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.

All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

 CKO wrote:
All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

I just got done shoveling my walk, and right as I got done, a dog came up to me and wagged its tail. I'm pretty sure that proves your point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players focus on, ignoring everything else...

 CKO wrote:
All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

Ah, the old L2P argument. Thanks for the great advice, CKO!!!

I don't play orks, and don't get to see my friend play often. Also, he really only uses his stormboyz to DS with the formation, so never actually saw the bonus move thing. Also, it is perfectly sensible that people know the brb better than a codex. Any player that plays multiple armies likely does.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 CKO wrote:
All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

Ah, the old L2P argument. Thanks for the great advice, CKO!!!

What is the L2P argument?

 CKO wrote:
All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

This is due to shooting often being the decisive phase for many if not most armies. Assault is in sorry shape this edition due to GW making it much harder compared to earlier editions to get off a successful charge. Overwatch, random charge distance, the ability to assault out of reserve/a non moving vehicle being disallowed in the vast majority of cases makes assault difficult unless your very fast or incredibly durable.

Movement is still important always have been, gotta get my marines where they need to.

The psychic phase is either all or nothing for many armies. As a marine player I usual have one or two psykers, enough to give some support but rarely enough to win the game. For the most part I'm going to win or lose based on my shooting.

 CKO wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 CKO wrote:
All of these simple questions is just an example of players not reading their codexes. If you dont even know your own codex surely you dont know the large rule book! If that is the case than you can not evaluate a unit and figure out its weakness.

Which proves my point that the shooting phase is the one phase of the game that all players know the rest are deprived of attention.

Ah, the old L2P argument. Thanks for the great advice, CKO!!!

What is the L2P argument?

The "learn to play" argument.

"Dude the only reason your army of footslogging vanilla termagaunts didn't beat my Wraithknights is because you are a worse general than me"
"your army is stronger than mine"
"no dude you just need to stop focussing on the shooting phase"
"we are playing kill points and I have literally no way of killing you, and I'm only allowed to use vanilla termagaunts"
"Not my fault you don't know tactics"

Some matchups aren't fair. Some armies/codices are stronger than others.
This means Tau will beat orks more than orks will beat Tau with equal skill players.
The Tau player tooting their own horn and saying they win more purely because the ork player sucks at tactics and "needs to learn to play" is a dick-move.

Your entire orignal post was saying, "wow, everyone else is a worse player than me. They should learn to not be worse than me right?"

People dislike Tau because Tau are Top-tier at the moment. This makes games against Tau unnaturally difficult because even a casual Tau list will destroy competitive lists from lower tier codexes (see CSM)
Earlier you pointed out he tactics for a footslogging ork army (that you picked, knowing the list it's fighting in advance) and rolling the dice, that ork army stil get's massacred, despite your enlightned tactics.

Don't be TFG. Acknowledge that your codex is top tier. Eldar / necron and SM players acknowledge it. You should too.

And seriously. Don't blame your opponent. It's really condescending to blame your opponent for losing when you have advantages stacked in your favor.

I play one of the few armies in the game that can claim to participate in all phases of the game and have them be absolutely pivotal, Harlequins. I know the assault and movement phase inside out, but just knowing these phases won't protect me.

I have to work dam hard to get my troupes into assault range with a Tau gunline along with a unit to eat up overwatch (I gave the soliaitre), but it's so easy for a Veil of Tears to fail to cast then the Tau player blows them to bitz. So easy to ignore my cover, so easy to overwatch a unit to death. People hate full shooting armies, especially armies like Tau and Eldar, because of how safe and how little counter play is available compared to assault armies. Playing Harlequins or Orks competitively will always take more skill then Tau or Eldar.

OK, my ork friend just checked his codex, and it doesn't say stormboyz can run 2d6. Can someone give me a page number so I can have him confirm?

harkequin wrote:
The "learn to play" argument.

You should never stop learning even experts in certain fields continue to learn, I see nothing wrong with the L2P arguement if that is its meaning.

harkequin wrote:
"Dude the only reason your army of footslogging vanilla termagaunts didn't beat my Wraithknights is because you are a worse general than me"
"your army is stronger than mine"
"no dude you just need to stop focussing on the shooting phase"
"we are playing kill points and I have literally no way of killing you, and I'm only allowed to use vanilla termagaunts"
"Not my fault you don't know tactics"

If constructive criticism is a problem for you that means your inner critic is not judgemental enough. I dont have the same issues that you have these things dont bother me, it doesnt mean I am a better player, perhaps tougher skin, idk.

harkequin wrote:
Some matchups aren't fair. Some armies/codices are stronger than others.

