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.

GW gonna GW. Instead of making them cheaper, or giving them incremental improvements, GW went nuts.

Marin wrote:
It`s easy actually. If you deploy well Tao will not shoot you out of the board turn 1, they don`t negate modifiers, don`t deploy units out of their deployment zone. So you have feeling you still have a chance, with SM good sooty armies just wipe you for 1-2 turns and its over.
Many people are stopping going to tournaments because SM are just stupid.

Largely this. Also there is the perception that the top Tau build takes a lot of skill to pilot whereas your classic marine builds not so much.

You will get a full 6 turn game against the top Tau players with the top list, you might even believe you are in with a chance when the scores are pretty level for the first 3 turns. Against some of the marine stuff, even just mid-table players of no great skill, you are quite likely to get tabled in 2 or 3 turns. I saw it at a RTT yesterday - two really decent young players with good tournament records getting absolutely wrecked by the sheer mathematical brutality of an IH list. That leaves a bad impression. Who wants to go to a tournament and only spend like 3 hours actually playing because they get tabled so fast?

Its rather clear saviour protocols is so broken it turns an otherwise mid tier army into a top tier one.

But you can't really take it away without changing a lot of other gak, because all armies should be able to compete in a well balanced game.

nareik wrote:My stompa + brigade fought in a 2k game vs 2 riptides, a storm surge and a ghostkeel supported by markerlights/warriors.

First game i managed to kill the ghostkeel turn 1 thanks to cunning but brutal then the stompa took 40 wounds (so close to surviving to turn 2!) second game it did 5 wounds to the storm surge then died (again in turn 1).

At least game 2 i managed to luck out on a few objectives for a respectable showing.

JNAProductions wrote:That’s not so much because Tau are great, and more cause Stompas suck.

Well we know that stompas are too broken to feature even in casual play . My colleague has pointed out to me that I may have been cheated slightly; he asked how a stompa only does 5 wounds to a stormsurge (my reply: "with great difficulty, i had to clear some shield drones first") as apparently it doesn't count as a battle suit so can't use drones! Whoops!

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Marin wrote:
It`s easy actually. If you deploy well Tao will not shoot you out of the board turn 1, they don`t negate modifiers, don`t deploy units out of their deployment zone. So you have feeling you still have a chance, with SM good sooty armies just wipe you for 1-2 turns and its over.
Many people are stopping going to tournaments because SM are just stupid.

Largely this. Also there is the perception that the top Tau build takes a lot of skill to pilot whereas your classic marine builds not so much.

You will get a full 6 turn game against the top Tau players with the top list, you might even believe you are in with a chance when the scores are pretty level for the first 3 turns. Against some of the marine stuff, even just mid-table players of no great skill, you are quite likely to get tabled in 2 or 3 turns. I saw it at a RTT yesterday - two really decent young players with good tournament records getting absolutely wrecked by the sheer mathematical brutality of an IH list. That leaves a bad impression. Who wants to go to a tournament and only spend like 3 hours actually playing because they get tabled so fast?

The problem with this is you are overrating killing power while underrating survivability. Yeah your stuff lives a lot longer against tau, but being a competitive 40k player I’m used to my stuff dying, and ultimately just care about what actually winning the game using tactical skill.

As far as your “marines are super OP!” goes let me start by saying there’s a grain of truth in it, as marines are extremely powerful. However, that doesn’t mean Tau aren’t too good or that marines are completely unbeatable.

Skill absolutely still matters when playing against marines. I’ve stomped a few average players who thought that buying into marines would automatically guarantee victory. Their idea worked against people who where at a similar skill level, but i and some the other better players at my LGS didn’t have much difficulty beating them.

You absolutely can get tabled by marines quickly if you’re not prepared/ luck is against you. However, you can still actually kill marines heavy hitters. I’ve wiped out a full centurion squad in one turn. I’ve killed 2.5 eliminator squads in a turn. I can easily kill 2-3 flyers a turn. I can easily kill Executioners a turn. All of these hit a lot harder than Ripetides, but i can’t kill a riptide until turn 3-4 at the earliest. By then most of my army is usually dead so I’ll likely need a lot of luck to even kill 1.

