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.

@OP-I am not sure I understand your question. Every army has options that can be unfun and more competitive except Chaos and Orks. I honestly think a lot of the hate Tau see (not flaming here, just an observation) comes from Marine players or competitive players who have realized Tau now have a paper to their rock. Marine/Imperial armies are some of the most un-fun to play in a competitive arena IMO due to their ability to pull from soooooo many options with limited downsides. It is very hard to adapt to because they have sooooo many options. Not sure why we don't see more hate threads there.

To me this game becomes fun when I am playing in a group and learn to adapt to my opponent. If you play in a static gaming group then they will complain when you bring something that beats them consistently (table flipping rage quit hehe). If people want to have fun playing against Tau then they need to adapt. There are no Auto Win buttons in the Tau list and everything has a strong counter so tell your gaming group to adapt. They will figure out the paper to your rock and then you will need to adapt again. Learning and adapting to a challenge is where this is fun for me, kinda like a puzzle. Years ago I was playing a list that I won a lot with (DE with the incubus court) and my group started complaining how broken it was. So....I swapped armies with them and they soon realized how much glass the DE really were heh. We ran an event where you swapped armies with opponents so they could try something new and learn the strength/weakness of other armies. It stopped a lot of the "over powered" conversations hehehe.

Hope that helps

Traditio wrote:

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.

Honestly I can't disagree with this. As a Guard player half the time I wonder why I bother putting my infantry down, they're essentially irrelevant now.

War Kitten wrote:Honestly I can't disagree with this. As a Guard player half the time I wonder why I bother putting my infantry down, they're essentially irrelevant now.

It's not just Guard, either. Khorne Berserkers, Tactical Marines, Thousand Sons, Sternguard, you name it.

All of these things should be really good on the table top. Because of gigantic robots, they aren't as good as they should be. Giant robots and overpowered bikes (whether space marine, dark angels, eldar, or otherwise).

I think a lot of the hate Tau gets is that they are a gunline AND a mobile army without the weaknesses of either. They counter every "counter" that usually exists, which makes their basic army builds have no real weaknesses. This causes frustration for most casual players and frustration = not fun. Are they weak in melee? Absolutely. Good freaking luck ever getting into melee with Tau unless the tau player monumentally screws up. A lot of this is of course not on the players - its on the rules GW built Tau with. Rather than having creative ways to try and counter things that could work or fail, they were given every hard counter in the book. You want to try and break up a gunline using DS/Pods? All their really killy units get interceptor dirt cheap! Want to try and use fliers to force snapshots? Nope! Elective Skyfire. Dodge their immense firepower with strategic terrain and careful movement? Markerlights - which you cant take cover against - strip that away. With all of those abilities coming on very good units Tau will take anyway, there is very little give and take in their army makeup. They get all the cool toys that very selective units in other codexs/armies get.

A glaring gap for tau is a lack of psychic presence, but many people don't like having to rely on psykers. Personally I like librarians but avoid them like the plague when with friends because of all the "cheese" that comes from them. This weakness can be exploited by some armies, and looks to be the one area where Tau doesn't match up to other lists.

At this point, unless you personally tailor a Tau list to include lesser seen units like kroot, stealth suits (sorry for that pun), or armor/fliers, it will be frustrating for most people who have seen the same Tau list and tactics a dozen times. The only real "fix" that I could see is GW making more of their units specialized by focusing the Intercepter/Skyfire/Ignores Cover onto specialist units and not the general whole army. They really need to make Kroot, Vespids and other weak units more useful - give Tau its power through choice and a plethora of unit options that can be effective instead of concentrating all the power into a few select builds that overwhelm and counter everything with the same army list every time. They have started to do this with things like the awesome Breacher teams, but at the same time they over did it and made them a little too killy, but its a step in the right direction at least.

Another glaring gap in tau is having the worst leadership in the game. any weapon/power/whatever that targets leadership will be twice as efficient against tau than anyone else.