Just because you have a bad matchup doesnt make it unfair, it happens with every competitive sport or card game.

harkequin wrote:
This means Tau will beat orks more than orks will beat Tau with equal skill players.
The Tau player tooting their own horn and saying they win more purely because the ork player sucks at tactics and "needs to learn to play" is a dick-move.

Who is doing this? Who is this player you speak? If the ork player wins its because of good tactics, so if they lose its because they were not able to use superior tactics. Now let me re-word this so I dont hurt players feelings. If the ork player wins its because he is a better player but if he lose its because he is facing tau!

harkequin wrote:
Your entire orignal post was saying, "wow, everyone else is a worse player than me. They should learn to not be worse than me right?"

That is a misinterpretation, the way you comprehend my OP is completely wrong. My first post was saying there are other phases of the game learn them and your chances of beating armies like Tau easier!

harkequin wrote:
People dislike Tau because Tau are Top-tier at the moment. This makes games against Tau unnaturally difficult because even a casual Tau list will destroy competitive lists from lower tier codexes (see CSM)

BAM, there it is people dislike Tau because it is top tier!

harkequin wrote:
Earlier you pointed out he tactics for a footslogging ork army (that you picked, knowing the list it's fighting in advance) and rolling the dice, that ork army stil get's massacred, despite your enlightned tactics.

Do you really think that by saying my enlightned tactics will be massacred has an effect on me! Do you really think someone that misinterpretated my simple post and feels that Tau players are laughing at him when he loses opinion bothers me! I am not surprised that you were unable to understand a post on useful tactics!

harkequin wrote:
Don't be TFG. Acknowledge that your codex is top tier. Eldar / necron and SM players acknowledge it. You should too.

I am not trying to deny which armies are top tier I am saying that they all can be beat with superior tactics, I made sure not to include any tactics in this post just for you!

Page 98, the entry for Rokkit Packs

 Swampmist wrote:
OK, my ork friend just checked his codex, and it doesn't say stormboyz can run 2d6. Can someone give me a page number so I can have him confirm?

Look at wargear, not unit entries. Theres a ton of rules for almost every codex thats not listed with the unit even if its exclusive to that unit.

Ah, that explains it. Thank you!

harkequin wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
So, noone willing to play things out?

Scroll up, a guy earlier was interested.

Who? Can't find him.

 koooaei wrote:

harkequin wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
So, noone willing to play things out?

Scroll up, a guy earlier was interested.

Who? Can't find him.

you can't find anyone because you pmed me. I went looking for vassal40k. I saw a reddit page for it but I was unable to find the installer. Help?

koooaei wrote:Hey, wana play a test vassal match with tau (me) against footslogging orks (you). Will see how fun the game goes.

 carldooley wrote:
And koooaei? I do appreciate the offer. I haven't looked at Vassal recently. If I do manage to install it properly, I'd be happy to play a game. You build a 1850 tac ork list, and I'll build a 1850 tac tau list, and we can trade and play.

Oh, cool! Sure, will help you out. Will pm.

Sent links

 CKO wrote:
Martel do you lose a lot? It seems that you are frustrated, it is just a game.

Haha, thats quite rich coming from someone who created two whine threads after an ITC nerf...

More on topic. No, people that complain about some Tau issues does not need to L2P. There are valid arguments as to why some Tau stuff should be nerfed (just as things from other codices ). Starting your first post with whine and L2P attitude will not lead to a constructive discussion.

tedurur wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Martel do you lose a lot? It seems that you are frustrated, it is just a game.

Haha, thats quite rich coming from someone who created two whine threads after an ITC nerf...

More on topic. No, people that complain about some Tau issues does not need to L2P. There are valid arguments as to why some Tau stuff should be nerfed (just as things from other codices ). Starting your first post with whine and L2P attitude will not lead to a constructive discussion.

I am not a bystander if someone is getting mistreated I do something about it, you may sit back and watch but I dont.

Each of those threads have over 200+ replies and over 3000 views so I am not the only one who wanted to discuss the matter.

