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.

 Coyote81 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:
Unit spam is not a codex problem, it's a 40k FoC format issue. You want less spam, reduce the amount of slots or do like fantasy and limit how many of a single choice you can take at various points levels.

No, it's a codex problem. There shouldn't be anything wrong with taking lots of copies of the same unit, and arbitrary WFHB-style restrictions are bad for both fluff and list-building creativity. The only reason that spam is a problem is that GW refuses to care about codex balance and creates units that are clearly better than the alternatives.

That is the world of mathhammer. There will always be units that are mathematically better then their counterparts. Thus people will learn this second hand (Spammers usually aren't the mathhamemers to be honest, they're the netlist takers), and then they will spam that unit, arguing it's mathematical superiority until the end of time. The only way to limit spam is limiting individual quantities of units that can be taken.

Not true. Sure it's basically impossible to perfectly balance everything, but when every codex has such a huge discrepancy of power between different units it means there's no reason to take the worst ones.
If, however, the discrepancy in power is very small, there's no reason not to take what you want.

I'd love to do a stealer spam army with the Swarmlord. But there's no contest between that and spamming Flyrants.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:
Unit spam is not a codex problem, it's a 40k FoC format issue. You want less spam, reduce the amount of slots or do like fantasy and limit how many of a single choice you can take at various points levels.

No, it's a codex problem. There shouldn't be anything wrong with taking lots of copies of the same unit, and arbitrary WFHB-style restrictions are bad for both fluff and list-building creativity. The only reason that spam is a problem is that GW refuses to care about codex balance and creates units that are clearly better than the alternatives.

That is the world of mathhammer. There will always be units that are mathematically better then their counterparts. Thus people will learn this second hand (Spammers usually aren't the mathhamemers to be honest, they're the netlist takers), and then they will spam that unit, arguing it's mathematical superiority until the end of time. The only way to limit spam is limiting individual quantities of units that can be taken.

Not true. Sure it's basically impossible to perfectly balance everything, but when every codex has such a huge discrepancy of power between different units it means there's no reason to take the worst ones.
If, however, the discrepancy in power is very small, there's no reason not to take what you want.

I'd love to do a stealer spam army with the Swarmlord. But there's no contest between that and spamming Flyrants.

So is the overall problem people spamming the best units? If all the units are roughly the same, aren't people going to just pick the one they like best and spam the crap out of that unit instead? Balancing will never solves the spamming issues. Only restrictions of how many of each unit will stop people from spamming. With balance, you might finally get different people spamming different units that are roughly the same in power, but however you will rarely get people taking a variety of units in their lists. Mostly because people have or develop favorite units and the spamming will continue based on that.

With all this in mind, I like the current Tau codex. Very few units are what I would consider bad. I choose to make a very competitive list using a variety of units. (I.E. I only bring 1 riptide) The diversity make it harder for people to judge shooting priority imo. It also brings me lots of enjoyment. I don't think markerlights in general are OP, just the rules for removing coversaves. I would be find if it went back to the 1 marker for -1 coversave. But the BS upgrades and snapfire rules are perfectly find with me, I think they balance nicely against not having psykers.

Lastly, I can totally agree with people having problems with the MSS item. It's kind of BS, especially since I can give up my shooting for both items. I should not be able to give up a shooting attack that i don't even have. Thus it should work like this. Do you have a weapon? Yes, then you can give up your shooting attacks for MSS or CNC(don't rememeber the name atm).

 Coyote81 wrote:
If all the units are roughly the same, aren't people going to just pick the one they like best and spam the crap out of that unit instead?

Yes, but who cares if they do that? Spam isn't a problem because there's something inherently wrong about having multiple copies of a unit in your army, it's a problem because spamming lots of the same overpowered unit means that your whole army is overpowered. For example, I doubt you'll find anyone complaining about rough rider spam, simply because rough riders are not overpowered.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:
If all the units are roughly the same, aren't people going to just pick the one they like best and spam the crap out of that unit instead?

Yes, but who cares if they do that? Spam isn't a problem because there's something inherently wrong about having multiple copies of a unit in your army, it's a problem because spamming lots of the same overpowered unit means that your whole army is overpowered. For example, I doubt you'll find anyone complaining about rough rider spam, simply because rough riders are not overpowered.

