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.

 Bach wrote:
Riptides are fine, they are in an army that has neither psychic powers nor real CC units. For optimum strength, it's ruleset requires a gamble for Nova reactor, which has a 1/3 chance to wound the unit. Also requires the use of markerlights to maximize it's average shooting. I've seen a couple of posts of people saying the 'scour' ML option (ignores cover) is 1 marker light. It's actually 2.

The Gamble is a 1/3 chance to fail, and then you get your FNP so you have a chance to not even get hurt...a 1/3rd chance mind you , also YOU DONT HAVE TO NOVA. A 5++ isn't great but its doable, as is a S8 AP2 Large blast. But since you really are complaining about how often you fail those rolls lets look at it this way. My Orks have SEVERAL weapons that Get hot on rolls of 1, we also have weapons that get hot on 1,2 or 3 under certain circumstances, we also have a weapon that kills its bearer, teleports him into B2B with its target, hits his own army and we have a unit that when using its weapons has a chance to explode, and a chance to hit itself with a single S9 AP2 hit.

So you complaining about a single 1/3rd chance to fail on a super over powered unit that is ridiculously cheap falls on deaf ears.

 Bach wrote:
In my experiences of playing with Riptides, the Riptide Wing was probably the poorest showing of the unit. The double attack option doesn't kill as much as you think it should and not moving a turn, to pull it off, can be costly. Also, you generally need to balance out every monstrous/gargantuan creature with some decent amounts of MSU units or you will eventually get worn down/shut down in the later parts of the game. Even in an army of giant robots, MSU/copious wounds still matter.

So a Riptide which is considered to be an OP unit that needs a nerf is better then the formation that it can be taken in that gives it huge advantages with almost no disadvantages? You get to shoot twice in 1 turn and you consider that not that great of a formation boost? Either you are ignorant of how good these units are or you are purposely being obtuse to try and save your precious gundam wing, or because you feel like annoying people.

 Bach wrote:
But don't just take my word for it. Any time another QQ thread on Riptides shows up, evidence is usually the best form of persuasion. So I present to you a Frontline Gaming video, a competitive list of the Riptide Wing and 2 Stormsurges, getting basically TABLED by Space Marines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Op5ovJHIE8
Are Riptides too strong? Well, the evidence of this video would suggest no.

Wow a single game where Tau get beaten by another top tier army? that is some impressive reasoning. If you want I can go grab about 100 other videos from people on youtube where the Tau Destroy almost every other faction in the game, it still won't be hard evidence but it will prove your 1 video completely wrong.

Fully upgraded your Riptide will cost about 225pts (EWO, Stim injector and Ion Accelerator) A Wing will cost you 675pts. You are now treading into the Super Heavy points range. The difference is that your 3 riptides have more wounds, more saves, more FNPS and more Dakka then any other Super heavy in the game for that same points cost. They are also faster, more durable and synergize with your army a lot more then any other superheavy in the game.

So please explain to me how the riptide and the riptide wing aren't OP? Because your current arguments are all wrong or invalid.

A single riptide is more durable than warhound titan against anti-tank weapons.

Martel732 wrote:
A single riptide is more durable than warhound titan against anti-tank weapons.

A riptide against a Stompa (if the riptide gets 1st turn) would end in a draw.........

Stompa has a S10 AP1 primary weapon, so that will hit unless it scatters double 6s....and even then I think it would still glance. So it would probably wound and against a 3++ and 5+++ it would probably not do anything.

Against the 3 super rockets it would hit with all 3 and wound with all 3 (wounding on 2s) but the tide would get a 2+ and a 5+++ so again, probably no wounds.

Against the supa-gatler it would be on average 7 shots at S7 BS2 so 2 hits probably 2 wounds and again against a 2+ and 5+++ probably no wounds.

The only way a Stompa could reliably kill a riptide is to get it into Close combat, and that would probably take 3+ turns to get there.

Whether that is a conversation about how crappy the stompa is (which it is) or about how the riptide is amazing....well thats open for debate, the point is that at the moment a 220pt unit is capable of standing up to a 770pt Super Heavy.

