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.

So, Traditio refuses to consider unit upgrades in his Space Marine vs Tau comparison, but bringing up markerlights is fair game?

Anyhow, I'm going to chime in and add to the voices who are pointing out that Space Marines Tac Squads get access to upgrades that Tau Fire Warriors don't get. Want to play the range game? Take a missile launcher in your squad. That'll let you take out Fire Warriors from 18" further out than they can reach with their pulse rifles. And their transport too! Or, give the squad a flamer, a combi-flamer, and a drop pod with a deathwind launcher. That'll put some hurt on Fire Warriors.

It's also worth pointing out that Fire Warriors have minimal upgrade options - networked markerlight for the squad leader is about it. So that S5 shooting is all they've got.

On the flipside, against the Tau players I've been playing against, the ability to dakka down Rhinos through glances has not been a desperation move. Part of that may be our meta - we play with 40% Troops minimum, so our players are obliged to take a lot of Fire Warriors. They can glance out Rhinos pretty reliably. Our SoB player doesn't use them anymore - she's switched over to Repressors for her Battle Sisters squads. My counter has been to start using a Land Raider Crusader (loaded with Scouts, because they're plenty killy for Fire Warriors) and to field a couple of Whirlwinds.

As for Overwatch, yes it's a nuisance, but if you understand how it works you can mitigate. The unit being charged can only fire overwatch once and can't fire overwatch if it's locked in combat. So lead the charge with something cheap and expendable to eat the overwatch.

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

It's also worth pointing out that Fire Warriors have minimal upgrade options - networked markerlight for the squad leader is about it. So that S5 shooting is all they've got.

Just want to clarify. Fire warriors may upgrade one to be a squad leader, who may upgrade further to have a markerlight and target lock HOWEVER it is not networked.. as awesome as that would be

Additonally as of the new Codex/Campaigns Fire warriors may take either a misslepod or Smart missile turret as an additional upgrade. However it should be noted that the squad must remain completely stationary (can't snapfire after moving like a missle launcher). If they move, it is "disassembled and strapped to the mule" essentially.

Fire Warriors are in fact flatly worse across the board than Space Marines. In fact, except for their Armor Save, they are inferior to Guardsmen. They are, indeed, awful, other than their gun, and mediocre with it.

They're designed to function in synergy with other units -- markerlight-equipped units, Etherials, Fireblades -- like Tau units in general.

I know this isn't news to people -- maybe I just like hearing myself talk.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spetulhu wrote:


My Tau opponent doesn't usually charge with his Firewarriors but his suits often do if it seems like a good idea. They can outlast weaker non-CC dedicated infantry and remain shielded from shooting while doing so, not always a bad thing. Not to forget they can play mobility too - suits have JSJ, Kroot can outflank, you can pack Firewarriors into Devilfish. A Tau player doesn't have to play gunline, and in fact might surprise an opponent pretty nastily if he goes for another option.

Crisis Bodyguards are actually more or less Ogryns in close combat.

Alcibiades wrote:
Fire Warriors are in fact flatly worse across the board than Space Marines. In fact, except for their Armor Save, they are inferior to Guardsmen. They are, indeed, awful, other than their gun, and mediocre with it.

They're designed to function in synergy with other units -- markerlight-equipped units, Etherials, Fireblades -- like Tau units in general.

I know this isn't news to people -- maybe I just like hearing myself talk.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spetulhu wrote:


My Tau opponent doesn't usually charge with his Firewarriors but his suits often do if it seems like a good idea. They can outlast weaker non-CC dedicated infantry and remain shielded from shooting while doing so, not always a bad thing. Not to forget they can play mobility too - suits have JSJ, Kroot can outflank, you can pack Firewarriors into Devilfish. A Tau player doesn't have to play gunline, and in fact might surprise an opponent pretty nastily if he goes for another option.

Crisis Bodyguards are actually more or less Ogryns in close combat.

They give up fewer points when they die and are often functionally superior in the context of a list. That's the gripe, I believe. Most of a space marine's "advantages" over a fire warrior don't matter much anymore.

