them, but in the bigger picture, DA are way better.

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

If tactical are useful for you, your opponents are doing something wrong. Not even my BA respects them.

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bobug wrote:
Lets be fair tactical marines really dont suck, theyre actually right in the "balanced" zone of unit power I think. They have decent survivability, decent weapons, and a good statline. Theyre effective against all targets in some way (very few troops units have this advantage) and they cost the same as a dire avengers, which while being stronger close range than tacticals, are not as flexible and far weaker. Also the argument for cover is actually a bit of a moot point when discussing eldar infantry due to their short weapon ranges.

Yes wave serpents are overpowered, and they make eldar infantry very good, everyone knows this and itll stay this way until the next eldar codex which hopefully puts the serpent shield back to something like it was in 4th ed.

Tacticals though, are not bad units. Infact I think armies with large numbers of tactical marines actually fare rather well. I think maybe some of it is the SM oriented metagame still, which means people plan their armies around killing space marines. This is starting to die out now which is a good thing, but definately around 4th and 5th, you would specifically build your army and rate weapon choices on "how good is this at killing space marines"

If you want to talk about a bad space marine unit lets bring up the subject of assault marines

Yes, they do suck because they overpay for being generalists. This is not a game of generalists.

"Oh no, you guys, don't get me started on Wave Serpents. I'm neither blind, nor stupid, I know where the overpowered piles lie smelling in my own codex, I'm railing against the fact that someone actually had the gall to claim that 1 AP2 wound out of 6 from a 10 man 130+ point unit of Dire Avengers would somehow make for a good example of how Space Marines in Power Armour was underpowered. In a straight up fire fight, Dire Avengers will slowly lose against Tactical Marines, with a slight evenness if assuming the same point cost, unless the Space Marines make it into close combat at which point they will slaughter the Dire Avengers. The only hope Dire Avengers have against Tactical Marines is to stack the odds, meaning bringing far superior numbers/points to bear to eliminate key targets.

Dire Avengers are nice, but they are on the same level as Tactical Marines.

The problem you have with Dire Avengers is, again, Wave Serpents. Which are with their Serpent Shield and the interaction of Scatter Laser, a pile of gak as far as game balance is concerned. Wave Serpents are not the same as Dire Avengers nor do Wave Serpents benefit much at all from Bladestorm. Bladestorm is there to make Eldar infantry NOT SUCK, since otherwise their weapon would be a heavily nerfed Bolter (which you guys seem to hate).'"

In the current meta, I'll take DIre Avengers everytime. They can put wounds on any toughness value, and rend though any armor. And run after the fact. Yes, maybe in a vacuum, the tacticals slowly kill them, but in the bigger picture, DA are way better.

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

If tactical are useful for you, your opponents are doing something wrong. Not even my BA respects them.

^^ this !!! ^^

I only use two because I have to and they don't exactly do a lot either

 Mahtamori wrote:
McNinja: An ap2 weapon on every vehicle? Really? I can understand if someone complains about the Scatter Laser, but the AP2 weapons?! You do realize that Space Marines have access to better AP2 weapons, right? And you realize that this is a thread about Tactical Marines and their supposed short comings and not about Terminators?

You do realize that I started the thread, right? Anyway, the fact that the Eldar have access on every single vehicle to powerful AP2 weaponry is indeed an issue for Marines.

They do not have access to better AP2 weapons. Sure, grav-guns are good, but those are really only taken on Bikes or Centurions so you can get full number of shots. SM plasma is not as good as Eldar plasma, if only because it can't be spammed nearly as much. Not only does almost every weapon have the potential to be AP2/1, but you can put those weapon on literally every vehicle. There is not a single Eldar vehicle than cannot be equipped with an AP2 weapon.

Can every marine vehicle have an AP2 weapon stuck on it? And for that matter, why do marines pay 20 points for an assault cannon when Eldar pay half or less for a Shuriken Cannon or Starcannon?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

Then I would have to say you must not be playing experienced players OR that your meta is almost the opposite of competative (or some combination of both). No tactical marine squad I have ever used has lived for longer than two turns.

Imperial heavy weapons are completely tragic, I agree. Especially the assault cannon and missile launcher.

 McNinja wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

Then I would have to say you must not be playing experienced players OR that your meta is almost the opposite of competative (or some combination of both). No tactical marine squad I have ever used has lived for longer than two turns.

Actually we are very experienced players [Me since 1989]. No we don’t play the “Ultra-Competitive” way.
We are very competitive within our local group. We are taking the Triple Riptide or Screaming whatever it is called, but be make good solid list. We have played the “Competitive Meta” and don’t enjoy it.

By the way Tactical Marines Do Not Suck, The Local Meta in witch they are forced to be played in that makes them.
If you have not noticed there are others out there that seem to make them work so they must be good.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

The vaunted T4/3+ is irrelevant when there's Ion Accelerators all over the place.