So if they are all roughly the same in a book (In this case overpowered) you don't care if this just choose one and spam it? You only care if they spam one that is undeniably better then the other ones in that book? Or are you only ok with it if all the units in a book are subpar. Then they can spam which ever unit they want? Seems a moot point on power level. Unless you are trying to compare units from one book to another, that is hard to do because of having to take into account all the other units in their respective books. Spamming is the issue.

 Coyote81 wrote:
So if they are all roughly the same in a book (In this case overpowered) you don't care if this just choose one and spam it?

In that case I wouldn't care, because there's no difference between an army that spams lots of copies of the same overpowered unit and an army that takes one each of several different overpowered units. Either way the army as a whole is overpowered. Obviously that doesn't mean that having a whole codex of overpowered units is a good thing, but that's a problem that has nothing to do with spam.

Spamming is the issue.

No, balance is the issue. Spam is only a problem when you have poor balance and units that are clearly better than the alternatives. In that situation spamming the overpowered units allows you to create an army composed of nothing but overpowered units, compared to a non-spam army that might have an overpowered unit or two along with average and weak units. If all of the choices are close to the same power level then spam isn't a problem because a spam army won't be significantly more powerful than a non-spam army.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:
So if they are all roughly the same in a book (In this case overpowered) you don't care if this just choose one and spam it?

In that case I wouldn't care, because there's no difference between an army that spams lots of copies of the same overpowered unit and an army that takes one each of several different overpowered units. Either way the army as a whole is overpowered. Obviously that doesn't mean that having a whole codex of overpowered units is a good thing, but that's a problem that has nothing to do with spam.

Spamming is the issue.

No, balance is the issue. Spam is only a problem when you have poor balance and units that are clearly better than the alternatives. In that situation spamming the overpowered units allows you to create an army composed of nothing but overpowered units, compared to a non-spam army that might have an overpowered unit or two along with average and weak units. If all of the choices are close to the same power level then spam isn't a problem because a spam army won't be significantly more powerful than a non-spam army.

I think we have a small confusion on the comparison. I'm talking about comparing units to other units in the same codex. IMO comparing units from one codex to another and saying they are overpowered is a futile effort. Example: *Begin sarcasm*Nerf Death Company, this unit is so OP. They are less then twice as many points as my firewarrior, and have +2WS +1BS +1S +1T +2I +1A and +1 LD They also get a amazing amount of special rules, Fearless, FNP, Relentless, Rage (omg 5 attacks on the charge! My guys only get 1!) Furious Charge (another +1S, geeze) Special pistols for any situation, and amazing close combat weapons.*End Sarcasm*

You really have to come codex as a whole(including possible battle brother allies since the rules incorporate them flawlessly now. Right after Tau lost their BB). And honestly the Tau book need very small changes, Maybe the cost of the IA for the riptide and the coversave mechanic for markerlights, including the seeker missile rules for markerlights (needs buff). But I would say the overall power level of Tau is good since they are totally deprived of allies and have to have the answers inside their own book. IoM armies have all the tools they need imo. So do Eldae/Dark Eldar. Necrons are fine. Nids should be fine for the most part, Orks imo are still suffering.

 Coyote81 wrote:
I think we have a small confusion on the comparison. I'm talking about comparing units to other units in the same codex. IMO comparing units from one codex to another and saying they are overpowered is a futile effort. Example: *Begin sarcasm*Nerf Death Company, this unit is so OP. They are less then twice as many points as my firewarrior, and have +2WS +1BS +1S +1T +2I +1A and +1 LD They also get a amazing amount of special rules, Fearless, FNP, Relentless, Rage (omg 5 attacks on the charge! My guys only get 1!) Furious Charge (another +1S, geeze) Special pistols for any situation, and amazing close combat weapons.*End Sarcasm*

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here. Obviously everyone agrees that if you use stupid methods to compare units between codices you don't get useful results. But I don't see why stupid comparisons are relevant here.

You really have to come codex as a whole(including possible battle brother allies since the rules incorporate them flawlessly now. Right after Tau lost their BB). And honestly the Tau book need very small changes, Maybe the cost of the IA for the riptide and the coversave mechanic for markerlights, including the seeker missile rules for markerlights (needs buff). But I would say the overall power level of Tau is good since they are totally deprived of allies and have to have the answers inside their own book. IoM armies have all the tools they need imo. So do Eldae/Dark Eldar. Necrons are fine. Nids should be fine for the most part, Orks imo are still suffering.

