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.

That's not looking pretty for Tau.

Makes me wonder whether the Markerlights nerf was too much. 5 for +1 BS seems far too much.

Suits seem a tad overpriced, not to mention vehicles that really suffer from moving.

 Frozocrone wrote:
That's not looking pretty for Tau.

Makes me wonder whether the Markerlights nerf was too much. 5 for +1 BS seems far too much.

Suits seem a tad overpriced, not to mention vehicles that really suffer from moving.

Tau armies right now be like. For a small donation you can save a Riptide from a cruel owner who doesn't want it anymore in 8th edition. There are many more Tau armies and units in need of loving owners out there today and only you can help.

 Gamgee wrote:
For a small donation you can save a Riptide from a cruel owner who doesn't want it anymore in 8th edition.

Tempted.

Just had a game.

AM vs Tau - AM win

2 more games to add in.

Tau vs Tau - (My) Tau win
Tau vs Blood Angels - Tau win

Granted both of these games were against fairly new players who are still learning 8th and the game in general, but I'm also still learning 8th so it kinda balances out. Definitely impressed with Stealth Suits, they are surprisingly durable with a -1 to hit and getting a 2+ save in cover and serve as a great distraction unit while still putting out some good firepower if your opponent ignores them.

Tau vs tyranids. Tau victory Y'varha is nasty

I'm sorry guys but any reports of a Tau victory are considered FAKE NEWS and will not be counted.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
I'm sorry guys but any reports of a Tau victory are considered FAKE NEWS and will not be counted.

What about the guy who played Tau vs Tau?

 Zande4 wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
I'm sorry guys but any reports of a Tau victory are considered FAKE NEWS and will not be counted.

What about the guy who played Tau vs Tau?

No such internal conflict exists. The Tau are united for the Greater Good. /officialbroadcast

World Eaters vs Tau.... Tau victory. I know. Shocking. Apparently, the Missile Hammerheads did a good job. This is not a game I played.

Drager wrote:
World Eaters vs Tau.... Tau victory. I know. Shocking. Apparently, the Missile Hammerheads did a good job. This is not a game I played.

I may be mistaken, but I've noticing that shooty armies can deal with Tau much better than most melee-y armies can.

I made 2 similar lists between Necrons and Tau, both fighting an almost all-melee Space Wolves list. Necrons were swept aside, while the Tau hold back.
Such a list vs AM with 11 vehicles, didn't fare as well at all.

With this week's FW FAQ on Index Xenos, we might find more Tau victories in the future

 Vector Strike wrote:

Drager wrote:
World Eaters vs Tau.... Tau victory. I know. Shocking. Apparently, the Missile Hammerheads did a good job. This is not a game I played.

I may be mistaken, but I've noticing that shooty armies can deal with Tau much better than most melee-y armies can.

I made 2 similar lists between Necrons and Tau, both fighting an almost all-melee Space Wolves list. Necrons were swept aside, while the Tau hold back.
Such a list vs AM with 11 vehicles, didn't fare as well at all.

With this week's FW FAQ on Index Xenos, we might find more Tau victories in the future

I've kinda noticed this too, but it seems more to me that people are just still approaching melee against Tau from a pre-8th mindset. Before, you charged a Tau unit and either you wiped them out in one round of combat, or they ended up locked in combat the rest of the game and might as well have been destroyed for all they did in the battle after that. That's all gone in 8th. Gone are the days of forcing Tau players to waste their overwatch on a 3 man unit charging from 10" away while a Terminator squad sat 3" away. Gone are the days that you can charge a combat squad into my battlesuits and render them useless by locking them in CC all game. My guys can leave the combat now, and a very large percentage of my army can still shoot after doing so. All of a sudden you have to treat melee with Tau the same way you treated melee with the rest of the armies in the game; you need an immediate decisive strike to cripple or kill me as soon as possible rather than trying to lock me up or attrition me out. As much as Tau players need to relearn our army, our opponents need to rethink their strategies for handling us. As melee focused armies learn that, I think they will be able to handle us Tau fairly well.

