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.

Just my personal opinion, and yes I'm a Tau player, but anyone who reads my posts knows I'm not against everything the ITC does, I'd like to un-nerf invisibility, and D shooting. The 2++ re-rollable annoys the crap out of me, but I'd be ok with it coming back in as well if ranged D was given back, since it can hard counter the 2++ re-rollable.

My only reason for not un-nerfing D shooting would be that currently not every faction has access to it, but it seems more and more are getting it with the new releases (I think the D shotgun is the inferior choice on the Stormsurge even un-nerfed though).

Overall they just need to evaluate the changes they've already made and see if they are still relivent or need to change as 7th edition has evolved with new codexes/campaign books.

Hey what do you know. Someone made a study of the LVO and did a more in depth look at it. What do you know quite a bit of what I said here has been confirmed the Tau are not doing flawlessly. They aren't a top tier army. It also confirms what some other posters have said here. They are an upper mid tier that can stomp lesser armies but isn't truly viable to try and win their tournament.

I think the only acceptable thing for the ITC to do is unnerf the Tau, but that won't happen and we all know it. If I could nerf every single army to be equal I would but I can't. So i would rather have the Tau be unnerfed to have them brought higher up into the top tier to add diversity and competition to the event.

http://variancehammer.com/2016/02/19/number-crunching-the-lvo/

I suspect the GW rules writes full well KNEW their Hunter Contingent buff would be viable to get Tau back into the upper tier. One of the few good rules writers, but due to the politics and fear surrounding the Tau someone within the ITC made up a false case on unfounded information to nerf the Tau that would work into the general public and the greater ITC's player base fears of the Tau to nerf them. It seems to have the desired effect. Now I could say this is all coincidence except this goes back two years now and the data supports that this is a concentrated effort or a widely held fear against the Tau army. Every year that goes by I have more and more data and information disproving widely held beliefs. It's my personal opinion that the ITC still needs to revisit not only the Tau but several other mid tier armies to see what can be done to bring them up to the tier of the top armies.

I find it rather ironic when the Tau were given the necessary tools to lift them up to the top table they were taken away from them. The one time the GW actually managed to balance a codex properly and we have its very own player base who thinks it knows better attempting to fix something that never needed fixing with the coordinated firepower nerf.

I'm sure when next years lvo comes and goes the same data will be on display as the powerful get more powerful and the mid tier gets squeezed with more pressure and we see some armies drop into lower tiers than middle. The ITC and the LVO has now had two recurring studies done on it and the meta has taken a turn for the worse.

I have to still advise the ITC to have a widespread reforms to root out this source of either corruption, bias, or even conspiracy that is hindering your tournament from potential growth and balance.

I sent something quite similar to this to Reccius and co last year and got a standard form reply back. It's evident no one their cares about any of this. So I will still sit here hoping to get the message out that there are major problems with the ITC. Thanks to all those who continue to do in depth analysis of their tournament results and for those who do agree with me. Maybe we'll make a difference next year.

 Gamgee wrote:
Hey what do you know. Someone made a study of the LVO and did a more in depth look at it. What do you know quite a bit of what I said here has been confirmed the Tau are not doing flawlessly. They aren't a top tier army. It also confirms what some other posters have said here. They are an upper mid tier that can stomp lesser armies but isn't truly viable to try and win their tournament.

I think the only acceptable thing for the ITC to do is unnerf the Tau, but that won't happen and we all know it. If I could nerf every single army to be equal I would but I can't. So i would rather have the Tau be unnerfed to have them brought higher up into the top tier to add diversity and competition to the event.

http://variancehammer.com/2016/02/19/number-crunching-the-lvo/

I suspect the GW rules writes full well KNEW their Hunter Contingent buff would be viable to get Tau back into the upper tier. One of the few good rules writers, but due to the politics and fear surrounding the Tau someone within the ITC made up a false case on unfounded information to nerf the Tau that would work into the general public and the greater ITC's player base fears of the Tau to nerf them. It seems to have the desired effect. Now I could say this is all coincidence except this goes back two years now and the data supports that this is a concentrated effort or a widely held fear against the Tau army. Every year that goes by I have more and more data and information disproving widely held beliefs. It's my personal opinion that the ITC still needs to revisit not only the Tau but several other mid tier armies to see what can be done to bring them up to the tier of the top armies.

I find it rather ironic when the Tau were given the necessary tools to lift them up to the top table they were taken away from them. The one time the GW actually managed to balance a codex properly and we have its very own player base who thinks it knows better attempting to fix something that never needed fixing with the coordinated firepower nerd.

