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:
Okay substitute marines with "BA" then. However, you are speaking of very SPECIFIC combinations. In general, the more models you can hit with a buff, the better it is. Giving a 50 man guard squad a 4+ invuln save means a lot more than giving 5 marines a 4+invlun save. I don't see how that is debateable.

Because you are specifying 5 Marines. Replace 5 marines with 10 Marines, or 5 [superspecialsnowflakeunit X] or the like. You would never give the power to 5 Marines, but even if you did it would still be a far better investment of the power.

Giving BS 3 models a reroll to hit is a percentage bigger jump in hits than giving it to BS 4.

WHAAATTTTT? With BS 4 rerolling to hit you are getting far more hits than with BS 3 rerolling.

BA can't make their units invincible to Tau. Not even close. That's why BA can't even entertain spamming psykers as a solution.

So its a BA problem. You do have a new supplement/army book coming out you know? And you also have it a lot easier than the Guard.

We all know what SW and superfriends death stars are all about. I'm talking about the rest of the field vs Tau.

Vanilla Marines can still fight Tau on an equal footing.

Read my post again and then think about your answers. Read carefully. Specifically the reroll part.

Martel732 is correct regarding the comparative boost in twin-linking, in terms of the raw firepower before and after.

BS 3 to Twin-linked BS 3 means you shift from hitting 50% of the time to hitting 75% of the time. That translates to a 50% increase in hits from the same unit.

BS 4 to Twin-linked BS 4 means you shift from hitting 67% of the time to hitting 89% of the time. That translates to a roughly 33% increase in hits from the same unit.

If the firepower-per-point were the same for the baseline BS 3 and baseline BS 4 units before they were twin-linked (and on that point, I'm not informed enough to have an opinion), the BS 3 unit increases its firepower-per-point in comparison to BS 4 unit.

Akiasura wrote:

Worst part? You can only do it once or twice, and many lists take 3 tides.

And here we come to the crux of the problem. Why, WHY are you playing these people??? Someone sits down opposite me, saying they have three 'tides and immediately I'm done. As I mentioned way back in the beginning of this thread, the problem w/ the Riptide is the ridiculously low cost and the fact that you can now take three as a single choice, or even worse - the Riptide wing, which shouldn't be a 'thing' at all.

The fact that people are allowing themselves to play against this douche-baggery is mind boggling to me. This is a game, it should be fun. Anything outside a tourney (which I do not participate in anymore, for exactly this reason), I would never expect to see someone bringing three Riptides. Certainly wouldn't play against them if that were the case.

And to the other points. Turning the Riptide into a Walker, immediately takes it out of contention for use. It would suddenly sit beside Vespid and our Flyers as the least used units in the codex. Which, it seems to me, is exactly what some people here want. Notice the amount of Dreadnaughts, War Walkers and Sentinals that are conspicuously absent from tables these days..? The 'fix' for the Riptide, in it's current state, is a bump to 250-260pts base, a 30pt Ion Accelerator and the EWO costing 20pts for the Riptide/Ghostkeel/Stormsurge, just like the pts difference for the Stim Injector between 'normal' suits and the Riptide. Still almost an auto-take, but now you're breaching Stormsurge territory for points costs, and starts making it hard to justify taking multiples. Also, with rare exceptions (I'm thinking 'nids, since they were the original 'MC'), MC/GMC's should never be able to be taken in squads. And Riptide Wing just needs to die in a fire.

However, before I would be prepared to accept these changes (other than the multiple models/squad), the same changes need to be implemented to the Wraithknight, and Grav Centurions need to die in the same fire that Riptide Wing needs to go to.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Martel732 is correct regarding the comparative boost in twin-linking, in terms of the raw firepower before and after.

BS 3 to Twin-linked BS 3 means you shift from hitting 50% of the time to hitting 75% of the time. That translates to a 50% increase in hits from the same unit.

BS 4 to Twin-linked BS 4 means you shift from hitting 67% of the time to hitting 89% of the time. That translates to a roughly 33% increase in hits from the same unit.