Martel732 wrote:

They give up fewer points when they die and are often functionally superior in the context of a list. That's the gripe, I believe. Most of a space marine's "advantages" over a fire warrior don't matter much anymore.

I actually have to agree with him on this. Fire Warriors have a good amount of support options. Sit them in cover and they have long range weapons with the ability to boost their BS and Ignore Cover. Then, if anything gets close, they have options to double or triple their shots, in addition to the aforementioned buffs. They just work better. Space Marines just pay for a 3+ save and some wargear, and that's all they really bring to the table most of the time.

Martel732 wrote:
They give up fewer points when they die and are often functionally superior in the context of a list. That's the gripe, I believe. Most of a space marine's "advantages" over a fire warrior don't matter much anymore.

Yes. When you start tossing around force multipliers like hot cakes....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

krodarklorr wrote:I actually have to agree with him on this. Fire Warriors have a good amount of support options. Sit them in cover and they have long range weapons with the ability to boost their BS and Ignore Cover. Then, if anything gets close, they have options to double or triple their shots, in addition to the aforementioned buffs. They just work better. Space Marines just pay for a 3+ save and some wargear, and that's all they really bring to the table most of the time.

Yes. That's why space marines (i.e., tac marines) need buffs and fire warriors need nerfs! I would say "expunge them [and all Tau] from the game," but models are expensive and there are lots of tau players.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grizzyzz wrote:Most Farsight Enclaves and even newer Tau Empire lists are much more interactive. Look at the core formation for the Hunter Contingent. "units withing 12" of commander or fireblade may run and shoot"... Tau with battlefocus, Awesome! Even the rules are trying to pull people off of gunlines and be mobile.

Bull pucky! You and I both know how tau use battlefocus. Not to make them more "mobile," i.e., actually to move across the battlefield. It just makes them harder to hit because of JSJ nonsense.

The gap between what a Marine and a FW give up when accounting for survivability isn't what you think it is.

Small arms?
Lasguns: FW lose 9/4 points, Marines lose 14/9
Boltguns: FW 9/3 Marines 14/6

Bugger stuff?
Scatter Lasers: FW @9/(5/12) vs Marines @14/(5/18)
67.5/18 vs 70/18 if I did my math right. Oh so marginally better.

Its not until you get to S6+ *AND* AP3 or better that FW are even noticeably cheaper per shot taken.

I think its an issue of infantry in general and scale creep. Relative to each other, there's nothing wrong with FW's or SM's. But when games are starting to look more and more like Kursk instead of a platoon scale engagement, a lot of things like infantry become increasingly less granular in many instances. When we are seeing stuff like scatterbike units able to dump the firepower of half an IG gunline on their own, or D weapons and GC's in play, individual infantry become increasingly irrelevant.

Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

Hey, 29 ppm for a guy with a plasma cannon. Good thing he's slightly better in close combat than a guardsman!

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

The bulk of a tac squad acts as bullet sponges for the special/heavy weapon guys in the unit while every fire warrior is contributing equally to their offensive potential. As FWs die their firepower drops off at a steady rate. When Tac Marines die they tend to lose the more expendable guys first while the real heavy hitters with special weapons are usually the last to die so firepower doesn't drop off as hard from casualties until the special weapons die. That and ATSKNF means that Tacticals stay in the fight longer and tend to not run off the board. These factors muddle how effective a Tactical Marine unit can be compared to the more straight forward Fire Warrior unit. Not saying your wrong btw, its just that the points and power are loaded onto a few guys who tend to die last.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Fire Warriors have a good amount of support options. Sit them in cover and they have long range weapons with the ability to boost their BS and Ignore Cover.

The squad only gets one Markerlight of it's own so the rest of the buffs will have to come from somewhere else. The Firewarriors aren't doing it all alone unlike a marine squad that has all of it's stuff in it.

Tacs rarely do anything on their own, either.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

It also causes a massive surge in their damage output.
Heck, against some not-too-special targets the plasma does more than the 7 boltguns that are used by his bullet catcher buddies.

Tau however, don't quite have such radical stat-shifting guns on their fire warriors. you got a good basic gun-but that's all you are getting.