What exactly does this have to do with spam?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:
I think we have a small confusion on the comparison. I'm talking about comparing units to other units in the same codex. IMO comparing units from one codex to another and saying they are overpowered is a futile effort. Example: *Begin sarcasm*Nerf Death Company, this unit is so OP. They are less then twice as many points as my firewarrior, and have +2WS +1BS +1S +1T +2I +1A and +1 LD They also get a amazing amount of special rules, Fearless, FNP, Relentless, Rage (omg 5 attacks on the charge! My guys only get 1!) Furious Charge (another +1S, geeze) Special pistols for any situation, and amazing close combat weapons.*End Sarcasm*

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here. Obviously everyone agrees that if you use stupid methods to compare units between codices you don't get useful results. But I don't see why stupid comparisons are relevant here.

You really have to come codex as a whole(including possible battle brother allies since the rules incorporate them flawlessly now. Right after Tau lost their BB). And honestly the Tau book need very small changes, Maybe the cost of the IA for the riptide and the coversave mechanic for markerlights, including the seeker missile rules for markerlights (needs buff). But I would say the overall power level of Tau is good since they are totally deprived of allies and have to have the answers inside their own book. IoM armies have all the tools they need imo. So do Eldae/Dark Eldar. Necrons are fine. Nids should be fine for the most part, Orks imo are still suffering.

What exactly does this have to do with spam?

I was just giving an example of why it's dumb to compare units from different codexs against each other and call one OP. Since you mention earlier about comparing units from one codex to another.

The 2nd part was actually tring to tie in the conversation to the OP post about Tau needing nerfs.

Spam is not solved by "number balancing", but by incomparibales.

When most units got features that cannot be directly mathed-out to what is superior in each case, because the power is not numberical to begin with.

Scouts VS marines is a good example. your tacticals have better shooting, CC and durability, but the scouts are cheaper and got more deployment options and slight mobility on the field (MTC), while there is the common choice for each player what he prefers-there is no strict math answer.

Crisis suits/stealth suits follow the same logic, deployment versus firepower and a different type of defense. had the stealth suits not been so overpriced for what they bring (and crisis suit not so mandatory due to lack of special weapons elsewhere) to the field, there was not the clear choice of crisis suits.

Chaos marks are mostly a BAD example, as their advantages are very clear mathematical ones, so there is always a "right" answer fr them (usually either nurgle or unmarked due to the point values, but other point values could modify the right choice)



Going back to the "riptide cant be mobile AND durable AND have immense firepower" thing.
First-why not? as long it was properly priced for it? its a nigh-superheavy class in size and cost, so a nigh-superheavy stats is not unfathomable.
Second-as I have shown on multiple past threads about the riptides, it really isn't normally, and only when he has an IA. with the HBC he has to either radically reduce his firepower by not using overcharges, or cause serious self-inflicted pain (average of 3.33 wounds over a game) making it durable OR destructive, but never both. the IA eliminates the need to NOVA and as such allows it to become absurd, the AI's main value is not in the pieplate form, the range or the AP2 (all are nice though), but in the removal of the need to NOVA. as long we play in the "IA does not exist" land, the riptide is completely fine.

As for "broadsides need to cost more", no. they should cost less, or be buffed.
Once again, just like the riptide its a specific weapon platform (the HYMP) that causes all problems, but without it the unit this time is not even fair, but unplayable.
I've got myself a pair of HRR broadsides from the old days, even converted them to have the cool "gunner" look and all of the new kits before they ever came out-but I simply cannot excuse using them, even in casual games. the HRR gets nothing done, against ANY target. the entire "rail" catagory needs some sort of special rule attached to give them more bite against tanks (like lance and melta has to get more pens, so that AP1 would mean anything.)
And for crying out loud-with the sheer SIZE of the damn thing, it should have been a T5 unit at the least. its as big as a dreadnaught!

Broadsides should become AV 12 walkers and Riptides should be AV 14 walkers.

The reasoning behind this is that Broadsides are Dreadnought equivalents (similar size with heavy weapons) and the Riptide should be AV 14 as at the moment it is +2T over the Broadside, so it should be +2AV (even on the rear).

Crisis suits should then become AV 11/12 walkers too (to keep it consistent).

SGTPozy wrote:
Broadsides should become AV 12 walkers and Riptides should be AV 14 walkers.