The Riptide can bounce enough AT fire that would kill a Warhound, BaneBlade, IK, Stompa, or even WK. WTF? How have the Tau not not straight up won 40K?

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide can bounce enough AT fire that would kill a Warhound, BaneBlade, IK, Stompa, or even WK. WTF? How have the Tau not not straight up won 40K?

Probably because every major event has an arms length list of things Tau players can't bring or nerfs for units. Which is hilarious because the Tau players I have seen here will moan and complain about these nerfs and drawbacks in one thread and then point out how weak the Tau are because they haven't won an ITC event in another thread

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide can bounce enough AT fire that would kill a Warhound, BaneBlade, IK, Stompa, or even WK. WTF? How have the Tau not not straight up won 40K?

Probably because every major event has an arms length list of things Tau players can't bring or nerfs for units. Which is hilarious because the Tau players I have seen here will moan and complain about these nerfs and drawbacks in one thread and then point out how weak the Tau are because they haven't won an ITC event in another thread

And it should say something that the tournaents have to nerf the tau that heavily, just to give the other armies even a slim chance at winning.

If you want to look at the stats of the thing, the closest thing to a counter to an IA riptide is another monstrous creature, probably a talos or something of that nature, against which the IA is not so hot, or a walker with AV13, against which the IA is even worse and has to use the nova profile to try to counter..

Come to think of it, a hive tyrant with a bonesword has a pretty good chance of killing it with instant death in a single turn, even if it doesn't fail morale and get overrun.

This is not to say that the thing is balanced; just that the IA is a heavy infantry killer and only adequate against other things.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
A single game means nothing. I've seen an ITC game with white scars gladius vs a tide wing of 5 tides and a bunch of obsec eldar bikes in reserve where the tide player kept failing all reserves and the tides took on the entire gladius. .

Why should your story weigh in the same as an actual video battle report? Go find your own evidence to the contrary. Yes it is Space Marines but the Tau player was absolutely dominated. If you were to watch this video, it would seem that the Riptides weren't effective enough. Me being a Tau player, should I cry and say that the Space Marine formations are too strong for 3 Riptides and 2 Stormsurges? Clearly, one solution to defeating an elite, few model army, is to bring all MSU. I think that the tau player could have won that game by dropping a Stormsurge and 1-2 Riptides and adding much more units, probably more troops.

In addition, if we were to take the QQ seriously about Riptides, this 'overpoweredness' should be reflected on the competitive scene, right? We should, in therory, be seeing twin Riptide Wings (maximized Riptide lists) raping everyone competitively, if this unit was truly broken. I think the results of competitive tournaments do reflect units/formations/armies that are for sure broken. If what you suggest is correct, Riptides/Tau should be adequately and frequently represented somewhere at top tournament results. So let's take a look at two large North American tournaments, BAO 2016 and LVO 2016.


Bay Area Open 2016

https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/itc/70C1F8D4-1D1D-4B8E-9ACF-8639AC0E0859

Tau armies don't even come in the top 10 and the first comes in at #16. Blood Angels came in at 10th? Wow, who is broken now

Las Vegas Open 2016 top lists

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/02/08/tits-tournaments-las-vegas-open-2016-top-8-lists/

See any Riptides in those lists? Didn't think so. Looks like the 2 armorsave, Nova Reactor, pie plates, FNP, 72 inch range, isn't good enough to make the top lists. Maybe that's because it's not an overpowered cheese unit? Hmmm...

But I get it. Somewhere along the line, the QQs here got their Blood Angels pie plated.

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide can bounce enough AT fire that would kill a Warhound, BaneBlade, IK, Stompa, or even WK. WTF? How have the Tau not not straight up won 40K?

Probably because every major event has an arms length list of things Tau players can't bring or nerfs for units. Which is hilarious because the Tau players I have seen here will moan and complain about these nerfs and drawbacks in one thread and then point out how weak the Tau are because they haven't won an ITC event in another thread

Well it is unfair that they don't do the same thing to the gladius or wolfstar.