Your actually expecting tacticals to survive anti-tank/anti-TEQ weapons, because that's what ion cannons and ion accelerators are. You can't expect them to survive against battle cannons, so why expect them to survive other armies BC equivalents.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

Then I would have to say you must not be playing experienced players OR that your meta is almost the opposite of competative (or some combination of both). No tactical marine squad I have ever used has lived for longer than two turns.

Actually we are very experienced players [Me since 1989]. No we don’t play the “Ultra-Competitive” way.
We are very competitive within our local group. We are taking the Triple Riptide or Screaming whatever it is called, but be make good solid list. We have played the “Competitive Meta” and don’t enjoy it.

By the way Tactical Marines Do Not Suck, The Local Meta in witch they are forced to be played in that makes them.
If you have not noticed there are others out there that seem to make them work so they must be good.

That doesn't make them good. That means some people have weak sauce opponents. Tac marines are awful because not even my BA fear them. Dire avengers give me some pause due to the fact that they can deliver max firepower at a range where they can't be assaulted.

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Maybe they only suck for your Meta

In my local Meta, the only reason only feild 3 Tactical Squads is I only have 3, but I am working on my 4th and posibly 5th.

Then I would have to say you must not be playing experienced players OR that your meta is almost the opposite of competative (or some combination of both). No tactical marine squad I have ever used has lived for longer than two turns.

Actually we are very experienced players [Me since 1989]. No we don’t play the “Ultra-Competitive” way.
We are very competitive within our local group. We are taking the Triple Riptide or Screaming whatever it is called, but be make good solid list. We have played the “Competitive Meta” and don’t enjoy it.

By the way Tactical Marines Do Not Suck, The Local Meta in witch they are forced to be played in that makes them.
If you have not noticed there are others out there that seem to make them work so they must be good.

That doesn't make them good. That means some people have weak sauce opponents. Tac marines are awful because not even my BA fear them. Dire avengers give me some pause due to the fact that they can deliver max firepower at a range where they can't be assaulted.

Just becouse somthing is not Good, does not mean it is Bad.
That does not make them bad either. They are just there, They do thier job and that is about it.

What is that job exactly? Scoring. That's it. They don't have the firepower to threaten anything meaningful. And their HTH is an absolute joke. Both in getting there and capability.

Compare to the humble sniper Kroot, who can at least do anti-MC duty or anti-teq duty. Tacticals take NO pressure off any other slot in the list.

Sit on an Objective and be a scoring unit.

Now unless they are TH/SS Terminators or the equivalent...S10 AP2 Pie is going to remove them from that spot, but that is ANY UNIT out there. Tactical Marines [Or insert ANY Troop Choice] are just the victom of the ability to SPAM S10 AP2 Pie.

[Breath]
"They Do not Suck" That is the statement that is raising my blood presure. They are just there. If you can get a Space Marine Player to Play them Good, you will see.
I see this all of the time. The game is won with Tactical Marines sitting on their obejctives giveing me VPs while the Sternguard/Terminators takes down my oponents Scoring Units.

You don't have enough Sternguard and terminators to take out my scoring units because YOUR scoring units can't help. The story of your tactic is the Sternguard and terminators do SOME damage, die, and then you try to outlast with tacticals. Marine lists just don't pack enough scary units to make this work if you bring lots of tacticals. That's why marine players are going with bikers as troops because at least then they get grav guns. At a price of durability, though. This is a dilemma other lists literally don't face.

On the other hand, lists like the Tau can have their Kroot kill the terminators and then have their other slots kill your Sternguard and have plenty of time left over to wipe up your *helpless* tacticals.

The problem you are missing is that tacticals don't contribute any meaningful offense in 6th edition. They didn't really in 5th, either, but the incoming fire wasn't as bad. Now that incoming fire is *withering*, doing damage back is a number one priority, since you literally can't live to end of the battle against, say, Eldar unless you have killed quite a few of them.

The troops in other lists are cheaper or cost the same and DO contribute meaningful offense. Just standing there with a 3+ save gets the marines NOTHING now against a GOOD opponent. If I pay points for something, and they contribute nothing other than scoring, then that unit does indeed suck. Especially with how much tacticals still cost.

Great we are back to "tit for tat"

What is so hard to belive that there are people out there that belive Tactical Squads do not suck?
And the reason they belive it is They work for thoise people.

It's not tit for tat. I'm showing you examples of how other lists' troops contribute in meaningful ways for fewer points. These lists, by definition, will have an incredible advantage over marines.

Your assertion that they "work" for some people is easily countered by own crushing of those who spam tacticals, as well as tournament results. It's even easier to play against someone with tactical squads, because those squads can be largely ignored until the wipe up phase of the game.

Unless you are somehow debating that sniper Kroot don't have more offensive utility than tactical marines while costing less. Their lack of defenses is largely irrelevant since this game is about what you can kill, not what damage you can absorb. Unless you are the magical few with 2+ rerollable. That's the save that matters now. Not 2+. Not 3+.

You know we have gooten so far off topoic.

Tau and Eldar can do that to ANY Troop, I aknowldge that, I did a while ago...