I'm sure when next years nova comes and goes the same data will be on display as the powerful get more powerful and the mid tier gets squeezed with more pressure and we see some armies drop into lower tiers than middle. The ITC and the NOVA has now had two recurring studies done on it and the meta has taken a turn for the worse.

I have to still advise the ITC to have a widespread reforms to root out this source of either corruption, bias, or even conspiracy that is hindering your tournament from potential growth and balance.

I sent something quite similar to this to Reccius and co last year and got a standard form reply back. It's evident no one their cares about any of this. So I will still sit here hoping to get the message out that there are major problems with the ITC. Thanks to all those who continue to do in depth analysis of their tournament results and for those who do agree with me. Maybe we'll make a difference next year.

Dude, while I appreciate your passion, you're trying too hard. We, the Tau players, are not suffering under the lash of the ITC because of the loss of the full fledged HC. Even the nerf to the Ghostkeel that I don't agree with doesn't kill us. OSC, Riptide Wing, and the DBC with a retaliation cadre core are all VERY powerful. I firmly believe one of the reasons Tau didn't make top 8 is that the power players know that while Tau IS a powerful army, Eldar, Necrons, and some superfriend combo's are MORE powerful. Keep in mind the HC was DESIGNED to kill death stars, which the ITC format does not support winning anyway. ITC is an MSU game, and Tau can MSU VERY WELL with the current ITC meta, just some people do it better. Changing the HC and the Ghostkeel back aren't going to change that.

I fully believe in un-nerfing EVERYTHING from invisibility, to ranged D, to even allowing the 2++ rerollable (two of those Tau don't have access to), but ITC gives us, as a community, a common ground on which to build our games, nothing more.

I'm trying to hard? That is very unhelpful. I would prefer it if you kept this in mind when playing at the ITC. The more people that start complaining and showing them this data the more likely Reccius and co have to do something about it. Without a voice things can't be fixed. Torrent of Fire has information for other ITC tournaments stretching back a year showing similar data pasterns. Tau has not been in the top for a long time now. Hence why I found the nerfs unjustified. Also I'm a very competitive player but as annoying as I am it's only because I want my opponent to have a fair chance at winning and giving me a fair chance. Right now it's not fair. 40k is inherently unfair and the ITC is only making its own mistakes. It's funny but I was going to be recruited in some video game teams to go pro a long time ago, but corruption brought down one of the games. While casualization took down the other. I'm inherently distrustful of competitive events for good reason now. The majority of people out there seem to cheat their way to success.

These results aren't just for Tau players but they can be used to call out armies that need toning down and nerfs if your not approving of buffs.

http://www.pcgamer.com/csgo-competitive-scene-embroiled-in-hacking-scandal-as-three-players-are-banned/

ok, so what we've learned: Eldar are the top codex (We knew that already, and I don't think anyone would mind a re-vote on the 1-in-3 scatterlaser per jetbike rule) and SM are second best (Which will probably change with less points, and is why I would like to try to lower the detachment limit to limit superfriends.) Tau still did well, but that doesn't mean other stuff shouldn't be nerfed. I'd rather see all the codexes that can\are top be nerfed to the mid level and the terrible codexes buffed than everything be high level.

Which is less likely to happen than raising one up to their level. It's too much work for the ITC to write full house rules for every codex. I mean if they want to do it go for it I'll support them. However I know humans all too well and they would seek to do the easiest thing if forced to take action.

Once every codex theoretically makes it to the top tier of balance then it could set that as the standard and try to keep further power creep from setting in.

but... that IS power creep. as of right now the top codexes break the game on so many levels it's not even funny. Ignoring Tau, as I agree their more top-mid tier than true top tier in the ITC, we have:
Eldar: Infinite-D, the single best troops choice in the game (Scat Bikes,) Move-shoot-move, Great allies, almost no bad unit, Spiders, Good Psychic use, good deathstar (Seer Council.)
Necrons: Basically Unkillable, have some pretty good shooting, good melee units and a good deathstar (Wraiths and Lychgaurd,) LD 10 everything meaning morale is pointless
Demons: The best psychic phase pretty much hands down, great death stars, summoning BS, Invis Spam, Great MCs, Renegade allies
Marines: MSU spam of legends with the most obsec out of anyone and ALSO free transports(Gladius,) The best deathstars (super friends,) Grav Cents, good psychic powers, White Scars bikey BS

As far as I know, that is everything wrong with the top 4 in the current iteration of the ITC. the Gladius stops being broken if you dissallow duplicate formations, meaning no free transports, and two detachments means no super friends and no 9 warp spiders. Not sure on the rest, but those are some pretty easy comp changes that help to bring down Marines, and to a lesser degree Eldar. More to the point, we should really try to list what these four armies do best and see what needs to be changed.

