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.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

Well said.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit of hyperbole to say that marines are pawing through 130 relics.

There's 15 in the main book, 7 or so more in the supplement, and 8 or so special issue.

15+15*6+6+5*1=116 not including BA, DA, DW, GK or SW. Adeptus Astartes have over 130 relics between them. Necrons have less than 20 between them. There are far more Necron characters than SM characters in the galaxy, they have the tech to make better relics as well. While any on Chapter might have access to as "little" as 23, Necron Dynasties have access to as few as 6 and no more than 7. Sorry about using SM and Adeptus Astartes interchangeably, I'm just thinking it's the same thing in low and high gothic respectively, didn't mean to say Codex SM.

Breaking news for you, there is a new necron codex, this will likely have different relics. Stop whining about a book thats got less than a month of life in it.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

????
why are quins and eldar the only ones that are able to charge tau in your little world?

And why do you consider them unchargeable? because their whole army fits in a 6" bubble to max out FTGG? So how can this "mobile" army reposition itself constantly if theyre stacked toghether in their corner?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

Putting aside the fact that this reads like a three year old is trying (and failing) to learn to speak, what exactly is your argument here? That Tau have ranged firepower? That they can Overwatch?

Though I do have to say that Im highly amused by the apparent assertion that I'm enraged because I lost to Tau...when Tau are one of my two primary armies at the moment.

Again, please continue to demonstrate that you lack a functioning understanding of how this edition, and this army in particular, operates.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

Now calculate it for a simple rhino charging in before its payload and see how its not getting blown up on average

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Yeah, thats what he said, thanks for confirming your reading comprehension.

One is more braindead than the other. Spoiler : its the one where you win by tabling the other guy.

Dudeface wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit of hyperbole to say that marines are pawing through 130 relics.

There's 15 in the main book, 7 or so more in the supplement, and 8 or so special issue.

15+15*6+6+5*1=116 not including BA, DA, DW, GK or SW. Adeptus Astartes have over 130 relics between them. Necrons have less than 20 between them. There are far more Necron characters than SM characters in the galaxy, they have the tech to make better relics as well. While any on Chapter might have access to as "little" as 23, Necron Dynasties have access to as few as 6 and no more than 7. Sorry about using SM and Adeptus Astartes interchangeably, I'm just thinking it's the same thing in low and high gothic respectively, didn't mean to say Codex SM.

Breaking news for you, there is a new necron codex, this will likely have different relics. Stop whining about a book thats got less than a month of life in it.

I was going to add in to the comment that I wasn't whining, but I thought that was unnecessary since I said it in my last comment. I am not whining about Necrons having too few Relics or SM having too many. I am just stating the facts of the matter, half of relics in the game are useless, having more relics in absolute terms is never negative and saying that the raw number is irrelevant because half of them are bad is ignoring that half of all relics are bad, not just half of White Scars relics. 20/2>6/2. Necrons have waited awfully long though, it's a year of SM having this many Relics and Necrons having so few. The real issue is in terms of faction abilities and Stratagems. Waiting a year for parity is unfair and we all know there won't be parity with the new codexes, Necrons got shafted in PA and nobody is going to convince me to get my hopes up again.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

Now calculate it for a simple rhino charging in before its payload and see how its not getting blown up on average

Rhino is significantly more vulnerable to Pule Rifles. Two less wounds and only a 3+ save means it takes...

10 failed saves
30 wounds
90 hits
270 Pulse Rifle shots to kill.

But, against the Heavy Burst Cannon, T7 makes a big difference.

5 failed saves
7.5 wounds
22.5 hits
67.5 shots

Speaking of which, I just noticed I did make a mistake on my Lord Discordant/Heavy Burst Cannon math. I used 5+ to-wound, not 4+. The actual numbers are:

6 failed saves
12 wounds
24 hits
72 shots

So they're about as durable as each other to HBC, with the Rhino being easier to kill with Pulse Rifles.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

Now calculate it for a simple rhino charging in before its payload and see how its not getting blown up on average

FTGG is a real thing. It's not going to survive overwatch from 3 mega units on overwatch. It would be a waste to try.

Standard riptide build now is ATS and reroll overwatch. Stratagem for overwatch on 5's. So 55% hits. Some cover gives 5+ to hit in overwatch too - if I was tau...thats where I'd put my broadsides and riptide for sure. Literally just giving tau free shooting phases. Don't act like this is viable strategy...It's called throwing units away to the wolves IMO.