I agree. It's a very exciting time for Tau.

 Frozocrone wrote:
That's not looking pretty for Tau.

Makes me wonder whether the Markerlights nerf was too much. 5 for +1 BS seems far too much.

Suits seem a tad overpriced, not to mention vehicles that really suffer from moving.

You can't argue Tau are underpowered based on this data unless you're prepared to argue that AM is vastly overpowered.

3 games so far, all 3 SM vs Nids

SM 2W 1L
Nids 1W 2L

Games were 1000pts, 1500 pts then 2000pts

 Marmatag wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
That's not looking pretty for Tau.

Makes me wonder whether the Markerlights nerf was too much. 5 for +1 BS seems far too much.

Suits seem a tad overpriced, not to mention vehicles that really suffer from moving.

You can't argue Tau are underpowered based on this data unless you're prepared to argue that AM is vastly overpowered.

And who is saying they are not?

 Marmatag wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
That's not looking pretty for Tau.

Makes me wonder whether the Markerlights nerf was too much. 5 for +1 BS seems far too much.

Suits seem a tad overpriced, not to mention vehicles that really suffer from moving.

You can't argue Tau are underpowered based on this data unless you're prepared to argue that AM is vastly overpowered.

There is a saying in Evidence (law) that I think is appropriate here.

"A brick is not a wall."

The gist is that evidence is often cumulative, and evidence need not be the entire "wall" for it to play a part in that "wall", and can and should be considered for that purpose.

Relying SOLELY on these numbers would probably be problematic, these numbers are not the sole measure by which we can argue relative army power.

You would look at the underlying mathhammer.

You would look at the casually-reported results here.

You would look at the results for ITC and other large tournaments.

You would look at the results for smaller tournaments (probably with less reliance than on larger tournaments, due to statistical issues).

You would look even at your own experience.


Its certainly possible that AM aren't doing as well in other areas of inquiry, and thus that AM aren't necessarily overpowered (despite kicking ass and taking names in this thread).

...But honestly, the vast majority of data we have available is suggesting that T'au are in a relatively poor place right now. In ITC and other larger tournaments, T'au are getting slaughtered, and the same is applying here. There is personal experience going both ways, but the vast majority of personal experience (in this thread, and elsewhere) seems to be "we've been gutted". There was a smaller tournament where T'au did well, reportedly, but again it was a small tournament (which introduces statistical issues), so the weight of evidence is clearly aligned in a particular direction.

My 2c on the Tau?

I think it's because they lost all that formation-based crap they had, and many of the players are lost without it.

I have come to this conclusion by watching Tau players' games. There was one who picked up Tau in 7e and spent a considerable amount of prep time complaining about the removal of formations, and he was beaten by the Ork player facing him. But there was another who didn't actually play Tau and was borrowing his friend's army to try it out, who won one game and pulled it close in another against a considerably more experienced player.


Here's the thing: I just don't think it's possible to go for just wiping out the enemy force anymore, you actually have to play to and capture the objectives. To this end, you need to have things other than big suits. Assault-out-of-deepstrike and turn 1 charges may be hurting them disproportionately, though, since they work similar to Imperial Guard but lack the defensive perimeter of cheap, expendable troopers.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
My 2c on the Tau?

I think it's because they lost all that formation-based crap they had, and many of the players are lost without it.

I have come to this conclusion by watching Tau players' games. There was one who picked up Tau in 7e and spent a considerable amount of prep time complaining about the removal of formations, and he was beaten by the Ork player facing him. But there was another who didn't actually play Tau and was borrowing his friend's army to try it out, who won one game and pulled it close in another against a considerably more experienced player.


Here's the thing: I just don't think it's possible to go for just wiping out the enemy force anymore, you actually have to play to and capture the objectives. To this end, you need to have things other than big suits.