If the firepower-per-point were the same for the baseline BS 3 and baseline BS 4 units before they were twin-linked (and on that point, I'm not informed enough to have an opinion), the BS 3 unit increases its firepower-per-point in comparison to BS 4 unit.

If only, I wouldnt mind having S4 Lasguns hitting 75% of their shots.

Your lack of understanding of how anything works is, as usual, amazing. So I'll throw you a meatball. Who gets more benefit from misfortune? Marines or IG?

 Vryce wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

Worst part? You can only do it once or twice, and many lists take 3 tides.

And here we come to the crux of the problem. Why, WHY are you playing these people??? Someone sits down opposite me, saying they have three 'tides and immediately I'm done. As I mentioned way back in the beginning of this thread, the problem w/ the Riptide is the ridiculously low cost and the fact that you can now take three as a single choice, or even worse - the Riptide wing, which shouldn't be a 'thing' at all.

The fact that people are allowing themselves to play against this douche-baggery is mind boggling to me. This is a game, it should be fun. Anything outside a tourney (which I do not participate in anymore, for exactly this reason), I would never expect to see someone bringing three Riptides. Certainly wouldn't play against them if that were the case.

There are counters to 3 Tides, and they include deathstars, grav cents (who can delete two with a psyker casting a buff), wraith spam, and a few others. They are certainly not impossible to deal with, they are just up there with the most OP stuff in the game when in formation. Outside of formation, they probably fall a bit short of the most op list but still stand tall above nearly anything else that is a single unit (outside of the WK).
When I play my friends, and we have moved to warmachine since this year since it's less work to get a good game in, we agree on a power level and play. I don't bring Chaos to a Tide Wing match, I bring my ultra marines or wolves. I don't bring my cent star in against Tyranid MC spam, I use my orks or chaos instead. It's fine, but we all have to agree on the power level of things. Outside of one player, we mostly do since it's very obvious once you run some numbers.

Sometimes here you'll see people saying things like "maulerfiend spam is viable" or "riptides are fine" and I like to chime in based on my personal experiences. We prefer competitive lists and have large collections, so we have no trouble running the more obscene builds (though not gladius...honestly its too time consuming) and I like to comment from that viewpoint. People who enjoy that viewpoint don't have anything wrong with them, though I agree 40k is not the game for them. The balance in this game is godawful.
Since the original conversation was more "what can handle the riptide" I'd like to keep the conversation on that rather than "Why would you play anyone who uses more than 1 Riptide?". The former is a game discussion, the latter is all about making another player feel dirty for enjoying the game. I love big stompy robots, its why I play Cygnar and recently got into Karchev and his lists in WM, so I understand the appeal and don't fault anyone for it.

I don't mind big stompy robots, actually. I mind miscosted big stompy robots.

Martel, I think a big reason you mind them is most likely due to the fact you only own and play BA.

For me, I own nearly every army in the game. I don't mind these because I can play an army that can handle the tide. I own armies that get stomped by the tide into the ground without any hope of fighting back. If I only had the latter, this would bother me a lot more.

I also have a few forces in WMH that I play, so the state of 40k doesn't bother me much either. Some people here believe crazy things that involve math being tossed out the window, which seems really odd to me though 40k is more random than WMH so I guess I understand that, but the game is pretty simple. I'm surprised everyone debates power levels so much.

Everyone should mind miscosted units.

This game is heinously expensive. It is fair to expect that most people will only own one or a few armies.

I don't expect anyone to own anything, I'm just offering why some people feel that Riptides are fine (They play competitive forces) and why some don't (they play non-competitive forces). I think owning so many armies gives you a unique view point, but I've been playing for...wow 30 years? That can't be right...

Martel, miscosted units don't bother me personally. 40k has a ton of problems, and while miscosted units are certainly a large part, I don't think they are the worst offender. Formations seem much worse to me, and there are ton of other rules that make the game imbalanced.