Im telling you this as an ultramarines player who frequently overwatches with 4 units against people trying to charge with a disco lord. DONT DO IT. YOU ARE HANDING ME THE W.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

Now calculate it for a simple rhino charging in before its payload and see how its not getting blown up on average

FTGG is a real thing. It's not going to survive overwatch from 3 mega units on overwatch. It would be a waste to try.

Standard riptide build now is ATS and reroll overwatch. Stratagem for overwatch on 5's. So 55% hits. Some cover gives 5+ to hit in overwatch too - if I was tau...thats where I'd put my broadsides and riptide for sure. Literally just giving tau free shooting phases. Don't act like this is viable strategy...It's called throwing units away to the wolves IMO.

Im telling you this as an ultramarines player who frequently overwatches with 4 units against people trying to charge with a disco lord. DONT DO IT. YOU ARE HANDING ME THE W.

So charge with an Infantry unit from behind cover.
Use anything that disables Overwatch.
Or have multiple units ready to charge-once you FTGG, you can't Overwatch again.

Or, hell, just win on points. If the entire Tau army is just cornered up, they'll lose.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Standard riptide build now is ATS and reroll overwatch. Stratagem for overwatch on 5's. So 55% hits. Some cover gives 5+ to hit in overwatch too - if I was tau...thats where I'd put my broadsides and riptide for sure. Literally just giving tau free shooting phases. Don't act like this is viable strategy...It's called throwing units away to the wolves IMO.

For the third time, Riptides, Broadsides, Ghostkeels, Commanders and Crisis Suits cannot benefit from terrain cover. Furthermore, the only time you can use the 5+ OW strat is if the unit that was charged was a vehicle, and then only that specific vehicle (which cant take a CDF) gets a 5+ OW. Which you absolutely will not see on the table at present because they are terrible.

 Xenomancers wrote:
FTGG is a real thing. It's not going to survive overwatch from 3 mega units on overwatch. It would be a waste to try.

Baiting out FTGG from three deathstar units is an excellent use of an 80 point Rhino. I'll give up the metal box to silence your main guns for the rest of the phase any day of the week, then follow up with additional charges to ensure that those Riptides are tagged in combat.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Im telling you this as an ultramarines player who frequently overwatches with 4 units against people trying to charge with a disco lord. DONT DO IT. YOU ARE HANDING ME THE W.

Thank you for fully admitting you have no concept of how a Tau army functions. Only took you two pages to get there.

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

I'm demonstrating how these victory conditions are stupid and have nothing to do with game balance. Balance is achieved by balanced stats and weapons and abilities. Not by changing the game to ignore the outcome of the battle and hand out snowflake rewards (here take the stands on poker chip reward - real competent general you lost your whole army but you held that observation post valiantly for 1 minute and 40 seconds!). If I have 90% of my army left and you have no models. The field is mine...all your Gaines are lost as I walk over your corpses.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

I'm demonstrating how these victory conditions are stupid and have nothing to do with game balance. Balance is achieved by balanced stats and weapons and abilities. Not by changing the game to ignore the outcome of the battle and hand out snowflake rewards (here take the stands on poker chip reward - real competent general you lost your whole army but you held that observation post valiantly for 1 minute and 40 seconds!). If I have 90% of my army left and you have no models. The field is mine...all your Gaines are lost as I walk over your corpses.

The ritual is complete, and Daemons begin spilling through to reality. There's only one surviving Cultist who is quickly beheaded by a Bloodletter, but the planet is still lost.
The comm pylon was protected for long enough to transmit vital data to the remainder of the Tau forces, even though there's no survivors.
The caravan of supplies that was making its way to the larger battlefront has made it through the pass, while the Ork assault was held off and prevented from disrupting it.

If you can't figure out a scenario that explains why a side can win despite suffering greater or even total losses, you lack imagination.
And if your sole criteria for a wargame's gameplay is "Kill the opposition" then I'm not sure wargames are for you.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Standard riptide build now is ATS and reroll overwatch. Stratagem for overwatch on 5's. So 55% hits. Some cover gives 5+ to hit in overwatch too - if I was tau...thats where I'd put my broadsides and riptide for sure. Literally just giving tau free shooting phases. Don't act like this is viable strategy...It's called throwing units away to the wolves IMO.

