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.

Not really. I have noticed much more a huge upswing on lowered tiered armies though. Which means the upper tier armies/lists are losing more and since they aren't adapting they believe they've swapped.

As for the Tau deal. It really comes off as a L2P kinda thing. Which makes sense as 8th pretty much in its infancy and we all need to L2P.

The thing many playing Tau forget is you're paying for marker lights. If you want your weapons to be the equivalent to a lascannon...then demand the removal of markerlights from your army and then readjust points from there.

It appears many want homogenization of armies so the differences are minor at best and with different looking models at most. Never got upset that I didn't have Nurgle unit equivalents for my Dark Eldar nor desiring my Nids having equivalent weapon options as say, Space Marines.

Why? Because I enjoy variety in armies gameplay as a theme. Could some of the Tau issues be points? Maybe, but again they get markerlights. My Nids don't get marker lights nor do my Dark Eldar or 1K Sons.

Point being weapons that fulfill the same/similar role as other armies aren't equal. They carry different weight/value based around the style of army it is. High quality range fire that is ridiculously powerful and easy to hit...needs to have a balance point.

Lastly, Mathhammer is utterly atrocious for an argument. Mathhammer works under averages. Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages. Furthermore, Mathhammer only works when its agenda driven to support ones own unchanging worldview on something as it removes vasts amount of elements that are also a part of the game.

It doesn't account for the rest of an army. It doesn't account for the skill of the players. It doesn't account for terrain or how the player rolls. It makes assumptions based in a closed environment and when wisely used it helps players to balance during a match success potential, but most of the time its used to backseat rule write and to be on hand as an excuse of soothing one's ego on why they lost.

TL;DR

Tau isn't IG which isn't Nids which isn't Space Marines. Markerlights are a thing, learn to use them now rather than how you used them before.

" Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages"

Actually, they do. The only question is how far into the law of large numbers of dice you go. Mathhammer tells you what will happen over many games for sure. Individual games can be outliers, but the aggregate data set will obey mathhammer guaranteed.

cavebear56 wrote:
Markerlights are a thing, learn to use them now rather than how you used them before.

People have basically abandoned them beyond the one markerlight hit, the cost to get more then a single unit fully marked ends up being prohibitive given the cheapest way to do so is 80pts of pathfinders.

I basicly expect T'au to be played as a horde of inf with fusion commanders or longstrike supported hammerheads for popping anything big, which I will be honest is a bit boring (at least to paint).

Martel732 wrote:
Pages 53, 56, 57, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73
and 74 – Saviour Protocols
Change this rule to read:
‘Saviour Protocols: If a <Sept> Drones unit is within 3"
of a friendly <Sept> Infantry or <Sept> Battlesuit
unit when an enemy attack successfully wounds it, you
can allocate that wound to the Drones unit instead of the target. If you do, that Drones unit suffers a mortal
wound instead of the normal damage.’

I suspect the shield drone will get an exemption in the codex.

Oh.. GW and their damn FAQs again. Figures.

Reading that, I'm never, ever taking shield drones. It's not worth it if they never get the invuln saves they pay 2 ppm for.

Rockfish wrote:

cavebear56 wrote:
Markerlights are a thing, learn to use them now rather than how you used them before.

People have basically abandoned them beyond the one markerlight hit, the cost to get more then a single unit fully marked ends up being prohibitive given the cheapest way to do so is 80pts of pathfinders.

I basicly expect T'au to be played as a horde of inf with fusion commanders or longstrike supported hammerheads for popping anything big, which I will be honest is a bit boring (at least to paint).

Don't forget vespid, those are still getting praised for obvious reasons.

Can't you just allocate the wounds to the drone?

cavebear56 wrote:

Lastly, Mathhammer is utterly atrocious for an argument. Mathhammer works under averages. Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages. Furthermore, Mathhammer only works when its agenda driven to support ones own unchanging worldview on something as it removes vasts amount of elements that are also a part of the game.

While true that basic Mathhammer works on an average, Mathhammer also recognizes the deviation and extremes.
This line basically invalidates everything else you said.

Also, no one is asking for homogenization. Stop pressing that strawman.

Rockfish wrote:

cavebear56 wrote:
Markerlights are a thing, learn to use them now rather than how you used them before.

People have basically abandoned them beyond the one markerlight hit, the cost to get more then a single unit fully marked ends up being prohibitive given the cheapest way to do so is 80pts of pathfinders.

I basicly expect T'au to be played as a horde of inf with fusion commanders or longstrike supported hammerheads for popping anything big, which I will be honest is a bit boring (at least to paint).

Yeah. As has been said, it looks like there are a lot of tau players who never learned how to actually play tau. Every step in the markerlight table has a distinct value to it that cannot necessarily be mathed out, and it looks like there are a lot of Tau players who simply don't know the game well enough to take advantage because they take one look at it and say "first hit and last hit are the only ones worth it"

One hit has obvious benefits. Especially if you're firing anything Ion.

If a vehicle has 4 or 5 wounds left, two markerlight hits can let you finish it off one seeker at a time if you have a heavy weapon that doesn't quite get the job done. How many times have you said "Oh man, just one more wound!" or "If I roll a 4, 5, or 6, it dies", only to roll a 3? This fixes that problem.

Piece of area terrain blocking sight for your heavy weapons? Three markerlight hits allows you to move into position and open them up. There are a lot of heavy weapons in the Tau index that 3 markerlight hits will help you get into position, and most of them are attached to highly mobile units that love to move.

Are you fielding Breachers? How about squads of gun drones? Stealth suits? Ghostkeels? Hell...a Riptide? Three markerlight hits let them move, advance, and open up without penalty.