And that’s the fundamental problem I have with Tau. Yeah their stuff as a whole is average, but I hate not being to effectively interact with my opponent’s army, and that’s where Tau’s strength lies in. Marine stuff may be powerful, but I can work around things like “always wound a 4+” and “halve damage on a dreadnought.” I can’t work around savior protocol or having to deal with insane overwatch (without building my list in a particular manner). This to me is what makes playing the top Tau lists worse than playing marine armies,

Lastly, Tau shooting being capped at 36 inches only matters a lot when you’re army that has good shooting at a longer range, and/or the Tau player isn’t very skilled. It’s not like Tau can’t move up the board, and/or look for ways to win without having to kill a lot. I’d rather lose most of my army and know I can still win, vs having most of army survive while knowing a loss is certain.

How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

 JNAProductions wrote:
How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

I had a single thermo cannon knight who could both shoot and charge them. I had 1 CP left to re-roll a 1 on the number of shots it got into a 5. He didn’t have any CP left to make it harder to kill the centurions (another marine weakness they run out of CP very quickly), so I shot off 4 dudes. The other 2 got killed when I charged them with my knight.

Salt donkey wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

I had a single thermo cannon knight who could both shoot and charge them. I had 1 CP left to re-roll a 1 on the number of shots it got into a 5. He didn’t have any CP left to make it harder to kill the centurions (another marine weakness they run out of CP very quickly), so I shot off 4 dudes. The other 2 got killed when I charged them with my knight.

So you got lucky.

5 shots
10/3 hits
20/9 wounds
20/9 unsaved wounds (assuming no cover, which would drop it to 50/27)

Hell, even with the max of 6 shots, you're looking at less than a 1/4 chance of WOUNDING 4 times, let alone KILLING 4 times.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Salt donkey wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

I had a single thermo cannon knight who could both shoot and charge them. I had 1 CP left to re-roll a 1 on the number of shots it got into a 5. He didn’t have any CP left to make it harder to kill the centurions (another marine weakness they run out of CP very quickly), so I shot off 4 dudes. The other 2 got killed when I charged them with my knight.

So you got lucky.

5 shots
10/3 hits
20/9 wounds
20/9 unsaved wounds (assuming no cover, which would drop it to 50/27)

Hell, even with the max of 6 shots, you're looking at less than a 1/4 chance of WOUNDING 4 times, let alone KILLING 4 times.

Um i re-rolled the 1 into a 5, my other thermo cannon got 4 shots. I worded “single thermo cannon knight” wrong I had 1 last knight with 2 thermocannons. So I got 9 shots total. I rolled a bit hot in shooting as 9 shots gets you 6 hits, which is 4 wounds, which doesn’t usually kill 4 centurions (I rolled better on hits, wounds, and damage). Still with the charge I on averages kill a bit more than 2 (15 attacks, 10 hits, 6.66 wounds, 4.44 unsaved wounds, means slightly more than 2 dead centurions ). One last note is I had the +1 WS dreadblade pact as well so it was even better for my knight in melee. So yes in whole I was a tad lucky, but not by a large degree.

Salt donkey wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Salt donkey wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

I had a single thermo cannon knight who could both shoot and charge them. I had 1 CP left to re-roll a 1 on the number of shots it got into a 5. He didn’t have any CP left to make it harder to kill the centurions (another marine weakness they run out of CP very quickly), so I shot off 4 dudes. The other 2 got killed when I charged them with my knight.

So you got lucky.

5 shots
10/3 hits
20/9 wounds
20/9 unsaved wounds (assuming no cover, which would drop it to 50/27)

Hell, even with the max of 6 shots, you're looking at less than a 1/4 chance of WOUNDING 4 times, let alone KILLING 4 times.

Um i re-rolled the 1 into a 5, my other thermo cannon got 4 shots. I worded “single thermo cannon knight” wrong I had 1 last knight with 2 thermocannons. So I got 9 shots total. I rolled a bit hot in shooting as 9 shots gets you 6 hits, which is 4 wounds, which doesn’t usually kill 4 centurions (I rolled better on hits, wounds, and damage). Still with the charge I on averages kill a bit more than 2 (15 attacks, 10 hits, 6.66 wounds, 4.44 unsaved wounds, means slightly more than 2 dead centurions ). So yes in whole I was a tad lucky, but not by a large degree.

You still got lucky.

9 shots
6 hits
4 wounds
4 unsaved wounds (assuming no cover), which requires a decent chunk of luck to kill 4 (about 30% chance with 4 wounds if in melta range)

Then, you either have a Warlord Trait, Relic, or Stratagem to get an extra attack, so with your stomps you get...