For the third time, Riptides, Broadsides, Ghostkeels, Commanders and Crisis Suits cannot benefit from terrain cover. Furthermore, the only time you can use the 5+ OW strat is if the unit that was charged was a vehicle. Which you absolutely will not see on the table at present because they are terrible.

 Xenomancers wrote:
FTGG is a real thing. It's not going to survive overwatch from 3 mega units on overwatch. It would be a waste to try.

Baiting out FTGG from three deathstar units is an excellent use of an 80 point Rhino. I'll give up the metal box to silence your main guns for the rest of the phase any day of the week, then follow up with additional charges to ensure that those Riptides are tagged in combat.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Im telling you this as an ultramarines player who frequently overwatches with 4 units against people trying to charge with a disco lord. DONT DO IT. YOU ARE HANDING ME THE W.

Thank you for fully admitting you have no concept of how a Tau army functions. Only took you two pages to get there.

Also thanks for pointing out another buff to overwatch. You have to make engagement range with ALL charge targets for charge to succeed - another example of how over-watch has been buffed.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Also thanks for pointing out another buff to overwatch. You have to make engagement range with ALL charge targets for charge to succeed - another example of how over-watch has been buffed.

Not being able to speculatively charge isnt a buff to overwatch, its a restriction on the assaulting unit with the side effect of reducing the amount of overwatch being fired. I guess allowing less OW is now a buff to OW? That makes sense.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit of hyperbole to say that marines are pawing through 130 relics.

There's 15 in the main book, 7 or so more in the supplement, and 8 or so special issue.

15+15*6+6+5*1=116 not including BA, DA, DW, GK or SW. Adeptus Astartes have over 130 relics between them. Necrons have less than 20 between them. There are far more Necron characters than SM characters in the galaxy, they have the tech to make better relics as well. While any on Chapter might have access to as "little" as 23, Necron Dynasties have access to as few as 6 and no more than 7. Sorry about using SM and Adeptus Astartes interchangeably, I'm just thinking it's the same thing in low and high gothic respectively, didn't mean to say Codex SM.

I'm just saying that no one player is interfacing with all those relics simultaneously. A Salamander's army will have 30 to choose from.

Otherwise we'd have to say that CSM have access to....36 (PA:CSM) + 14 (CSM) + 6 (TS) + 9 (PA:TS) + 6 (DG) + 7 (PAG) + 3 (Bile) + 6 (PA daemon weapons) = 87

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

I'm demonstrating how these victory conditions are stupid and have nothing to do with game balance. Balance is achieved by balanced stats and weapons and abilities. Not by changing the game to ignore the outcome of the battle and hand out snowflake rewards (here take the stands on poker chip reward - real competent general you lost your whole army but you held that observation post valiantly for 1 minute and 40 seconds!). If I have 90% of my army left and you have no models. The field is mine...all your Gaines are lost as I walk over your corpses.

All this shows is you lack imagination. Plenty of ways to show a victory despite losing your forces as others have already come up with narrative reasons in this thread, and requires you to actually plan things out instead of hurr durr shoot big gun well.

If the Orks wipe out all life on Armageddon and destroy its infrastructure, but the imperium wipes out every ork on the planet afterwards who really won? Probably the side that lost a critical planet and production center, not the side with an endless tide of bodies

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Also thanks for pointing out another buff to overwatch. You have to make engagement range with ALL charge targets for charge to succeed - another example of how over-watch has been buffed.

Not being able to speculatively charge isnt a buff to overwatch, its a restriction on the assaulting unit with the side effect of reducing the amount of overwatch being fired. I guess allowing less OW is now a buff to OW? That makes sense.

It is undoubtedly a buff to the defender which in this situation is the overwatchER. Hence it is a tau buff...they are almost always the defender. Spin however you like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

I'm demonstrating how these victory conditions are stupid and have nothing to do with game balance. Balance is achieved by balanced stats and weapons and abilities. Not by changing the game to ignore the outcome of the battle and hand out snowflake rewards (here take the stands on poker chip reward - real competent general you lost your whole army but you held that observation post valiantly for 1 minute and 40 seconds!). If I have 90% of my army left and you have no models. The field is mine...all your Gaines are lost as I walk over your corpses.

All this shows is you lack imagination. Plenty of ways to show a victory despite losing your forces as others have already come up with narrative reasons in this thread, and requires you to actually plan things out instead of hurr durr shoot big gun well.

