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.

Yeah the second best Tau list was an FSE using the drones. They nerfed him at the last second and he didn't get very far at all.

I bet he wouldn't have even won the tournament if he didn't get nerfed, but you know that Tau fear and bias.

I agree with you as well Grizzyzz. I was originally quite upset when they made polls public and so conveniently timed with the Tau release as well. The one and most hated faction gets a big release and polls go public with fear mongering and hysteria everywhere.

It's been a complete farce for Tau, but I'm sure other armies out there have horror stories like us. Right?

Also I do play FSE and am much more mobile. To the point where when I do take a SS I might use its default gun because it's going to be in close range a lot more with me.

 Gamgee wrote:
The irony is that of all the people here I have voted most fairly.

See, it's saying stupid things like this that makes no one take you seriously.

Yes, you are the only person in the entire internet who votes fairly with no bias whatsoever.

I vote for things that buff weaker factions and vote to try and keep the power of the big 4 in check.

No bias. Only fair person in the world.

GreaterGouda wrote:
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.

The temporary LVO Tau rulings are on the poll. FLG said those would be the ones on the new poll. If you want the previous Tau rulings to have a re-vote then contact FLG.

ITC 40k Rules Question Submission Form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1W8A22qTts0p9CIkhxZIefmicHr7J2RoWlJmPqGQFiZo/viewform

ITC Questions: Frankie@FrontlineGaming.org

Requizen wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The irony is that of all the people here I have voted most fairly.

See, it's saying stupid things like this that makes no one take you seriously.

Yes, you are the only person in the entire internet who votes fairly with no bias whatsoever.

I vote for things that buff weaker factions and vote to try and keep the power of the big 4 in check.

No bias. Only fair person in the world.

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

Honestly, this makes you just as bad as him IMO. One troll on the internet makes you upset, so you make an effort to not help make the game more balanced... excellent job.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

Honestly, this makes you just as bad as him IMO. One troll on the internet makes you upset, so you make an effort to not help make the game more balanced... excellent job.

Assuming that unnerfing Tau makes the game more balanced, the idea of which is part of the reason people are dismissing him in the first place.

 DarkLink wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

Honestly, this makes you just as bad as him IMO. One troll on the internet makes you upset, so you make an effort to not help make the game more balanced... excellent job.

Assuming that unnerfing Tau makes the game more balanced, the idea of which is part of the reason people are dismissing him in the first place.

Your missing my point (maybe your not, but at least your response seemed like you were).. It is not about "Tau", its the fact that you vote based on how you feel and not by what will make the game better. (and no, nerfing tau will not make the game better)

To your point, I think Tau were fine as was, but considering how complicated the CF rule is. I played more conservatively and exactly how NOVA is ruling it for their upcoming tournament..

Coordinated Firepower and Interaction with Unit-Wide Buffs - The Signature Systems and similar unit wide effects transfer via the coordinated fire rule. Unit Wide effects apply to all contributing units, however only models, or weapons in the case of Gargantuan Creatures, firing at the target of the coordinated firepower attack gain the effect of applicable buffs through coordinated firepower. As such, contributing units that make use of Target Locks or GC Split Fire rules do not gain the buffs on those shots that don’t go at the primary target.

I think this is an extremely fair middle ground. Will it make Tau more competitive in ITC formats.. I think it will add options to Tau lists, but I don't think this would even bring Tau to and Eldar/Cron/SM level.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

Honestly, this makes you just as bad as him IMO. One troll on the internet makes you upset, so you make an effort to not help make the game more balanced... excellent job.

Also, I recognize that the game has never been balanced, and that it's kinda pointless to try and balance it. I have several armies, and many of them would have sat on the shelf for years, if not multiple entire editions, if all I did was worry about competitive "balance". I play what I want. If I want to play competitively, and the rules favor Wraithknights, then that's what I'm going to buy and play. If the rules say to buy a lot of Razorbacks, then I'll do that. Because I'm a competitive player.