"But I get it. Somewhere along the line, the QQs here got their Blood Angels pie plated. "

I don't mind that. I just want the opportunity to be able to remove the model from the table. Which is functionally impossible for most lists. The list of things that owns BA is long and varied. The Riptide is the only one I can think of that is immortal.

"Yes it is Space Marines but "

There is no "but". We all already know the space marines can beat Tau by just showing up with 400 pts of free obj sec transports that the Riptides will never shoot through in time. But that's a victory style no other list in the game can emulate.

The ion accelerator's efficiency goes down a lot vs T5. Armies like SW that are spamming T5 models with invuln saves or invis can trivially cross the board and run over a Tau list. Armies that can't field that just melt. It's a very bimodal situation, but it doesn't make the Riptide any less infuriating.

Tau are seeing use in competition, as tacked on formations to armies with better Obsec.

If you really want to ask what the Riptide is for, it should be supporting Tau troop choices to secure objectives and play the mission.

Bach, check out the NOVA 2016 results, you'll find some Riptide Wings tacked onto Scatbike lists.

 Bach wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
A single game means nothing. I've seen an ITC game with white scars gladius vs a tide wing of 5 tides and a bunch of obsec eldar bikes in reserve where the tide player kept failing all reserves and the tides took on the entire gladius. .

Why should your story weigh in the same as an actual video battle report? Go find your own evidence to the contrary.

You apparently missed the whole point. It doesn't matter if someone shows up with an "I saw" story or a full feature length documentary, the evidence is still anecdotal. It still involves certain mission objectives, matchups, player mindsets, and a plethora of dice rolls in a combination that we're unlikely to see exactly copied in another game ever again.

Even large tournaments are a hilariously small sample size for the amount of randomness involved. Do you know what you have to do to make top8 in LVO? Go 6-0 or 5-0-1 in a very hardcore field of 300+ lists involving the most broken shenanigans in the game. "Not making top 8 at LVO" is not a good argument against a model being broken. All it takes to not make it there is one bad seize roll, a couple amazing psychic shrieks, one bad matchup, or a fist full of 1's at a critical time. The dice gods travel to events too, y'know.

A much better measurement is to watch where the tide wing players land over the course of many events, and if you go through a good bit of tournament history for this year, they tend to gravitate near the upper ranks right along with the rest of the A team. In fact the tau player who led the ITC for the first entire third of this year or so is a tide wing player.

But really the most definitive measurement is simply the math. If something can contribute from any spot on the board, has good mobility, and durability so good that hilariously few things can kill it without clocking in at way over equal cost, it's probably broken. Yeah it's not the only broken model in the game, but it's definitely on the top 10 list.

 Bach wrote:


Why should your story weigh in the same as an actual video battle report? Go find your own evidence to the contrary. Yes it is Space Marines but the Tau player was absolutely dominated. If you were to watch this video, it would seem that the Riptides weren't effective enough. Me being a Tau player, should I cry and say that the Space Marine formations are too strong for 3 Riptides and 2 Stormsurges? Clearly, one solution to defeating an elite, few model army, is to bring all MSU. I think that the tau player could have won that game by dropping a Stormsurge and 1-2 Riptides and adding much more units, probably more troops.

In addition, if we were to take the QQ seriously about Riptides, this 'overpoweredness' should be reflected on the competitive scene, right? We should, in therory, be seeing twin Riptide Wings (maximized Riptide lists) raping everyone competitively, if this unit was truly broken. I think the results of competitive tournaments do reflect units/formations/armies that are for sure broken. If what you suggest is correct, Riptides/Tau should be adequately and frequently represented somewhere at top tournament results. So let's take a look at two large North American tournaments, BAO 2016 and LVO 2016.