Marines scout-snipers in cover? Four markerlight hits and you can make them gone.

Don't like your odds on finishing off an almost dead target because all your seeker mounting units had to move this turn? Two more markerlight hits can fix that (remember boys and girls. Seeker missiles are Heavy 1)

5-man Marine fire team in a building with a 1+ save because city fight rules are giving them +2 to their saves? Four Markerlight hits and your breacher team will dust them.

Five markerlight hits gets you a +1 BS. However, it also grants the rest of the markerlight benefits as well. Tag something 5 times and you reroll 1's, get your BS on seekers to fix those "I almost killed it!" moments, can move and shoot with heavy weapons and advance and shoot assault weapons without penalty, ignore cover, AND get +1 to hit. All at the same time.

The only people who look at that and think "Gee, only the first markerlight is worth anything" are Tau players. Literally everyone else is telling you that markerlights are awesome, and that we fear them because they will allow you to wreck us.

I just don't get it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:

cavebear56 wrote:

Lastly, Mathhammer is utterly atrocious for an argument. Mathhammer works under averages. Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages. Furthermore, Mathhammer only works when its agenda driven to support ones own unchanging worldview on something as it removes vasts amount of elements that are also a part of the game.

While true that basic Mathhammer works on an average, Mathhammer also recognizes the deviation and extremes.
This line basically invalidates everything else you said.

No. You don't get to say this after trying to argue against my point using vacuum-math on a las-pred.

 Arandmoor wrote:

Yeah. As has been said, it looks like there are a lot of tau players who never learned how to actually play tau. Every step in the markerlight table has a distinct value to it that cannot necessarily be mathed out, and it looks like there are a lot of Tau players who simply don't know the game well enough to take advantage because they take one look at it and say "first hit and last hit are the only ones worth it"

One hit has obvious benefits. Especially if you're firing anything Ion.

If a vehicle has 4 or 5 wounds left, two markerlight hits can let you finish it off one seeker at a time if you have a heavy weapon that doesn't quite get the job done. How many times have you said "Oh man, just one more wound!" or "If I roll a 4, 5, or 6, it dies", only to roll a 3? This fixes that problem.

Piece of area terrain blocking sight for your heavy weapons? Three markerlight hits allows you to move into position and open them up. There are a lot of heavy weapons in the Tau index that 3 markerlight hits will help you get into position, and most of them are attached to highly mobile units that love to move.

Are you fielding Breachers? How about squads of gun drones? Stealth suits? Ghostkeels? Hell...a Riptide? Three markerlight hits let them move, advance, and open up without penalty.

Marines scout-snipers in cover? Four markerlight hits and you can make them gone.

Don't like your odds on finishing off an almost dead target because all your seeker mounting units had to move this turn? Two more markerlight hits can fix that (remember boys and girls. Seeker missiles are Heavy 1)

5-man Marine fire team in a building with a 1+ save because city fight rules are giving them +2 to their saves? Four Markerlight hits and your breacher team will dust them.

Five markerlight hits gets you a +1 BS. However, it also grants the rest of the markerlight benefits as well. Tag something 5 times and you reroll 1's, get your BS on seekers to fix those "I almost killed it!" moments, can move and shoot with heavy weapons and advance and shoot assault weapons without penalty, ignore cover, AND get +1 to hit. All at the same time.

The only people who look at that and think "Gee, only the first markerlight is worth anything" are Tau players. Literally everyone else is telling you that markerlights are awesome, and that we fear them because they will allow you to wreck us.

I just don't get it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:

cavebear56 wrote:

Lastly, Mathhammer is utterly atrocious for an argument. Mathhammer works under averages. Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages. Furthermore, Mathhammer only works when its agenda driven to support ones own unchanging worldview on something as it removes vasts amount of elements that are also a part of the game.

While true that basic Mathhammer works on an average, Mathhammer also recognizes the deviation and extremes.
This line basically invalidates everything else you said.

No. You don't get to say this after trying to argue against my point using vacuum-math on a las-pred.

I can provide a TON more examples about how Tau Heavy Weapons are severely overpriced.
Tho it would all reach the exact same conclusion.

As far as the Markerlight Table is concerned.
2 - Seeker Missiles are pretty garbage, it would take quite a bit of math to prove this tho. I have done it before, and I just don't think this thread is worth the effort so far.
3 - This is a massive gamble. If you fail to reach 3 Lights on your target, then you have severely punished your shooting.
4 - Arguably decent. The effect is fairly strong, but situational. Against Anti Tank it's often irrelevant since most Tanks won't have this benefit.
As well as Cover as a whole is a lot less common in 8e.

If a Vehicle has 4-5 wounds left, you will need about 10-15 Seeker Missiles to get the job done. Those Missiles need platforms that can carry them.
As well as the order of operation matters here. If you shoot with let's say AT Weapon #1 that carries 2 Seeker, it does poorly. ATW#2/2 Seekers, it does okay. AT#3 and it is now low enough to justify using Seekers on... You can't go back and use the Seekers on the 1st 2.

Gun Drones are easily the most broken thing in the Tau Codex. I would happily see them nerfed in return for the rest of the Index being viable.

The hard truth about Markerlights is that too many people have hangups of their power from previous editions. So they automatically assume they are "GOD GG SSS TIER".
When the truth is... their effects can often be replicated with intelligent play or other options.

 Arandmoor wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

 Arandmoor wrote:

Again, it's almost as though different armies are different or something!