Considering I can't even convince one forum Tau aren't OP your going to convince them to nerf the Space marines, Eldar, Necrons, and Chaos Deamons?

Good luck. I've found a few like minded people and we continue to spread the word but it's taking a long time.

I'm not disagreeing with you and if we could convince them to nerf all of those down to the level of everything else I would, but pick and choose your battles. Once they start taking the small suggestions seriously maybe we could get them to do more and open up an internal discussion to see if we want them to move from FAQ's to complete house rules, but one thing at a time.

Dude, Im a marine player and i realize this. I'm also writing an entire homebrew set up, starting with orks, because I want to be able to play fluffy games while still being semi competative. At this point, any little bit helps. and plenty of people are happy to nerf the top tier codexes, just many believe tau to be one of those codexes. Personally, I think they may need a slight toning down from now if everything is toned down, if only because i'd rather everything about the same power level with some small variance then have high, mid and low mid tier, but that would need play testing to see for sure. seriously, the game wouldn't be hard to fix if we actually put our minds to it.

Are you Reccius or the ITC though and do you have that kind of influence with them or the ITC to make your voice heard and an actual chance of any of that happening?

Otherwise I doubt there's much more that you can do. So I'll continue to do my thing trying to get them unnerfed and a look at the ITC. Easier said than done. Your plan is far less likely to succeed than mine which could lead to further changes down the line.

I just think you'd have more luck getting people to agree with you about nerfing the top than to unerf the tau, tbh. Lots of BA, Nids, CSM, I|G and Ork players are going to, as we have seen, be kinda satly about a good codex wanting to be better, buit would love to see the best codexes taken down a notch.

Except we have to deal with the entrenched winning codices player bases who all have far more sway at the ITC.

However if you really ever think you can do it then I'll support an even nerf of the top codices. People need to realize just because they don't like one army it's not a valid reason to suddenly treat them unfairly.

If the ITC can work at its basic issues with treating Tau and their players like they do then I feel they can have a mature discussion about larger sweeping changes, but if they can't even deal with something this minor as one faction being slightly nerfed and some quick small changes all that's needed to fix it I just don't see them all cooperating enough to start nerfing everything down to the lower level of the other codices.

Baby steps. We have to try and fix the underlying way people approach competitive gaming and each other to try and treat each other with more respect. I don't think diving into the deep end and everyone fighting it out to see how we would nerf the good codices down is a good way to test them to see if they can handle it.

Baby steps.

Or, how about we start by bringing Tau down to CSM / IG levels and then defer the SM / Eldar question until later...

From what I understand, the goal of the ITC is to spread around the fun of playing to as many people as possible. While it doesn't exactly justify nerfing Ghostkeels (and that's hardly nerfing, let's get real), the intent seems pure. If Tau players feel they are now forced into running TripTides to stay competitive, then so be it. At least they'll have one army configuration to play that doesn't get roflstomped by everything out there. IG, CSM, Ork and BA players would rejoice if they even had one single army configuration that could compete at the top levels. If these kinds of decisions leave Tau players with salt in their mouths, then so be it, it is only one faction after all.

That being said, since there is likely to be a reduction in points, potentially all the way to 1500, any kind of arguments about this unit or that unit are really just academic at this point. A smaller points limit will shake up the meta way more than any one other thing could, so until we wait to see how things settle, there's not much point to tripping up over minor things.

In fact, thinking about it more, the points reduction should have been the only thing on the poll. It's impact will be felt thought the entirety of the game, so I think it deserves more gravitas than it has been getting. The rest of the proposed changes could easily have waited until after that decision was made.

I would be okay with that... assuming I felt the parties were trustworthy. Nothing I've seen so far as indicated such given the many accusations leveled at me across this forum. More of implications I suppose. This is a trust game here. I have to trust all the other codex representatives and they only have to trust me. It's definitely not in my favor. At some point there needs to be cooperation or nothing is going to get done. If I'm willing to see the Tau nerfed then someone else should step forward and want to see their top tier faction nerfed as well.

So.... When are we gonna get to vote on the Wraithknigt, 450pts minimum, and scatter bikes, 1-3 heavy weapons, that would make eldar a little bearable to me.