There are now plenty of people trying non suit based lists and getting tabled slightly less and reporting they are "slightly" better but the key word is slight. Infantry lists don't win games and none of our big stuff is priced fairly to support them. It's going on two and a half months this weekend since people have been playing Tau and I know many people are letting Tau players proxy units into their army for testing perposes or even Tau players finishing the infantry and playing lists with it.

They are simply not winning. The Tau are in dire straights. They rely on being the best shooting army and that was taken away from them. Even in 7th the data supported that they were already a mid tier army other than the broken stuff like Riptide wings, Storm Surge spam, and some broken formations. Once those were taken away Tau were typically a mid tier codex. However the stuff that was mid tier was somehow seen as too powerful and over nerfed and now we end up with the Tau where they are now.

8th edition made every army nearly as good at shooting as the Tau used too (in 7th) and the Tau got nothing to make them stand out for shooting in 8th. So naturally we are now at this impasse where our army isn't capable of all that much in a competitive or even semi-competitive sense.

I've been here since day one of the 8th edition leaks saying Tau were going to be weak and every day more evidence arises and all of our detractors continually fail to provide any sort of evidence other than emotional arguments or perhaps sheer misinformation due to simply not knowing. The goalposts have been moved a lot in regards to the Tau. We always need to keep adapting and keep trying harder and harder. Then when we do and still fail we get told to do the same thing.

Absolutely ridiculous.

 Gamgee wrote:

I've been here since day one of the 8th edition leaks saying Tau were going to be weak and every day more evidence arises and all of our detractors continually fail to provide any sort of evidence other than emotional arguments or perhaps sheer misinformation due to simply not knowing. The goalposts have been moved a lot in regards to the Tau. We always need to keep adapting and keep trying harder and harder. Then when we do and still fail we get told to do the same thing.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Infuriatingly, this is the same thing that happened to the bottom-tier armies in 5e, 6e, and 7e. People who used them knew they were crap. Some people who fought them also knew they were crap. Significant parts of the playerbase then yelled "Git Gud Sun" at people who in the previous edition had been tournament winners/runners-up.

 Gamgee wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
My 2c on the Tau?

I think it's because they lost all that formation-based crap they had, and many of the players are lost without it.

I have come to this conclusion by watching Tau players' games. There was one who picked up Tau in 7e and spent a considerable amount of prep time complaining about the removal of formations, and he was beaten by the Ork player facing him. But there was another who didn't actually play Tau and was borrowing his friend's army to try it out, who won one game and pulled it close in another against a considerably more experienced player.


Here's the thing: I just don't think it's possible to go for just wiping out the enemy force anymore, you actually have to play to and capture the objectives. To this end, you need to have things other than big suits.

There are now plenty of people trying non suit based lists and getting tabled slightly less and reporting they are "slightly" better but the key word is slight. Infantry lists don't win games and none of our big stuff is priced fairly to support them. It's going on two and a half months this weekend since people have been playing Tau and I know many people are letting Tau players proxy units into their army for testing perposes or even Tau players finishing the infantry and playing lists with it.

They are simply not winning. The Tau are in dire straights. They rely on being the best shooting army and that was taken away from them. Even in 7th the data supported that they were already a mid tier army other than the broken stuff like Riptide wings, Storm Surge spam, and some broken formations. Once those were taken away Tau were typically a mid tier codex. However the stuff that was mid tier was somehow seen as too powerful and over nerfed and now we end up with the Tau where they are now.

8th edition made every army nearly as good at shooting as the Tau used too (in 7th) and the Tau got nothing to make them stand out for shooting in 8th. So naturally we are now at this impasse where our army isn't capable of all that much in a competitive or even semi-competitive sense.

I've been here since day one of the 8th edition leaks saying Tau were going to be weak and every day more evidence arises and all of our detractors continually fail to provide any sort of evidence other than emotional arguments or perhaps sheer misinformation due to simply not knowing. The goalposts have been moved a lot in regards to the Tau. We always need to keep adapting and keep trying harder and harder. Then when we do and still fail we get told to do the same thing.