Take a basic transport with ~12 wounds. A quad lascannon pred with a 3+ BS will shoot with 4, hit with 2-3, wound with 1-2, and deal 3-7 damage for ~200 points.

Broadside with HRR and a single markerlight will shoot with 2, hit with 1-2 (re-rolling 1's), wound with 1-2, and deal 3-7 damage for ~200 points with a, roughly, 1 in 3 chance for an extra mortal wound.

For return fire, the pred has ~12 wounds, ~T7, and a 3+ save.
The Broadside has 6 wounds, T5 or 6, a 2+ save, a potential 4++ save, and drone bubble-wrap with more 4++ saves or markerlights.

Can someone look up broadsides for me and tell me how easily they can take advantage of cover?

Broadsides are not Infantry, they actually need to be 50% hidden.
Drone Bubble Wrap gets no saves when they take wounds, so no 4++

Also, I already posted the math on it...

 Talamare wrote:

4Las Predator vs Longrails vs Railside vs Railheads vs Railhead(Longstrike buffed) -- vs a ... I'll be nice to HRR, and say a T7 Tank.
Predator - 4 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 5/6 * 3.5 = 5.18
Longrails - 1 * 5/6 * 5/6 * 3.5 + 1 * 5/6 * 1/3 * 2 = 2.98
Railside - 2 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 3.5 + 2 * 1/2 * 1/6 = 2.5
Railhead(LS) - 1 * 5/6 * 2/3 * 3.5 + 1 * 5/6 * 1/6 * 2 = 2.22
Railhead - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 + 1 * 2/3 * 1/6 * 2 = 1.77

You basically need a 2 Broadsides to equal a Predator
400 points to equal 200 points

A Quad Pred Lascannon will shoot 4, hit with 3, wound with 2, deal 3-7 damage (~10% chance of dealing 0 damage)
A HRR Broadside will shoot 2, hit with 1, and like miss, or maybe get a few wounds. (~40% chance of dealing 0 damage)

Again, No one cares that the armies are different. What we care about is that
Army A - Has Good Psychic, Good Shooting, Good Melee
Army B - Has No Psychic, Bad Shooting, Worst Melee in the Game
These are PROVEN OBJECTIVE MATHEMATICAL TRUTHS.

In a vacuum. Only in a vacuum.

Broadsides have secondary weapons they pay points for, that make them useful in other situations. SMS can be used to bombard approaching infantry from cover. Plasma rifles can be used to pop marines as they approach. Broadsides can benefit from markerlights, and their weapon packages make them highly value that 3rd hit. Meanwhile, a moving predator has to eat that -1 to hit if it wants to move. Broadsides get a support system that can include a 4++ save over their 2+, or a drone controller to enable their own markerlight drone spam, or a velocity tracker to turn them into anti-air batteries for a mere 2 points without gimping them against non-aerial targets.

Oh, and shield drones get their 4++ save against any wounds allocated to them through their savior protocols. I have no idea where you got the idea that they cannot take their invuln save. The protocols just allow you to allocate the wound. It's still saved against as normal.

Finally, again, Tau do NOT have bad shooting. They have 4+ bs, but also have a higher than average strength. It's not the army's fault that you like elite spam that doesn't take advantage of it.

Firewarriors and Breacher teams are where your advantaged shooting is. They reverse the math against the marine standard by hitting with half and wounding with 2/3rds (compared to a bolter vs a marine that hits with 2/3rds and wounds with half). The infantry units you don't use have marine shooting before markerlights are taken into account, and do so for about 60% of the cost per model.

Your broadsides should be supporting your gunline. Not standing in place of it.

You're trying to argue that the entire Tau army sucks, and your proof is that Broadsides aren't as good as a las-pred in a vacuum. If you can't understand why that's a bad argument, I don't know what else I *can* tell you.

Edit: I thought you were comparing Tau to IG. How did space marines enter into theis? We already know that SM shoot really well for their points because they pay for it with 13 point models at a minimum. A better comparison given the context of the rest of the conversation would be a broadside vs a LRBT.

SMS is one of the worst points per wound weapons in our dex. So now we stack the two terrible things together? SMS is hugely over costed and a broadside is looking at another 40 points total for both the sms which brings the broadside even less into points efficiency than the tank. It's still only 8 heavy str 5 shots no rend.

I do agree that SMS are garbage for their points. They've got the whole "no LOS required" thing going for them, but they're still garbage for the price.

Plasma wins over SMS every single time.

SMS just isn't an interesting weapon system. They don't do anything interesting.

Silver144 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Silver144 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Spoiler:

I know this is a bit vague but I was playing in another bracket myself so I never actually got to see his list and I only got to watch the last part of his first match, can't remember how many Ghostkeels exactly, three or four? Each one had two stealth drone escorts that gave a further -1 penalty to to hit rolls against the Ghostkeels but apparently they only needed to be within six inches of any stealth drone to get their bonus, not just their own like the army name suggested - Intangible Ghostkeels.
A pair of fire warriors, one packing a markerlight weapon that seemed to have a good fifty inches of range, I never actually got to see what the other one did and three HQ suits.

What I saw was him systematically table a Necron player.
What I heard and read in the results was that he managed the same with an AM army and a Space Wolves player from my own club who I consider a better SW player than myself.
The only player he didn't boardwipe was a Daemon player who had luck in his back pocket when the TO announced The Relic and then just kept making invul saves.
I played the Daemon player, I think my Deathwatch might have beaten the Ghostkeels, a combination of the Null psychic power and a stupid amount of Special Ammo put the Daemons in their place - it's also possible I could have lost entire units before I even got in Bolter range.
I'm not saying the Ghostkeel shenanigans are broken but Tau definitely have lists that aren't bottom tier.