However, if I'm actually a casual player, then none of this "balance" crap matters. In that case, I play what I like and don't worry about it.

Given that I'm just one drop in the bucket, it won't matter. But it makes me feel better as a casual to turn the screws to the guys who want to have their cake and eat it, too. Which is what Gamgee wants. He wants the meta and TOs to cater to him, so that his army becomes competitive. I say "boo" to that. If he wants to play with the big boys, he needs to suck it up and buy a competitive army. If he wants to be Fluffy and fun, then let him play on the lower tables with the CSM / IG players.

That is, I am 100% in favor of GW's "Pay To Win" strategy. I think GW is correct to make bank on competitive players. The competitive crowd claims that they support GW's new releases in a significant financial way, so l am very happy to see them put their money where their mouth is.

Cindis wrote:
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.

This is highly relevant. I'd be interested to see if someone could run a quick analysis of the top 20 players (those who consistently win GT level events or make top 8 at GT level events) and how many of them play Tau, and if they do play Tau, if that had a negative impact on their consistent placing. There is probably not enough data (since the update is relatively new) to paint a clear picture, but my experience in any competitive game is that the top players tend to be the top players, not necessarily just the army that they run.

Not to mention, Tau is still newish, and most top players don't just jump lists/factions for major events. List fluency is a real thing, and it takes time to develop, no matter how good you are. I think a lot of people are emphasizing the tools instead of the carpenter, and yes, certain books are weaker compared to others, and so this may influence with armies the top players play, but I think we are starting to blame the book far more than the player, and that doesn't go well.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

And that is why I voted against him by voting against Tau.

As the poster child for "why you should nerf Tau", Gamgee is doing an excellent job.

Honestly, this makes you just as bad as him IMO. One troll on the internet makes you upset, so you make an effort to not help make the game more balanced... excellent job.

The game is being made more balanced.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

GreaterGouda wrote:
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.

The temporary LVO Tau rulings are on the poll. FLG said those would be the ones on the new poll. If you want the previous Tau rulings to have a re-vote then contact FLG.

ITC 40k Rules Question Submission Form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1W8A22qTts0p9CIkhxZIefmicHr7J2RoWlJmPqGQFiZo/viewform

ITC Questions: Frankie@FrontlineGaming.org

Not all the pre-LVO rulings are up on the poll. Specifically the ability to leave the turn the piranhas arrive.

I can think of a few good Tau players, but the only really competitive one that comes to mind is Paul McKelvey, and he had pretty bad luck at the LVO. I don't think his ninja Tau list performed like it used to in the previous book.

 DarkLink wrote:
I can think of a few good Tau players, but the only really competitive one that comes to mind is Paul McKelvey, and he had pretty bad luck at the LVO. I don't think his ninja Tau list performed like it used to in the previous book.

Is there a source for all the players lists at LVO. I would be interested in others outside of the top 8.

Tinkrr has been collecting the LVO lists:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/y28px3mgjeergdn/AADDpUf3n_u2QfkiYzDzHSh0a?dl=0


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mulletdude wrote:

Spoiler:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

GreaterGouda wrote:
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.

The temporary LVO Tau rulings are on the poll. FLG said those would be the ones on the new poll. If you want the previous Tau rulings to have a re-vote then contact FLG.

ITC 40k Rules Question Submission Form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1W8A22qTts0p9CIkhxZIefmicHr7J2RoWlJmPqGQFiZo/viewform

ITC Questions: Frankie@FrontlineGaming.org

Not all the pre-LVO rulings are up on the poll. Specifically the ability to leave the turn the piranhas arrive.

I don't think that one was really necessary to vote on. Having units your opponent can't interact with is bad for the game regardless of casual or competitive.

Gamgee wrote:Yeah the second best Tau list was an FSE using the drones. They nerfed him at the last second and he didn't get very far at all.

I bet he wouldn't have even won the tournament if he didn't get nerfed, but you know that Tau fear and bias.

