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.

MilkmanAl wrote:
How do you guys feel about Broadside spam? It's no secret that they offer impressive firepower per point, and they're featured prominently in a few interesting formations. However, they're essentially static and aren't terribly durable.

My thought is that you could possibly work with the Ranged Support Cadre to make them more mobile since one marker light hit (that counts as double in the formation) brings them back to baseline in terms of hitting things. Yes, Pathfinders are immobile and fairly flimsy even with Shrouded, but that double marker light perk is darn nice. Is it enough to make up for all the things Drone Net Marker Drones do better, though? Would it be better to get multiple Broadsides from other sources (like, say, the relentless ones from a Retaliation Cadre)?

In any event, it seems like hooking them up with tank/monster hunter is a really good idea. Whether that buff should come from a buffmander, the FBSC formation bonus, or the DBC formation bonus is something I'm still pondering.

For instance, try this on for size:

DBC
Hunter Cadre
Commander - 2 missile pods, TL - 120
3x5 FW - 135
2xRiptide - IA, EWO, SMS - 380
Piranha - 40
Stormsurge - pulse driver, shield gen, AFP, EWO - 435

RSC
3x5 Pathfinders - 165
3x1 Broadsides - EWO - 210

RSC
2x5 Pathfinders - 110
4 Pathfinders - 44
3x1 Broadsides - EWO - 210

1849 in total, by my count.

It's definitelyt in keeping with the MSU theme this thread has taken on, and while you don't benefit from the Hunter Contingent bonuses, your units are mostly pretty marker-independent. If you don't need the markers elsewhere - like for your Stormsurge - you can reposition a few of the 'sides as necessary and still have them shoot effectively. The Commander is a bit of a lost puppy in this setup, unfortunately. I'd figured to have him run with the FW to create target priority issues and to keep them extra mobile, but if you guys can think of better uses, I'm all ears. The Piranha will likely be reserved for some objective grabbing and maybe use as a roadblock. Ideally it'd come on the board in a location that allows it to take advantage of the Hunter Cadre bonuses to flat out then shoot something in your opponent's backfield.

Problem with broadside spam is their mobility and the need for them to be deployed in MSU and needing good cover. I field four single model broadsides and i find that a few times i need to snap fire them in order to reposition them. They also move very slow with no jet pack. moving from cover to cover means they need to take multiple dificult terrain test. relying on cover save is another problem. With t4, they are too easily intant killed even with their 2+ armor save. Most of the game, i can't find optimal cover for deployment to maximize their reach on potential target. I employ my broadsides to act as a wall of bullets for charging enemy units. But if i face long range army like IG, eldar or another tau list, then my broadside will likely see underusage due to their limited range.

My recomendation if you want to spam broadside is to put some of them in retaliation cadre so that they can act as an advancing wall of bullets as well as the range support cadres. DBC is actually good for broadside spam as their guns don't hurt heavy target much and need the wound reroll quite often in the current meta of GCs. I know that you put huntre cadre in primarily for the stormsurge, but its not optimal in this case. A broadside spam list with at least 9-12 broadside will have more than plenty of fire power to wipe anything off the board as long as they get to fire their guns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Are Breachers any good? They seem like they would be half decent if you loaded them up in a Devilsfish and took a forward objective. Then again, that seems against the Tau's MO.

No. breacher advancing on objective is a misconception for most people. They are meant to flush enemy out, not to hold objectives. No tau infantry unit are good in holding objectives without ethereal support. So your ethereal need to advance with the breacher as well which is too riasky since they will give vp to opponent if they are killed. The only use i see for breachers is on the tidewall counter-attack formation which can double the range of their guns + other bonus. The formation looks descent on paper but is no where near competitive since the tidewall movement is also somewhat limited in actual game play and they are too costly for what they do.But if you want to flush enemy out, the tau codex gives you alot of better options than breachers in devilfish. i.e. riptides and OSC is alot more mobile and survivable, which means they can actually hold objectives descently in most games.

Ah, a shame. They are a cool unit. Thanks for the advice!

Imperial Knights, what is the best way to take them out?

I made a list than I realize, I have no way of dealing with Imperial Knights.

 CKO wrote:
Imperial Knights, what is the best way to take them out?

I made a list than I realize, I have no way of dealing with Imperial Knights.