I didn't saw ghostkeels on the table myself yet, but on the paper - it is battlesuit for 168 pts with 2+1d3 meltashots. I don't know, with bs4+ this is not so much, my deepstriking combi- jetpack wolf guards looks better as for me. I mean he will get 2 hits average and his to-hit penalty works only when the enemy is 12', and his drones are only t4 single wound, I can take them down with bolters.

Unless he makes a decent number of his saves then blows your Jump Squad away.
You'd honestly be better off dropping them on the markerlight guy and his bodyguard to put them out of the battle as quick as possible.
The Necron guy's first volley was against the Drones, so were all his others, the HQ missiles and Ghostkeels put down his Arks then did his 'crons squad by squad.
Twelve inches is Rapid Fire range for Space Marines and Necrons, having Fly means even dedicated CC like TWC can only get one meaningful round on them and there is no relevant penalty on them when they just leave combat so hanging about at the twelve inch range is low risk and means most Orks literally can't shoot them unless they charge the Orks, Guard are effectively Overwatching them in any given shooting phase and wounding them on fives or sixes, meanwhile those HQ suits are laying into anything that truly threatens the Ghostkeels with fairly powerful Missiles while being untargetable to non Sniper models due to the blocking Ghostkeels and drones. Nid swarms, maybe Nurgle zombies and Deathwatch would be the only things in my mind that would have a better than 50% chance as a list against the Ghostkeels, with the Nids and Zombies able to put down so many fearless models that the Tau army simply wouldn't have enough shots to bring enough of them down before just about everything being overrun by the Nids and the Keels having nowhere to escape to so no way of leaving combat or simply outlasted by the Zombies - Deathwatch is another name I'll throw in that hat due to Specialised Ammo and the Tau list having such a small model count.

I don't compare jetpack WG vs ghostkeel direct battle, just notice, that jetpack WG make their the job better (and they have the same role as ghostkeel). And even if we will pit them, ghostkeel will only kill one or two guy average. Look at his weapons, 2x melta and heavy 1d3 melta, with bs4+ it is 2 hits average, 1-2 dead marine, but every one costs 40 pts, not a cheap guys though.

 Arandmoor wrote:

One hit has obvious benefits. Especially if you're firing anything Ion.

If a vehicle has 4 or 5 wounds left, two markerlight hits can let you finish it off one seeker at a time if you have a heavy weapon that doesn't quite get the job done. How many times have you said "Oh man, just one more wound!" or "If I roll a 4, 5, or 6, it dies", only to roll a 3? This fixes that problem.
.

Thank you. I was starting to think that I was the only one who had realized this.

Except the reason you have those wounds left over is because you wasted points tanking inefficient seeker missiles instead a more points efficient option that would have wounded way more stuff.

 Talamare wrote:



2 - Seeker Missiles are pretty garbage, it would take quite a bit of math to prove this tho.

It would take an infinite amount of math, because you cannot mathematize the value of being able to allocate exactly how many shots you need to fire to accomplish a specific task, which is precisely what seeler missiles, especially on Skyrays, provide.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gamgee wrote:
Except the reason you have those wounds left over is because you wasted points tanking inefficient seeker missiles instead a more points efficient option that would have wounded way more stuff.

Thnk for five seconds man. You know target x has two wounds left, you fire exactly two missiles, and you are pretty much 100% guaranteed of the target being destroyed (assuming a Skyray with 5+ ML support, because 97% chance of a wound per missile fired).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm pretty sure it's the only way in the game to do that.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Talamare wrote:



2 - Seeker Missiles are pretty garbage, it would take quite a bit of math to prove this tho.

It would take an infinite amount of math, because you cannot mathematize the value of being able to allocate exactly how many shots you need to fire to accomplish a specific task, which is precisely what seeler missiles, especially on Skyrays, provide.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gamgee wrote:
Except the reason you have those wounds left over is because you wasted points tanking inefficient seeker missiles instead a more points efficient option that would have wounded way more stuff.

Thnk for five seconds man. You know target x has two wounds left, you fire exactly two missiles, and you are pretty much 100% guaranteed of the target being destroyed (assuming a Skyray with 5+ ML support, because 97% chance of a wound per missile fired).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm pretty sure it's the only way in the game to do that.

Thats nice and all but why are you even taking a skyray? It has 6 seeker missiles, 2 burst cannons or so of guns, and two markerlights for 170+ points, once you have spent those 6 missiles (of which ~4 will hit) you are 6 pathfinders effectively.

Even I have to admit that the skyray is just a heaping pile of hot garbage. Just...no.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
2 - Seeker Missiles are pretty garbage, it would take quite a bit of math to prove this tho.

It would take an infinite amount of math, because you cannot mathematize the value of being able to allocate exactly how many shots you need to fire to accomplish a specific task, which is precisely what seeler missiles, especially on Skyrays, provide.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gamgee wrote:
Except the reason you have those wounds left over is because you wasted points tanking inefficient seeker missiles instead a more points efficient option that would have wounded way more stuff.

Thnk for five seconds man. You know target x has two wounds left, you fire exactly two missiles, and you are pretty much 100% guaranteed of the target being destroyed (assuming a Skyray with 5+ ML support, because 97% chance of a wound per missile fired).

Think for six seconds man, 100% guaranteed =/= 94% chance of success.

This is a honest question for Tau players, not a slight at all.