Also, how is the fact tau has the common "power build" any different from eldar power build "spam scatbikes/spiders plus as many wraithknights you are allowed", the marine powerbuilds "I have more obsec than you got units in general", and every other power build out there?

I keep finding it staggering how people keep throwing accusations against tau as if the very same things are not true for many other armies. in fact, every other functional army. its the nature of games to have powerbuilds evolve.

And of course tau has an answer to fething everything-IT SHOULD. its not marines with a bazillion allies to cover any possible need, its not eldar with super-specialists who are above and beyond anyone else in their niches (and also got a few allies, and some mind boggling brute force units), and its not non-functional like chaos and some xenos who are non-functional FOR THE VERY REASON THEY LACK ANSWERS TO COMMON THREATS AND GET NO INNER SYNERGY.

Yes, tau can answer and hard-counter practically anything but psykers-but the tau general has to CHOOSE. you can't fit it all into a list, you can't cover every angle at once.
The iternal balance issues make it a bit too monotonic in the competetive scene, but what you need to fix that is not nerfing tau, but redestributing power by tweaks. making X a bit less and Y a bit more (ion accelerators for example are a bit too good, while the HBC not quite enough. the HYMP a bit too good, the HRR not quite enough, etc)

And frankly, the age of formations solved it a bit. yes you got the ball-busting riptide wing that should never existed, but things like the OSC gives a new angle on tau being up close and personal "dance around" fighters, things like the retaliation cadre is a very much "in your face" type force, etc. the formations do little to benefit the boring gunline, and far better support mobile forces, irregular engagement methods and precision tactical use of units for gaining the maximum effect.


The problem is not tau, very much not tau.
The problem is that some armies LACK that level of proper army inner working, unifying themes, or proper rules. going over them quickly:
=Chaos is a pisspoor mesh or rules without a theme and generally bad units all around who are inferior to imperial ocunterparts. the marines are the worst of it, the daemons rely on gimmiks because they lack the inner workings required.
=Orks have the mob rule that is supposed to enforce large numbers. except it also applies to small units like nobs? they should benefit from being a horde, not looking at indiviual units and saying "well, pay a toll for not making that unit big enough"
=Nid's theme of synapse is a pure negative, and both the units feding on it (gaunt hordes for example) and the units meant to uphold it (warriors) are simply not good enough, they are pushed to abusing the few units who work around the problem/lists that hardly cares.
="Astra Millitarum" (still going with IG) have the most unwieldy composite formation ever, and while the order system is great, the support pieces are just lacking in power level. most tanks overprice, and infantry paying as much as marines for upgrades who don't offer nearly as much of an effect, artillery and airforce are great but don't belong on the 72*48 table but only apocalypse ranges, and such. they are not built for the 1000-2000 scale, but the 2500+ on the massive table.
=Dark eldar, are practically non-existent because thier other eldar brothers (clowns, crafts and pirates) all out-do them in most fields, many of their units suck and the place they should have shined (leadership shenanigans) is disfunctional because every marine army is practically immune due to the DE's own rules saying ATSKNF is immune, so you really shouldn't even bother.

In contrast, look at codex marines, dark angels, eldar, necron new space wolves-they all HAVE a "gameplan", an inner synergy, proper tools to handle mostly anything and the ability to spin around multiple paths to victory. and the work, usually as good or better than tau too (well, eldar work TOO good due to a few choice OP units, but if you took the wraithknight/scatbike/spider out of the equasion, the army would work properly)

Don't bring the tau down, mark the disfunctional into real armies, rather than the mash of random unrelated units they are today.

how to balance dysfunctional and tau? stick to a single CAD with (possibly) a single ally (see below), Leave the formations at home, but allow your opponent to field whatever they want.

I will say it again. . .
the last game that I played, the shrieks of outrage weren't over my stormsurge, but rather my Culexus. (so be careful which ally you bring too)

So going to cover a few points brought up...

