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.

Martel732 wrote:
Actual space marines were too powerful in 3rd ed. There is little debate to this. Sweeping advance was a thing, as was Rhino rush.

Four editions later, meqs are back where they were in 2nd. Marines don't make marine lists good, things like grav cents do. I'm not an Astartes supremacist, but I object to them being busted back down to cannon fodder that don't last any longer than guardsmen.

1000 men in your whole chapter and you are reduced to fodder for a tactical marine. Such a sad state.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Please quit trying to use GW's terrible fluff to justify in game stats.

Perhaps Traditio should be told that.

Exalted beyond all belief. I'd reiterate my points, but what's the use?

Martel732 wrote:

 Jewelfox wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I'm just used to pre-built lists with no discussion

I think I see your problem.

All players names go in a kitty with their list. Opponents are randomly assigned. People can not change their list after submission for a reason. (No tailoring) Why do you think this should be a problem?

If there isn't a problem, then why did you threadjack my request for advice in order to complain about the injustice of having to bring grav in that situation?

Maybe you can also tell me what I can bring, as Tau, that can deal with a Knight and costs less than a Stormsurge (and won't make people raeg like a Stormsurge).

Knights, in the scheme of things, are actually very mediocre. They take a fraction of the firepower to bring down compared to a stormsurge or riptide. Their firepower is also meh.

 Jewelfox wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not certain why they took away the idea of Kroot being assault thugs. That made Tau less helpless against opponents in melee range and reduced the need to massacre every last enemy before they could assault.

Maybe because we're powerful enough as it is, without being half-decent in assault.

I liked the idea of melee Kroot, though.

Kroot weren't massively decent, even when they were S4. If anything their overall power got buffed thanks to sniper rounds whilst at the same time stripping them of the flavour and fluff that they had brought to the Tau previously.

Martel732 wrote:
Knights, in the scheme of things, are actually very mediocre. They take a fraction of the firepower to bring down compared to a stormsurge or riptide. Their firepower is also meh.

Who needs Firepower when you can point-n-stomp things off the board?

Feth it, you guys are right, I shouldn't be playing this game

Same thing most other factions do.

Moar "normal" troops. Fire Warriors. Kroot.

A Crisis team is cool. An army of them is not.

A Broadside is fun. Max Broadsides is not.

Do stuff with troops. Don't spam. Don't bring Walkers that get MC rules. Etc.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Jewelfox wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not certain why they took away the idea of Kroot being assault thugs. That made Tau less helpless against opponents in melee range and reduced the need to massacre every last enemy before they could assault.

Maybe because we're powerful enough as it is, without being half-decent in assault.

I liked the idea of melee Kroot, though.

Kroot weren't massively decent, even when they were S4. If anything their overall power got buffed thanks to sniper rounds whilst at the same time stripping them of the flavour and fluff that they had brought to the Tau previously.

Frankly kroot being melee made sense and made them stand out. At least they were something different. I don't think tau really need a second good Shooty infantry. Now kroot just seem flavorless. Melee kroot were nice.

Also give me back my strength 10 broadsides.

And put tetras in the main book

And make plastic barracudas

 Jaxler wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Jewelfox wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not certain why they took away the idea of Kroot being assault thugs. That made Tau less helpless against opponents in melee range and reduced the need to massacre every last enemy before they could assault.

Maybe because we're powerful enough as it is, without being half-decent in assault.

I liked the idea of melee Kroot, though.

Kroot weren't massively decent, even when they were S4. If anything their overall power got buffed thanks to sniper rounds whilst at the same time stripping them of the flavour and fluff that they had brought to the Tau previously.

Frankly kroot being melee made sense and made them stand out. At least they were something different. I don't think tau really need a second good Shooty infantry. Now kroot just seem flavorless. Melee kroot were nice.

Also give me back my strength 10 broadsides.

And put tetras in the main book

And make plastic barracudas

And bring back the fun FW Kroot units.

I'm going to caveat the following by pointing out that I played Tau mostly in 4th ed, and currently play them as a mech force with no Riptides.

I have found that they are only really enjoyable to play against if your opponent:
1) has played against Tau before.
2) really enjoys the tactical movement and positioning aspects of the game.