What percentage of players only own about 2000 points (7e cost) of tau models, all purchased in 6th/7th? I would assume from this thread that these armies would be decimated by the best 8e Tau list. Would some of Tau's troubles be related to lack of models?

are tau the new "sex panther"?

cavebear56 wrote:
Lastly, Mathhammer is utterly atrocious for an argument. Mathhammer works under averages. Playing actual games, sorry to tell you...they do not care about averages. Furthermore, Mathhammer only works when its agenda driven to support ones own unchanging worldview on something as it removes vasts amount of elements that are also a part of the game.

It doesn't account for the rest of an army. It doesn't account for the skill of the players. It doesn't account for terrain or how the player rolls. It makes assumptions based in a closed environment and when wisely used it helps players to balance during a match success potential, but most of the time its used to backseat rule write and to be on hand as an excuse of soothing one's ego on why they lost.

Exactly, but no one applies Scientific Method to their Mathhammer.
1] Come up with the Theory
2] Test your Theory at least Three Times.
3] When you can duplicate your Theory Three times then you can say you have proved your Theory.

With Table Top Gaming it is a little bit harder, you need to kick it out to 5-9+ times because you need to deal with all of the variable including your different list, your opponents, your opponent's list and the different terrain.

You don't need the scientific method for non-observation based claims. Mathematics is tautological, so no hypioheses necessary.

Yeah, and mathhammer is especially bad when you deliberately make bad assumptions, obfuscate the facts, and deliberately refuse to account for various things that you'd need to account for.

See: Martel's hilarious series of threads about space marines.

 JimOnMars wrote:
This is a honest question for Tau players, not a slight at all.

What percentage of players only own about 2000 points (7e cost) of tau models, all purchased in 6th/7th? I would assume from this thread that these armies would be decimated by the best 8e Tau list. Would some of Tau's troubles be related to lack of models?

I have about 12K points, purchased since 5th edition. I own multiples of every single core GW model, with the exception of the SS, because I find the design to be hideous, and several FW units. And honestly? I haven't been able to field a list that another faction can't do better...

The best Anti-tank we have is on about the same level as a quad-lascannon predator. The best. And that's the Quad-fusion Commander. Our next anti-tank is Longstrike, who fires a single S10 D6 damage shot a turn. Then I want to say... Gun Drones?

Now, I can understand, to a point, the argument that people need to relearn to play Tau, but here's the thing... I always ran the lists that are supposed to be doing well in this addition. Small, aggressive units of breachers/strike squads supported by varying suits... And a lot of my enemies feel sorry for how easily it is to handle that now. Tau have always revolved around synergy and a single phase of the game, shooting. Some armies won or lost in the movement phase as well, (hi, Farsight Enclaves and all your Crisis Suits.)Yet now there are armies that can easily outdo our shooting for the same price, while being better at every other phase of the game as well. Tau have no psychic ability. Something I want to say can only be said by one other faction in the game in the form of Necrons with their insane durability. Tau used Markerlights. Used. The new Markerlights just don't cut it, the +1 to hit needs to be lower on the list to be viable. Tau are an elite costed army with a horde level BS, and the edition changes highlight this. S5 isn't as good as it was against anything T3, and Tau pay a lot for those S5 guns. Look at a guardsman stat line and Fire Warrior stat line and tell me the point difference isn't that gun. On top of that, one of the "better" levels, which allows you to move and fire heavy weapons, or advance and fire assault weapons without penalty is a trap, since you have to choose to do those things before you're able to get the benefit. It really sucks when you bank on one of your abilities working, and you flub a dice roll and end up with two Markerlights, and now half your army is firing at BS 5+. I'd honestly prefer they drop Markerlights entirely and just give Tau BS 3+. It seems like that's how they're costed, at least.

I'm not going to stop playing Tau, I have several other armies including Chaos, Space Wolves, Tyranids, and Orcs... And Tau are easily the worst off out of all of them. They needed to be tones down a bit, (ironic for me since I never had a opponent complain about my armies before, seeing as how I never played a static gunline...) but they didn't get toned down, they got hammered down, hard. The only things they have going for them are Drone Savior Protocols, abundant Fly, and Quad-fusion Commanders. The first one is easily gotten around by a good opponent, the second only works if something survives combat, and the third is basically a gimmick. Tell me, would you take a Quad-Lascannon Predator with half the wounds, lower toughness, and an 18" range, even when you can deepstrike it, if it costed ~40ish points less? It's a suicide unit. It'll hit one target, admittedly hard, and then die. Yet that's the best option, by far, for Tau.

All in all, they can win, I've done it, but it's certainly not easy, even when you're taking the "good" stuff against another faction's mid/low-tier. For giggles a friend and I tried to do a mirror match with Space Marines and Tau, taking the closest equivalent units. It wasn't even a fight.

Martel732 wrote:
You don't need the scientific method for non-observation based claims. Mathematics is tautological, so no hypioheses necessary.

One could think that, but look at when the 5th Edition Space Wolf Codex, everyone looked at Bloodclaws as worthless, then I put 15 + a Wolf Priest into an LRC. The question became who would want to take Grey Hunters?

You have to look at everything you can to make a unit work, not just do some math and go 'That unit is Junk'.

Right now look at the Wolf Guard Battle Leader or the Primaris Lieutenant and their Re-Roll for Damage with Las-Cannons or Missile Launchers or the Wolf Lord and the Re-Roll of 1's To Hit and Plasma. What happens to the Hellblaster Squad and their Plasma Incinerators with that combination, suddenly it goes from an ok unit to vaporizing MC at will.

Deadawake1347 wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:
This is a honest question for Tau players, not a slight at all.

What percentage of players only own about 2000 points (7e cost) of tau models, all purchased in 6th/7th? I would assume from this thread that these armies would be decimated by the best 8e Tau list. Would some of Tau's troubles be related to lack of models?