If you want a good comparison, don't compare fire warriors to tacticals-compare them to bolter scouts.
Ignoring for a moment that scouts got alternative weapons, heavy weapons and such. just basic bolter scouts.

Scouts pay two more per dude.
They have THE SAME shooting output against most targets due to BS versus better gun difference, with warriors having a slightly better range.
+2WS +1S +2I makes them less of a paper towel in CC compared to the FW.
+1 T means they don't die quite as easy.
Defensive grenades replaced by frag and krak grenades, a definite upgrade.
Lose out Supporting Fire, and in return get ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, Combat Squads, Infiltrate, Move Through Cover and Scout. holy gak that's alot of special rules.

Honestly, can you even attempt to argue the FW are somehow better than the scouts?
Because if I could switch my FW to scouts, I wouldn't even blink. heck even assuming that there get no relevant chapter tactics at all-its still probably an upgrade.

And then you got the fact they can get far better options in upgrades, transports and alternate loadouts.

I didn't think about them because BA scouts are BS 3 and I use them for CC only.

Vanilla scouts are pretty sweet, I'll admit.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

It also causes a massive surge in their damage output.
Heck, against some not-too-special targets the plasma does more than the 7 boltguns that are used by his bullet catcher buddies.

Tau however, don't quite have such radical stat-shifting guns on their fire warriors. you got a good basic gun-but that's all you are getting.


If you want a good comparison, don't compare fire warriors to tacticals-compare them to bolter scouts.
Ignoring for a moment that scouts got alternative weapons, heavy weapons and such. just basic bolter scouts.

Scouts pay two more per dude.
They have THE SAME shooting output against most targets due to BS versus better gun difference, with warriors having a slightly better range.
+2WS +1S +2I makes them less of a paper towel in CC compared to the FW.
+1 T means they don't die quite as easy.
Defensive grenades replaced by frag and krak grenades, a definite upgrade.
Lose out Supporting Fire, and in return get ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, Combat Squads, Infiltrate, Move Through Cover and Scout. holy gak that's alot of special rules.

Honestly, can you even attempt to argue the FW are somehow better than the scouts?
Because if I could switch my FW to scouts, I wouldn't even blink. heck even assuming that there get no relevant chapter tactics at all-its still probably an upgrade.

And then you got the fact they can get far better options in upgrades, transports and alternate loadouts.

This.
Marines are heavy infantry in an edition which doesn't favour heavy infantry.

Compare FW with a unit of a closer armour and size class, and you see a huge difference.

Firewarriors aren't the problem anyway.

Martel732 wrote:
I didn't think about them because BA scouts are BS 3 and I use them for CC only.

Vanilla scouts are pretty sweet, I'll admit.

At least your scouts can be a cheap troop.

SM scouts are great. I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

30 inch str 5's for your basic trooper though. That is also great.

Yeah it's clear that space marines are discriminated against by GW and totally given short shrift in terms of power and options.

Space Marine players: the rich white straight Christian males of the 40k community, continually under attack by the oppressive GW not giving them subfaction specific rules for their homebrew chapter and not updating the totally ancient miniature line.

Does that make BA trailer trash Trump supporters?

It's just a feeling, but I have a real issue with Tau dice rolling - buckets of dice flood across the table, followed by watching the other player pick out loads of them for re-roll this and re-roll that for what feels like every unit.

For a time-consuming game, it just feels extra bloated. - I'd like to see the dice rolling part streamlined more.

Spetulhu wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Fire Warriors have a good amount of support options. Sit them in cover and they have long range weapons with the ability to boost their BS and Ignore Cover.

The squad only gets one Markerlight of it's own so the rest of the buffs will have to come from somewhere else.

Marker Drones are a thing.
It boosts the points value of a squad up by 49 points to do so, but it is not impossible to have a Fire Warrior Team with 3x Markerlights within the unit.

The Firewarriors aren't doing it all alone unlike a marine squad that has all of it's stuff in it.

You would have a point if it weren't such a low opportunity cost for Markerlights to function compared to what they give.