Bay Area Open 2016

https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/itc/70C1F8D4-1D1D-4B8E-9ACF-8639AC0E0859

Tau armies don't even come in the top 10 and the first comes in at #16. Blood Angels came in at 10th? Wow, who is broken now

Las Vegas Open 2016 top lists

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2016/02/08/tits-tournaments-las-vegas-open-2016-top-8-lists/

See any Riptides in those lists? Didn't think so. Looks like the 2 armorsave, Nova Reactor, pie plates, FNP, 72 inch range, isn't good enough to make the top lists. Maybe that's because it's not an overpowered cheese unit? Hmmm...

But I get it. Somewhere along the line, the QQs here got their Blood Angels pie plated.

Why do you think Tau didn't do as well at these major tournaments? Keep in mind that a number of rules were in place that stopped a lot of shenanigans.

Because the game has other things that are FAR more broken then Riptides. Invis deathstars, most of the Eldar codex, 400pts of free OBSEC transports from Gladius. Nobody is saying those aren't broken BS that needs nerfing, we are pointing out that Tau BS is almost as strong and almost as OP as those things.

"Yes it is Space Marines but "

There is no "but". We all already know the space marines can beat Tau by just showing up with 400 pts of free obj sec transports that the Riptides will never shoot through in time. But that's a victory style no other list in the game can emulate.

You are making it seem that the hold out from you winning against Tau is just the Riptide? If you are losing to Tau with Riptides, taking the Riptides out of the list isn't going to matter that much because there are more fundamental issues going on.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Tau are seeing use in competition, as tacked on formations to armies with better Obsec.

If you really want to ask what the Riptide is for, it should be supporting Tau troop choices to secure objectives and play the mission.

Bach, check out the NOVA 2016 results, you'll find some Riptide Wings tacked onto Scatbike lists.

I can see that but I guess my point is that you constantly see that same armies fielding the same units with same formations with a frequency that would make for a much more compelling argument to ultimately change them- as opposed to "Riptides are too strong, this one time at band camp, I have no videos (or other proof) to prove it, but please nerf them!" And then when someone does show some evidence to the contrary showing Riptides dying to bolters, there is this denial that, "oh well that was Space Marines." Top 10 tournament results are peppered with the occasional Tau unit/army but not in a way that would suggest that the army or units, within, have the kind of balance problems as let's say Eldar, Necrons, Space Marines, etc.

More evidence - Dark Eldar beating Tau in an ITC match. A couple Riptides lasted until the end of the game but the Tau still lost to one of the arguably worst armies in 40K. Dark Eldar plays to objectives and wins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQOOoTt1JDI

More evidence - Grey Knights beating Tau with Riptides and Forgeworld. Tau is basically tabled. I guess it doesn't take a Space Marine formation of free transports to do this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAGSNb6AqtQ

More Evidence -Dark Angels beating Tau - Riptides are apparently not cheesy enough to stop Dark Angels from scoring enough points to win.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96Y22BuCZmA

There is enough of these videos to show that Riptides should not be charactierized as dominating, as some in this thread suggest. Clearly, 'lower tier' armies can win by playing to objectives if not outright killing a Riptide. It also shows that it is not necessary to kill Riptides to win games. It shows that Riptides can't necessarily prevent 'lower tier' armies from playing the game effectively to win.

Again if there were truly problems with this unit, there would be much more widely available evidence to support it. On the contrary, there is reasonable evidence to refute that Riptides are overpowered. Yeah I understand that some of you have stories but there are more objective ways to show your point of view and stories/anecdotes don't cut it when we have video of battle reports and data from tournaments.

 Bach wrote:


You are making it seem that the hold out from you winning against Tau is just the Riptide? If you are losing to Tau with Riptides, taking the Riptides out of the list isn't going to matter that much because there are more fundamental issues going on.

I would disagree. Removing and replacing a unit that is more powerful than what its entry cost makes it out to be could make a massive difference to the chances of winning against that list, especially if there are more than one of those units.

"You are making it seem that the hold out from you winning against Tau is just the Riptide?"

No, it's just the straw that break the BA camel. BA don't have much T5 in the list, so the IA is the perfect weapon vs BA. As I said, both SW and vanilla marines have their reasons for not caring nearly as much.