The reason I say this is that Tau can be one of the most disheartening armies to play against. Most games involve your opponent picking up models for the first two turns, and either crashing into your lines and destroying all your stuff, or failing to get there and falling apart.
They really feel like a glass cannon, where if your opponent pushes up the middle of the field, with no concern for flanking or cover, they're going to get shot to pieces right quick. However, if they're smart about flanking, and unit positioning, all you need to do is get a few units into CC to make the whole army fall apart.

True story, one of the most enjoyable games I've had with Tau in recent memory literally revolved around a flanking multi assault by a 5 man squad of raptors into a unit of Fire Warriors, and a unit of Broadsides. At one point, the actual phrase used was "I only need three of these guys to make it so I can wipe out this flank". They made it, won combat and swept the remaining Fire Warriors, and 2 Broadsides.

I only bothered to read about 5 pages of this before i had to stop and start laughing. People trying to defend Tau and Eldar LMAO.

9ppm Firewarrior:
2 3 3 3 1 2 1 7
defensive grenades, s5 gun Rng 30 rapid fire

6ppm Ork
4 2 3 4 1 2 2 7
Grenades S4 rng 12 pistol

600 pts of Boyz vs 400pts of Fire warriors thats 100 boyz vs 44 Fire warriors.

Starting at Range 30
Turn 1
Firewarrriors shoot first 44 shots 22 hits 14 wounds 14 dead Orks. Orks move up 6 run 4 and thats it.

Turn 2
Firewarriors shoot 44 shots, 22 hits 14 more dead orks.
Orks move up 6, run 4 and thats it, they are now 10 inches away from Firewarriors.

Turn 3
Firewarrriors move back 6 double tap orks for 28 dead orks, they are now down to 44 boyz against the Tau who haven't lost a single model. Boyz move up 6 (10 inches away) attempt a charge, probably fail, but for the sake of YOLO lets say they make it, OVERWATCH!
88 shots hitting on 6s = 14ish hits, 10ish wounds 10 ish dead orks, Orks are now down to 34 boyz and just failed the charge because removing 10 models ruined the charge distance.

Turn 4, Orks concede because GW hates them and Tau goes on to complain about how they need buffs because the Orks almost hit them with a knife.

This also doesn't take into account the fact that Tau can just run backwards the entire time and stay barely within range and continue to infuriate the ork player

ThatGuyFromThatPlace wrote:
I only bothered to read about 5 pages of this before i had to stop and start laughing. People trying to defend Tau and Eldar LMAO.

9ppm Firewarrior:
2 3 3 3 1 2 1 7
defensive grenades, s5 gun Rng 30 rapid fire

6ppm Ork
4 2 3 4 1 2 2 7
Grenades S4 rng 12 pistol

600 pts of Boyz vs 400pts of Fire warriors thats 100 boyz vs 44 Fire warriors.

Starting at Range 30
Turn 1
Firewarrriors shoot first 44 shots 22 hits 14 wounds 14 dead Orks. Orks move up 6 run 4 and thats it.

Turn 2
Firewarriors shoot 44 shots, 22 hits 14 more dead orks.
Orks move up 6, run 4 and thats it, they are now 10 inches away from Firewarriors.

Turn 3
Firewarrriors move back 6 double tap orks for 28 dead orks, they are now down to 44 boyz against the Tau who haven't lost a single model. Boyz move up 6 (10 inches away) attempt a charge, probably fail, but for the sake of YOLO lets say they make it, OVERWATCH!
88 shots hitting on 6s = 14ish hits, 10ish wounds 10 ish dead orks, Orks are now down to 34 boyz and just failed the charge because removing 10 models ruined the charge distance.

Turn 4, Orks concede because GW hates them and Tau goes on to complain about how they need buffs because the Orks almost hit them with a knife.

This also doesn't take into account the fact that Tau can just run backwards the entire time and stay barely within range and continue to infuriate the ork player

Unit A vs unit B is always going to be a gak comparison. You're ignoring so many important factors as to weather or not a unit is good that it's really pointless. Nobody will ever run an army of just 400 points worth of fire warriors, and I don't expect you to do a bunch of boys with no actual support for them. As such, your hypothetical situation is really a rather pointless one that proves nothing.

ThatGuyFromThatPlace wrote:
I only bothered to read about 5 pages of this before i had to stop and start laughing. People trying to defend Tau and Eldar LMAO.

9ppm Firewarrior:
2 3 3 3 1 2 1 7
defensive grenades, s5 gun Rng 30 rapid fire

6ppm Ork
4 2 3 4 1 2 2 7
Grenades S4 rng 12 pistol

600 pts of Boyz vs 400pts of Fire warriors thats 100 boyz vs 44 Fire warriors.