If someone says the Tide isn't miscosted or is easy to handle, they're wrong. I don't disagree there. But I don't think a few units being undercosted is the reason the game is falling apart in regards to balance.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Martel732 is correct regarding the comparative boost in twin-linking, in terms of the raw firepower before and after.

BS 3 to Twin-linked BS 3 means you shift from hitting 50% of the time to hitting 75% of the time. That translates to a 50% increase in hits from the same unit.

BS 4 to Twin-linked BS 4 means you shift from hitting 67% of the time to hitting 89% of the time. That translates to a roughly 33% increase in hits from the same unit.

If the firepower-per-point were the same for the baseline BS 3 and baseline BS 4 units before they were twin-linked (and on that point, I'm not informed enough to have an opinion), the BS 3 unit increases its firepower-per-point in comparison to BS 4 unit.

If only, I wouldnt mind having S4 Lasguns hitting 75% of their shots.

In case my point wasn't clear enough (and unfortunately, that appears to be the case here), I've bolded the relevant portion of my argument.

When it comes to comparing SM and AM forces on a firepower-per-point basis, we're not just looking at the strength of each shot, but also the VOLUME of each unit's output. The comparison I'd be making would be X points of lasgun-toting BS 3 models versus X points of boltgun-toting BS 4 models, and the comparatively greater firepower-per-point would only apply if the inevitably higher-volume S3 shots (with a subsequently higher number of S3 hits, even when taking the difference in BS into account) was roughly equal, firepower-wise, to the lower-volume S4 shots.

Of course, if the baseline firepower is not equal - if even the higher number of lasgun hits per point doesn't equal the effectiveness of the lower number of boltgun hits per point, then boosting the AM's firepower would only work to make AM better (though the specific quantity of boost may result in only closing SOME of the gap, or overshooting the gap, depending on how close those baseline firepower quantities were to start).

This may well be a moot point, given that AM squads are so rarely (due to the mostly-agreed-upon premise that AM blobs are not a good choice) going to be in the quantities to make a single buffer able to actually affect equal-point-equivalents of SM.

This is also fairly tangentally related to the topic at hand, so this will be my last [attempt at] explanation of the above.

Cheers

Miscosted units are far worse than formations. It's not even close, really.

There are more than a few units miscosted. I'd say half the game easy.

Martel732 wrote:
Miscosted units are far worse than formations. It's not even close, really.

There are more than a few units miscosted. I'd say half the game easy.

I disagree. The issue is undercosted units taken in formations.

Formations which provide special rules (such as Riptide Wing) can exponentially increase the effectiveness of the units within it. When you combine that with a unit which is already undercosted (such as the IA Riptide) you get a perfect storm of bad game design which pushes an already powerful unit clean through the roof.

If the units weren't undercosted to being with, the formations wouldn't be an issue. No one complains about formations of terminators or wyches.

I can prove the undercosted thing is a bigger deal with one word: scatbike. And Wraithknight. Eldar CADs with these units wipe the floor with 95% of the formations in the game.

Riptide Wing wouldn't matter if Riptides weren't immortal vs 95% of the game's weapons to begin with. They could reroll nova reactor rolls all day, but if those rolls were only giving them a 4++, it wouldn't matter. Or if they straight up costed a lot more.

Martel732 wrote:
Miscosted units are far worse than formations. It's not even close, really.

There are more than a few units miscosted. I'd say half the game easy.

True, maybe I'd have to count but I'm easily willing to say 1/3-2/3 is debatable, but the overcosted ones don't really impact the game unless you play that army overly much. We can agree to disagree on formations, but it seems like for a lot of armies the formations are what breaks it. I should have been specific since I meant undercosted.
I don't think, for example, the tide and WK would be so bad if MC's weren't so good. If, for example, MC's suffered damage as wounds piled up like tanks do, they'd be more manageable. A few wounds on them and they go from OP to "okay, do I finish this off or have I done enough damage?" like you get with tanks. But MC's are broken by and large, and jumping ones even worse. Flying ones are also bad, see tyranids, and those are incredibly expensive, relatively speaking.