If the Orks wipe out all life on Armageddon and destroy its infrastructure, but the imperium wipes out every ork on the planet afterwards who really won? Probably the side that lost a critical planet and production center, not the side with an endless tide of bodies

Orks won because they will turn into fungus and then ork babies.

Xeno, honest question.

Do you actually WANT the only objective to be killing enemy models?

Because to me, that sounds boring as hell as a default. An occasional game of that, whether to get a new player acquainted with the rules, or just a relaxing break from actually having to think beyond target priority is fine. But as the main ruleset? No. Not good.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit of hyperbole to say that marines are pawing through 130 relics.

There's 15 in the main book, 7 or so more in the supplement, and 8 or so special issue.

15+15*6+6+5*1=116 not including BA, DA, DW, GK or SW. Adeptus Astartes have over 130 relics between them. Necrons have less than 20 between them. There are far more Necron characters than SM characters in the galaxy, they have the tech to make better relics as well. While any on Chapter might have access to as "little" as 23, Necron Dynasties have access to as few as 6 and no more than 7. Sorry about using SM and Adeptus Astartes interchangeably, I'm just thinking it's the same thing in low and high gothic respectively, didn't mean to say Codex SM.

I'm just saying that no one player is interfacing with all those relics simultaneously. A Salamander's army will have 30 to choose from.

Otherwise we'd have to say that CSM have access to....36 (PA:CSM) + 14 (CSM) + 6 (TS) + 9 (PA:TS) + 6 (DG) + 7 (PAG) + 3 (Bile) + 6 (PA daemon weapons) = 87

The reality is you are limitied to the number of characters in your army for how many relics you can take. Or in certain situations you can give to a sargent (honored sargent) or a single unit with a stratagem. There is really no doubt in anyones mind that the 8.5 space marine codex was a test for 9th eddition play codex design. All codex are going to look like the space marine one coming up. want 6 relics in your army? It's coming.

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

The game should be more than just roll dice, remove models, repeat until one side has no more models.

If an army cannot achieve that, then the army should be changed so it CAN achieve that.

That is the game ether way. You are literally just changing the victory conditions from the player who does the most damage to the player that stands on poker chips the longest.

Right, and as tau are currently designed they dont do well standing on poker chips the longest which is why they dont do well in a tournament setting (as seen so far at least). Not sure what arguement youre trying to make now.

I'm demonstrating how these victory conditions are stupid and have nothing to do with game balance. Balance is achieved by balanced stats and weapons and abilities. Not by changing the game to ignore the outcome of the battle and hand out snowflake rewards (here take the stands on poker chip reward - real competent general you lost your whole army but you held that observation post valiantly for 1 minute and 40 seconds!). If I have 90% of my army left and you have no models. The field is mine...all your Gaines are lost as I walk over your corpses.

All this shows is you lack imagination. Plenty of ways to show a victory despite losing your forces as others have already come up with narrative reasons in this thread, and requires you to actually plan things out instead of hurr durr shoot big gun well.

If the Orks wipe out all life on Armageddon and destroy its infrastructure, but the imperium wipes out every ork on the planet afterwards who really won? Probably the side that lost a critical planet and production center, not the side with an endless tide of bodies

Quite frankly we would still have people making the same stupid "it's about how you play the game L2P" arguments if CSM units were all increased by 50 points for no reason. Hell people were still doing it towards Grey Knights players before they got their revamp.

 Xenomancers wrote:

It is undoubtedly a buff to the defender which in this situation is the overwatchER. Hence it is a tau buff...they are almost always the defender.

Your argument is literally "Tau overwatching less, and being unable to maneuver after being engaged, is a buff to Tau". That's some astounding logic right there.

 Billagio wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Tau basically only have 2 phases, and to make the most of their abilities they need to stay grouped...Not exactly good for the new objective based victory conditions in 9th. In other editions where you could win by just ass blasting your oppenent sure, but thats not the case anymore.

So secondaries are also holding armies back that have no other way of competing then huh? This is a good thing?

No, they should balance the secondaries if needed or change how the army is designed. Last night the guys on Tabletop Titans said that GW should consider re-designing Tau (If they were hypothetically going to overhaul 1 army completely) Also Tau would do pretty well in most of the kill secondaries and engage on all fronts. But if they castle up they will lose on primaries

It's almost like - and bear with me here - going All-Gundam-All-The-Time from the Riptide onwards was a bad plan, and they should've been introducing a wider range of Auxiliary units to cover capability gaps within the faction. Vaguely competent melee, some degree of tanky objective-holders, etc, etc.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Xeno, honest question.