15 swings
10 hits
20/3 wounds
10/3 (Infernal or no benefits) or 40/9 (Iconoclast) unsaved wounds

You can't rely on luck.

Edit: Missed the +1 WS Dreadblade, but doesn't that mean you don't get the Iconoclast benefits?

Dreablade pacts don’t negate chaos knight traits benefits. Perhaps the biggest reason chaos knights outclass imperial knights despite having worse warlord traits (that and cheap thermo cannons, and vows).

Salt donkey wrote:

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Marin wrote:
It`s easy actually. If you deploy well Tao will not shoot you out of the board turn 1, they don`t negate modifiers, don`t deploy units out of their deployment zone. So you have feeling you still have a chance, with SM good sooty armies just wipe you for 1-2 turns and its over.
Many people are stopping going to tournaments because SM are just stupid.

Largely this. Also there is the perception that the top Tau build takes a lot of skill to pilot whereas your classic marine builds not so much.

You will get a full 6 turn game against the top Tau players with the top list, you might even believe you are in with a chance when the scores are pretty level for the first 3 turns. Against some of the marine stuff, even just mid-table players of no great skill, you are quite likely to get tabled in 2 or 3 turns. I saw it at a RTT yesterday - two really decent young players with good tournament records getting absolutely wrecked by the sheer mathematical brutality of an IH list. That leaves a bad impression. Who wants to go to a tournament and only spend like 3 hours actually playing because they get tabled so fast?

The problem with this is you are overrating killing power while underrating survivability. Yeah your stuff lives a lot longer against tau, but being a competitive 40k player I’m used to my stuff dying, and ultimately just care about what actually winning the game using tactical skill.

No, I am saying that the average player who is not really in the running to win a big event still wants to actually play the game. Getting tabled before you get to take your second turn is not fun at all, it is a miserable experience. I had to watch a young player drop out of a tournament and catch an early bus home in poor spirits because he got utterly smashed - that is bad for the game and bad for the community. This was a young player who pushed me into 2nd earlier this year by winning his games bigger than I did, keen as mustard and a good player.

I had to watch another good player, slightly younger, get utterly smashed in the last game of the day by IH bs in barely over an hour.

I personally am not salty. I beat that IH player by a comfortable margin even though he tabled me on turn 6. The issue is how it makes the wider player-base feel, I would never bring that sort of list because I still want there to be other players in that store wanting to play tournaments in a year's time. If that one player causes there to be fewer people at the next tournament at that store *then* I will be salty.

The complaints about marines are so much louder because of how much worse it feels when a top-tier marine list just rolls over you with no skill required other than stacking up layer upon layer of their buffs in the list building stage.

If you don't see why that is worse for the game then I don't think you understand human nature very well.

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Salt donkey wrote:

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Marin wrote:
It`s easy actually. If you deploy well Tao will not shoot you out of the board turn 1, they don`t negate modifiers, don`t deploy units out of their deployment zone. So you have feeling you still have a chance, with SM good sooty armies just wipe you for 1-2 turns and its over.
Many people are stopping going to tournaments because SM are just stupid.

Largely this. Also there is the perception that the top Tau build takes a lot of skill to pilot whereas your classic marine builds not so much.

You will get a full 6 turn game against the top Tau players with the top list, you might even believe you are in with a chance when the scores are pretty level for the first 3 turns. Against some of the marine stuff, even just mid-table players of no great skill, you are quite likely to get tabled in 2 or 3 turns. I saw it at a RTT yesterday - two really decent young players with good tournament records getting absolutely wrecked by the sheer mathematical brutality of an IH list. That leaves a bad impression. Who wants to go to a tournament and only spend like 3 hours actually playing because they get tabled so fast?

The problem with this is you are overrating killing power while underrating survivability. Yeah your stuff lives a lot longer against tau, but being a competitive 40k player I’m used to my stuff dying, and ultimately just care about what actually winning the game using tactical skill.

No, I am saying that the average player who is not really in the running to win a big event still wants to actually play the game. Getting tabled before you get to take your second turn is not fun at all, it is a miserable experience. I had to watch a young player drop out of a tournament and catch an early bus home in poor spirits because he got utterly smashed - that is bad for the game and bad for the community. This was a young player who pushed me into 2nd earlier this year by winning his games bigger than I did, keen as mustard and a good player.