For formations;
Necrons are good, go to OP with decurion.
Eldar aspect warriors are good, though inferior to wraith forces mostly and Scatbikes, go to OP in formation quickly. I play aspect warriors since my old eldar force is biel-tan and I manage to do well against everything you can think of.
Gladius makes basic warriors/transports OP.
Riptide Wing makes them go from very good to OP.
And there are many others. It's basically free buffs to good units in return for not taking things you probably weren't going to. Or it's a massive point advantage.

Obviously somethings don't need formations, eldar forces for one, deathstars for another, but they do tend to break the game when they are good. WMH had issues with these as well, EE was running the field for a long time and denny's theme force was outright broken. It's a hard thing to balance and I wish they were never introduced. At least points can be adjusted, I think this genie is out of the bottle.

Without formations there would be a lot issues in the game still. Tanks versus MC for example, is not something that can be fixed with points. Special rules being amazing or garbage (Soul Blaze, Furious charge for example, are pretty bad, while fleet is really solid). Overwatch, random charge distances, winning combat by a lot being bad (seriously this is just mind numbing), none of these can be fixed with points and change the fundamental nature of the game in a way that points can help with but not fix. Look what has happened to CC; you either get broken units like wolves or wraiths, or you tend to stay home because CC is so tilting the way it's written. I can't blame 40k for having awful CC unit points when CC is so jarring.

If units could, for example, fire into CC but have to reroll hits (not misses, hits), but have the same rule apply when firing at a unit after combat is won for one turn, CC would be a lot more fair. Units can fire but at much weaker shooting levels (and certain units that are infiltrators could get an SC that reduces this to hit chance by 1, like striking scorpions or assault marines for example). Remove charge distances being random, everyone charges movement + init, with orks moving double init. Fleet allows you to double init to charge rolls. Voluntary retreat from combat but requires LD rolls.

But instead we have this mess.

Edit;
Martel, to get on point, see the gladius formation. It's filled with terrible options, basic marines and transports, but does well since it's free points. Basic marines and transports are not normally undercosted, but this formation makes them broken by stacking benefits on. It's crazy.

Gladius is an extreme outlier. And even it is helped immensely by tac squads having access to grav cannons.

Most if the issues you list off can actually be fixed by points. MCs are great? Vehicles suck? Then make mcs more expensive and vehicles cheaper. Assault units bad? Make them cheaper.

If units were worth what you paid for them to start with, a lot of other problems go away.

Riptides are op without the wing. I think they that miscosted.

Martel732 wrote:
Gladius is an extreme outlier. And even it is helped immensely by tac squads having access to grav cannons.

Most if the issues you list off can actually be fixed by points. MCs are great? Vehicles suck? Then make mcs more expensive and vehicles cheaper. Assault units bad? Make them cheaper.

If units were worth what you paid for them to start with, a lot of other problems go away.

That comes with issues. I don't want to have to spend an extra $40 on more assault squads because they get cheaper points wise. I'd rather see assault units get better.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Gladius is an extreme outlier. And even it is helped immensely by tac squads having access to grav cannons.

Most if the issues you list off can actually be fixed by points. MCs are great? Vehicles suck? Then make mcs more expensive and vehicles cheaper. Assault units bad? Make them cheaper.

If units were worth what you paid for them to start with, a lot of other problems go away.

That comes with issues. I don't want to have to spend an extra $40 on more assault squads because they get cheaper points wise. I'd rather see assault units get better.

That doesn't make it not the best fix. You should get what you pay for or in the case of assault marines only pay for what you get.

Martel732 wrote:
Gladius is an extreme outlier. And even it is helped immensely by tac squads having access to grav cannons.

Not really, it's helped by obsec. The army doesn't win by doing any real damage, its just target saturation taken to an extreme skew. Few armies can mulch through that many PA bodies and transports before the game is over.
It's a gear check list, it just has a really high level for that check.

Martel732 wrote:

Most if the issues you list off can actually be fixed by points. MCs are great? Vehicles suck? Then make mcs more expensive and vehicles cheaper. Assault units bad? Make them cheaper.