The reasoning behind this is that Broadsides are Dreadnought equivalents (similar size with heavy weapons) and the Riptide should be AV 14 as at the moment it is +2T over the Broadside, so it should be +2AV (even on the rear).

Crisis suits should then become AV 11/12 walkers too (to keep it consistent).

More like av13 for a riptide. Even a mad crab is av12 and it looks way tougher.

Every time someong brings up crisis suits as walkers we people who actually follow these stuff need to remind that it was tested, in the original version of crisis suits even-and JSJ walkers are absurdly OP.
Take away the JSJ and you lost the entire theme, price it up and the crisis cannot compete with its light guns.

Crisis as walkers will brake tau one way or another, there is simply no way to balance it without a complete redesign of the weapon choices to match.

And even than, you got yourself into the corner of crisis suits suddently being great CC units by the mere fact non-specialists are punched to death with little chance of retribution.

While we're at it let's make the average tactical Marine an AV10 walker, since Marines and crisis suits are essentially the same damn concept but the crisis suit is only slightly larger.

Means a marine can explode violently...i need to playtest it asap.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Every time someong brings up crisis suits as walkers we people who actually follow these stuff need to remind that it was tested, in the original version of crisis suits even-and JSJ walkers are absurdly OP.
Take away the JSJ and you lost the entire theme, price it up and the crisis cannot compete with its light guns..

To be fair, this was during third edition. 40k was a very different beast back then, with far less damage output in its units (other than death co. And the bleedin' eldar 'always stationary' heavy3 starcannon mounted on everything.)

Crisis suits as walkers? I don't like the idea personally (I prefer the bike like toughness boost) but 40k is different now, so the third ed truths may not necessarily apply any more.

A fireblade with shield gen is 77 points. thats a lot for one model.why would crisis suits need an increase in points? So for a squad of three that's 231 for a unit that without that 25 point shield gen is just three space marines carrying special weapons.

 koooaei wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
Broadsides should become AV 12 walkers and Riptides should be AV 14 walkers.

The reasoning behind this is that Broadsides are Dreadnought equivalents (similar size with heavy weapons) and the Riptide should be AV 14 as at the moment it is +2T over the Broadside, so it should be +2AV (even on the rear).

Crisis suits should then become AV 11/12 walkers too (to keep it consistent).

More like av13 for a riptide. Even a mad crab is av12 and it looks way tougher.

IK are AV 13, as are Soul Grinders so why not a Riptide? It would be far tougher than a Chimera and Armoured Sentinel's armour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, I also don't think that suits being walkers would be suitable, but I just showed what Tau would be like if the Riptide became a Walker so people need to make up their minds how they want Tau to be; massed high AV walkers or how they are now.

Well that's an easy question to answer, whatever option results in Tau not being on the table anymore. They don't really want Tau to be, so...

Spam is a filthy, if somewhat paletable-if-grilled pork dish.

Now, unto the question asked.

A good bunch of the wargear could get the axe for what I care. They add nothing but increased specialized effectiveness for points, in a way I van't quite explain... Just being able to pay for a random BS 2 Overwatch is weird.

Ion is cool, but I'd rather have one shooting option with it, the Overcharged ones. Maybe lower the AP on them, to emphasize the S.

Overwatch could be "one unit within 6"".

The Riptide needs help, obviously. I'd give it 3 W, and a small price increase. The Ion Accelerator could change to AP 3, lesser range, 20-25 pt.

That's more or less it, though. Ho boy am I looking forward to this Codex

 The Wise Dane wrote:

The Riptide needs help, obviously. I'd give it 3 W, and a small price increase. The Ion Accelerator could change to AP 3, lesser range, 20-25 pt.

The 3W alone would make it unusable because you'd never risk using a Nova charge. The rest would just ensure it'd never be seen on the table again. You're talking about 200 points for a 3W model with gets hot and a gets hot that hits twice as often and with no saves.

The Riptide definitely needs some kind of nerf, because they are invalidating entire army concepts atm.

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide definitely needs some kind of nerf, because they are invalidating entire army concepts atm.

That line of thinking is dangerous and inane. Blood angels now have the ability to get models from deep strike into melee the turn they arrive with intercepting only being on snap shots. That sounds like a perfect counter to some of these Tau lists that everyone has problems with. Should we nerf those BA lists because they invalidate entire army concepts (such as the concept of shooting something to death and staying out of melee)?

 Mulletdude wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide definitely needs some kind of nerf, because they are invalidating entire army concepts atm.