I don't know Formosa but all I know is the entrenched codex players would throw a fit at nerfs. Which is why I think it would be easier to convince them to buff factions up. Though if we can convince them to get nerfed that will do a well.

Just let me bring the Transcendent C'tan from Escalation and I'll no longer have a problem with Eldar's power level

Gamgee, take a break. At this point you are worse than a troll. You are attacking people and quoting blogs that are using a data set with one point. If Tau are weak it will come out naturally and instead of being in the top 3 you'll have to settle for top 5.

You and some of the other Tau players keep stirring gak up and people are starting to dislike Tau for the exact reason I do. Because of the PEOPLE who play the army.

There is literally nothing you can say to change minds, no data to quote to prove your point, no good will to cash in.

All the Tau players just need to suck it up and smile while playing their favorite army; because you know, you picked it because you liked the fluff? Otherwise you'd be playing Eldar.

As I said above...

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 luke1705 wrote:

 thejughead wrote:
Tau hate is real.

Truth be told, I don't get it.

I think it's more a referendum on the Tau players than the Tau Codex...

Hate the player, not the game.

If not for Gamgee's temper tantrum over the last ITC vote, I wouldn't have even voted. But the way he stirs the pot, it's impossible for me not to have voted against every Tau point on basic principle. Really, it's players like Gamgee that are driving the anti-Tau reaction more than anything else.

And, for the record, this is actually voting against my self-interest, as normally, I'd want more Xenos as counterbalance against Imperial Super Friends....

Always attacking me and not the points raised. Just because you personally don't like me. Speak for yourself about having no good will. Me and swamp seemed to have come to an understanding if not an agreement.

Edit
Nova 2015. http://www.torrentoffire.com/7287/nova-2015-recap Tau mid tier. This was before their update.

From earlier in 2015 year. http://www.torrentoffire.com/7163/7th-edition-stats-1-year-in Again Tau are mid tier.

I don't know the meaning of giving up guys.

Edit2
LVO 2015. http://www.torrentoffire.com/6767/graphing-lvo Tau Empire... Mid tier. It's almost like I have a lot of data to support my claims. I could go on. However I've found listing facts alone isn't enough.

 Gamgee wrote:
I don't know the meaning of giving up guys.

never stop poasting

Tau don't win tournaments because good players don't play Tau. The Codex is fine, it's just the types that are attracted to it can't handle more than 2 out of the 4 phases of the game.

This becomes a problem when they face players that can. Eventually the training wheels have to come off.

So 1650 is way better than 1500. I play a lot of 1500 pt tourneys and because they're friendlies it's fine, but at an ITC large tourney with nut crushingly cheesey lists, 1650 just opens up a bunch more options and is more fun.

The main roblem with Tau (IMO) is entirely based on perception. They are a pure shooty army in a shooty meta that requires (at a glance) little perceived skill. Stand and shoot and win. Its not fun to play against and as such does not create a very engaging or fun experience for the one playing against it.


Tau could be a weaker codex and would still be disliked due to its playstyle and what its like to play against it. It just does not lend itself well to creating fun and balanced games. Does this mean it cant? Of course not, but the problem is perception and a person's perception defines their reality. I realize this and I still hate Tau and immedietly judge someone the moment they say they are a Tau main or defend Tau. I know they can have entirely good points as to why they believe Tau are not OP. I know the guy who is playing them can be a super nice guy and not a try hard at all, but even then I cannot overcome my utter hate towards the Tau due to their playstyle.

Tau are like super high dps stealth characters in MMOs or MOBAs. Nobody but the person playing them likes them. They can be totally balanced but will still be hated by the vast majority of players because of their playstyle. I personally always see Tau as being hated and disliked because they ARE a shooty army with strong gameplay mechanics thats not fun to face.

So by this logic you may ask how are they any different from IG? IG are a pure shooty army so why do people not hate guard nearly as much? Beyond Guard being a weaker codex they have the invaluable quality of being fun to kill. Killing hordes of enemy models is just plain satisfying and on top of that just about any IG list is fluffy so its hard to perceive the player as being a WAAC kinda guy.

Now I could be 100% incorrect (Would not be the first time), but thats what I have observed so far.

I gave it my view.

Keep 1850, keep detachment limit, nerf GC cover, countermeasures once per unit. I generally went quite conservative, with some exceptions (I think the CK taking legacies is fine).

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
As I said above...

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 luke1705 wrote:

 thejughead wrote:
Tau hate is real.

Truth be told, I don't get it.

I think it's more a referendum on the Tau players than the Tau Codex...

Hate the player, not the game.