You want to make them not "Suck": Get rid of all of the AP3 SPAM, problem solved. As soon as that is done Tacticals will come back as stroing as they should be.

 Anpu42 wrote:
You know we have gooten so far off topoic.

Tau and Eldar can do that to ANY Troop, I aknowldge that, I did a while ago...

You want to make them not "Suck": Get rid of all of the AP3 SPAM, problem solved. As soon as that is done Tacticals will come back as stroing as they should be.

It's not AP 3/2. It's weight of wounds. Weight of wounds is especially heinous because cover means nothing.

It's not just Eldar and Tau. Tacticals don't carry their weight in ANY matchup, not even BA. It just shows the most against Tau and Eldar because they get out shot so badly.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not AP 3/2. It's weight of wounds. Weight of wounds is especially heinous because cover means nothing.
It's not just Eldar and Tau. Tacticals don't carry their weight in ANY matchup, not even BA. It just shows the most against Tau and Eldar because they get out shot so badly.

Actualy 80% of the games in my group are MEQ on MEQ. The Non-MEQ on MEQ action, I had two games in a row where I was never given a chance to make my Saves, not even cover so I am Very familiar with the problem.
My Space Wolves are built around a core of 2-4 Grey Hunter Packs. They always do well exept for one Pie Plate Guard army, and I lost that game becouse one of my Lone Wolves did not Die!
The games I get crushed in are the ones where I don't get to make saves.

BTY: every time I see BA All I see is Blood Angels.

That's not my experience at all. I regularly am forced to make 40-50 saves a turn. You can do the math on how fast meqs die at a 33% rate with that many wounds to save. As I said, this method is better than AP because cover doesn't help. Of course, Riptides are the worst with ignore cover and AP 2.

Also note that grey hunters are far, far better than tactical marines. This may skew your perception of the situation. Although their advantages are mostly negated by Tau/Eldar.

Martel732 wrote:
That's not my experience at all. I regularly am forced to make 40-50 saves a turn. You can do the math on how fast meqs die at a 33% rate with that many wounds to save. As I said, this method is better than AP because cover doesn't help. Of course, Riptides are the worst with ignore cover and AP 2.

Also note that grey hunters are far, far better than tactical marines. This may skew your perception of the situation. Although their advantages are mostly negated by Tau/Eldar.

I know they do, but I also play Dark Angles, Blood Angels and Normal Marines.

But what has been our group's probem has been the denial of cover and saves. [Stupid DoM]
As for the buckets of saves I usaly do well. Tacticals can also put out buckets of wounds if toolled up right.

How exactly do tacticals put out buckets of wounds? That's where you are losing me. Please provide an example of such a load out. Because as far as I can tell, tacticals have to be within 12" to really do anything remotely meaningful.

Also, are you claiming to go against the statistics of 50 wounds killing about 17 marines a turn consistently? Which marine list can afford these kinds of losses?

[First I had done a realy long reply with math and everything, but the Machine-God ate it]
Yes One Tactical Squad can't do that, but three can [what I normaly run]. I can dish out 24+ wounds a turn. I belive in Kill Zones.

3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.

So statistically, 8 hits will be plasma and 32 will be bolters.

That's ~7 AP 2 wounds and 24 AP 5 wounds. That's around 19 dead dire avengers. That's pretty good.

But this drops to HALF beyond 12". And that's also assuming we get 30 tactical marines to within 12" of two squad of dire avengers. This is where the problem comes in. Most fire fights are outside 12".

Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents. Oh, and they can move 12" and unload on your face. And are immune to bolters.

Any of the other troop choices in other books can do killzones with 2-3 squads of their own as well.

^beat me to it, close range fire fighting might be our strong suit but we're going to be pie-plated or charged the second our turn is done if 2-3 squads have to all be within 12" of the enemy unit to shoot it.

Martel732 wrote:
3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.
Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents.

Well we don't have Eldar players, so I would not know.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.
Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents.

Well we don't have Eldar players, so I would not know.

Suddenly I see why you think tacticals are "okay". Your data set is completely biased by taking out the top army in the game.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.
Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents.

Well we don't have Eldar players, so I would not know.

Do you have Tau players?

 McNinja wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.
Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents.

Well we don't have Eldar players, so I would not know.

Do you have Tau players?

Even if he does, Eldar are far worse imo. He's literally not playing the best list and thinking tacticals rock the house.

Martel732 wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
3 tactical squads let's say with two plasmas each get an average of 40 hits at 12" range and against say Dire Avengers.
Against more sturdy troops, like meqs, these numbers go down a lot more. But you what doesn't go down much? The carnage created by Wave Serpents.

Well we don't have Eldar players, so I would not know.

Do you have Tau players?

Even if he does, Eldar are far worse imo. He's literally not playing the best list and thinking tacticals rock the house.

We do have one starting Tau Player, but only a few games. I am also putting together a small Tau Force, in fact I am working getting together a decent sized "Allied Force" for each Army.