Starting at Range 30
Turn 1
Firewarrriors shoot first 44 shots 22 hits 14 wounds 14 dead Orks. Orks move up 6 run 4 and thats it.

Turn 2
Firewarriors shoot 44 shots, 22 hits 14 more dead orks.
Orks move up 6, run 4 and thats it, they are now 10 inches away from Firewarriors.

Turn 3
Firewarrriors move back 6 double tap orks for 28 dead orks, they are now down to 44 boyz against the Tau who haven't lost a single model. Boyz move up 6 (10 inches away) attempt a charge, probably fail, but for the sake of YOLO lets say they make it, OVERWATCH!
88 shots hitting on 6s = 14ish hits, 10ish wounds 10 ish dead orks, Orks are now down to 34 boyz and just failed the charge because removing 10 models ruined the charge distance.

Turn 4, Orks concede because GW hates them and Tau goes on to complain about how they need buffs because the Orks almost hit them with a knife.

This also doesn't take into account the fact that Tau can just run backwards the entire time and stay barely within range and continue to infuriate the ork player

I don't think you know how to play the game.

bleak wrote:

ThatGuyFromThatPlace wrote:
I only bothered to read about 5 pages of this before i had to stop and start laughing. People trying to defend Tau and Eldar LMAO.

9ppm Firewarrior:
2 3 3 3 1 2 1 7
defensive grenades, s5 gun Rng 30 rapid fire

6ppm Ork
4 2 3 4 1 2 2 7
Grenades S4 rng 12 pistol

600 pts of Boyz vs 400pts of Fire warriors thats 100 boyz vs 44 Fire warriors.

Starting at Range 30
Turn 1
Firewarrriors shoot first 44 shots 22 hits 14 wounds 14 dead Orks. Orks move up 6 run 4 and thats it.

Turn 2
Firewarriors shoot 44 shots, 22 hits 14 more dead orks.
Orks move up 6, run 4 and thats it, they are now 10 inches away from Firewarriors.

Turn 3
Firewarrriors move back 6 double tap orks for 28 dead orks, they are now down to 44 boyz against the Tau who haven't lost a single model. Boyz move up 6 (10 inches away) attempt a charge, probably fail, but for the sake of YOLO lets say they make it, OVERWATCH!
88 shots hitting on 6s = 14ish hits, 10ish wounds 10 ish dead orks, Orks are now down to 34 boyz and just failed the charge because removing 10 models ruined the charge distance.

Turn 4, Orks concede because GW hates them and Tau goes on to complain about how they need buffs because the Orks almost hit them with a knife.

This also doesn't take into account the fact that Tau can just run backwards the entire time and stay barely within range and continue to infuriate the ork player

I don't think you know how to play the game.

well since someone thought it was perfectly ok to compare Space Marine tacticals to Tau Firewarriors I went ahead and did the same thing. Clearly its not a real game scenario, my point though is that in this edition stat lines don't mean anything. Realistically the only stats (in 7th edition) that matter are BS, T, W Sv and LD to an extent. WS, Initiative attacks and strength are almost worthless because you never get to CC, or if you do your killed the following turn when you wipe out your target. So when you compare a Space Marines statline and a Fire warriors and go "Ohh well see the Space Marine has better stats across the board he should cost way more" you fail to take into account that in a shooty edition, the side that can put more rounds down range quickest is going to win.

A SM is humanities Elite, he is armed with a rapid fire rifle that shoots RPGs for all intents and purposes. If Tau had the same S4 with 30 inch range it wouldn't be as big of a deal, but since GW decided to give these guys a S5 rifle at 30 inches it becomes a big deal. Not to mention they can then buff entire units with better BS and ignores cover for a few more points.

The point we are trying to make is that Tau Fire warriors and tau in general are under costed for what they do because they are a shooty army in a shooty edition. Orks, Space Marines, Nids and other armies are paying premium points for Close Combat stats in a game right now where Close combat is significantly diminished.

I have played Orks for a long time and I generally don't turn down games unless the person is a known TFG WAAC player. However, I actively dread playing against Tau because I know that its going to be a long game of me trying to hide from LoS and then removing every model that I don't manage to hide. It is not enjoyable because GW has given Tau to many ranged abilities and given CC armies very few ways to mitigate them or find a way to get close to the assault in order to stop the ranged slaughter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And of course that isn't even touching on the fact that all of the Tau Vehicles are in fact MC and GMC so therefore are even HARDER to get rid of when you do get close enough because....reasons.