I also wrote thise thread but they shut it down maybe they like the bad more than the good I dont know you be the judge!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/678916.page

 CKO wrote:

harkequin wrote:
The "learn to play" argument.

You should never stop learning even experts in certain fields continue to learn, I see nothing wrong with the L2P arguement if that is its meaning.

harkequin wrote:
"Dude the only reason your army of footslogging vanilla termagaunts didn't beat my Wraithknights is because you are a worse general than me"
"your army is stronger than mine"
"no dude you just need to stop focussing on the shooting phase"
"we are playing kill points and I have literally no way of killing you, and I'm only allowed to use vanilla termagaunts"
"Not my fault you don't know tactics"

If constructive criticism is a problem for you that means your inner critic is not judgemental enough. I dont have the same issues that you have these things dont bother me, it doesnt mean I am a better player, perhaps tougher skin, idk.

harkequin wrote:
Some matchups aren't fair. Some armies/codices are stronger than others.

Just because you have a bad matchup doesnt make it unfair, it happens with every competitive sport or card game.

harkequin wrote:
This means Tau will beat orks more than orks will beat Tau with equal skill players.
The Tau player tooting their own horn and saying they win more purely because the ork player sucks at tactics and "needs to learn to play" is a dick-move.

Who is doing this? Who is this player you speak? If the ork player wins its because of good tactics, so if they lose its because they were not able to use superior tactics. Now let me re-word this so I dont hurt players feelings. If the ork player wins its because he is a better player but if he lose its because he is facing tau!

harkequin wrote:
Your entire orignal post was saying, "wow, everyone else is a worse player than me. They should learn to not be worse than me right?"

That is a misinterpretation, the way you comprehend my OP is completely wrong. My first post was saying there are other phases of the game learn them and your chances of beating armies like Tau easier!

harkequin wrote:
People dislike Tau because Tau are Top-tier at the moment. This makes games against Tau unnaturally difficult because even a casual Tau list will destroy competitive lists from lower tier codexes (see CSM)

BAM, there it is people dislike Tau because it is top tier!

harkequin wrote:
Earlier you pointed out he tactics for a footslogging ork army (that you picked, knowing the list it's fighting in advance) and rolling the dice, that ork army stil get's massacred, despite your enlightned tactics.

Do you really think that by saying my enlightned tactics will be massacred has an effect on me! Do you really think someone that misinterpretated my simple post and feels that Tau players are laughing at him when he loses opinion bothers me! I am not surprised that you were unable to understand a post on useful tactics!

harkequin wrote:
Don't be TFG. Acknowledge that your codex is top tier. Eldar / necron and SM players acknowledge it. You should too.

I am not trying to deny which armies are top tier I am saying that they all can be beat with superior tactics, I made sure not to include any tactics in this post just for you!

The L2P argument is flawed on its face. A player cannot learn to succeed on more armor saves while their troops close through shooting with more strength and better range than they can muster, at a better ballistic skill, and for less points.

Learn to play is only a valid argument if all armies are on an equal footing. Despite your vociferous assertions to the contrary, not all armies are equal. To say that a person is bad at the game because their CSMs are getting smashed by Riptide wing and Drone Factories is the same as saying that you're good at the game because you could buy all the coolest toys. It's not true, and no one is impressed.

The L2P argument is flawed on its face. A player cannot learn to succeed on more armor saves while their troops close through shooting with more strength and better range than they can muster, at a better ballistic skill, and for less points.

Learn to play is only a valid argument if all armies are on an equal footing. Despite your vociferous assertions to the contrary, not all armies are equal. To say that a person is bad at the game because their CSMs are getting smashed by Riptide wing and Drone Factories is the same as saying that you're good at the game because you could buy all the coolest toys. It's not true, and no one is impressed.

This.

CKO you managed to miss the point of my entire post despite quoting it all!

I see nothing wrong with the L2P arguement if that is its meaning.

You see nothing wrong with putting your opponent down and saying they are terrible at the game? That is the L2P argument. You can't beat me, because you need to learn how to play. It's really rude and makes you TFG.

If constructive criticism is a problem for you that means your inner critic is not judgemental enough. I dont have the same issues that you have these things dont bother me, it doesnt mean I am a better player, perhaps tougher skin, idk.

What constructive criticism? What possible critisism could you give the "Codex:Vanilla Termagaunts player" in the above.
It's a metaphor, one player is playing an objectively better codex, and objectively will win literally every game regardless of tactics.