I agree with you as well Grizzyzz. I was originally quite upset when they made polls public and so conveniently timed with the Tau release as well. The one and most hated faction gets a big release and polls go public with fear mongering and hysteria everywhere.

It's been a complete farce for Tau, but I'm sure other armies out there have horror stories like us. Right?

Also I do play FSE and am much more mobile. To the point where when I do take a SS I might use its default gun because it's going to be in close range a lot more with me.

If by "didn't get very far at all", you mean "only just missed getting into the top eight". There were mono-DE and IG and Ork players that did far worse.

That Tau player stood just as much of a chance as any other competitive army going in. What determines final standings at events of the LVO's caliber is a combination of random pairings, player skill, and luck of the dice. Notice that the Tau player could only affect one of those three factors.

I do have a horror story to share with you, and one with which you should be very familiar Gamgee. Not quite one year ago, the latest Eldar Craftworlds codex was released. On a scale of 1 to 10 in terms of Power Creep, the new Eldar codex was firmly at "ludicrous".

The response by TOs was at that point some of the swiftest rulings in history. The ITC unilaterally, without any input from its playerbase, nerfed ranged D. A vote was held on nerfing Scatbikers to one heavy weapon per three was held, and only narrowly failed. These changes were greeted with cheers by many on DakkaDakka, with the ITC being hailed as the saviors of 7th edition 40k.

At the same time, a wave of hate not seen since the days of 5th edition Grey Knights swept the forum. Many rage threads were created denouncing the new Eldar codex and Eldar players in general. In particular, one thread attempted to launch a boycott of Eldar from all competitive events. In the time of perhaps the greatest hatred toward the Space Elves, it managed to garner a total of five signatures and was described by none other than Carl Tuttle as "The most ridiculous thing I have ever read". To this day, Eldar remain one of the most reviled and disliked armies in the game.

Do you remember those days, Gamgee? I do. There’s plenty of other people who remember as well. Yet you continually seem to forget those days, which is why I keep having to tell this story.

What I remember most about those days was the reaction of Eldar players. There were very few cries for people to “L2P” or that they should simply adapt to the new Eldar book. I, along with many other Eldar players, instead chose to self-limit and tone down our armies we brought. Competitive events still brought out the cheese, but that was to be expected. Eldar players recognized how overpowered their army was, and compensated for the sake of the game (and their ability to play).

So I don’t have much sympathy for Tau players at the moment. I would have some sympathy, but instead of reacting with some humility, you and a couple of other noted Tau players on this forum have reacted as if you have rightfully inherited the title of “Most Overpowered Army”. Instead of recognizing how powerful Tau are, you play it down and put the onus on other armies to build against you. You ask for TOs to consider only your viewpoints when making their tournament FAQs. You act as if Tau rightly should be the most powerful army in an imbalanced mess of a game, when not too long ago Tau were a bad joke.

Eat a giant slice of humble pie, and I might just start taking your arguments seriously. Who knows, I might even stop having to tell my story…

Grizzyzz wrote:Your missing my point (maybe your not, but at least your response seemed like you were).. It is not about "Tau", its the fact that you vote based on how you feel and not by what will make the game better. (and no, nerfing tau will not make the game better)

To your point, I think Tau were fine as was, but considering how complicated the CF rule is. I played more conservatively and exactly how NOVA is ruling it for their upcoming tournament..

Coordinated Firepower and Interaction with Unit-Wide Buffs - The Signature Systems and similar unit wide effects transfer via the coordinated fire rule. Unit Wide effects apply to all contributing units, however only models, or weapons in the case of Gargantuan Creatures, firing at the target of the coordinated firepower attack gain the effect of applicable buffs through coordinated firepower. As such, contributing units that make use of Target Locks or GC Split Fire rules do not gain the buffs on those shots that don’t go at the primary target.

I think this is an extremely fair middle ground. Will it make Tau more competitive in ITC formats.. I think it will add options to Tau lists, but I don't think this would even bring Tau to and Eldar/Cron/SM level.