You attack it from two or more facings with high strength attacks, enough to net 6 hull points. That's how you kill an IK.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Imperial Knights, what is the best way to take them out?

I made a list than I realize, I have no way of dealing with Imperial Knights.

You attack it from two or more facings with high strength attacks, enough to net 6 hull points. That's how you kill an IK.

SJ

Indeed, this, I usually give it a choice between front facing D missiles, or side hitting yvara emp

Sounds like a solid plan to me!

 CKO wrote:
Imperial Knights, what is the best way to take them out?

I made a list than I realize, I have no way of dealing with Imperial Knights.

There are a few ways to dealing with IK, but its generally one of the toughest enemy for competitive tau armies:

1) If you have several mobile units like riptide, you can try to outflank him witht he 4d6 move 3-4 turns consecutively. This way it will allow you to shoot at his soft spots (rear and side armor). I have tried this and it worked well because I always get to wound an IK 2-3 hp per turn due to my 2 riptides being tank hunter from fbc formation.

2) Have lots of stormsurges and hope for a roll of six in the d weapons. Honestly, its kind of a gamble to rely on d too much. I actually like the s10 ap2 pie plates better. Together with outflanking riptides can net you 1 IK per turn

3) FBC broadsides with HYMP. My opponent were mostly scared of them aand thats why he made a bee line towards them first instead of the riptides and stormsurges. With the tankhunter special rule they can put lots of wound on IK. four of these guys can potentially bring down an IK with out invulnerable save per turn, which means any sensible IK player will put his shield towards them. I recommend deploying them in two corners of the map so that half of them can shoot at the soft side or rear armor.

4) Fire warriors with emp granades. Many IK players ignored them until they get in range for their bomb. Not an IK killer, but it can help with taking out a couple of HP when the IK is in charging range.

5) Kill them on overwatch shooting. counter fire defense systems which increase bs to 2 in overwatch. This is handy for overwatching charging IK. If you put them on the buffmander controlling the drones, the marker drones will over watch at bs 2. If you put them on riptides on hunter cadre list, they get to support fire within 12" on bs 2. Together, you might take out 2-3 HP if you still have broadside doing over watch. I killed one of my opponent's IK on overwatch from units positioned in multiple angle and took out his last 2 HP. That is the killing blow to his army and won me the tournament. Don't underestimate the value of good overwatch tactic.

6) recently, it got me thinking into using the firestream formation to impede charging opponents. a bare minimal 160pts on four piranhas will do. This will net you 8 gun drones per turn. IK charge on turn 2-3. so by that time you get 16-24 drones to screen the charge. This will force them to shoot at the drones to clear it or charge them to clear them with stomp attacks. Either ways, they will redirect heavy firepower towards the drones or else they cannot charge. And if they use blast weapons, then they cannot shoot the drones that is 1 inches away from their IK by turn 2, forcing them to use the heavy stubber of charge them. I have not tried this yet, but it might be the only way for a pure tau list to stop a 5 IK list or superfriend death star with invisibility and veil of time.

Turtlesoup wrote:


4) Fire warriors with emp granades. Many IK players ignored them until they get in range for their bomb. Not an IK killer, but it can help with taking out a couple of HP when the IK is in charging range.

I believe an FAQ has ruled you can only have one model use a grenade in the assault phase. So giving Fire Warriors EMP grenades are a waste of points as you only get to use two grenades max per turn (throw one in shooting then use one in HTH).

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Turtlesoup wrote:


4) Fire warriors with emp granades. Many IK players ignored them until they get in range for their bomb. Not an IK killer, but it can help with taking out a couple of HP when the IK is in charging range.

I believe an FAQ has ruled you can only have one model use a grenade in the assault phase. So giving Fire Warriors EMP grenades are a waste of points as you only get to use two grenades max per turn (throw one in shooting then use one in HTH).

yes i am aware and thats why you only put emp when you have spare points. If taking hunter cadre there is a mandatory 3 units of fire warrior which can be used to screen attacks and can potentially release 3 emp bomb at shooting phase and 3 at assault phase which can potentially take out 1-2 hp of knights. quite good for the investment of 6pts for emp.

that FAQ is not official.

Turtlesoup wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Turtlesoup wrote:


4) Fire warriors with emp granades. Many IK players ignored them until they get in range for their bomb. Not an IK killer, but it can help with taking out a couple of HP when the IK is in charging range.