I had to watch another good player, slightly younger, get utterly smashed in the last game of the day by IH bs in barely over an hour.

I personally am not salty. I beat that IH player by a comfortable margin even though he tabled me on turn 6. The issue is how it makes the wider player-base feel, I would never bring that sort of list because I still want there to be other players in that store wanting to play tournaments in a year's time. If that one player causes there to be fewer people at the next tournament at that store *then* I will be salty.

The complaints about marines are so much louder because of how much worse it feels when a top-tier marine list just rolls over you with no skill required other than stacking up layer upon layer of their buffs in the list building stage.

If you don't see why that is worse for the game then I don't think you understand human nature very well.

No one’s arguing that marines aren’t bad for the game as a whole or that Tau are worse than marines in general. Marines should be nerfed absolutely.

My point is that A) marines being OP doesn’t mean Tau (specifically savior protocol) aren’t a problem and
B) facing the one type of List is a worse experience for me personally than facing marine lists.

Please don’t strawman my argument into “Tau are worse for 40k than marines!” Because I fundamentally believe marines are more of a problem for the game than Tau.

Salt donkey wrote:


No one’s arguing that marines aren’t bad for the game as a whole or that Tau are worse than marines in general. Marines should be nerfed absolutely.

My point is that A) marines being OP doesn’t mean Tau (specifically savior protocol) aren’t a problem and
B) facing the one type of List is a worse experience for me personally than facing marine lists.

Please don’t strawman my argument into “Tau are worse for 40k than marines!” Because I fundamentally believe marines are more of a problem for the game than Tau.

It is human nature; if you have a bruised arm and a broken leg which one do you tell everyone about and which one hardly gets mentioned?

We are in agreement that Marines are causing a lot more pain than Tau right now - that explains why there is barely any complaining about Tau relative to how much complaining there is about Marines.

 JNAProductions wrote:
How'd you wipe the full Centurion squad in one turn? 24 T5 2+ wounds?

Not really that hard for many factions.

I mean, i can do it with 500 points of shooting from Tyranids, i expect other factions to do better than that.

Insane overwatch, so like, aggressors that get like 18 bolter shots apiece that get dakkadakkadakka on 6s ignore cover and an extra AP, right?

Oh you mean tau, where charging 1 fire warrior squad might mean an extra five fire warriors get to try and shoot at you too.

I can tell a lot of the tau players in here are just meta chasers. Tau have many viable builds.

Riptides and drones is only the most used army because it has a broken mechanic that lots of armies CANT beat. However they do have other strong builds that actually have to play the game like everyone else and risk losing units - (LIKE OMG).

Longstrike+ Ionheads is REALLY good. It's basically command tank spam with the fly keyword. It doesn't even need much marker light support. Tripple batallion with 45 fire warriors 3 commanders. It can win tournaments.

Tripple storm surge was already really strong. It basically nukes your best unit with 12 d3 mortal wounds. Then you have the equivalent of 3 repuslor executioners worth of firepower and you got 4++ saves. This army is going to take over riptides 100%. Since GW felt this army needed about 150 points off.

Broadside spam. Works like Riptide spam but it does a lot more damage with slightly less defense and mobility.

The claims that tau only have 1 build is really uninformed and frankly anyone making such a claim clearly doesn't actually play tau.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I can tell a lot of the tau players in here are just meta chasers. Tau have many viable builds.

Riptides and drones is only the most used army because it has a broken mechanic that lots of armies CANT beat. However they do have other strong builds that actually have to play the game like everyone else and risk losing units - (LIKE OMG).

Longstrike+ Ionheads is REALLY good. It's basically command tank spam with the fly keyword. It doesn't even need much marker light support. Tripple batallion with 45 fire warriors 3 commanders. It can win tournaments.

Tripple storm surge was already really strong. It basically nukes your best unit with 12 d3 mortal wounds. Then you have the equivalent of 3 repuslor executioners worth of firepower and you got 4++ saves. This army is going to take over riptides 100%. Since GW felt this army needed about 150 points off.

Broadside spam. Works like Riptide spam but it does a lot more damage with slightly less defense and mobility.

The claims that tau only have 1 build is really uninformed and frankly anyone making such a claim clearly doesn't actually play tau.