Do you actually WANT the only objective to be killing enemy models?

Because to me, that sounds boring as hell as a default. An occasional game of that, whether to get a new player acquainted with the rules, or just a relaxing break from actually having to think beyond target priority is fine. But as the main ruleset? No. Not good.

It's always been then objective in the game. The primary objective has always actually been the secondary objective if you failed to remove all models which is pretty dang rare.

Just think about it...we rate units by their ability to get points back during a game. Heck most units can do it in 1 or 2 turns on average. HOW DO YOU GUYS HAVE ARMIES LEFT?

 Dysartes wrote:

It's almost like - and bear with me here - going All-Gundam-All-The-Time from the Riptide onwards was a bad plan, and they should've been introducing a wider range of Auxiliary units to cover capability gaps within the faction. Vaguely competent melee, some degree of tanky objective-holders, etc, etc.

It's a little more nuanced than that, but you're not wrong. Adjustments to rules for various battlesuits to allow them to fill some of those niches would go a loooooong way to ameliorating the issues the army is facing right now. If, for instance (and this is me deliberately avoiding the issue of Markerlights), Broadsides and Crisis Suits could fire while engaged, then you'd very likely see defensively kitted variants of both used as "melee" screens for other components of the Tau arsenal.

Xenomancers wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Wow sounds like you just put the sledgehammer down even though your whole army got shot off the board before it got close enough to charge me and die in overwatch...LOL you clearly dont play this game. Charge tau...you are hliarous...unless you are quinns or eldar...that aint happening.

It takes...

12 railed saves
72 wounds
216 5+ Overwatch hits
648 shots, or 216 Fire Warriors in range of a Cadre Firebalde to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

It takes...

6 failed saves
12 wounds
36 hits
108 shots from a Heavy Burst Cannon to kill a Lord Discordant on Overwatch.

And a Lord Discordant can get a first-turn charge easily, by using Warptime.

Now calculate it for a simple rhino charging in before its payload and see how its not getting blown up on average

FTGG is a real thing. It's not going to survive overwatch from 3 mega units on overwatch. It would be a waste to try.

Standard riptide build now is ATS and reroll overwatch. Stratagem for overwatch on 5's. So 55% hits. Some cover gives 5+ to hit in overwatch too - if I was tau...thats where I'd put my broadsides and riptide for sure. Literally just giving tau free shooting phases. Don't act like this is viable strategy...It's called throwing units away to the wolves IMO.

Im telling you this as an ultramarines player who frequently overwatches with 4 units against people trying to charge with a disco lord. DONT DO IT. YOU ARE HANDING ME THE W.

You’re telling him this as an Ultramarine player who has consistently demonstrated an inability to understand your own army, let alone others, at even a casual level let alone the competitive level you insist on weighing in on all the time with completely underprepared, inexperienced, and downright illogical statements.

I’m not saying Tau aren’t a good army in 9th, I’m not going as far as some others have. But I will say absolutely nothing you’ve said so far has been even remotely accurate, and you are just clearly demonstrating how your incorrect gameplay decisions have led you to build up beliefs about the game from the perspective of a very casual level of play. Applying it to competitive discussion is a fallacy. Xenos you simply are not playing the game at the level of most the other posters weighing in here, let alone the higher level of play above that, that you assume your experiences will hold true all the way up to. I don’t doubt your experience has been what you claim. I’d just like to put it to you that your experience means far less than what you assume it does, and you having admitted to never even attending a competitive event, and self professing to not understanding the depth to how this game can be played competitively that some people are able to consistently win events without CHEATING, I really don’t think you should be making soooooo many posts always staunchly arguing these things with people and never ever even considering backing down or admitting you may be wrong, no matter how overwhelming the evidence that you are mistaken gets. Even if your overall point is right here (doubtful) it would be by pure chance and absolutely not for any of the illogical reasons you’ve put forth so far. That’s not a good place to ALWAYS be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And wow, the idea that having to control objectives and actually having tactical spaces to play around, is less skillful than just lining Up models at their appropriate ranges each turn and seeing what the dice say, is just astounding to me. Have you put any real thought into the path your argument is currently taking, or are you just whipping that stuff out there because it’s a statement you can use to support your core argument here?

In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only the Gish gallop.