I believe an FAQ has ruled you can only have one model use a grenade in the assault phase. So giving Fire Warriors EMP grenades are a waste of points as you only get to use two grenades max per turn (throw one in shooting then use one in HTH).

yes i am aware and thats why you only put emp when you have spare points. If taking hunter cadre there is a mandatory 3 units of fire warrior which can be used to screen attacks and can potentially release 3 emp bomb at shooting phase and 3 at assault phase which can potentially take out 1-2 hp of knights. quite good for the investment of 6pts for emp.

EMP grenades are 2 points per model, so on a minimum unit of 5 dudes you'd have to pay 10 to equip them with EMP. And THAT is why I never bother with them; there is almost always something better to do with those points.

 ZergSmasher wrote:

Turtlesoup wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Turtlesoup wrote:


4) Fire warriors with emp granades. Many IK players ignored them until they get in range for their bomb. Not an IK killer, but it can help with taking out a couple of HP when the IK is in charging range.

I believe an FAQ has ruled you can only have one model use a grenade in the assault phase. So giving Fire Warriors EMP grenades are a waste of points as you only get to use two grenades max per turn (throw one in shooting then use one in HTH).

yes i am aware and thats why you only put emp when you have spare points. If taking hunter cadre there is a mandatory 3 units of fire warrior which can be used to screen attacks and can potentially release 3 emp bomb at shooting phase and 3 at assault phase which can potentially take out 1-2 hp of knights. quite good for the investment of 6pts for emp.

EMP grenades are 2 points per model, so on a minimum unit of 5 dudes you'd have to pay 10 to equip them with EMP. And THAT is why I never bother with them; there is almost always something better to do with those points.

You don't have to put 5 emp on a squad. Just put on one model/squad. so you spend 6pts to equip your fire warriors so that they can potentially put a couple of wound on vehicles. Sounds like a good investment to me.

You can't do that. The entry says that the unit may take EMP grenades at 2 points per model. So you have to buy them for the whole unit.

Otherwise it would have to be worded the same way as the pulse rifle to pulse carbine swap i.e any model may take emp grenades at 2 points per model.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
You can't do that. The entry says that the unit may take EMP grenades at 2 points per model. So you have to buy them for the whole unit.

Otherwise it would have to be worded the same way as the pulse rifle to pulse carbine swap i.e any model may take emp grenades at 2 points per model.

To clarify (because you're absolutely correct here), the entry states:

The unit may take EMP grenades........................................... 2 pts/model

The unit takes the grenades, not individual models - the cost of equipping the unit with EMP grenades, however, is based on the number of models in the unit.

What's odd to me is that the last entry, allowing Bonding Knives, uses the same wording but adds "entire" in front of unit.

Nevertheless, I feel the intention is fairly clear: if you want EMP grenades, you have to buy them as a unit, not per model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:
that FAQ is not official.

It's official (as in, released by GW), but not finalized (that is, it doesn't have the final wording).

However, they've explicitly stated that (barring mistakes, which when called out, they've clarified then and there) the rulings on the FAQ will NOT be changed based on feedback, and will at most be modified for clarity.

There is no interpretation/clarity issue regarding the answer on grenades, and despite a fair number of complaints regarding that ruling, they have not stated that ruling is a mistake. Further, the rule as written is open to GW's official interpretation, so it isn't even an errata-disguised-as-a_FAQ (which itself is a silly, pedantic argument, but a different topic).

Thus, the FAQ is in force for anyone who wants to play the game as intended by the developers. Putting your hands over your ears and yelling "It isn't official yet" is your choice, but not a terribly convincing argument.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
You can't do that. The entry says that the unit may take EMP grenades at 2 points per model. So you have to buy them for the whole unit.

Otherwise it would have to be worded the same way as the pulse rifle to pulse carbine swap i.e any model may take emp grenades at 2 points per model.

Thanks for the clarification. It seems i agree with your interpretation and its a crappy rule. The investment makes it not worth their points in my opinion.

Eurgh. I really hope they think again on the drop pod rulings... they are stupidly daft.

Stupid question, but I see people mention "Mark'o" as their Marker source... Can someone just explain what that is? I assume its some flavor of Commander attached to a bunch of drones, but didn't know if it meant something more specific.