Absolutely ridiculous.

I maintain that we were the best shooting army, always and forever, and Tau was second. But that's besides the point.

Anyway, I don't think Tau are in dire straits, because they look to me like Imperial Guard -1. And it's Imperial Guard -1 because they don't have Conscripts to screen the perimeter against assault.

I'm not sure how their "best shooting" was taken away. It looks to me like just about everything has the same stats it did before, so unless the magic is in the new Plasmaguns I'm not seeing it. I'm not sure how every other army's shooting was buffed, either. In fact, it seems to me that every army's shooting got worse.

I do find it kinda funny how people constantly raise the requirements.

People look at mathhammer and rules interaction and start worrying T'au aren't very good and AM are far too good, and we are told those have nothing to do with the game, mathhammer means nothing, wait till people actually play etc.

Then people do and well... same thing. But now we just haven't played enough, the results aren't conclusive etc.

Some people just can't accept balance issues.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I'm not sure how their "best shooting" was taken away. It looks to me like just about everything has the same stats it did before, so unless the magic is in the new Plasmaguns I'm not seeing it.

Points, man, points! We use a points system. You don't have to get a stat reduction to be made useless.

AM are the new Tau.

Set up your walls of conscripts. Put down your tanks out of LOS.

No matter where your opponent deploys, you'll be erasing 2-3 units per turn with absolute ease, and it will take them a couple turns to actually get to your tanks, if they get there at all.

It's the same game every time. Playing AM in 8th is like playing against Tau in 7th.

The armies just flip flopped, is all.

 Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I'm not sure how their "best shooting" was taken away. It looks to me like just about everything has the same stats it did before, so unless the magic is in the new Plasmaguns I'm not seeing it.

Points, man, points! We use a points system. You don't have to get a stat reduction to be made useless.

If only there were modes of play that didn't use points.

Idea for 9th edition I guess.

/sarcasm

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I'm not sure how their "best shooting" was taken away. It looks to me like just about everything has the same stats it did before, so unless the magic is in the new Plasmaguns I'm not seeing it.

Points, man, points! We use a points system. You don't have to get a stat reduction to be made useless.

If only there were modes of play that didn't use points.

Idea for 9th edition I guess.

/sarcasm

Oh yes, because dividing the points by 20 and not paying for upgrades is SO much more balanced. /sarcasm

Here's what I hypothesize: Tau relied on gunning down the enemy with elite, high-efficiency shooting units before they reach their lines. Because of a variety of changes unrelated to the units in the Tau army, namely charging out of deep strike, charging out of transports, and easy turn-1 charges, Tau are unable to do so. In addition, my army, which is functionally similar, has the ability to put a big wall of bodies between my big guns and the turn 1 charge, whereas the Tau equivalent unit is twice the cost.


Hammerheads are the same price as a Leman Russ, and function similarly. Fire Warriors look pretty decent too. Kroot look pretty decent deployed en-masse. Little suits look pretty decent deployed in small numbers. What looks distinctly bad to me are the really big guys.

 Marmatag wrote:
AM are the new Tau.

Set up your walls of conscripts. Put down your tanks out of LOS.

No matter where your opponent deploys, you'll be erasing 2-3 units per turn with absolute ease, and it will take them a couple turns to actually get to your tanks, if they get there at all.

It's the same game every time. Playing AM in 8th is like playing against Tau in 7th.

The armies just flip flopped, is all.

Dunno, I always felt tau at least took some planning and thought outside of pure riptide/stormsurge spam, which stands in stark contrast to guard which is all basically abusing under costed units and cheap force multipliers.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I maintain that we were the best shooting army, always and forever, and Tau was a second. But that's besides the point.

Anyway, I don't think Tau are in dire straits, because they look to me like Imperial Guard -1. And it's Imperial Guard -1 because they don't have Conscripts to screen the perimeter against assault.

