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.

From favourite to least.

1. Farsight Enclaves
2. Tau
3. Dark Eldar
4. Necrons (New Lore Sucks or would be #1)
5. Tyranids
6. Orks (mostly like the fluff and how funny they are)
7. Deathwatch
8. Blood Ravens
9. Imperial Fists
10. Adeptus Mechanicus/Skitarrii
11. Chaos Marines/Deamons
12. Imperial Guard
13. Harlequins
14. Corsairs
15. Assorted Imperial Factions
16. Most other Space Marines
17. Grey Knights
18. Ultramarines
-10. Eldar (Stupid Fluff, don't like their weird contrasting paint schemes, and don't like their style. Doesn't help they are so over powered either and no one seems to want to reign them in.)

 Gamgee wrote:
From favourite to least.

1. Farsight Enclaves
2. Tau
3. Dark Eldar
4. Necrons (New Lore Sucks or would be #1)
5. Tyranids
6. Orks (mostly like the fluff and how funny they are)
7. Deathwatch
8. Blood Ravens
9. Imperial Fists
10. Adeptus Mechanicus/Skitarrii
11. Chaos Marines/Deamons
12. Imperial Guard
13. Harlequins
14. Corsairs
15. Assorted Imperial Factions
16. Most other Space Marines
17. Grey Knights
18. Ultramarines
-10. Eldar (Stupid Fluff, don't like their weird contrasting paint schemes, and don't like their style. Doesn't help they are so over powered either and no one seems to want to reign them in.)

Huh, seems exactly like my list only inverted... and perhaps its not a good idea to throw stones and live in a glass house when it comes to power level

Tau are top of mid tier in the ITC. Not as powerful as the big 4 Eldar by a mile, then Marines, Necrons, and Chaos Deamons. They all have access to far better armies and cheese than any Tau could hope to throw together right now.

In all the years of data I have to support this no one has ever refuted me and I doubt they ever will. Outside the ITC the Tau can be more powerful depending on how some rules are interpreted but even then that would only raise them up to the upper tier. I doubt they equal Eldar or Necrons even then.

Just so we're clear I've done a lot of research on this. Can check my old posts and look in the tournament forum it was a huge debate at one point. I don't want to get back into it.

Edit
The problem about Tau being top of Mid tier is they stomp anything lower than it but when it comes to the upper tier armies struggle a lot. Back last edition the power gap wasn't so enormous but its growing in the ITC and in GW rules at all tiers. The strongest factions are getting more powerful and the weak aren't being buffed enough by a longshot.

"Tau are top of mid tier in the ITC."

ITC is the operative word - we all know of the rampant and absurd house rulings to nerf Tau into the ground, outside of that I propose we agree to disagree in that regard.

Gameplay wise I always wanted Tau to be this fast and strategic force that promoted interlocking tactics (outside of moar markerlights) but in reality they come across as just a gunline army with a hefty alpha strike.

Aesthetic wise I wish their suits were less 'boxy' and more sleek if that makes sense, same with the tanks.

Finally really not a fan of the fluff but hey this is all just subjective

 Gamgee wrote:
Tau are top of mid tier in the ITC. Not as powerful as the big 4 Eldar by a mile, then Marines, Necrons, and Chaos Deamons. They all have access to far better armies and cheese than any Tau could hope to throw together right now.

In all the years of data I have to support this no one has ever refuted me and I doubt they ever will. Outside the ITC the Tau can be more powerful depending on how some rules are interpreted but even then that would only raise them up to the upper tier. I doubt they equal Eldar or Necrons even then.

Just so we're clear I've done a lot of research on this. Can check my old posts and look in the tournament forum it was a huge debate at one point. I don't want to get back into it.

Edit
The problem about Tau being top of Mid tier is they stomp anything lower than it but when it comes to the upper tier armies struggle a lot. Back last edition the power gap wasn't so enormous but its growing in the ITC and in GW rules at all tiers. The strongest factions are getting more powerful and the weak aren't being buffed enough by a longshot.

Umm the new Tau codex is murdering people, especially with the Stormsurge which is a beast at range and in melee (against non super heavies). Only army I think that truly outclasses the Tau in the ITC is Eldar but I think given enough time we will see Tau really step into their own and dominate hard. Eldar got their update basically a year ago but it wasn't until the past few months that we saw Eldar completely smashing face in the ITC. Tau are absolutely in the top 4 and a strong contender for #1, it just needs time for the good players to refine their builds and get past the gimmick builds.

