Rikimaru
October 23rd, 2009, 00:40
Balance! What is it?
A good question. OK in various recent topics the subject of balance within Tau lists has been raised quite a lot and it is something that is often mentioned when discussing what makes a good list.
With this in mind I thought it would be quite interesting to discuss what is meant by balance in regards to Tau army builds and use my list as an example to try and explain how balance plays a part in how it was built.
To start with lets look at the Tau army and its strengths and weaknesses because to build a balanced effective list we need to have a decent understanding of what works or does not work in the Tau army.
The first and most obvious strength the of the Tau is its powerful shooting output. So obviously this needs to be optimised; however one thing I have noticed is when a lot of new players build a list they go overboard incorporating lots of awesome guns. Sounds good but too much spent on firepower impacts on other strength aspects of the list.
Which are?
Mobility: It can be argued quite strongly that mobility is equally as important as firepower for Tau and is another of its strengths. Luckily for Tau players above average mobility is something many Tau units have as standard but for some units it has to be paid for. A lack of mobility will result in defeat for Tau players so mobility has to be factored into the balance.
Flexibility: Another Tau strength, we are blessed with a few units that can be outfitted to cope with whatever type of opponent we face. The XV8 is our most flexible unit with enough options in weaponry and wargear to tailor them to deal with pretty much any opponent. Problem is this bewildering amount of variation can lead to an unbalanced and overly expensive reliance on the XV8.
The Hammerhead has the Railgun, which is good against armour and also infantry and can also be fitted with the Ion cannon.
Stealth units can be equipped with Fusion blasters, which gives them the capability to take down armour with the rest of the team dealing with infantry. Lastly we have the Kroot! This unit is extremely flexible in that it can be deployed in various ways (reserves, infiltration, outflank) can be carried in a Devilfish, has good shooting but also has decent close combat skills. They can be used equally well in defense and offense.
Enhancement: The Tau army has the ability to enhance certain characteristics or game mechanics either by using wargear or by the use of the Markerlight. This as will be shown is a major and incredibly important strength.
Weaknesses
Assault: Well the overriding weakness for Tau is its lack of close combat ability. Yes we have the Kroot but they can only do so much. Most other armies most basic units have decent CC abilities but the Tau’s CC abilities are woeful. Even our XV8’s are only blessed with initiative 2 and weapon skill 2. Kroot with Hounds are formidable but Tau should never have assault as part of a list building strategy.
Whenever we build a list avoiding or mitigating an opponents assault superiority is possibly one of the most important considerations we need to take into account.
Average ballistic skill: Now as someone who shall remain nameless :sinister: keeps telling me opinions are not facts. Well OK but it is my ‘opinion’ that the average BS of the Tau is a weakness.
When you consider that the overriding way we can win is to inflict more damage by shooting then the enemy then having something that restricts the ability to maximise this ability can I think quite rightly be called a weakness.
If we take standard Codex Tau units then only two units have above average BS, the HQ commanders and Hammerheads. All other units are saddled with BS3. BS3 sucks noodles in regard to the Tau. If we take no enhancements then an average 50% of shooting output will fail. This is a major weakness that needs addressing. Luckily we can address it but that balance we are discussing needs taking into consideration.
A Lack of choice in most force slots: yes we can tailor certain units but the one thing you will notice with Tau lists is the same units appearing over and over again in lists. This is a weakness because it makes it easier for opponents to judge what tactics we are going to employ because a lack of variety means a lack of variation in tactics.
Consider for instance the Marine player and just how many variations he can field in just the HQ slot, Tau have two options (XV8 or Ethereal) unless special characters are used. Consider the elites (8 choices), Fast attack (9 choices), Transport (7 choices), Heavy (8 choices). Compare that lot to what the Tau can field.
When we face Marines we cannot really prepare with any certainty for what we are going to face because there is simply so much variation.
Just try thinking about a game facing the Tau for a second, I bet you have a pretty good idea what you will be facing:
XV8 HQ
XV8 elites (usually Fireknife or Deathrains)
1 maybe 2 units of Fire Warriors in Devilfish
Kroot (usually a couple of units)
Pathfinders
Hammerheads (usually two)
Piranhas
XV88’s or Skyray
Stealths
Rarely seen Vespids and Sniper Drones
There will be slight variations but essentially that is it. A saying comes to mind “familiarity breads contempt”. Just think about varying your Tau list for a while and I bet you will be quite frustrated because you will inevitably end up very close to what you already use.
OK so we have some idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the Tau army.
How does this translate into game play? Well on the most basic level we need to ensure the opponent does not reach Tau units while we punch the living daylights out of their army.
On a more advanced level we need (in no particular order)
Board control
Effective firepower application
Unit synergy
Equality of army effectiveness regardless of mission type
The ability to be effective against as many army types as possible
Redundancy
Solid defensive capability.
How do we build a list to build on the strengths and alleviate the weaknesses? Well we try to achieve balance. What is balance? Or to put it another way, define balance in respect to Tau.
First thing we need to do is define what we need to balance in respect to 40K and more specifically Tau. Well balance in this context is 'the utilisation of the individual components of the army to ensure that army as a whole works in an effective way across the largest amount and variation of games encountered'.