Also, Tau are strictly superior to IG in every conceivable way, despite having the same schtick. That also generates considerable hate.

" more fundamental issues going on. "

Yes, the Tau get a single turn of shooting, and my army is gone. BA are fragile. That's what's going on.

Martel732 wrote:
Also, Tau are strictly superior to IG in every conceivable way, despite having the same schtick. That also generates considerable hate.

IG play the aircraft, artillery, and long range shootout game quite well while the Tau struggle outside the 36" firing range. IG can also attempt to compete in the psychic phase while Tau are at the mercy of any psychic attacks.

 Bach wrote:
And then when someone does show some evidence to the contrary showing Riptides dying to bolters...

You might want to do your homework and calculate the averages on this one.

Martel732 wrote:
The Riptide can bounce enough AT fire that would kill a Warhound, BaneBlade, IK, Stompa, or even WK. WTF? How have the Tau not not straight up won 40K?

Tau murder the bottom feild better than any other army can. The problem is - tau game play is pretty straight forward - I roll buckets of dice and need to remove models as a result. If I can't remove models with buckets of dice - I can't win.

Things like daemon armies that average a 3++ save every turn and do most of their damage from flying MC - tau don't stand a chance. 20 man indestructible deathstars also wreck tau because they are impossible for any units to kill. These are much bigger problems than the riptide being so undercosted IMO but if these problems were fixed - I think giving the riptide a substantial nerf would be in order.

Don't get me wrong though - if tau are going first - they can blow ANYTHING off the table.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

 Bach wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
A single game means nothing. I've seen an ITC game with white scars gladius vs a tide wing of 5 tides and a bunch of obsec eldar bikes in reserve where the tide player kept failing all reserves and the tides took on the entire gladius. .

Why should your story weigh in the same as an actual video battle report? Go find your own evidence to the contrary.

You apparently missed the whole point. It doesn't matter if someone shows up with an "I saw" story or a full feature length documentary, the evidence is still anecdotal. It still involves certain mission objectives, matchups, player mindsets, and a plethora of dice rolls in a combination that we're unlikely to see exactly copied in another game ever again.

Even large tournaments are a hilariously small sample size for the amount of randomness involved. Do you know what you have to do to make top8 in LVO? Go 6-0 or 5-0-1 in a very hardcore field of 300+ lists involving the most broken shenanigans in the game. "Not making top 8 at LVO" is not a good argument against a model being broken. All it takes to not make it there is one bad seize roll, a couple amazing psychic shrieks, one bad matchup, or a fist full of 1's at a critical time. The dice gods travel to events too, y'know..

I would have to disagree, it's not anecdotal when you have a video of a battle report. There is an objective element that is absence from a story or otherwise casual observation. I agree that there is not a lot of this kind of evidence relative to the amount of games played or potential outcomes but as imperfect as it is, it is a form of objective documentation that cannot be embellished, changed, and can be scrutinized.

There is a persistence to push for the subjective:

- "A Riptide raped me"

- "A friend of a friend got beat by Tau and I think they had Riptides"


Then there is more objective ways to look at actual outcomes of Tau/Riptide performance:

- The possible under-represntation of Tau armies/ riptide lists at the top of tournament results.

- Video battle reports showing Tau lists with Riptides losing to varous armies both top and bottom tier.


Not saying the way I look at this issue is fool proof but, if I were interesting in trying to change a unit (or make a real case for it), I would do my best to look at the actual performance of the unit, the best that I could, in games played, not rules in a vacuum. Not in theory, not in Mathhammer, but games played in a format that can be verified by others.

"it's not anecdotal when you have a video of a battle report. "

A single battle report, or even five, is the definition of anecdotal. How much grim detail do we need to go into?

Martel732 wrote:
"it's not anecdotal when you have a video of a battle report. "

A single battle report, or even five, is the definition of anecdotal. How much grim detail do we need to go into?

Anecdotal evidence is more about hearsay, like a story you want to share. A video, memorializing a game played, would be a form of hard fact. Hard fact vs hearsay, hmm..