If all tau suits were Vehicles and followed those rules it would be a different story.

Do 400 points of orks vs. 600 points of Crisis Suits. No weapons on them, because apparently you don't allow that in your comparisons.

Buff Crisis Suits!

 raverrn wrote:
Do 400 points of orks vs. 600 points of Crisis Suits. No weapons on them, because apparently you don't allow that in your comparisons.

Buff Crisis Suits!

Which buffs would you give the Orks in my previous scenario that would allow them to win that particular fight? Go ahead and crunch the numbers, for every 10 boyz take a heavy weapon, for every 10 you can take a nob with a PK, if you really want you can upgrade them 4pts a model with Eavy armor to give them a 4+ save.

SO do the math, or let me know which upgrades you would use, list tailor to win that fight? probably just the 4+ armor so orks become 10pts a model (more expensive then Fire warriors) Here i'll even do it for you, no upgrades for the Tau and 4+ armor for the Boyz. 400pts of fire warriors is again 44 Fire Warriors vs 600pts of orks or 60 Boyz in Eavy Armor.

Turn one the Tau fire 44 shots, 22 hits, 14 wounds 7 dead orks, orks move 6 and run 4 (20 inches away.)
Turn two the tau move back 6 inches, fire 44 shots kill 7 more orks, Orks move forward 6 run 4 (16 inches away)
Turn three tau move back 6 inches, fire 44 shots and kill 7 more orks, Orks move forward 6 run 4 (12 inches away)
Turn four Tau move back 6 inches, fire 44 shots, kill 7 more orks, Orks move forward 6 run 4 (8 inches away)
Turn five Tau move back 6 inches DOUBLE TAP fire 88 shots kill 14 more orks, orks move forward 6 attempt 8 inch Charge, OVERWATCH 88 shots = 14 hits 10 wounds and 5 more dead orks. Total casualties so far: Tau: 0 Orks: 47. Orks now have 13 remaining models Tau have 44.

This of course is in a vacuum, no intervening terrain, no other units inflicting random damage and other factors. The point is that in a shooty game Tau reign supreme where as all CC armies languish in the dust.

So please tell me which buffs would help the ork Boyz more? I am talking about basic ork gear no added ICs and such.

What buffs? Battlewagons. KFF. Mega-armored characters.

This is a tactical game, not a WWI reenactment.

 raverrn wrote:
What buffs? Battlewagons.

So for Ork boyz to be effective against Tau Fire warriors they need to take a 110 pt (Naked) Heavy Support choice?

You just edited so let me do likewise, KFF has to be taken on an IC so thats a 50pt upgrade on a 35pt model or 39 with eavy armor or 75 if you give them Mega Armor. Your quickly racking up those points my friend. And a KFF only gives a 6inch radius bubble that grants a 5++ to shooting attacks. Also if you put him in Mega Armor you can't run your boyz so your exposed to more shooting.

Again, im well aware this isn't a WW1 battle, I am doing the numbers in a vacuum as I pointed out. Since you can't follow the simple premise of boyz vs Fire Warriors, go ahead and make me the strongest Codex Complaint, BOUND ork list you can that would beat your average TAU list.

Yes. Just like they need one to be effective against Knights or Thunderfire Cannons.

 raverrn wrote:
Yes. Just like they need one to be effective against Knights or Thunderfire Cannons.

I am very well aware of that, however the point I was making is that Fire Warriors are SUPERIOR to Ork boyz and tactical Space Marines, or really any type of unit that spends most of its points for CC stats in 7th edition where shooting is so much stronger then assault.

I think everyone was already acutely aware that Orks are near bottom tier and obviously lose to Tau in any sensible match up.

 Blacksails wrote:
I think everyone was already acutely aware that Orks are near bottom tier and obviously lose to Tau in any sensible match up.

True Blacksails but again the point I was making was for ALL armies and units that spend points on CC weapons and stats. Tau prove that having MC, Battle Suit infantry, regular infantry and GMC that spend their points on ranged weapons are superior to similar units that spend their points on CC.