Considering that NOVA for unmodified 2+ re-rollable and Invisibility, I can understand the reasoning behind loosening the reins on Coordinated Fire Power.

Allow me to play Devil’s Advocate: Why shouldn’t people vote based on their feelings of how powerful Tau are? For the average player, Tau are part of the Cheese List that includes Necrons, Eldar, Chaos Daemons, and Admech/Skitarii. Tournaments do not cater to the type of people who regularly place highly at the final rankings. They cater to the average player coming in and wanting to have fun in a competitive environment. Without this base, there is no money for prize support and not enough people to make solid pairings. If from this standpoint Tau are overpowered, why should they not be brought down to approximate the mean power level?

 TheNewBlood wrote:
What I remember most about those days was the reaction of Eldar players. There were very few cries for people to “L2P” or that they should simply adapt to the new Eldar book.

To be fair, I was part of the "L2P" crowd, simply because it made for a funnier narrative. Really, I'm just gratified that Eldar get a turn on top.

Now, I'm waiting for CSM and IG to get their turn as the "OMG, OP!!11!" army of the month. That would be far more satisfying. Unfortunately, I do not see that happening for IG, based on the ridiculously bad formations that came out recently. Nor CSM, which GW always keeps a half step behind SMs.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Allow me to play Devil’s Advocate: Why shouldn’t people vote based on their feelings of how powerful Tau are? For the average player, Tau are part of the Cheese List that includes Necrons, Eldar, Chaos Daemons, and Admech/Skitarii. Tournaments do not cater to the type of people who regularly place highly at the final rankings. They cater to the average player coming in and wanting to have fun in a competitive environment. Without this base, there is no money for prize support and not enough people to make solid pairings. If from this standpoint Tau are overpowered, why should they not be brought down to approximate the mean power level?

Fairly put. It is as you put of best interest for a TO to cater to the majority of players because they want people to have fun, I think that is the best thing for them to do. The ultra competitive as said above are going to "pay to win", it will always be that way and no FAQ is going to change that.

HOWEVER, there is a huge difference even with feelings involved in giving a Poll that says -- "hey guy who probably has no idea what this new rule XYZ might be... (A) Nerf XYZ (B) Dont nerf"

In this case someone who has ill feelings will always vote to nerf, despite RAW, or any other criteria or even if it has no effect on him what so ever. I HATE facing necrons, they are just such a pain, but it is what it is, I am not going to vote to change a 4+ reanimation to be worse just because it annoys me... my personal view though.

I guess what I am trying to say, I understand the need to please the masses, but I don't care for the approach that is taken. And yes, I still vote because hey maybe my 1 vote might matter. And whether anyone will believe me, I try to vote with other armies in mind. I play more than just Tau. I try and be fair and want the game to be fun for everyone. Plus on the off chance that one day I can make it to LVO.. I at least know what the current Meta is like!



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
What I remember most about those days was the reaction of Eldar players. There were very few cries for people to “L2P” or that they should simply adapt to the new Eldar book.

To be fair, I was part of the "L2P" crowd, simply because it made for a funnier narrative. Really, I'm just gratified that Eldar get a turn on top.

Now, I'm waiting for CSM and IG to get their turn as the "OMG, OP!!11!" army of the month. That would be far more satisfying. Unfortunately, I do not see that happening for IG, based on the ridiculously bad formations that came out recently. Nor CSM, which GW always keeps a half step behind SMs.

As am I, because that means people aren't complaining about <insert current hated army here>.

Requizen wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The irony is that of all the people here I have voted most fairly.

See, it's saying stupid things like this that makes no one take you seriously.

Yes, you are the only person in the entire internet who votes fairly with no bias whatsoever.

I vote for things that buff weaker factions and vote to try and keep the power of the big 4 in check.

No bias. Only fair person in the world.

Have you even looked at this thread? Want me to quote all the people who literally say they voted to nerf Tau just because they hate Tau and not because of the actual rules?

notredameguy10 wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The irony is that of all the people here I have voted most fairly.