The problem is that these alternative build (except brodside spam) cannot benefit from savior protocols. So youve got overcosted units that die too quickly . Sure they can win tournaments, but its not as min-maxed as it could.
And in the end, the strategy stays the same, stay in your corner and try to table the opponent in the shooting phase.

Also stop putting yourself on a pedestal as a know-it-all. Its been proven with tournament results througout 8th edition that triptide is the most consistent build to win with as tau.

The future of Tau is Vespid, Stealth Suits and Ghostkeels anyway. Big mobile blobs boxing in opponents and performing surgery on Iron Hands buffing characters.

LoftyS wrote:
The future of Tau is Vespid

this is my favorite thread in months, man. THE TAKES ARE SO SPICY.

LoftyS wrote:
The future of Tau is Vespid, Stealth Suits and Ghostkeels anyway. Big mobile blobs boxing in opponents and performing surgery on Iron Hands buffing characters.

Outside of ITC I think you might actually be right, I definitely think in CA19 missions that is a very strong core of a list. I think the ITC mission skews toward such a narrow meta that you might still see the Riptides dominating there.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I can tell a lot of the tau players in here are just meta chasers. Tau have many viable builds.

Riptides and drones is only the most used army because it has a broken mechanic that lots of armies CANT beat. However they do have other strong builds that actually have to play the game like everyone else and risk losing units - (LIKE OMG).

Longstrike+ Ionheads is REALLY good. It's basically command tank spam with the fly keyword. It doesn't even need much marker light support. Tripple batallion with 45 fire warriors 3 commanders. It can win tournaments.

Tripple storm surge was already really strong. It basically nukes your best unit with 12 d3 mortal wounds. Then you have the equivalent of 3 repuslor executioners worth of firepower and you got 4++ saves. This army is going to take over riptides 100%. Since GW felt this army needed about 150 points off.

Broadside spam. Works like Riptide spam but it does a lot more damage with slightly less defense and mobility.

The claims that tau only have 1 build is really uninformed and frankly anyone making such a claim clearly doesn't actually play tau.

The problem is that these alternative build (except brodside spam) cannot benefit from savior protocols. So youve got overcosted units that die too quickly . Sure they can win tournaments, but its not as min-maxed as it could.
And in the end, the strategy stays the same, stay in your corner and try to table the opponent in the shooting phase.

Also stop putting yourself on a pedestal as a know-it-all. Its been proven with tournament results througout 8th edition that triptide is the most consistent build to win with as tau.

There are so few tau players in tournaments AND most of those players don't even have the models to do anything else. Not one of those units I mentioned is over-costed ether. In fact the storm surge has become decidedly under-costed. Costing far less than a Gallant with the firepower close to a crusader. I don't know everything but I know more than anyone saying tau have only 1 viable competitive build - which is what most tau players say.

I've got about 8k points of tau. I've fooled around with lots of their units. Riptides really only do well due to busted shield drone mechanics and the result being they don't give up any ITC points. You could build to just table your opponent with different options and do probably just as well - it's just more risky.

It might be because they're boring to play with, so players either decide to go play something else (SM) and stop complaining, or they're satisfied with boring but good.

 Xenomancers wrote:

There are so few tau players in tournaments AND most of those players don't even have the models to do anything else. Not one of those units I mentioned is over-costed ether. In fact the storm surge has become decidedly under-costed. Costing far less than a Gallant with the firepower close to a crusader. I don't know everything but I know more than anyone saying tau have only 1 viable competitive build - which is what most tau players say.

I've got about 8k points of tau. I've fooled around with lots of their units. Riptides really only do well due to busted shield drone mechanics and the result being they don't give up any ITC points. You could build to just table your opponent with different options and do probably just as well - it's just more risky.

It is partly/mostly an ITC thing.

I took a semi-competitive Kroot & Vespid list to a tournament last weekend thinking it would be a pretty casual pre-Xmas thing. To my slight surprise ran into a maximum cheese Iron Hands list.

Playing an objectives game from Chapter Approved I had a playable route to victory - use my superior mobility and numbers to outscore him on objectives and mitigate the damage as much as possible to avoid getting tabled until it was too late for him to get the VP back. Got tabled on turn 6 with a VP lead so I won it. If that had been ITC the Kill More every turn would have left me no possible route to victory. So would I take that sort of oddball list to an ITC event? Of course not, even if it is a pre-Xmas bash I would not. I would just take the same stuff everyone else does because that is what the ITC format pushes you towards unless you just want to auto-lose some games.