Just because you have a bad matchup doesnt make it unfair, it happens with every competitive sport or card game.

You are right, but that's not how 40k works. 40k isn't supposed to have rock-paper-scissors codexs.If you play orks vs 7.5 codexes it's a bad matchup. If you play guard vs 7.5, etc..
It does make it unfair, all codexes are supposed to be equal. but see poor Codex : Vanilla Termagaunts above.

Who is doing this? Who is this player you speak? If the ork player wins its because of good tactics, so if they lose its because they were not able to use superior tactics. Now let me re-word this so I dont hurt players feelings. If the ork player wins its because he is a better player but if he lose its because he is facing tau!

Like it or not, if someone plays CSM vs Tau there are only 2 ways they will win.
1.An ungodly skill difference (either really bad Tau player, or Next level CSM player)
2. Some serious dice swing.
This is true and you have to accept it. The point is It's not a fair fight, and you keep saying it is a fair fight, but the opponent is worse than you

That is a misinterpretation, the way you comprehend my OP is completely wrong. My first post was saying there are other phases of the game learn them and your chances of beating armies like Tau easier!

Re-reading the OP, I'm spot on. Actual excerpt from the OP "Perfect example of this is Tau. Players who do not know the rules get blown off the table by Tau"

Oh it's my fault my opponent has access twice as much power as me for half the cost, how could I not realise!

BAM, there it is people dislike Tau because it is top tier!

Congratulations? You won? People dislike Tau because it's unfairly strong, oh no!
People also dislike 1.Eldar 2. Necrons. 3. SM 4. Grav 5.Skyhammer 6. decurion 7. WKs 8. D-weapons 9. IKs

Do you really think that by saying my enlightned tactics will be massacred has an effect on me! Do you really think someone that misinterpretated my simple post and feels that Tau players are laughing at him when he loses opinion bothers me! I am not surprised that you were unable to understand a post on useful tactics!

No. I was pointing out how hypocritcical you were being.
Paraphrasing
"you all need to learn tactics"
"Tactics won't help my boys not get blown off the table"
""yeah they will"
"prove it "
[lists the exact same tactics everyone knows] "see you kill his entire army"
{does math-hammer} "nope, all the orks die, as usual"

You claim to be so much better , and that the secret to beating tau is not being worse, You claim that footslogging orks will beat Tau if I only bring 400 pts of lootas for every 65 pts of his army.
You gave the orks wargear for 1/3 the price in your "tactics"
You failed to account for the tau player not being an idiot (12" scout move, stays still and dies)
And you Failed the math repeatedly. Apparently Assault D3 fires 3 shots on average, not 2. Apparently 2 Bs2 rockits will kill a vehicle. Apparently orks that hare hugging terrain won't be slowed down and stopped from assaulting.

I'm saying get off your high horse.

I am not trying to deny which armies are top tier

Despite making 2 seperate whine threads for Tau nerfs, saying repeatedly that they have been made useless in the tourney scene despite them placing in the top half very well.

Call it what you want, you are trying to blame the loser for losing. Not cool.

You have "Codex : Wraithknights" at the moment, don't get upset and tell him he's a bad player if "Codex : Vanilla Termagaunts" is a little salty.

The point is not that people dislike Tau 'cos they are a codex that has its units working together. It's becauae Tau, Eldar, Necrons and Space Marines are given codices that give this opportunity and Orks, Deldar, Csm and Tyranids are not. It is not a matter of skill, but a matter of some codices just being better.

 CKO wrote:

harkequin wrote:
Don't be TFG. Acknowledge that your codex is top tier. Eldar / necron and SM players acknowledge it. You should too.

I am not trying to deny which armies are top tier I am saying that they all can be beat with superior tactics

That may be the case at your FLGS. If someone is playing Tau at your FLGS, they might be able to be bested by the ork player in the corner who has a deep understanding of the game.

That does not apply to everyone, and certainly does not apply to national events like NOVA, LVO, and Adepticon. There is a reason you see Tier 1 armies placing in the top brackets at those events -- it's because they are the most effective. If just 'using better tactics' was the solution, you would see a variety of armies instead.