1) the only unit that has "networked" markerlights are the Skyray and the Sunshark bomber. So it doesn't matter if FW's or any unit has its own markerlights.. they cant use them. and if we do take them, then we are looking at committing multiple units at ONE target. and if you know this MSU.

2) If you are worried about potentially 40 shots coming from one squad of FWs... which averagly downs only 4.5 marines.. and at BS5 from markers only..7.5 marines.. remember how many points we dropped to get that.. at a minimum 110 points (154 w/ pathfinders to get 2 marker hits).. and that was for a guy that by default has no save, and gives up an extra victory point.. and another that is still t3 with a 4+ save. Oh and they can't move else they don't get to fire the extra shot.

3) If even after (2) you are still worried.. Marines MSU like nobody else. Sure i have a 10 man squad in a pod.. oh .. they are 2x5 man squads now when they deploy in your face. So all those shots go into 1 unit and doesn't really matter how many i have then.. you have another

4) I realize its not always reliable.. but that said.. marines do have ways to gain their buffs through their psychers and chapter tactics.. Imperial fists, just reroll 1s wow. Ultrasmurfs.. dont get me started as you can potentially use everything twice in your parking lot lists... LIBRARIAN CONCLAVE.. take Tiggy and you literally now can nearly get all the psychic powers you need to be viable and will statistically get successes for them all.

5) Using point (4) you have access to invisibility preventing pie plates regardless of marker buffs (which still snap fire themselves)


Point is.. Marines have an equal internal synergy, people just for some reason don't think about it in the same way because Tau's is completely focused to one phase where theirs are split to two to three phases.

You know what is really scary as a Tau player.. when a white scars biker army on their turn 1 is in your face because they can move 24" and then act as normal. (one of many examples.. of good marine lists)

Large durable Monstrous creatures are just so unfun to play against. When you fight vehicles, you know that if you get a penetrating hit, even if you fail to kill it you may do some extra, useful damage like immobilize, Stun, destroy a weapon etc. This makes vehicles also fun to play with, your Tank lost its main gun, what to do? No worries, you can still find ways to make use of it.

By contrast, Monstrous Creatures just lose a wound when you get by their save, no extra effects, you can't instakill it. They stomp on with maximum combat effectiveness until you grind down their last wound, then they disappear. No explosion, no crater, no nothing. It is so BORING.
Sure Tau aren't the only offender but they are amongst the worst. And it is made worse by that Tau actually have a selection of interesting, variable vehicles, they just never see use because their rules are so crappy compared to Giant Monster Robots.

Good luck anyone trying to convince me, or even yourself that for example this list is any fun to play against.

Backfire wrote:
Large durable Monstrous creatures are just so unfun to play against. When you fight vehicles, you know that if you get a penetrating hit, even if you fail to kill it you may do some extra, useful damage like immobilize, Stun, destroy a weapon etc. This makes vehicles also fun to play with, your Tank lost its main gun, what to do? No worries, you can still find ways to make use of it.

By contrast, Monstrous Creatures just lose a wound when you get by their save, no extra effects, you can't instakill it. They stomp on with maximum combat effectiveness until you grind down their last wound, then they disappear. No explosion, no crater, no nothing. It is so BORING.
Sure Tau aren't the only offender but they are amongst the worst. And it is made worse by that Tau actually have a selection of interesting, variable vehicles, they just never see use because their rules are so crappy compared to Giant Monster Robots.

Good luck anyone trying to convince me, or even yourself that for example this list is any fun to play against.

The problem is not with MCs its that tanks are awful in the current Meta.. the fact that they CAN explode and take random damage is what brings them down a lot. MCs can be ID.. they are also susceptible to maledictions and other psychic witchfires/novas etc.
-------
I saw that list, it is by far a ROCK in the rock paper scissor game.. its completely min-maxed and thus has some serious counters. You think that List is unbeatable.. Ask Alex Harrison if he is afraid of that list with his warp spider spam? Wounding all of them on 2s and flicker jumping when they are targeted. Additionally riptides have the least optimal loadout of Tau to take down wraithknights.