Also, the last few pages of discussion had a few folks mentioning Tau deathstars being less competitive... Does that include the Optimized Stealth Cadre, as those Keels seem somewhat like a deathstar, but always do very well for me.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Stupid question, but I see people mention "Mark'o" as their Marker source... Can someone just explain what that is? I assume its some flavor of Commander attached to a bunch of drones, but didn't know if it meant something more specific.

Also, the last few pages of discussion had a few folks mentioning Tau deathstars being less competitive... Does that include the Optimized Stealth Cadre, as those Keels seem somewhat like a deathstar, but always do very well for me.

Basically a commander with Drone controller attached to a unit of marker drones. The drone controller gives all of the drones in the unit the BS5 of the Commander.

You can also give other wargear though the drone controller is all that is strictly needed to function as a mark'o. Other equipment is often dual missile pods and a target lock as it allows the commander to engage separate targets from the same range as the drones, allowing your marker sources to keep far back from the enemy. Alternatively you could give him stims and/or iridium armour and use him to tank wounds against your marker drones, though there are other units who may benefit from that tankage more, such as broadsides who are unable to JSJ.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Stupid question, but I see people mention "Mark'o" as their Marker source... Can someone just explain what that is? I assume its some flavor of Commander attached to a bunch of drones, but didn't know if it meant something more specific.

Also, the last few pages of discussion had a few folks mentioning Tau deathstars being less competitive... Does that include the Optimized Stealth Cadre, as those Keels seem somewhat like a deathstar, but always do very well for me.

The above poster has basically explained what mark'o means so i am going to answer the second question.

No, an OSC formation is not a death star....not even close. It is only a death star to a row of vehicles...which most competitive list wont take other than a gladius strike force. The only pseudo deathstar i can think of for tau is the crisis bomb with shadowsun as warlord joining it. But as I mentioned in previous post.....its not competitive in this current meta due to the fact that it does not have enough protection against all the shenanigans that other army can throw at it. If you meet another tau list with hunter contingent army, then you might as well shake hand and say good game before the game even start.

It says directly on it that its only a draft. It is not to be considered any more than as being submitted for comment. I do not expect some of it to make the cut. So dont act on a draft.

 Jancoran wrote:
It says directly on it that its only a draft. It is not to be considered any more than as being submitted for comment. I do not expect some of it to make the cut. So dont act on a draft.

Other than tank shocking a stormsurge to death, i think most of the new change in the faq make sense and is steering towards ITC rules in some parts. I am betting that at least 90% of the faq content will be final soon.

Maybe. Until then, it's a draft. And there are things in the draft that werent as well received. if GW is intelligent, they will actually act on the input they got.

How have people found breachers in general? Just getting around to doing mine up now, another option for more casual lists I figure.

For a kill team, I'm thinking I'll rock 10 breachers, the SMS turret (one lucky dude gets to hide out of los & Fire it) and a devilfish with disruption pod and sensor spines. Jeez the cost of the D'fish becomes really apparent at kill team level, half your points for a transport! At least in kill team, ignore cover should be relatively rare, so that 3+ jink and front armour might keep it alive.

I love breachers, but I've found that they are hard to get close enough to an enemy, even with a D-fish. They are fun, and they hit really hard if they do get close enough (I doubled out a bunch of those Skitarii Ruststalkers once with my breachers). I never take one of the gun turrets, but I do usually take a Guardian drone for that 5++ save (helps more than you might think).