Years ago, I used to say similar things that you do. "Anyone can win with anything with the right tactics" I was always the best player at my FLGS.
Then I started attending competitive events with extremely skilled players and realized how much more I had to learn about the game of 40k.
I would like to invite you to come try those events as well. I expect it would greatly change your perspective on this game.

That CKO guy already stated he just came back to the game and has not even build a list yet (Tau was on his mind). He claims he was a very good player, but haven't had the chance to play in tourney yet so in the mean time he will just continue to argue whatever his opinions (rather annoying) on the forums.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
That CKO guy already stated he just came back to the game and has not even build a list yet (Tau was on his mind). He claims he was a very good player, but haven't had the chance to play in tourney yet so in the mean time he will just continue to argue whatever his opinions (rather annoying) on the forums.

If CKO hasn't actually started collecting yet, isn't it possible that he is doing so in the smart way? Of course Tau is a top tier codex. But at the same time, isn't it smart to have a reasonable expectation to know how to use your army competitively? With the ITC trend of changing the rules with their polls, why should he get the 'competitive' options available to him if they are going to be 'nerfed' into uselessness?

Can CKO get objective ideas from other tau players as to what is useful without the (I was going to say unwashed, but that is just a gamer meme) hordes of other players doing (essentially) what you are doing now?

 carldooley wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
That CKO guy already stated he just came back to the game and has not even build a list yet (Tau was on his mind). He claims he was a very good player, but haven't had the chance to play in tourney yet so in the mean time he will just continue to argue whatever his opinions (rather annoying) on the forums.

If CKO hasn't actually started collecting yet, isn't it possible that he is doing so in the smart way? Of course Tau is a top tier codex. But at the same time, isn't it smart to have a reasonable expectation to know how to use your army competitively? With the ITC trend of changing the rules with their polls, why should he get the 'competitive' options available to him if they are going to be 'nerfed' into uselessness?

Can CKO get objective ideas from other tau players as to what is useful without the (I was going to say unwashed, but that is just a gamer meme) hordes of other players doing (essentially) what you are doing now?

If he made an appropriate thread hee would get plenty of advice with little to no hostility.
Title it , "With current ITC trends, What units will most likely stay competitive for Tau?"

Don't make one thread whining about Tau nerfs used to balance the tournament scene.
Don't make another saying the only reason people dont like Tau is because people are bad players.

He's been called out in this thread because the first post was really a passive aggressive way of ignoring the power discrepancy of Tau.
He straight up said that people lose to Tau because they are bad at the game, when as evidenced by the tournament scene, Tau are doing pretty solid POST nerfs. This means either Tau generals are just better than other armies generals because they can win despite the nerfs, or Tau was too powerful, and the nerf has largely balanced them.
It's not the former.
So when he said that it's other people's fault they don't know the rules, its rude as feth.

Simply he asked "do people hate tau because they focus too much on the shooting phase"
And refused to accept the answer "People hate Tau because they are over powered"

I've been on the receiving end of this. People were livid when Newcrons dropped, we sat atop the tier list and it was good, people were upset my army could shrug off every other wound with no counterplay. They were right to be upset, Newcrons were completely OP for a lot of codexes before eldar dropped.
Tau are now completely OP for a lot of codexes , we'll see when the next codex drops.

Have you ever seen the movie or read the book "Battle Royale?"

People are handed out backpacks with weapons at random.

Several people get small firearms or decent melee weapons.
One guy gets a cloth headband.

I'll let you figure out how that parallels here.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Have you ever seen the movie or read the book "Battle Royale?"

People are handed out backpacks with weapons at random.

Several people get small firearms or decent melee weapons.
One guy gets a cloth headband.

I'll let you figure out how that parallels here.

not terribly well?
It isn't like we are going to be randomly handed an army to play a game. This hobby costs too much for anyone to willingly hand off their collections for such a game.

Hoboy.

 carldooley wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Have you ever seen the movie or read the book "Battle Royale?"

People are handed out backpacks with weapons at random.

Several people get small firearms or decent melee weapons.
One guy gets a cloth headband.

I'll let you figure out how that parallels here.

not terribly well?
It isn't like we are going to be randomly handed an army to play a game. This hobby costs too much for anyone to willingly hand off their collections for such a game.

The way codex's are written it may as well be the difference between whether the army you have been collecting for years will end up being a fire arm or a piece of cloth.

8 pages later...I still don't know what the point of this thread is. Can someone explain it to me?