Grey knights would be laughing at that list.. Psilencer finally has some uses here, plus all their other force weapons.

I think BOLS Goatboy and his harliquins might even have a decent shot here with some trickery. As the are still Tau in CC.

Dark Angels 2+ reroll shenanigans.. no markerlights

Standard marines though.. so many psychic options not to mention MSU. Only 1 turn you need to worry about the double shooting phase. and with no markerlights you can jink and take all the cover saves you want. Run a Librarious conclave star run up .. lower their leadership and psychic shriek. More then likely you will kill a riptide.. and then at lower leadership they most likely will fail and fall back .... and since they DONT have ATSKNF they will need to then regroup and if they do, they are snapfiring for another turn... devastating if that is on a 3 man riptide squad.

He also has 0 objective secured where space marines have ALL objective secured units in their decurian. MAYBE you can't outgun them, but you certainly can win the game in other areas. I am waiting to hear back from his tournament to see how it actually did in practice.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

The problem is not with MCs its that tanks are awful in the current Meta.. the fact that they CAN explode and take random damage is what brings them down a lot. MCs can be ID.. they are also susceptible to maledictions and other psychic witchfires/novas etc.

Tanks are awful because MC's do not have similar weaknesses they should, by all logic, have (why doesn't Riptide ever blow up? It has a huge Power reactor just like a tank). "Random damage" which makes vehicles "awful" is one of the factors why they are fun. It would be boring if they were given same wound/save mechanic like MC or infantry.

ID'ing a MC is very rare, compared to the rate vehicles blow up to normal shooting or Close combat attacks. People always bring up Force weapons, but almost all Force weapons are AP3 and Riptide is 2+ T6. In fact your typical Force weapon is more likely to hurt a tank than a Riptide!

 Grizzyzz wrote:

I saw that list, it is by far a ROCK in the rock paper scissor game.. its completely min-maxed and thus has some serious counters. You think that List is unbeatable.. Ask Alex Harrison if he is afraid of that list with his warp spider spam? Wounding all of them on 2s and flicker jumping when they are targeted.

I don't think the list is unbeatable. Far from it. I claim it is not fun to play against, regardless of what army, list or units you yourself have. I play this game to have FUN.

Backfire wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

The problem is not with MCs its that tanks are awful in the current Meta.. the fact that they CAN explode and take random damage is what brings them down a lot. MCs can be ID.. they are also susceptible to maledictions and other psychic witchfires/novas etc.

Tanks are awful because MC's do not have similar weaknesses they should, by all logic, have (why doesn't Riptide ever blow up? It has a huge Power reactor just like a tank). "Random damage" which makes vehicles "awful" is one of the factors why they are fun. It would be boring if they were given same wound/save mechanic like MC or infantry.

ID'ing a MC is very rare, compared to the rate vehicles blow up to normal shooting or Close combat attacks. People always bring up Force weapons, but almost all Force weapons are AP3 and Riptide is 2+ T6. In fact your typical Force weapon is more likely to hurt a tank than a Riptide!

There was a Proposed rules thread on vehicles not long ago, and I think the majority of people would respectfully disagree with you that vehicles are fun to play because they might explode haha. In fact most of the rules fixes suggested were to give them a toughness and armor save.. Any way not trying to argue about vehicles here.. just tossing you some info to check out

Backfire wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

I saw that list, it is by far a ROCK in the rock paper scissor game.. its completely min-maxed and thus has some serious counters. You think that List is unbeatable.. Ask Alex Harrison if he is afraid of that list with his warp spider spam? Wounding all of them on 2s and flicker jumping when they are targeted.

I don't think the list is unbeatable. Far from it. I claim it is not fun to play against, regardless of what army, list or units you yourself have. I play this game to have FUN.

That is extremely reasonable. I also love fun games. Today I am about to play a Harlequin List against my friends GKs.. it is absolutely not in my favor lol ..