If not for Gamgee's temper tantrum over the last ITC vote, I wouldn't have even voted. But the way he stirs the pot, it's impossible for me not to have voted against every Tau point on basic principle. Really, it's players like Gamgee that are driving the anti-Tau reaction more than anything else.

And, for the record, this is actually voting against my self-interest, as normally, I'd want more Xenos as counterbalance against Imperial Super Friends....

You're doing The Emperor's work.

The irony is that of all the people here I have voted most fairly. I've only ever put in one single vote the way I see it. I vote for things that buff weaker factions and vote to try and keep the power of the big 4 in check. Why would I ever vote multiple times when I believe there are those faking accounts to vote multiple times. I mean I could be a hypocrite but I started this crusade because I found people doing it.

Yet every time I get accused of being the one using under handed tactics. Then we get people blatantly admitting to emotional voting which is ridiculous and only undermines not only my point but the whole system the ITC operates under. I'm sure Reccius and his fellow ITC operators would only be too happy to see posts like these.

It's a very petty thing to do. However no matter how low some individuals might sink I wont stoop to their level and revenge petty vote. I have to set a good example after all. Despite my utter distaste for Imperial factions I will do what I can to buff the weaker ones.

Also still no one actually reads the data I have provided to even try and counter point me. It's silly.

This poll is comical. After the LVO the Frontline guys stated that their FAQ/amendments were only temporary. And that the issues regarding Tau would come to a vote. Fair enough. I took this to be damage control. They were trying to calm the upset Tau players down by giving them a fair vote. After seeing the poll I was wrong to assume they were trying to ease Tau player's concerns. In fact it is the opposite. It appears they were only easing the concerns of players that felt Tau were not nerfed hard enough. The poll doesn't offer opportunity to reverse any of the Tau nerfs. It in fact gives opportunity to further tighten the noose on Tau formations. And here we are, ready to nerf Tau further into the ground while just about every other book has an opportunity to rise up.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
The main roblem with Tau (IMO) is entirely based on perception. They are a pure shooty army in a shooty meta that requires (at a glance) little perceived skill. Stand and shoot and win. Its not fun to play against and as such does not create a very engaging or fun experience for the one playing against it.


Tau could be a weaker codex and would still be disliked due to its playstyle and what its like to play against it. It just does not lend itself well to creating fun and balanced games. Does this mean it cant? Of course not, but the problem is perception and a person's perception defines their reality. I realize this and I still hate Tau and immedietly judge someone the moment they say they are a Tau main or defend Tau. I know they can have entirely good points as to why they believe Tau are not OP. I know the guy who is playing them can be a super nice guy and not a try hard at all, but even then I cannot overcome my utter hate towards the Tau due to their playstyle.

Tau are like super high dps stealth characters in MMOs or MOBAs. Nobody but the person playing them likes them. They can be totally balanced but will still be hated by the vast majority of players because of their playstyle. I personally always see Tau as being hated and disliked because they ARE a shooty army with strong gameplay mechanics thats not fun to face.

So by this logic you may ask how are they any different from IG? IG are a pure shooty army so why do people not hate guard nearly as much? Beyond Guard being a weaker codex they have the invaluable quality of being fun to kill. Killing hordes of enemy models is just plain satisfying and on top of that just about any IG list is fluffy so its hard to perceive the player as being a WAAC kinda guy.

Now I could be 100% incorrect (Would not be the first time), but thats what I have observed so far.

I will first say I 100% agree that mowing down hordes of guardsmen is absolute bliss.

However, what you state (which is your opinion and i respect that), is really the root of the issue, and why general public polls written up as they are don't work to balance anything. Many people feel the way you do, and vote against an army because they don't like it.. but does this help the game at large? absolutely not. I play Tau (main), Eldar, and Nids; I used to play space marines but honestly got extremely bored playing them. It is all perspective. I thought Space marines are as you perceive tau.. one play style.. i spam as many combat squads in rhinos as possible, move hop out, blow something up.. hop back in move to an objective. The new marine codex just reenforced this play style for me (which is super boring.. for me). Tau can be a very strong gunline, but I would like to make a distinction, there are Tau gunline players and there are every other tau player... If you look at the lists for Tau that did well at LVO (despite the previous rulings), none of them are gunline or even close too it. On top of this you have many of the Tau players playing a Farsight Enclaves style list which is extremely mobile and reactive. Yes, many of my friends hate playing my FSE lists because it is going to be a tough game; doesn't mean i always win, but every game was a great battle start to finish (my gaming group does not play ITC though).

Don't judge me too hard