I have about 12K points, purchased since 5th edition. I own multiples of every single core GW model, with the exception of the SS, because I find the design to be hideous, and several FW units. And honestly? I haven't been able to field a list that another faction can't do better...

The best Anti-tank we have is on about the same level as a quad-lascannon predator. The best. And that's the Quad-fusion Commander. Our next anti-tank is Longstrike, who fires a single S10 D6 damage shot a turn. Then I want to say... Gun Drones?

Now, I can understand, to a point, the argument that people need to relearn to play Tau, but here's the thing... I always ran the lists that are supposed to be doing well in this addition. Small, aggressive units of breachers/strike squads supported by varying suits... And a lot of my enemies feel sorry for how easily it is to handle that now. Tau have always revolved around synergy and a single phase of the game, shooting. Some armies won or lost in the movement phase as well, (hi, Farsight Enclaves and all your Crisis Suits.)Yet now there are armies that can easily outdo our shooting for the same price, while being better at every other phase of the game as well. Tau have no psychic ability. Something I want to say can only be said by one other faction in the game in the form of Necrons with their insane durability. Tau used Markerlights. Used. The new Markerlights just don't cut it, the +1 to hit needs to be lower on the list to be viable. Tau are an elite costed army with a horde level BS, and the edition changes highlight this. S5 isn't as good as it was against anything T3, and Tau pay a lot for those S5 guns. Look at a guardsman stat line and Fire Warrior stat line and tell me the point difference isn't that gun. On top of that, one of the "better" levels, which allows you to move and fire heavy weapons, or advance and fire assault weapons without penalty is a trap, since you have to choose to do those things before you're able to get the benefit. It really sucks when you bank on one of your abilities working, and you flub a dice roll and end up with two Markerlights, and now half your army is firing at BS 5+. I'd honestly prefer they drop Markerlights entirely and just give Tau BS 3+. It seems like that's how they're costed, at least.

I'm not going to stop playing Tau, I have several other armies including Chaos, Space Wolves, Tyranids, and Orcs... And Tau are easily the worst off out of all of them. They needed to be tones down a bit, (ironic for me since I never had a opponent complain about my armies before, seeing as how I never played a static gunline...) but they didn't get toned down, they got hammered down, hard. The only things they have going for them are Drone Savior Protocols, abundant Fly, and Quad-fusion Commanders. The first one is easily gotten around by a good opponent, the second only works if something survives combat, and the third is basically a gimmick. Tell me, would you take a Quad-Lascannon Predator with half the wounds, lower toughness, and an 18" range, even when you can deepstrike it, if it costed ~40ish points less? It's a suicide unit. It'll hit one target, admittedly hard, and then die. Yet that's the best option, by far, for Tau.

All in all, they can win, I've done it, but it's certainly not easy, even when you're taking the "good" stuff against another faction's mid/low-tier. For giggles a friend and I tried to do a mirror match with Space Marines and Tau, taking the closest equivalent units. It wasn't even a fight.

Sounds like my infantry heavy list I ran in 7th is going to get crushed. More or less what I was expecting. Especially in my very competitive scene and its an itc tournament.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You don't need the scientific method for non-observation based claims. Mathematics is tautological, so no hypioheses necessary.

One could think that, but look at when the 5th Edition Space Wolf Codex, everyone looked at Bloodclaws as worthless, then I put 15 + a Wolf Priest into an LRC. The question became who would want to take Grey Hunters?

You have to look at everything you can to make a unit work, not just do some math and go 'That unit is Junk'.

Right now look at the Wolf Guard Battle Leader or the Primaris Lieutenant and their Re-Roll for Damage with Las-Cannons or Missile Launchers or the Wolf Lord and the Re-Roll of 1's To Hit and Plasma. What happens to the Hellblaster Squad and their Plasma Incinerators with that combination, suddenly it goes from an ok unit to vaporizing MC at will.

Okay, dude. There is more to using a unit than mathhammer, but the mathhammer itself is tautological. Some units, you can say are junk, such as terminators 2nd-7th ed, just from the math. Clearly, the bloodclaws were more of a "bubble" unit that could salvaged by circumstance. Circumstance, however, did NOT change their base mathhammer. So it was never as bad as people originally thought. Clearly.

Of course, your scenario involves a Land Raider which WAS junk in 5th, as well as 6th and 7th. So are wasting 250 pts to empower the blood claws. Maybe they'd have been even better with packs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gamgee wrote:

Deadawake1347 wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:
This is a honest question for Tau players, not a slight at all.

What percentage of players only own about 2000 points (7e cost) of tau models, all purchased in 6th/7th? I would assume from this thread that these armies would be decimated by the best 8e Tau list. Would some of Tau's troubles be related to lack of models?

I have about 12K points, purchased since 5th edition. I own multiples of every single core GW model, with the exception of the SS, because I find the design to be hideous, and several FW units. And honestly? I haven't been able to field a list that another faction can't do better...

The best Anti-tank we have is on about the same level as a quad-lascannon predator. The best. And that's the Quad-fusion Commander. Our next anti-tank is Longstrike, who fires a single S10 D6 damage shot a turn. Then I want to say... Gun Drones?