See, it's saying stupid things like this that makes no one take you seriously.

Yes, you are the only person in the entire internet who votes fairly with no bias whatsoever.

I vote for things that buff weaker factions and vote to try and keep the power of the big 4 in check.

No bias. Only fair person in the world.

Have you even looked at this thread? Want me to quote all the people who literally say they voted to nerf Tau just because they hate Tau and not because of the actual rules?

Those people don't claim themselves to

 Gamgee wrote:
have voted most fairly.

while also stating that they're voting with a bias. We call that hypocrisy.

Where's the option for only two detachments?

 raverrn wrote:
Where's the option for only two detachments?

As I've said many times, I'm gonna write an email once the poll finishes asking this exact question, as I believe it would go a long way to fixing some of the stupider builds (Like 9x squads of Spiders, for example.)

notredameguy10 wrote:
Have you even looked at this thread? Want me to quote all the people who literally say they voted to nerf Tau just because they hate Tau and not because of the actual rules?

There are none.

And to clarify, I voted to nerf Tau because I don't like the pontificating of a particular Tau player, not because of the Tau army nor the rules.


Also, this whole RAW thing that the Tau players are on? You know what? Fine. Play your Tau stuff RAW. Just be damn sure that Eldar get to play their Codex 100% RAW. No nerfs to S(D), no limits on Scatbikes. None of that crap.

Poll questions are based on player feedback. If they didn't include an option for 2 detachments (which was previously voted on and more detachments won by a solid margin), it's likely because they aren't getting asked to reduce the number of detachments in any real quantity. They're not going to revote on it unless there are people asking for it, and presumably people aren't asking for it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
What I remember most about those days was the reaction of Eldar players. There were very few cries for people to “L2P” or that they should simply adapt to the new Eldar book.

To be fair, I was part of the "L2P" crowd, simply because it made for a funnier narrative. Really, I'm just gratified that Eldar get a turn on top.

What, the previous two turns at the top weren't enough for you John?

Now, I'm waiting for CSM and IG to get their turn as the "OMG, OP!!11!" army of the month. That would be far more satisfying. Unfortunately, I do not see that happening for IG, based on the ridiculously bad formations that came out recently. Nor CSM, which GW always keeps a half step behind SMs.

Hey now. The Guard formations aren't all terrible.

Clean up the wording of the Emperor's Shield Infantry Company/Platoons("Must contain a minimum of 5 Infantry type units") and they become much more realistic for basically everyone that isn't a die-hard Guard player to potentially field!

Also, make a normal Infantry Platoon or the ESIP a Core Choice and it becomes something that can be fielded sub-2k with some options!

Edit Note: My brain is completely elsewhere.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

At the same time, a wave of hate not seen since the days of 5th edition Grey Knights swept the forum. Many rage threads were created denouncing the new Eldar codex and Eldar players in general. In particular, one thread attempted to launch a boycott of Eldar from all competitive events. In the time of perhaps the greatest hatred toward the Space Elves, it managed to garner a total of five signatures and was described by none other than Carl Tuttle as "The most ridiculous thing I have ever read". To this day, Eldar remain one of the most reviled and disliked armies in the game.

Lol, i'm pretty sure i'm one of those 5 signatures. I don't play against eldar, and i'm not playing against tau either.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Tinkrr has been collecting the LVO lists:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/y28px3mgjeergdn/AADDpUf3n_u2QfkiYzDzHSh0a?dl=0


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mulletdude wrote:

Spoiler:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

GreaterGouda wrote:
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.

The temporary LVO Tau rulings are on the poll. FLG said those would be the ones on the new poll. If you want the previous Tau rulings to have a re-vote then contact FLG.

ITC 40k Rules Question Submission Form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1W8A22qTts0p9CIkhxZIefmicHr7J2RoWlJmPqGQFiZo/viewform

ITC Questions: Frankie@FrontlineGaming.org

Not all the pre-LVO rulings are up on the poll. Specifically the ability to leave the turn the piranhas arrive.