If people want more variety in the armies people take they need variety in the missions - it opens the game up to a lot more army builds. When every mission is functionally the same a single build is optimal for all of them and it narrows down the options for players who don't want to get stomped on.

If people really want to complain about those repetitive cookie-cutter Tau lists they are almost certainly complaining about the wrong thing.

Those of us who wanted cheaper marines are looking pretty prophetic now. The "make them feel elite" crowd got their wish, though.

happy_inquisitor wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

There are so few tau players in tournaments AND most of those players don't even have the models to do anything else. Not one of those units I mentioned is over-costed ether. In fact the storm surge has become decidedly under-costed. Costing far less than a Gallant with the firepower close to a crusader. I don't know everything but I know more than anyone saying tau have only 1 viable competitive build - which is what most tau players say.

I've got about 8k points of tau. I've fooled around with lots of their units. Riptides really only do well due to busted shield drone mechanics and the result being they don't give up any ITC points. You could build to just table your opponent with different options and do probably just as well - it's just more risky.

It is partly/mostly an ITC thing.

I took a semi-competitive Kroot & Vespid list to a tournament last weekend thinking it would be a pretty casual pre-Xmas thing. To my slight surprise ran into a maximum cheese Iron Hands list.

Playing an objectives game from Chapter Approved I had a playable route to victory - use my superior mobility and numbers to outscore him on objectives and mitigate the damage as much as possible to avoid getting tabled until it was too late for him to get the VP back. Got tabled on turn 6 with a VP lead so I won it. If that had been ITC the Kill More every turn would have left me no possible route to victory. So would I take that sort of oddball list to an ITC event? Of course not, even if it is a pre-Xmas bash I would not. I would just take the same stuff everyone else does because that is what the ITC format pushes you towards unless you just want to auto-lose some games.

If people want more variety in the armies people take they need variety in the missions - it opens the game up to a lot more army builds. When every mission is functionally the same a single build is optimal for all of them and it narrows down the options for players who don't want to get stomped on.

If people really want to complain about those repetitive cookie-cutter Tau lists they are almost certainly complaining about the wrong thing.

My opinion has varied about ITC. Personally I like the idea of all the different ways to score in ITC but I don't think you should be able to pick the objectives. They should be random and you should have to build a force dealing with the 20+ possible secondaries rather than just the 3 you choose.

While I rarely see anything out of Xeno that I agree with, this is the exception. Well done.

I'm not going to lie, I complain constantly as my Custodes are getting shot off the table everytime by skinny blue aliens. But it's not their fault their army was built well.

As a matter of fact, you could make the argument their army has been one of the consistently best in the entire edition.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm not going to lie, I complain constantly as my Custodes are getting shot off the table everytime by skinny blue aliens. But it's not their fault their army was built well.

As a matter of fact, you could make the argument their army has been one of the consistently best in the entire edition.

Disagree, Tau has been consistently above average in the entire edition, it's because their faction archetype simply can't be bad under the 8th edition system. They do horribly against negative modifiers and for the past months 2 of the strongest builds have -2 modifiers all over the board: elf planes and plaguebearers. And with the new Faith and Fury supplement, 10 night lord warptalons have a decent chance of crippling an entire Tau army. Tau have very polarizing matchups, they are not consistent enough to even compare to pre-nerf castellan soup, ynnari, or current space marine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Those of us who wanted cheaper marines are looking pretty prophetic now. The "make them feel elite" crowd got their wish, though.

Wanting to make them feel elite is a desire to readjust their playstyle to fit their background fluff, it has nothing to do with jacking their stats up so much that it breaks the game. An over-adjustment in either direction is bad, and doesn't make the other side correct in any way.

That's like if GW kept that stats unchanged but cut point cost for the entire book by half or something, it also breaks the game but the "elite" crowd can't turn around and go "see I told you guys making them cheaper was a bad decision"

the_scotsman wrote:

LoftyS wrote:
The future of Tau is Vespid

this is my favorite thread in months, man. THE TAKES ARE SO SPICY.

Shocking, I know. Vespid always had one problem and one problem only. They were scissors to paper that was cheaper than them. After CA 2019, they are now dramatically cheaper than the marines they're meant to kill and can finally do their job. And the other big winners of CA were Stealth suits and Ghostkeels, the two units they most synergize with.