Now, I can understand, to a point, the argument that people need to relearn to play Tau, but here's the thing... I always ran the lists that are supposed to be doing well in this addition. Small, aggressive units of breachers/strike squads supported by varying suits... And a lot of my enemies feel sorry for how easily it is to handle that now. Tau have always revolved around synergy and a single phase of the game, shooting. Some armies won or lost in the movement phase as well, (hi, Farsight Enclaves and all your Crisis Suits.)Yet now there are armies that can easily outdo our shooting for the same price, while being better at every other phase of the game as well. Tau have no psychic ability. Something I want to say can only be said by one other faction in the game in the form of Necrons with their insane durability. Tau used Markerlights. Used. The new Markerlights just don't cut it, the +1 to hit needs to be lower on the list to be viable. Tau are an elite costed army with a horde level BS, and the edition changes highlight this. S5 isn't as good as it was against anything T3, and Tau pay a lot for those S5 guns. Look at a guardsman stat line and Fire Warrior stat line and tell me the point difference isn't that gun. On top of that, one of the "better" levels, which allows you to move and fire heavy weapons, or advance and fire assault weapons without penalty is a trap, since you have to choose to do those things before you're able to get the benefit. It really sucks when you bank on one of your abilities working, and you flub a dice roll and end up with two Markerlights, and now half your army is firing at BS 5+. I'd honestly prefer they drop Markerlights entirely and just give Tau BS 3+. It seems like that's how they're costed, at least.

I'm not going to stop playing Tau, I have several other armies including Chaos, Space Wolves, Tyranids, and Orcs... And Tau are easily the worst off out of all of them. They needed to be tones down a bit, (ironic for me since I never had a opponent complain about my armies before, seeing as how I never played a static gunline...) but they didn't get toned down, they got hammered down, hard. The only things they have going for them are Drone Savior Protocols, abundant Fly, and Quad-fusion Commanders. The first one is easily gotten around by a good opponent, the second only works if something survives combat, and the third is basically a gimmick. Tell me, would you take a Quad-Lascannon Predator with half the wounds, lower toughness, and an 18" range, even when you can deepstrike it, if it costed ~40ish points less? It's a suicide unit. It'll hit one target, admittedly hard, and then die. Yet that's the best option, by far, for Tau.

All in all, they can win, I've done it, but it's certainly not easy, even when you're taking the "good" stuff against another faction's mid/low-tier. For giggles a friend and I tried to do a mirror match with Space Marines and Tau, taking the closest equivalent units. It wasn't even a fight.

Sounds like my infantry heavy list I ran in 7th is going to get crushed. More or less what I was expecting. Especially in my very competitive scene and its an itc tournament.

Fire warriors are 8 pts. You'll be fine.

While I did notice that what was previously considered "OP" armies coming in last while "weak" armies coming in high, I don't think it's due to the rules themselves. I think it's more due to the players.

Although there are exceptions, the majority of people who flock to the OP armies (and especially the OP-lists built out of the OP armies) largely relied on the rules to win games for them and don't have much in the way of tactical sense. When the rules themselves changed on a fundamental level and the game becoming more tactical (like, requiring actual in-game coordination, unit positioning and whatnot rather than just shoot everything and run for the objectives), these people are now at a loss for what to do; the rules could no longer carry them to victory alone. This is why you see a lot of these people going "but X unit in X army costs less than my Y unit in my Y army but they have the same stats!" or go "X weapon use to costs less points and do more damage to Y units". They're still largely stuck in 7th edition mindset and playstyle, which is not going to work in this edition. Paired with the now more balanced ruleset, this means that they're at a severe handicap from the getgo.

Meanwhile, people who have stuck with the "weaker" armies got a huge leg up; these people generally made the best of the worst situation (for some, for many editions now) and balancing out their own army's shortcomings with their own skills. Eking out these tiny advantages have always been part of the mindset of these players and adapting to changes became almost manditory, since your strong stuff often got nerfed with the next edition so you had to change up your game quick. When things got equalized, these players got a massive boost since they were already quick to adapt and seeking out every tactical advantage they could get.

I come to this conclusion because the majority of the people I see that are failing with this edition are either people who've been playing with armies traditionally considered "OP" for a few editions now, or newbloods who just bought their armies within the past edition or so. The people having successes, likewise, are generally oldbloods who have stuck with the game through thick and thin with their armies (although not quite shutting up with the complaining in those editions). Again, there are exceptions, as this is not universal (I have seen some oldbloods with the weaker factions struggle and some newbloods who have adapted extremely quickly), but it does seem like the trend to me.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
While I did notice that what was previously considered "OP" armies coming in last while "weak" armies coming in high, I don't think it's due to the rules themselves. I think it's more due to the players.

Although there are exceptions, the majority of people who flock to the OP armies (and especially the OP-lists built out of the OP armies) largely relied on the rules to win games for them and don't have much in the way of tactical sense. When the rules themselves changed on a fundamental level and the game becoming more tactical (like, requiring actual in-game coordination, unit positioning and whatnot rather than just shoot everything and run for the objectives), these people are now at a loss for what to do; the rules could no longer carry them to victory alone. This is why you see a lot of these people going "but X unit in X army costs less than my Y unit in my Y army but they have the same stats!" or go "X weapon use to costs less points and do more damage to Y units". They're still largely stuck in 7th edition mindset and playstyle, which is not going to work in this edition. Paired with the now more balanced ruleset, this means that they're at a severe handicap from the getgo.

Meanwhile, people who have stuck with the "weaker" armies got a huge leg up; these people generally made the best of the worst situation (for some, for many editions now) and balancing out their own army's shortcomings with their own skills. Eking out these tiny advantages have always been part of the mindset of these players and adapting to changes became almost manditory, since your strong stuff often got nerfed with the next edition so you had to change up your game quick. When things got equalized, these players got a massive boost since they were already quick to adapt and seeking out every tactical advantage they could get.