I don't think that one was really necessary to vote on. Having units your opponent can't interact with is bad for the game regardless of casual or competitive.

While I agree with that sentiment, I still would've liked to see rule changes up for votes if we're going to be voting on rules at all.

Seeing all the drama on this thread makes me happy that my FLGS and basically every store in my area doesn't use the ITC rule set or if we do we tweak certain things, for example not nerf a single army into the ground yet let other armies have their shenanigans (in particular the tendency to favor Imperial Armies it seems). Way to much immaturity on here from several people, especially those voting repeatedly (which some have admitted and just proves how broken and corrupt their system of voting is) just to spite Tau players because they need the handicap in order to win, or at least judging from many peoples attitudes on here it seems that way.

 gmaleron wrote:
especially those voting repeatedly (which some have admitted and just proves how broken and corrupt their system of voting is)

Who is voting repeatedly?

 gmaleron wrote:
Seeing all the drama on this thread makes me happy that my FLGS and basically every store in my area doesn't use the ITC rule set or if we do we tweak certain things, for example not nerf a single army into the ground yet let other armies have their shenanigans (in particular the tendency to favor Imperial Armies it seems). Way to much immaturity on here from several people, especially those voting repeatedly (which some have admitted and just proves how broken and corrupt their system of voting is) just to spite Tau players because they need the handicap in order to win, or at least judging from many peoples attitudes on here it seems that way.

It makes me kinda sad that my FLGS is adopting the ITC stuff for their next tournament (this weekend), and I keep reading all this stuff about how ITC works. I don't blame the TO for doing it because he doesn't actually work for the store or get ANY compensation for doing this, he does this for our gaming community and I commend him on that. He was trying to take questions from everyone at the previous tournaments and write a FAQ/Errata for our local meta, but it just got to be too much work in his spare time. He chose ITC because it's wide spread, even though he PERSONALLY doesn't like all of it, and it was easy to access.

At the end of the day ITC doesn't make the top armies unplayable, it doesn't make Tau unplayable, it does change how some things work, and as I've said before I don't agree with all of it, but as long as everyone understands that going in, it’s just a set of house rules to help everyone get along. All I want to do is play 3 or 4 games with my little plastic men, have a good time, and go home having enjoyed myself, and hopefully my opponents will have had a good time too.

 Gamgee wrote:
Yeah the second best Tau list was an FSE using the drones. They nerfed him at the last second and he didn't get very far at all.

I bet he wouldn't have even won the tournament if he didn't get nerfed, but you know that Tau fear and bias.

I agree with you as well Grizzyzz. I was originally quite upset when they made polls public and so conveniently timed with the Tau release as well. The one and most hated faction gets a big release and polls go public with fear mongering and hysteria everywhere.

It's been a complete farce for Tau, but I'm sure other armies out there have horror stories like us. Right?

Also I do play FSE and am much more mobile. To the point where when I do take a SS I might use its default gun because it's going to be in close range a lot more with me.

Gamgee where have you been I thought I was the only one who notice this!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/675443.page

I made a thread about it, I even made another thread to show where the piranha formation is not overpowered. I have created 3 threads with over 3k viewers and the response I get is you should go through the proper channels to get in contact so I tried to get in contact via personal message and facebook to voice my concerns and ironically they ask a question on the poll to further nerf the piranha formation! Than everyone tells me I should try email or ask the question through the blog so I did that, I wonder what the result will be?

The worst part is I dont even play Tau, I play Marines and Imperial Guard! I just see the injustice and I dislike it and I am seen as the bad guy. The inability of people to see that they are being manipulated is unbearable! The vote to allow Dark Eldar to get a 10 point hq so they can use the points they save to pay for a venom or pay for another warp spider squad makes me want to through up. There are so many flaws that its crazy and people want to act like its perfect, give me a break.

Luckily for me you are that break or atleast a breathe of fresh air, I have a companion!