I just played in a local 40k tournament today. 1850 points, ITC rules and missions. I played a Tau Hunter Contingent with a drone net tacked on outside the detachment. I managed to squeeze in a Stormsurge, a Firebase Support Cadre, and an Optimized Stealth Cadre. My first matchup was against a friend of mine who is a really amazingly good Eldar player. He had a Pale Court detachment and a CAD. Basically 11 scatbikes (total) in 3 units, an Autarch and a Farseer on bikes, a Skathach (spelling?) Wraithknight, and 31 Warp Spiders (6 units). I actually managed to only lose that game by a single point (which is amazing considering the skill of my opponent). Second game was against a mechanized Astra Militarum list. I won that one handily, getting maximum points. Third game was against a nasty Tau Farsight Enclaves list with 2 Stormsurges, a Riptide Wing, and a Mark'O with 10 drones, and 2 naked Crisis suits as troop tax. I went first and my opponent failed to sieze despite having allied in Coteaz. My turn 1 alpha strike really won me the game, as my Stormsurge's D-missiles stripped all but 2 hullpoints off of one enemy Stormsurge (which the two Stealth teams from the OSC then finished off). The second Stormsurge got taken down by my Firebase Support Cadre (those rerolls really came in handy, as well as the Hunter Contingent's Coordinated Firepower ability). After that, my opponent just didn't have the firepower to stop me, although he still managed to kill some of my stuff and kept from being tabled. I won that game 9-2, the 2 only happening because he got lucky and managed to last-minute take two of the Crusader objectives, forcing a tie on that mission. I ended up 2nd overall, with my first opponent going 3-0 to win the whole thing. Still, this is probably my best tournament outing yet, so I'm pumped!

My takeaway:
The Firebase Support Cadre can be very clutch, especially in a Hunter Contingent (if you combine fire with all 3 units, they get +1BS in addition to Monster Hunter and Tank Hunter). I'll definitely be running it again in the future.
The Optimized Stealth Cadre is pretty mean, especially to Guard players who rely on that front armor 14 on their Leman Russ tanks. It's probably better to have more than one Ghostkeel in the formation, though.
In a battle of Tau vs. Tau with both lists being pretty well built, the outcome can hinge on who goes first. My opponent's choice to take Coteaz was a good one, even if it didn't end up working out for him in our game. If I had not gone first, I would have been absolutely slaughtered.
The Hunter Contingent is a pretty solid way to build a competitive Tau list, although taking a CAD is viable as well. That coordinated firepower can really come in handy, even without markerlights.
Drone Net is almost a must take for Tau. It's just too good to leave out. You really don't even need a Mark'O to make it work, although I still recommend one as having some BS5 lights is great.

 Jancoran wrote:
Maybe. Until then, it's a draft. And there are things in the draft that werent as well received. if GW is intelligent, they will actually act on the input they got.

It is true, though, that most of it will probably be the same. So it's not a terrible idea to start adjusting to it and then only a few things will change whenever they make it official vs waiting for the whole thing and then a ton of things will be different.

But I agree - there is no reason to release a "first draft" unless you actually want feedback. Otherwise, they would have just released them as an official FAQ

So far, in my experience, the Hunter Contingent has proven adequet, but relatively unexciting. The amount of units you need to combine fire to gain the +1 BS, and the shared Marker usage is ok, but really, if you need to combine that much fire at a given target, your list is too all-over-the-place. If you have three units that are the optimal choices to be firing at target "x", you probably have a rough match-up as-is, and could find more efficiency at the list-building level.

Plus, a CAD lets you take Y'vahra which is just so unbelievable for the points, right now.

Likewise, I feel like a lot of players assume Drone-net is a mandatory inclusion, but I think player judgement needs to step in and ask if their list really needs Marker-drones in that volume. I know, yes, technically everything benefits from Marker-lights, but some lists need them in bulk, whereas others only get marginal benefit from them.

Well they don't all need to be marker drones if you don't need that many markerlights. You could take a unit of gun drones instead to have a unit to contribute some more S5 shooting on a mobile platform.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Well they don't all need to be marker drones if you don't need that many markerlights. You could take a unit of gun drones instead to have a unit to contribute some more S5 shooting on a mobile platform.

If we're talking about playing with friends, or at a casual event, absolutely... but at something competitive, I would never, so long as I live, spend points on Gun-Drones. :-p

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Well they don't all need to be marker drones if you don't need that many markerlights. You could take a unit of gun drones instead to have a unit to contribute some more S5 shooting on a mobile platform.

If we're talking about playing with friends, or at a casual event, absolutely... but at something competitive, I would never, so long as I live, spend points on Gun-Drones. :-p

Better that than Shield Drones, lol.

But seriously, I actually ran a Drone Net a month ago and took one squad of gun drones in it (I wanted to be completely WYSIWYG). They're not terrible, but not great either. 4 gun drones = 8 BS3 S5 twinlinked shots with Pinning. If you Outflank them with the Drone Net's ability, you could strip some hullpoints off the rear of a vehicle, and at least force your opponent to turn some of his guns on your pesky little frisbees.