1. They are fast and mobile, but they shoot more while being a mobile suit army.

2. There are plenty of tactics around shooting better as the Tau. However if you don't like that it's okay. It's a common misconception Tau only do gunline armies when all the better armies tend to be more mobile.

3. Personal preferences about are looks. I love the aesthetic it blends a sort of simple elegance with a boxy look to it. I also like the Tau asymmetrical designs.

4. I like most of the fluff. They use their brains and science to overcome obstacles instead of moping in a corner of the galaxy causing trouble. Anyways clearly have different tastes.

Edit
Tau haven't won a any major tournaments since their new update in the ITC. They haven't and they didn't even place in the top 10 at the LVO. It's a big misconception how "powerful" they are. I work to show people how silly they are. Anyways there are two locked topics on the matter that cover it in more detail if you want to hunt them down and one in the tournament discussions area.

Years of data, amazing figuring they have only been out for less than a year.

 Gamgee wrote:

Tau haven't won a any major tournaments since their new update in the ITC. They haven't and they didn't even place in the top 10 at the LVO. It's a big misconception how "powerful" they are. I work to show people how silly they are. Anyways there are two locked topics on the matter that cover it in more detail if you want to hunt them down and one in the tournament discussions area.

Ah, thanks to Gamgee for clearing up that confusion! Glad to see you're the only one telling truths here and everyone who disagrees is a dirty liar. Thanks for dispelling the misconception. Tau aren't that powerful, I just need to L2P. Problem solved.

Favourites...IG - sorry, AM. There is so much to choose from it's impossible not to find a favourite from there.

Dark Angels - they're uncompromising and live a double life. People who ask too much have tendency to disappear. What's not to like?

Former favourites...Blood Angels. I liked their old backstory as a tragic, dying chapter, former greats in terminal decline. But since 5th edition they have been written as unbeatable flying Space Jesuses. Booooring.

Tyranids...I liked them really a lot before they became "Gimmick Monster of the Week" -army.

Former favourites & currently least favourite: Tau. I loved their old codex and never would have believed I would eventually hate the army, but Vetock managed to pull it off. 6th edition Codex paid absolutely no respect whatsoever to the feel, lore or style of the army. Subsesquent releases have only made it worse and like Nids, they are now all about Gimmick Monsters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gobbla wrote:
Favorite: Anything but Tau.

Least favorite: Tau.

Tau are a Star Wars army, NOT a 40K army.

Tau lore is more subtle than most other factions. They are basically what Humans were when they were young and expansionistic race - and presumably Eldar before them. A new talent coming to blow away decayed, crumbling empires, before eventually doomed to become one themselves.

40k universe is somewhat exceptional in the respect that there, it's the Humans who are ancient rulers of the Galaxy now in decline, and some young upstart alien race is the dynamic, adaptable and idealistic. This is one reason why people find Tau annoying. Likely it's meant to be like that.

But as said, current Tau lore is mostly a step down from old.

The data includes the information I could find of about.... 6 or so ITC tournaments with the new Tau codex. Also I have watched batreps, read battle reports, and just talked to players to get this data. The biggest piece of evidence is the LVO where a supposed "top tier army" got creamed and didn't have a single army place in the top 10 and only two armies in the top 25 at all. Not to mention the second best Tau army was nerfed days before the guy showed up to the tournament and he wasn't told about it early enough so his army he brought was nerfed during his travel to the LVO.

The Tau are mid tier. The years of data goes back even further into its 6e codex where again it was the top of the mid tier but not upper tier. There was a brief surge of Tau tournament victories with the FSE first dropped but that was ages ago at this point and very brief.

This indicates a big Tau bias in the general public and even ITC player base.

Edit
However depending on how your local group rules them if it doesn't use the ITC then the Tau could be much stronger. Especially with coordinated firepower working as is and not nerfed like it is in the ITC and the Firestream Wing as well.

Reavas wrote:
Daemons is my favourite, the randomness just throws a spanner in any pre-made plans so its full of surprises each game

Tau is least favourite, its so run of the mill and least interesting playstyle that also requires the least amout of thought and adaption, each game its the same strategy for me so I dont enjoy playing with them as my army or against them due to predictability.

Man, the first guy responding has the same response that I do! Well said!!
Daemons rock, hate Tau (except battlesuits look epic). Hate all other aspects of Tau.

So much Tau hate. I can't decide if this is because modern Tau lore is mouseshit or if Tau lore in general is mouseshit.