None of what you are saying would work.
Take, for example, the rhino. Do I make that cheaper? By how much? What about the Razorback? The ork trukk? Many of these are already cheap, and dropping their point cost will make people take more, which will move the game away from infantry level weapons, a problem we already see. Your solution would make that worse.
MCs have a similar issue. They are fundamentally broken since their rules are just too good. Even the carnifex, which is a pretty bad MC, isn't as bad as the worst tank option, simply because MC's put high quality weapons on the table. They need a rule change.
Both should be heavy in the points with rare exception (transports basically) to move the game towards infantry and infantry level weapons.
Adjusting point costs leads to other problems.

In addition, adjusting the point cost alone leads to the problem we have now; Lascannons are garbage, mid strength high RoF is king. This is due to the fundamental rules.
What if lascannons caused 2 wounds, or D3? You'd see them taken against heavier targets since they become a lot better, while still being relatively rare compared to bolters. Enemies would be worried about 3 lascannons with divination on them, since that can one round a MC, compared to now where you figure, at best, the MC is doing fine and doing its job since it can take 2-3 rounds of that easy, maybe more?
You still wouldn't see them spammed since they lack the RoF to deal with PA troops, but it would create an option. An option that doesn't exist by just adjusting points alone.

Similar issues are with assault units. Wolves are expensive, but are tough enough to reach CC. Same with Spawn. Assault marines are relatively cheap, but are too slow and die too quickly for what they accomplish. At best they wipe one squad and explode the following turn due to poor CC rules. This isn't something that can be fixed with point costs, the only viable assault units are extremely durable to the point that they become deathstars, which are extremely unhealthy for the game. I doubt anyone is excited to fire at a unit hoping for a 1 armor save to be re-rolled into another 1, because some tank out in front has 3 wounds and a 2+ save that gets re-rolled.
The idea of a horde of melee guys charging your lines is a part of the 40k world, but not the table top. This is due to the rules directly, CC is bad and has been for a long time now.

Martel732 wrote:

If units were worth what you paid for them to start with, a lot of other problems go away.

If unit types and SC were balanced, and the phases closer together in influence (you can't tell me shooting is not the strongest phase, followed by psyker or movement depending on list, followed dead last by assault. I've had games were assault doesn't even happen). Unit costs would be easier to get right, since you'd have more wiggle room. Honestly with a 1850pt game, the differences you can allow for are staggering...a 100 point game of warmachine can't make a unit 15 or 18 and have it mean as little as an 1850 pt game can, but they manage a lot better because the rules are tighter.

Riptides are op without the wing. I think they that miscosted.

In tournaments, anything goes. In normal games, I limit myself to 2 MC or GMCs, because it is extremely hard to support more.
Over the last couple months I have acquired 3 knights, ostensibly so that my opponents could use them against me. A shortsighted decision.

Voted: Other

If you are playing against a fairly unskilled or even average player then often the riptide works best as a distraction. Feed the riptide to a part of your opponents army that you know can't kill it in a single turn. These monstrous creatures make amazing tanks even without shields/FnP.

 carldooley wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Unfortunately none of those are reliable methods of dealing with it as it is currently implemeted. Plasma, melta and lascannons all lack the rate of fire to threaten riptide. 2+ armor and t6 make it immune to most cc.

How many people have killed T6 MCs with lasguns? I HAVE!
you want to be able to one shot a riptide? try a psilencer. 'Oh no, it is a str4 gun. . .' To which I say, 'ROF!'

On average you'll need 54 BS4 Psilencer shots to kill a Riptide. About as many shots as Plasma Guns would need against an FNP'd 2+/3++ Riptide, and a GK army generally isn't bringing enough to the field to output that kind of firepower out of the entire army

Yes the rules could use a huge overhaul. However some points tweaks could really help the situation we currently have.

Martel732 wrote:
Miscosted units are far worse than formations. It's not even close, really.

There are more than a few units miscosted. I'd say half the game easy.