That line of thinking is dangerous and inane. Blood angels now have the ability to get models from deep strike into melee the turn they arrive with intercepting only being on snap shots. That sounds like a perfect counter to some of these Tau lists that everyone has problems with. Should we nerf those BA lists because they invalidate entire army concepts (such as the concept of shooting something to death and staying out of melee)?

I don't think that formation is going to be as good as people think. I guess time will tell. I don't care if that formation were banned, because I never plan on using it. I personally don't think that list can counter a thing. They are still going get intercepted to pieces when they try their little stunts. And seriously, 3 full tac squads? Who is scared of that?

With the 5th ed codex, I literally had to surrender to most Tau lists by turn 2. I don't see how forcing me into that is good for the game and they couldn't have done it without triple riptides.

This line of thinking of thinking is only dangerous to player who want to rofl stomp other players off the table with ion accelerators and not give them the chance to play at all.

Martel732 wrote:

 Mulletdude wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide definitely needs some kind of nerf, because they are invalidating entire army concepts atm.

That line of thinking is dangerous and inane. Blood angels now have the ability to get models from deep strike into melee the turn they arrive with intercepting only being on snap shots. That sounds like a perfect counter to some of these Tau lists that everyone has problems with. Should we nerf those BA lists because they invalidate entire army concepts (such as the concept of shooting something to death and staying out of melee)?

I don't think that formation is going to be as good as people think. I guess time will tell. I don't care if that formation were banned, because I never plan on using it. I personally don't think that list can counter a thing. They are still going get intercepted to pieces when they try their little stunts. And seriously, 3 full tac squads? Who is scared of that?

With the 5th ed codex, I literally had to surrender to most Tau lists by turn 2. I don't see how forcing me into that is good for the game and they couldn't have done it without triple riptides.

It's not the formation that is scary, it's what it brings. You can have furioso's charging on turn 1 with that formation. Well, and I'm sure 3 stormravens is going to be hard to deal with too.

Stormravens are rather overcosted for the actual effect they have on the game in my experience. They shouldn't be scaring anyone, especially Tau. There won't be many pts left for Furiosos after paying the formation tax and HQ tax.

That formation won't be able to hold Riptides' jock straps once everything shakes out.

Martel732 wrote:
Stormravens are rather overcosted for the actual effect they have on the game in my experience. They shouldn't be scaring anyone, especially Tau. There won't be many pts left for Furiosos after paying the formation tax and HQ tax.

That formation won't be able to hold Riptides' jock straps once everything shakes out.

The main reason I stated this line of discussion is inane is because of IK's. IK's invalidate entire play styles and the entire Tau codex, but I don't the the vile hatred toward them that I see toward the Tau. The IA needs to be brought down in power a bit and the broadside options need to be re-tooled a bit as well and the Tau book will be fine. Supporting fire can be mean, but only if you're planning on charging with one unit. It gets no worse than normal overwatch once multiple charges start getting called in a single turn.

Also, terrain. I've seen a lot of **** terrain people play against Tau on. Line of sight blocking is a godsend when playing against Tau.

 Mulletdude wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Stormravens are rather overcosted for the actual effect they have on the game in my experience. They shouldn't be scaring anyone, especially Tau. There won't be many pts left for Furiosos after paying the formation tax and HQ tax.

That formation won't be able to hold Riptides' jock straps once everything shakes out.

The main reason I stated this line of discussion is inane is because of IK's. IK's invalidate entire play styles and the entire Tau codex, but I don't the the vile hatred toward them that I see toward the Tau. The IA needs to be brought down in power a bit and the broadside options need to be re-tooled a bit as well and the Tau book will be fine. Supporting fire can be mean, but only if you're planning on charging with one unit. It gets no worse than normal overwatch once multiple charges start getting called in a single turn.

Also, terrain. I've seen a lot of **** terrain people play against Tau on. Line of sight blocking is a godsend when playing against Tau.

You cant' count on it and I shouldn't need special terrain to be able to compete against any army.

Personally I think the only nerf the Tau Codex needs is a slight one to Riptide.

If we ignore of the riptide (that can be fixed later, or just gotten rid of *hinthint*), the tau codex is quite balanced overall. Now, it's not perfect, and definitely could use a once-over, but it's not bad.

95% of my problem with the Tau gets tied back to the Riptide. The rest is competitive and manageable for even BA, who are marines -1.