To be fair to the OP of that list.. he was making a Tournament list.. not one to play for fun .

" MCs can be ID."

Not with their T vaues. The other ID mechanics are far too rare to be considered a real threat.

Martel732 wrote:
" MCs can be ID."

Not with their T vaues. The other ID mechanics are far too rare to be considered a real threat.

Pfff, why would you need Instant Death anymore when you have D-weapons?

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" MCs can be ID."

Not with their T vaues. The other ID mechanics are far too rare to be considered a real threat.

Pfff, why would you need Instant Death anymore when you have D-weapons?

There's that, too, but since MCs usually have more wounds than tanks have hps, they are better against those, too. Not to mention real cover saves.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" MCs can be ID."

Not with their T vaues. The other ID mechanics are far too rare to be considered a real threat.

Pfff, why would you need Instant Death anymore when you have D-weapons?

There's that, too, but since MCs usually have more wounds than tanks have hps, they are better against those, too. Not to mention real cover saves.

I thought you couldn't "take cover" against D weapons. as well as FNPs for that matter. But i think his point still stands that those are not rare in the current meta.

Why would cover not work against D weapons?

D weapons aren't rare, but MCs are still better off.

The real issue is that it's much easier to glance out a vehice with mid STR, high ROF than it is to power down MCs with the same weapon.

Martel732 wrote:
Why would cover not work against D weapons?

D weapons aren't rare, but MCs are still better off.

Well, a 6 ignores even Cover.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Why would cover not work against D weapons?

D weapons aren't rare, but MCs are still better off.

Well, a 6 ignores even Cover.

The 2-5 results don't, though. That's what kills most targets with D. D weapons don't have the ROF to reliably generate "6"s. The 2-5 result is bad enough.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Why would cover not work against D weapons?

D weapons aren't rare, but MCs are still better off.

Well, a 6 ignores even Cover.

The 2-5 results don't, though. That's what kills most targets with D. D weapons don't have the ROF to reliably generate "6"s. The 2-5 result is bad enough.

Either way, Instant Death is becoming obsolete when armies have access to D weapons, especially D in CC.

That's very true. Although my codex suffers from a lack of Str D. Funny that. The BA have literally no good way to get rid of Riptides. None.

Maybe Tau players don't understand how undercosted the Riptide is because of D weapons. In which case, maybe it's not undercosted. Maybe the entire C:BA is OVERcosted. If I could bring say 25 tanks or 200 ASM to single battle, some might live to turn 3.

BoomWolf wrote:And of course tau has an answer to fething everything-IT SHOULD

No, it shouldn't.

Every army should have determinate strengths and weaknesses inherent to that army. Space marines SHOULD be the toughest, most capable and well equipped infantry in the game. They should NOT be able to maintain an overwhelming numerical presence on the battlefield.

Eldar SHOULD be a highly specialized, highly mobile army of space elf ninjas. They should NOT be unstoppable destruction machines, nor should they have unkillable giant robots.

Tau SHOULD be highly capable in the shooting phase. It should NOT be impossible to get Tau into close combat, and Tau SHOULD crumble when you do get close enough to chain-sword bash them in the face. Nor, again, should they have unkillable giant robots.

Picking an army should be like picking weapons and armor in Dark Souls 1. Oh, you want to wear havels armor? Fine. But you aren't going anywhere fast. You want to use a great sword? Fine. But your striking speed is going to be SLOW.

Havel in Dark Souls 1 SHOULD NOT have an answer to me circling around him and stabbing him in the back. That should be inherent to the weapons and armor that he uses.

I don't object to the giant robots as much as the *unkillable* part.

Traditio wrote:

BoomWolf wrote:And of course tau has an answer to fething everything-IT SHOULD

No, it shouldn't.

Every army should have determinate strengths and weaknesses inherent to that army. Space marines SHOULD be the toughest, most capable infantry in the game. They should NOT be able to maintain an overwhelming numerical presence on the battlefield.