I'm not sure how their "best shooting" was taken away. It looks to me like just about everything has the same stats it did before, so unless the magic is in the new Plasmaguns I'm not seeing it. I'm not sure how every other army's shooting was buffed, either. In fact, it seems to me that every army's shooting got worse.

Cover changed and is less important. Even if it were still important tau aren't actually that great at ignoring it these days. That plus the fact they can longer gain access to BS increases easily, markerlights now offer the same basic benefit most generic HQs offer.

Also, IG -1 would imply they had most of the tools of the guard. Orders are a much better force muliplier than marker lights currently, no widespread morale immunity, troops are actually priced more or less fairly, no cheap yet highly dangerous artillery to speak of, etc. Dunno, looks like they are missing most of the cheese 8th edition guard uses to win.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
My 2c on the Tau?

I think it's because they lost all that formation-based crap they had, and many of the players are lost without it.

I have come to this conclusion by watching Tau players' games. There was one who picked up Tau in 7e and spent a considerable amount of prep time complaining about the removal of formations, and he was beaten by the Ork player facing him. But there was another who didn't actually play Tau and was borrowing his friend's army to try it out, who won one game and pulled it close in another against a considerably more experienced player.


Here's the thing: I just don't think it's possible to go for just wiping out the enemy force anymore, you actually have to play to and capture the objectives. To this end, you need to have things other than big suits. Assault-out-of-deepstrike and turn 1 charges may be hurting them disproportionately, though, since they work similar to Imperial Guard but lack the defensive perimeter of cheap, expendable troopers.

I've seen this idea tossed around a few times in this thread and elsewhere on dakka. I have issues with this line of thinking for 2 reasons.

1. It presumes that all Tau players were running the same OP formations (Riptide Wing, OSC, Hunter Cadres with Stormsurges, etc.) and that that is all they played. While that may be the case for tournaments, that's how it goes at tournaments at all but the highest level (just like the majority of Space Marine players at tournaments ran battle company or super friends or what have you). You're assuming that all Tau players just ran netlists without actually learning our army and codex and coming up with these lists ourselves.

2. The bigger issue IMO. It assumes that there are no good players among Tau players. A good player in this game can adapt fairly quickly, figure out what's good and what isn't when changes happen to their army, and adjust their lists and playstyles accordingly. According to you, that is not happening among Tau players. Which says that Tau players are poor players who aren't actually good at this game, and that, going back to point 1, only won or performed well last edition because we ran netlists. And now without those netlists our poor player skill is revealing itself.

According to you and anyone else who posts something along these lines, the only reason Tau are having a poor showing in 8th edition is because Tau players suck at this game and can only do well when they run netlists. Not because we were heavily nerfed. Not because many of our staple units in the army are overpriced. Not because our internal army balance is about as bad as 7th edition Tyranids. Because we all just need to "git gud". Does this apply to some Tau players? Absolutely it does, just as it would apply to the players of any army. But to say that our poor record reflected in this thread is based solely on us being all bad players who can't win without our army being OP? Is that the argument you are trying to make here? Cause that is how people, especially Tau players, are going to read it. And, quite frankly, that is condescending and dismissive as all hell and is not good for the game at all. (especially if GW is going to do as they claimed they would and listen to player feedback as they adjust armies going forward)

Tau are a quality shooting army. The fluff is to bring the right weapon pinpoint the target and blast it. We did that with crisis suits dropping in, markerlighting a target and killing it. Thats why we are a bs4+ army. In the 4th end codex suits could take an upgrade to make them hit on 3s to reduce our need for markers. In 6 and 7th we needed them to compete with other armies that have the 3+ built in.

But now markers don't allow that. To invest in the 5+ markers on a target we lose the points we need to actually kill the targets. I stopped bringing markers( one if the iconic mechanics of rau) because I'd rather just bring more damaging guns. But with only 50% accuracy its tough to have the longevity to win games