I honestly can't think of any unit that does CC predominantly that is worth much in this game with maybe the exception of the Necron one, and only then because it comes in a formation that for all intents and purposes gives is a 4+ FNP that can't be taken away, as well as an invul save. And that unit is only worth as much as it is because on top of the durability it has, it is inside a group of necrons that lay down a fairly impressive amount of fire power.

If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it worthwhile.

Comparing a top tier army with a solid troop choice against a bottom tier army with a weak troop choice doesn't show much of anything.

Its like comparing riptides to ratlings and then declaring that Tau/Riptides are OP. No gak, we knew that before the comparison was made to an obviously bottom tier unit.

Now, as you pointed out, a comparison to necrons would much more apt and carry some weight in a point.

Dreadknights seem to do melee very well. As do Imperial Knights. Wulfen are fantastic in CC.

The point you're trying to make is slow, poorly protected melee units are bad.

Don't bring really powerful units against weaker tier codex. Mix it up a bit if you can with weaker units. House rules. Give your opponent extra points if you have something super strong. Feel free to discuss what you would like to bring in advance. Play with more terrain.
My friend doesn't bring multiple heldrakes and I don't run all Ravenwing. Done. Sometimes we play scenarios. Like if he ran a complete nurgle army against a fortified dark Angels fortress with just a space marines company of dark Angels how long would it last? One sided? OK how so? Not enough terrain. OK let's run it in a city and make it khorne demonkin. It was a blood bath. Sure I can overwatch at full bs but with all the cover and kill zones my marines died in droves. Point is the game is just that. Play what you like and talk to others to find what they like.

 Blacksails wrote:
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it worthwhile.

Comparing a top tier army with a solid troop choice against a bottom tier army with a weak troop choice doesn't show much of anything.

Its like comparing riptides to ratlings and then declaring that Tau/Riptides are OP. No gak, we knew that before the comparison was made to an obviously bottom tier unit.

Now, as you pointed out, a comparison to necrons would much more apt and carry some weight in a point.

Necron warriors are themselves shootyish and only cost as much as they do because of there durability, not there CC statlines (which are decent except the initiative being 2) Put another way, if I lowered Necron Warriors WS to 2 would it drastically effect their army? But by the same token would I then be justified in reducing their price by 2 pts? Of course the cost of the unit is also a direct reflection of the weapon as well, gauss is very good but similar to bolters, but for some reason space Marines are still more expensive, even though Necron warriors have almost the exact same stats except initiative (2 lower), leadership (2 higher) and Armor save (necrons 4 SM 3) but necrons also have that wonderfully inbuilt 5+ RP which realistically makes them more durable then a marine.

Regardless the point I was making was that CC armies and units are weaker then Shooty armies and units, but since there are ZERO "Top Tier" armies with CC Infantry its rather hard to comply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 raverrn wrote:
Dreadknights seem to do melee very well. As do Imperial Knights. Wulfen are fantastic in CC.

The point you're trying to make is slow, poorly protected melee units are bad.

Dreadknights do not do well in melee, they might be able to beat up weak CC units but most of a Dreadnights points are spent on his durability and his amazing ranged weapons. Even with all of that I recently killed a dreadknight in CC with a Warboss on a bike and a Painboy on bike attached to a warbike squad. At the end of combat I only had 2 wounds on my warboss and 1 on my painboy and the unit of 5 warbikers (including a nob) were dead. But guess what? those 4 warbiker wounds, 2 Nob biker wounds all came from the Dreadknights SHOOTING, he managed 2 wounds on the unit once it got into CC.

Imperial Knights do very good in CC if you can get them there. Not because they are good at CC (They Aren't) but because they are a super heavy walker and benefit from the "Stomp" rule. I have yet to face wulfen (or space wolves in general) so I can't comment.

The point I made is very plain to see and doesn't involve "Poorly protected melee units" but ALL Melee units. The fact that two of your units you used to say are good units are some of the shootiest in the game tells you something.

Marines have several advantages over 'crons - Pistols and grenades, ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics....

And lol at Dreadknight shooting being anything but mediocre. S7 AP4 that doesn't even have the decency to ignore cover.

 raverrn wrote:
Marines have several advantages over 'crons - Pistols and grenades, ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics....

And Necrons have a 5+ RP that can be turned into a 4+ RP. So realistically they are even or more likely leaning in favor of the Necrons, ATSKNF is good, but again its really only good for CC.

As soon as you bring formations into it SM get free transports, and that drives cost way, way, way down.