 Bach wrote:


Anecdotal evidence is more about hearsay, like a story you want to share. A video, memorializing a game played, would be a form of hard fact. Hard fact vs hearsay, hmm..

Those are one of the same - a battle report told by word of mouth is the same as a battle report that has been recorded, unless you think the person is lying, of course.

 Bach wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"it's not anecdotal when you have a video of a battle report. "

A single battle report, or even five, is the definition of anecdotal. How much grim detail do we need to go into?

Anecdotal evidence is more about hearsay, like a story you want to share. A video, memorializing a game played, would be a form of hard fact. Hard fact vs hearsay, hmm..

No, it's not. Anecdotal evidence is evidence that has too few data points to be considered data. It has nothing to do with hearsay. A single hard fact is still only a single fact, and hence, anecdotal.

The problem with battle reports is that there is plenty of evidence in both directions. What does this mean? Tau players like Riptides. This is not denied, but why do we take them? the same reason that Nid players take flyrants.

 General Annoyance wrote:

 Bach wrote:


Anecdotal evidence is more about hearsay, like a story you want to share. A video, memorializing a game played, would be a form of hard fact. Hard fact vs hearsay, hmm..

Those are one of the same - a battle report told by word of mouth is the same as a battle report that has been recorded, unless you think the person is lying, of course.

But that was my point, they are not the same because one can be verified and one cannot. We generally put more weight on things we can verify than things just told to us.

 carldooley wrote:
The problem with battle reports is that there is plenty of evidence in both directions. What does this mean? Tau players like Riptides. This is not denied, but why do we take them? the same reason that Nid players take flyrants.

I agree, but I think every codex has 'auto-includes' units. I am not saying that Riptides can't be effective, just that their abilities do not rise to the undercosted/overpowered status. I think that stating that they need changing is extreme, being supported by stories that cannot be verified. Yes videos aren't the all be all, but they are better than just another extreme story or perception.

It doesn't need to be verified as to how crazy it is to get a wound through against a Riptide. That's a mathematical truth given the parameters of the game. Also, the crazy low points cost for a unit this durable does not need to be verified, either.

It's not extreme at all to want to change a unit that is functionally immune to 95% of the other units in the game. On top of this, it's got a great gun, and is very mobile. And can't be suppressed via shaken results like a tank. It's got too many perks for the price.

"I agree, but I think every codex has 'auto-includes' units."

You would be wrong. BA lacks such a unit, even after the latest book.

"We generally put more weight on things we can verify than things just told to us. "

That doesn't make your battle report non-anecdotal.

I put my vote down for other.
Regardless of what it is in the fluff the Riptide gamewise is a gatekeeper. They're something you can almost guarantee facing & need to have a plan to face.
Sadly enough some factions just don't have a way of getting around one so it's become the gatekeeper between higher and lower tiers.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
I put my vote down for other.
Regardless of what it is in the fluff the Riptide gamewise is a gatekeeper. They're something you can almost guarantee facing & need to have a plan to face.
Sadly enough some factions just don't have a way of getting around one so it's become the gatekeeper between higher and lower tiers.

This is really insightful.

 Bach wrote:

 General Annoyance wrote:


Those are one of the same - a battle report told by word of mouth is the same as a battle report that has been recorded, unless you think the person is lying, of course.

But that was my point, they are not the same because one can be verified and one cannot. We generally put more weight on things we can verify than things just told to us. .

It doesn't change the fact that both pieces are anecdotal, whether they can be easily verified or not; it is one instance of one happening in a game system that has chances that need to be taken at every corner, therefore its findings simply can't be attached to the functionality of the Riptide. Not until you have a fair amount of instances of the same or similar outcomes can you even start to define a unit existing in a game with as many dice rolls as it has.

G.A

Given there's 19 pages of this, was a consensus produced at some point on whether the Riptide is a balance issue without the use of Nova Charge?

Yes, I did say "dakka dakka" and "consensus" in the same sentence. I know.