Eldar SHOULD be a highly specialized, highly mobile army of space elf ninjas. They should NOT be unstoppable destruction machines, nor should they have unkillable giant robots.

Tau SHOULD be highly capable in the shooting phase. It should NOT be impossible to get Tau into close combat, and Tau SHOULD crumble when you do get close enough to chain-sword bash them in the face. Nor, again, should they have unkillable giant robots.

Picking an army should be like picking weapons and armor in Dark Souls 1. Oh, you want to wear havels armor? Fine. But you aren't going anywhere fast. You want to use a great sword? Fine. But your striking speed is going to be SLOW.

Havel in Dark Souls 1 SHOULD NOT have an answer to me circling around him and stabbing him in the back. That should be inherent to the weapons and armor that he uses.

In a perfect world.

The worst part is that the Riptide is a beautiful model, but I hate the rules so much that I just want to mallet all of them to pieces.

Martel732 wrote:
The worst part is that the Riptide is a beautiful model, but I hate the rules so much that I just want to mallet all of them to pieces.

I have the same feelings, especially for the Wraithknight.

krodarklorr wrote:In a perfect world.

You say that, but I think that Necrons are pretty close to what I'm describing.

Necrons ARE the toughest infantry in the game to kill.

But they pay for it in:

1. Relatively high points costs (in point of fact, the points cost should be a bit higher).
2. Relative lack of transport options.
3. General incompetence in the assault phase and
4. Relative lack of shooting capability. Necron infantry mostly have a 30 inch threat range (6 inch move + 24 inch range for their guns).

Again, that's why I like playing Necrons. I think that Necrons are fun to play against.

Playing Necrons is like wearing Havel's armor and wielding a short sword.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The worst part is that the Riptide is a beautiful model, but I hate the rules so much that I just want to mallet all of them to pieces.

I have the same feelings, especially for the Wraithknight.

That thing is even worse, actually.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Traditio wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:In a perfect world.

You say that, but I think that Necrons are pretty close to what I'm describing.

Necrons ARE the toughest infantry in the game to kill.

But they pay for it in:

1. Relatively high points costs (in point of fact, the points cost should be a bit higher).
2. Relative lack of transport options.
3. General incompetence in the assault phase and
4. Relative lack of shooting capability. Necron infantry mostly have a 30 inch threat range (6 inch move + 24 inch range for their guns).

Again, that's why I like playing Necrons. I think that Necrons are fun to play against.

Necrons are NOT incompetent in assault. Not even close.

Traditio wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:In a perfect world.

You say that, but I think that Necrons are pretty close to what I'm describing.

Necrons ARE the toughest infantry in the game to kill.

But they pay for it in:

1. Relatively high points costs (in point of fact, the points cost should be a bit higher).
2. Relative lack of transport options.
3. General incompetence in the assault phase and
4. Relative lack of shooting capability. Necron infantry mostly have a 30 inch threat range (6 inch move + 24 inch range for their guns).

Again, that's why I like playing Necrons. I think that Necrons are fun to play against.

I also think that Necrons are the most internally balanced codex in the game right now. Everything is decent and can be used effectively. The externally you start to see things like Scatterbikes, D weapon spam, Stomps, ext.

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons are NOT incompetent in assault. Not even close.

The average Necron infantry is roughly as capable as an upgraded tactical marine. Marines have higher intiative, but necrons have reanimation protocols.

Necrons do have dedicated assault units, of course.

Necrons are tough, but they can't throttle me the way that Gladius marines, centstar marines, Eldar or Tau do. They just can't kill me off nearly as quickly which means more things can go wrong for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Traditio wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons are NOT incompetent in assault. Not even close.

The average Necron infantry is roughly as capable as an upgraded tactical marine. Marines have higher intiative, but necrons have reanimation protocols.

Necrons do have dedicated assault units, of course.

They also have access to relentless which means they can double tap and then assault. And take even fewer wounds in CC than tac marines.