But why would you put 3 expensive markerlights in a fire warrior unit when the fire warrior unit cant use it's own markerlights?

 BoomWolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are never 14 pts a model though. They are always armed with grav or plasma or what not. This actually decreases their survivability/pt significantly.

It also causes a massive surge in their damage output.
Heck, against some not-too-special targets the plasma does more than the 7 boltguns that are used by his bullet catcher buddies.

Tau however, don't quite have such radical stat-shifting guns on their fire warriors. you got a good basic gun-but that's all you are getting.

You're totally right. Tau don't have unit upgrades like Imperial armies do.

You know what they DO have though? Synergy beyond belief with the characters in the army.
Fire Warriors, while not being able to toss a Plasma Rifle into the squad, don't necessarily need to. Park Fire Warriors near an Ethereal doing "Storm of Fire" and all of a sudden, they're firing three shots at 15" range. Never mind that if they stay still and have a Fireblade in the unit they're firing four shots at 15".

Can you think of any other army that gets to do that with no LD test or gimmick beyond you stating that "I'm doing this power now"?

If you want a good comparison, don't compare fire warriors to tacticals-compare them to bolter scouts.
Ignoring for a moment that scouts got alternative weapons, heavy weapons and such. just basic bolter scouts.

Scouts pay two more per dude.
They have THE SAME shooting output against most targets due to BS versus better gun difference, with warriors having a slightly better range.
+2WS +1S +2I makes them less of a paper towel in CC compared to the FW.
+1 T means they don't die quite as easy.
Defensive grenades replaced by frag and krak grenades, a definite upgrade.
Lose out Supporting Fire, and in return get ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, Combat Squads, Infiltrate, Move Through Cover and Scout. holy gak that's alot of special rules.

Honestly, can you even attempt to argue the FW are somehow better than the scouts?
Because if I could switch my FW to scouts, I wouldn't even blink. heck even assuming that there get no relevant chapter tactics at all-its still probably an upgrade.

And then you got the fact they can get far better options in upgrades, transports and alternate loadouts.

Which FW are we talking about here? Strike or Breacher?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Merellin wrote:
But why would you put 3 expensive markerlights in a fire warrior unit when the fire warrior unit cant use it's own markerlights?

You do know that you're not limited to fielding "just one" unit of Fire Warriors, right?

Kanluwen, How does giving them 1 extra shot at half range, Make them shoot 2 shots at max range..? Storm of Fire gives Pulse weapons 1 extra shot at half the weapons maximum range.

Merellin wrote:
Kanluwen, How does giving them 1 extra shot at half range, Make them shoot 2 shots at max range..? Storm of Fire gives Pulse weapons 1 extra shot at half the weapons maximum range.

That's my bad, however...it doesn't change the point I was attempting to make. Fire Warriors can put out an OBSCENE volume of firepower, whether at their full 30" range or at 15".

To pretend that the presence of a Plasma Gun or some other kind of special weapon is somehow a benefit when that unit can potentially be put down outside of their 'best' range is asinine.

People are complaining about fire warriors so much, yet people seem to ignore that fire warriors got a big buff by having their min squad size lowered, and aren't a staple in every tau list. In fact I've seen people opt to take kroot or as few squads of min warriors as possible. If they were OP in the codex, than I suspect that'd be used far more often in the competitive scene.

Also fire warriors are essentially a crap guy with a high quality gun. Most of your points are going into the guy's gun and save, and beyond that not much else. It's a min maxed unit, that frankly drops to pie plates and runs like hell. They're not optimal in a tau list.

I'm of the mind tau shouldn't be nerfed, but other codexes should be buffed.

That's how we get the joy of power creep. Things like Tau and Eldar should be nerfed and the weaker books should be buffed.

Jaxler wrote:I'm of the mind tau shouldn't be nerfed, but other codexes should be buffed.

I completely agree. Codices don't need buffs. Everything should be scaled down to bring the game more in line with a "my army (i.e., this blob of infantry with their vehicles) fights your army (that blob of infantry with their vehicles)" kind of feel. Giant robots and other nonsense like that need to be scaled down. A lot.