Tau and melee combat.

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.

**pm713**

Kap'n Krump wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
Ordana wrote:
There is ritual combat between Ethereals.
Tau have a vision impairment, can't remember what is was, that plays a part in them being horrible at close combat.

They are said to have poor depth perception, which is odd; as they have two eyes...

This makes EXTRA no sense because I feel like a creature with poor depth perception would be worse at range than up close.

**Blndmage**

pm713 wrote:
Kap'n Krump wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
Ordana wrote:
There is ritual combat between Ethereals.
Tau have a vision impairment, can't remember what is was, that plays a part in them being horrible at close combat.

They are said to have poor depth perception, which is odd; as they have two eyes...

This makes EXTRA no sense because I feel like a creature with poor depth perception would be worse at range than up close.

I think that's from a book GW made which is an in universe guidebook for Guardsmen. Containing helpful advice like Orks look tough but are actually very weak and can be beaten by a punch.

Basically a load of lies to make Guardsmen feel better about their survival chances.

**skchsan**

Blndmage wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Kap'n Krump wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
Ordana wrote:
There is ritual combat between Ethereals.
Tau have a vision impairment, can't remember what is was, that plays a part in them being horrible at close combat.

They are said to have poor depth perception, which is odd; as they have two eyes...

This makes EXTRA no sense because I feel like a creature with poor depth perception would be worse at range than up close.

I think that's from a book GW made which is an in universe guidebook for Guardsmen. Containing helpful advice like Orks look tough but are actually very weak and can be beaten by a punch.

Basically a load of lies to make Guardsmen feel better about their survival chances.

I have no depth perception. But I'm spookily good at darts, archery and similar things.
I use these things differently from most folks.
No depth perception means, I simply straight shot it, go hard enough to avoid ballistic arcing over the distance I need, it seems to work well for me.

Agreed. Depth perception simply deals with the ability to discern how far an object is from the viewer. It has nothing to do with how accurate one can point at an object.

**Bharring**

It's important for those firing weapons that toss some mass over at a target while shooting at long range - as you need to judge range for dropoff.

Maybe that's why Boltguns and Autoguns are only 24" range - nobody in 40k can figure out how to handle dropoff!

Plasma would be affected by dropoff, but may not be as affected (depends on speed and relative density of projectile vs environment)

**Grimtuff**

pm713 wrote:
Kap'n Krump wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
Ordana wrote:
There is ritual combat between Ethereals.
Tau have a vision impairment, can't remember what is was, that plays a part in them being horrible at close combat.

They are said to have poor depth perception, which is odd; as they have two eyes...

This makes EXTRA no sense because I feel like a creature with poor depth perception would be worse at range than up close.

I think that's from a book GW made which is an in universe guidebook for Guardsmen. Containing helpful advice like Orks look tough but are actually very weak and can be beaten by a punch.

Basically a load of lies to make Guardsmen feel better about their survival chances.

It's actually from their Index Xenos article in WD.

**MalfunctBot**

Unusual Suspect wrote:
Also, they have auxiliaries to engage in barbarity if tactics absolutely require it. Despite being worthless in melee on the tabletop, the Kroot in fluff are actually pretty damn badass (they'll engage Astartes and do reasonably well, FFS), as are their offshoot species (Krootox, Knarlocs, Greater Knarlocs, and Hounds). Vespid are known to have claws that can cut through rock (again, not reflected well on the tabletop). There's doubtlessly other species the T'au have incorporated that can be similarly effective.

But that isn't reflected in the tabletop, for the most part, because the theme of the army's playstyle is far more important when GW is developing unit stats than such minor inconveniences as lore.

To be fair a Kroot is as good at combat as your average Astartes, 1 whole WS3 S4 attack each

**Cynista**

I'd back myself against an unarmed Tau. I can't say the same for a single other unit in 40k.... except maybe Ratlings.

**Slayer-Fan123**

MalfunctBot wrote:
Unusual Suspect wrote:
Also, they have auxiliaries to engage in barbarity if tactics absolutely require it. Despite being worthless in melee on the tabletop, the Kroot in fluff are actually pretty damn badass (they'll engage Astartes and do reasonably well, FFS), as are their offshoot species (Krootox, Knarlocs, Greater Knarlocs, and Hounds). Vespid are known to have claws that can cut through rock (again, not reflected well on the tabletop). There's doubtlessly other species the T'au have incorporated that can be similarly effective.

But that isn't reflected in the tabletop, for the most part, because the theme of the army's playstyle is far more important when GW is developing unit stats than such minor inconveniences as lore.

To be fair a Kroot is as good at combat as your average Astartes, 1 whole WS3 S4 attack each

And since you get two of them for every Marine, they outperform them when it comes to offense. Look at that!