To back up martel in this issue I brought along some numbers. What does the Riptide wing actually do that is amazing? Really the only thing that it does that is above and beyond is the double tap ability. The +1 BS is good but not that great and the rerolling Nova's is good and all but not game breaking.

So without using any crazy formations I built a 1,500 point list with Tau that is just as broken and ridiculous and not fun to play against at all.

2 CADS

Ethereal x1

Striker Squad with 2 Markerlight drones X2 (1 has Shasui with Markerlight)

RIPTIDE x2 with IoA, EWO and stim injector

Markerlight Drones x 4

Ethereal x 1

Striker Squad with 2 Markerlightdrones X2 (1 has Shasui with Markerlight)

RIPTIDE x2 with IoA, EWO and Stim Injector.

Markerlight Drones X4

So I have 14 Markerlights with which to buff those 4 riptides up. More importantly I HAVE 4 RIPTIDES AT 1,500 POINTS!

Yep that isn't broken at all. Worse then that, its both legal and could be taken in most tournaments since its only 2 CADs.


So really it isn't the formation that breaks Riptides, its the fact that the unit is severely under priced. If those things were 250 base with IoA costing 25pts then it would be a lot closer to where it should be.

.I'd love to face that 4 riptide list with my daemonkin. Sounds like a pretty easy game. Get in combat turn 2, multi charge some fire warriors and watch the riptides run away.

I don't know what kind of lists you guys are trying to use, but riptides are far from invincible. They're tough, but their firepower is pretty lame for the 220pts they cost. They have equivalent firepower to a Ion hammerhead.. I get that some of you want them to never see the light of day, but suggestions like making them 300pts are laughable.

Riptides are supposed to be tanky. That's the role they fill. Before riptides, Tau capped at av13 and the majority of the army is MEQ. Riptide gives Tau something they can use to take the fight to the enemy.

If you want to nerf riptides fairly, my suggestions would be removing the overheat profile. Leave the 3 S7 and the S9, but don't let it Pie-plate on the same turn it ripple-fires or 3++'s.
If you really want to kill it, take away a wound, and make it lose Smash.

And kill the riptide wing. That is single-honestly the worst designed formation ever. Formations should give buffs to bad units or give special rules in exchange for restricted army building: the Wing gives you additional special rules on an already good unit for no penalty AND allows non-Tau tax-free access.

Trasvi wrote:
.I'd love to face that 4 riptide list with my daemonkin. Sounds like a pretty easy game. Get in combat turn 2, multi charge some fire warriors and watch the riptides run away.

I don't know what kind of lists you guys are trying to use, but riptides are far from invincible. They're tough, but their firepower is pretty lame for the 220pts they cost. They have equivalent firepower to a Ion hammerhead.. I get that some of you want them to never see the light of day, but suggestions like making them 300pts are laughable.

Riptides are supposed to be tanky. That's the role they fill. Before riptides, Tau capped at av13 and the majority of the army is MEQ. Riptide gives Tau something they can use to take the fight to the enemy.

If you want to nerf riptides fairly, my suggestions would be removing the overheat profile. Leave the 3 S7 and the S9, but don't let it Pie-plate on the same turn it ripple-fires or 3++'s.
If you really want to kill it, take away a wound, and make it lose Smash.

And kill the riptide wing. That is single-honestly the worst designed formation ever. Formations should give buffs to bad units or give special rules in exchange for restricted army building: the Wing gives you additional special rules on an already good unit for no penalty AND allows non-Tau tax-free access.

Did you just choose to not read the rest of this at all? People so far have PROVEN how hard it is to delete Riptides. The plethora of Plasma or Melta or Lascannon needed to remove this model is ridiculous. Furthermore, what units are you charging those riptides with? Because they have to be as fast as the riptide to catch the damned thing, it has to be as tanky if not MORE tanky then the riptide to survive that long...basically I don't see it happening. Those Firewarrior squads are speed bumps, thats it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nevermind, i just realized your bias in your title "Trustworthy Shas'vre "

SemperMortis wrote:
Did you just choose to not read the rest of this at all? People so far have PROVEN how hard it is to delete Riptides. The plethora of Plasma or Melta or Lascannon needed to remove this model is ridiculous.