Tau are kind of annoying but i like some of the models

Fluff wise best to worst

1. Imperial Guard
2. Daemons
3. Chaos Space Marines
4. Newcons
5. Orks
6. Dark Angels
7. Tyranids
8. Space Marines
9. Tau
10. Eldar
11. Blood Angels
12. AdMech
13. Dark Eldar
14. Sisters of Battle
15. Grey Knights

 dusara217 wrote:
So much Tau hate. I can't decide if this is because modern Tau lore is mouseshit or if Tau lore in general is mouseshit.

The first.
And it is less about the lore, and more about the rules, boring and unchallenging way the army is structured nowadays.

People seem to be anti-shooting, too, doesn't help.

Backfire wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:
So much Tau hate. I can't decide if this is because modern Tau lore is mouseshit or if Tau lore in general is mouseshit.

The first.
And it is less about the lore, and more about the rules, boring and unchallenging way the army is structured nowadays.

Aye, though Lore being gak isn't unique to Tau, GW's fluff has been abysmal for years now, the quality of the writing and immersive feel of stories between something from say, 2E/3E/4E and something from say, 5E/6E/7E is gigantic.

However, I think the biggest thing with Tau, lore and visuals aside, they kinda get to do "everything" when it comes to shooting. They can shoot with high BS that ignores armor and cover saves and wounds on 2's while other armies, even shooting oriented ones, usually only get to pick two, or they can't be anywhere near as versatile with it. Also, supporting fire really is an absurd "gotcha" in many instances.

 Bobthehero wrote:
People seem to be anti-shooting, too, doesn't help.

Tau basically tell other lists that they don't get to play. Can't imagine why that might get hate.

Martel732 wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
People seem to be anti-shooting, too, doesn't help.

Tau basically tell other lists that they don't get to play. Can't imagine why that might get hate.

That's how I feel more about Necrons and Eldar. Tau, to me at least, don't have the insane defensive capabilities these armies have (barring a couple of the new formations that people got hissy about getting nerfed in the ITC, despite them being broken as balls).

Last time I played Necrons, I think I killed a grand total of 1 Wraith, 11 Warriors, and an Ark before being tabled, and that was getting first turn to alpha strike. It's gotten to the point where I pretty much will just pass on games against Necron opponents, there's just no point in setting up and having them auto-pilot themselves to victory because you can't actually hurt anything. Eldar sometimes too depending on what they're running.

Ah did anyone see the Nova FAQ? They have sane rulings of Tau. Sane! A man can dream the ITC would adopt them.

Martel732 wrote:
Personally, I like starcraft accuracy, which is 100%

No, it's just accounted for in their DPS. Marines in SC still spray'n'pray.

But who is surprised that SC2 is more granular and realistic when the Stormtrooper equivalent has 55 wounds?

45 before the shield upgrade. SC marines are definitely power armor units in a scenario where weapons are treated more realistically. No one fields guardsmen because there is no point. And the stims are way more effective than any astartes upgrades.

Modern: Space Marines are my favourite. Dark Eldar least favourite. Bad fluff, bad minis.

Olde fashioned Rogue Trader armies: Orks are the my favourite. Then Chaos. None are bad factions, though Eldar are least interesting.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Aye, though Lore being gak isn't unique to Tau, GW's fluff has been abysmal for years now, the quality of the writing and immersive feel of stories between something from say, 2E/3E/4E and something from say, 5E/6E/7E is gigantic.

Hmmm...don't fully agree, sure there is quite a bit of bad lore around nowadays, but it's not like everything was gold back in the day. When I read 3rd Ed codices, oftentimes I feel embarrassed for the writers, most of the fluff pieces are pretty bad.
IMO chief problem nowadays is the Codex bloat, they have so many pages to fill that they get way too wordy and explain everything in very detailed fashion. It was better when they were sparser and left more for imagination.

 Vaktathi wrote:

However, I think the biggest thing with Tau, lore and visuals aside, they kinda get to do "everything" when it comes to shooting. They can shoot with high BS that ignores armor and cover saves and wounds on 2's while other armies, even shooting oriented ones, usually only get to pick two, or they can't be anywhere near as versatile with it. Also, supporting fire really is an absurd "gotcha" in many instances.

Yes, old Tau was much more interesting in this sense. They were strong shooters but they were strong short/medium range shooters with only few (though powerful) long range weapons. Also, they were less about volume of fire and more about making your shots count by flexibility and various technical gimmicks not available for other armies. Nowadays it's buckets of Markerlights followed by larger buckets of Pulse fire. It's so boring.

I actually only use about.... 4-6 ML in one army. I wouldn't call that bucket loads haha. I find anymore to be wasteful in points.