I come to this conclusion because the majority of the people I see that are failing with this edition are either people who've been playing with armies traditionally considered "OP" for a few editions now, or newbloods who just bought their armies within the past edition or so. The people having successes, likewise, are generally oldbloods who have stuck with the game through thick and thin with their armies (although not quite shutting up with the complaining in those editions). Again, there are exceptions, as this is not universal (I have seen some oldbloods with the weaker factions struggle and some newbloods who have adapted extremely quickly), but it does seem like the trend to me.

You can say that but I want to be able to field a balanced force of infantry backed up with a few crisis suits and broadsides, a semi fluffy feeling list. However in order to do so I have to take units that are statistically worse than others in my faction, to the point where I effectively have to spend 30% of my points to be objectively worse than the boring lists of commanders and fire warriors that are flooding tau forums. Would it be unreasonable to expect that crisis suits perform competitively compared to commanders?

From ATT:

One Commander costs much less than two identically-armed XV8s, yet has more firepower. For example, one Commander with 4 Burst Cannons costs 116 points and statistically hits 13 times, while two XV8s armed with three Burst Cannons each cost 144 points total, yet will only statistically hit 12 times.

Most of issues tau players are complaining about are that our units are a often a commander but worse, a HYMP broadside is a commander with 4xMP but worse, etc. One can make the argument that maybe commanders are undercosted, and this maybe true, but at the same time people are spamming the commanders without curbstomping people so far. This may change with tournaments overtime, but if people are still not breaking even with our 'ideal' units maybe it would at least be fine to bring our other units back in line when compared to commanders at least.

Oh yeah and people complaining about markerlights should be aware of the the AM spotlight
From Facepunch

They also accidentally created one of the best units in the game with the Sabre platform with defensive searchlight, which is unfortunately no longer for sale. However if you were to make your own out of vehicle spotlights, for 20 points per platform (available in teams of 1-3) you get a unit which can target any enemy unit within 48" and line of sight. Then, one Imperial Guard unit can use the marker to get +1 to hit, much like an old school Tau markerlight. Even better, these do not have to roll to hit, and there is nothing that says the benefit doesn't stack with multiple spotlights or other bonuses. With 3 Saber platforms and an officer giving front rank fire, second rank fire, a unit of 50 conscripts will hit on 2+'s with 100 lasgun shots at 24", or 200 lasgun shots within 12".

 Arandmoor wrote:
Yeah. As has been said, it looks like there are a lot of tau players who never learned how to actually play tau. Every step in the markerlight table has a distinct value to it that cannot necessarily be mathed out, and it looks like there are a lot of Tau players who simply don't know the game well enough to take advantage because they take one look at it and say "first hit and last hit are the only ones worth it"

One hit has obvious benefits. Especially if you're firing anything Ion.

If a vehicle has 4 or 5 wounds left, two markerlight hits can let you finish it off one seeker at a time if you have a heavy weapon that doesn't quite get the job done. How many times have you said "Oh man, just one more wound!" or "If I roll a 4, 5, or 6, it dies", only to roll a 3? This fixes that problem.

Piece of area terrain blocking sight for your heavy weapons? Three markerlight hits allows you to move into position and open them up. There are a lot of heavy weapons in the Tau index that 3 markerlight hits will help you get into position, and most of them are attached to highly mobile units that love to move.

Are you fielding Breachers? How about squads of gun drones? Stealth suits? Ghostkeels? Hell...a Riptide? Three markerlight hits let them move, advance, and open up without penalty.

Marines scout-snipers in cover? Four markerlight hits and you can make them gone.

Don't like your odds on finishing off an almost dead target because all your seeker mounting units had to move this turn? Two more markerlight hits can fix that (remember boys and girls. Seeker missiles are Heavy 1)

5-man Marine fire team in a building with a 1+ save because city fight rules are giving them +2 to their saves? Four Markerlight hits and your breacher team will dust them.

Five markerlight hits gets you a +1 BS. However, it also grants the rest of the markerlight benefits as well. Tag something 5 times and you reroll 1's, get your BS on seekers to fix those "I almost killed it!" moments, can move and shoot with heavy weapons and advance and shoot assault weapons without penalty, ignore cover, AND get +1 to hit. All at the same time.

The only people who look at that and think "Gee, only the first markerlight is worth anything" are Tau players. Literally everyone else is telling you that markerlights are awesome, and that we fear them because they will allow you to wreck us.

I just don't get it.

I'm sorry but, how many markerlights does this imaginary tau army have? Even with 2 full squads of pathfinders, which is realistically the max anybody will ever take, you average around 10 ML hits (it might be a little higher when you split fire between the squad or do the slow roll to take advantage of their own 1+ reroll, but given they didnt move and havent take any casualties as well). so yea, how many times can you throw 4+ tokens at a unit in cover? How are you going to ensure those 5+ token on that single vehicle that is already almost dead to 'guarantee' it is dead, without accidentally coming up short or massively over saturating the target (in which case grats those 5+ token are now gone because the target is dead and you lost any opportunity to do more damage which those tokens elsewhere)? And, how many tokens do you have left to get 3+ hits on other targets for all those ghostkeels you didnt take target locks on?

People that think markerlights are still good dont know what they are talking about. The 1+ reroll is nice for a little bit added to hit, and yea its good when overcharging ion weapons, but the rest is just to high a cost and unreliably to be useful. You'll either end up with to few hits to achieve the result you wanted, or to many wasting even more point efficiency. And dont get me started on seeker missiles, they were marginally useful in 7th but hitting at firer bs is just so bad for the dmg they do for a one shot weapon.