The number of plasma/melta/lascannon shots needed to kill ANYTHING that isn't a marine on foot is a large number.
Moreover, trying to take on Tau in a shooting match is something that you SHOULD lose. Shooting is Tau's only strength: if they can't beat you at that then the entire army is pointless. Try to capitalize on Tau's weaknesses in movement/psychic/combat.

Furthermore, what units are you charging those riptides with? Because they have to be as fast as the riptide to catch the damned thing, it has to be as tanky if not MORE tanky then the riptide to survive that long...basically I don't see it happening. Those Firewarrior squads are speed bumps, thats it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nevermind, i just realized your bias in your title "Trustworthy Shas'vre "

Some people occasionally change armies Especially if they've been playing for 15 years. I haven't touched my Tau since the start of 6th edition - I predominantly play Daemonkin at the moment.

For example, with my Daemonkin in 1500pts I use 30+ flesh hounds, a juggernaut lord and a D-thirster. If I get first turn, I'm touching your riptides before they move. The D-thirster most likely dies (3 riptides ripple-firing at him with full markerlight support will do it), but you need to deal with 9 units charging you on the next turn. If I manage to multi-charge a squad of Fire Warriors or Drones and a Riptide at the same time, you're very likely to lose both squads to sweeping advance. If I can't, I'll use your speedbumps against you by taking steps to reduce my damage output and get stuck in combat for a turn or three while your riptides cheer from the sidelines. The moment I get in to combat, I've 'won' - because I'll stick there for the rest of the game and eventually win.

That Tau army doesn't have a huge amount of mobility, especially if you're trying to hide the riptides behind the firewarriors and the firewarriors are trying to use their markerlights. This makes it relatively easy to take them on in Maelstrom games. It also lacks anti-vehicle firepower; at its best it is putting out 12 S7 or 4 S9 Blast shots. Its not an unbeatable army by any means - but if you try to take it on by footslogging marines with meltas up to the Tau gunline, you deserve what you get.


I acknowledge that the Riptide is a very good unit; but it's not the powerhouse of invulnerability or firepower that people in this thread are claiming it is.
Nerfing the Riptide by removing the IA S8 profile would be an enormous hit. It would mean that the max damage output it could do is ripple fire SMS OR try the 1/3 chance to Gets Hot for the blast profile. It would mean no blast profile at the same time as 3++ save. It would mean you'd have to prepare the Nova-charge the turn prior to attempting to intercept with the blast profile. TBH I think it could do with a points decrease if that happened.

Without knowing your list I wouldn't be able to say how easy it would be to counter that. But going by what you said, it wouldn't be very difficult for the Tau to destroy your units piecemeal before you can get in charge range. The D-thirster honestly isn't that scary for a 3++ model. I don't know how you have the juggerlord equipped but he is probably as much a threat as the D-thirster and beyond that all you have is the units of hounds which aren't that scary either, especially when they can get doubled out by the Riptides easily.

So Turn 1 you will not get the charge off unless he is stupid enough to deploy forward or move forward on his turn. You have to survive 4 Riptides blowing holes in your forces, then you have to close the distance as he jets away, turn 2 your still not even remotely close enough and he gets another turn of 4 riptides blowing holes in you, this turn your probably going to mulch 1-3 of those firewarrior units but that is what they are there for, also when you do get to assault one of them on turn 2 your opening that unit up to devastating over watch. After that you have to survive yet ANOTHER round of shooting and then after that you might be close enough to assault a riptide or two, but again massive overwatch means you have to survive that. Add to that, the fact that in CC The riptide isn't atrocious. Since its a MC it gets Smash AP2 attacks. But even if you do get to him, survive the smash attacks you still have to break through his 2+ armor 3-5++ and 5+ FNP on a 6 wound model.

Overall, Tau tend to mulch everyone. CC is the answer to tau most of the time but getting there is the problem