Here is what I think we need to balance to achieve the above:
Firepower
Mobility
Survivability
Offensive capability against a range of differing army types
Assault mitigation and offensive power
Defensive ability
Competitiveness across different scenarios/mission types
Redundancy
Every single one of the above categories needs to be taken into account individually but also needs to be balanced against every single one of the other categories. Concentrating to much in any one single area will result in detriment to other areas.
First I am going to discuss firepower. To state the obvious, if Tau players get this wrong the game is over. There are differing schools of thought regarding Tau firepower:
(1) Torrent of fire
(2) Optimised firepower
(3) A combination of the above
All the above have merits but focussing solely on either of the first two will result in failure. The best approach is number three, a combination of both.
Take for instance the torrent approach. This usually consists of taking as many guns as possible with the hope of just wiping the opponent of the board with lots of shots. Only problem is unless the shots are accurate the advantage of the volume of shots is mitigated by the reduced hit rate. For instance 36 shots at BS3 are basically the same as 24 shots at BS4 but you have to pay for the extra 12 shots. In the case of Fire Warriors this would entail buying an extra unit at a minimum of 120pts.
The problem is though to get 24 shots at BS4 we have to pay for Markerlights and again these cost points but because we have paid for lots and lots of guns we have less points to spend on the Markerlights.
We should also remember that ML’s might not be the only thing we struggle to pay for if we go for to many guns. So we need to assess which option gives us the best (yes you guessed it) ‘balance’. So lets discuss balance in regards to accuracy and firepower.
Given that accuracy is so important it helps to take as many units that are inherently accurate without external help as possible. Following this simple rule will ensure we go a long way to gaining the optimisation of firepower.
To illustrate my list includes Shas’Els (BS5 with a targeting array), XV8 Deathrains (with Targeting arrays) a torch squad with Flamers that do not roll to hit and Hammerheads. Any unit that can deliver firepower at optimal or near optimal levels (cheaply if possible is a bonus) is a real asset to the list and as long as they fit your overall plan for the army they should always be maximised.
Remember the majority of units in the Tau army are BS3 but additionally we have the problem of a higher availability of cover saves for the stuff we are firing at. So if possible it is nice to have at least some Markerlight support. Ideally any list should have at least two sources of Markerlights. Having one unit while useful is obviously limited by the fact that it can only provide marker light hits against one unit and there is no redundancy, if your one unit is killed then you have no ML support.
Markerlights offer many nice advantages chief amongst them as I said earlier are BS upgrades and the removal of cover saves. These benefits are so attractive it is often tempting to cram as many ML’s as possible into a list, big mistake. The key is taking just enough and it is quite a hard balance to achieve.
As detailed above having units that do not need ML help to up their BS or that can work at a reasonable level (but do work better if the ML’s are available) without the ML support means that (a) we do not need to take as many ML’s and (b) the ML’s we do take can be used in a much more effective and targeted manner. We are starting to balance the army.
Having the weapons:
Balance of weaponry is another priority. I think it is fair to say (and I think most will agree) that high on the list of target priority in an opponents army are transports and armour. Of course depending on the army faced other units will present themselves as the priority but in general terms Tau players need to maintain as much distance between the Tau units and the opponents as is humanly possible.
Luckily we have some really good weapons to aid us in stopping vehicles, notably the Railgun and the Missile pod. The ideal situation is to stop tanks shooting back and to put passengers in transports on foot on the table. So we know we need the heavy stuff to handle vehicle type units but these are not the only unit types on the table.
If it’s not a vehicle then it usually fits into one of the following categories:
(a) Infantry type units these include any unit with stat lines similar to standard troops
(b) Slightly enhanced elite infantry type units (Termies, Wyches etc)
(c) Non-vehicular armoured units (Dreadnoughts, Warwalkers etc)
(d) Bike type units or fast attack light vehicles such as speeders etc
If we do not take enough to handle whatever combination of the above is thrown at us then games will be lost. Deathrains are great but they suck against a unit of 24 Hormegaunts a twin linked Flamer equipped XV8 on the other hand will do the job quite nicely. Ideally we need redundancy in every aspect of attacking weaponry and this can be quite hard to achieve. I think the best way to show how this balance is achieved is to describe how I built my list.
Here is the breakdown of my list and how it is tuned for balanced performance against a wide variety of opponents, unit types and missions. Now this is only one type of list and one way of attaining balance but it is a good illustration of the thinking that should go behind any list.
HQ
Shas'El
Plasma, Missile Pod, Targeting array, HW multi tracker, HW Target lock, HW BSF, HW Drone controller, Marker Drone 135pts
Shas'El
Plasma, Missile pod, Targeting array, HW multi tracker 97pts
Ok first of all we have ‘two’ HQ XV8’s. This is not extravagance but carefully thought out. Missile pods are vital and having two at BS5 is well 'nice'. Taking two Shas’El’s means I have redundancy and having two individual models means it is harder for the opponent to stop both. Having two BS5 Plasma’s also helps the army against MEQ type opponents.
I also have the Marker light Drone on one of the Els’s which helps to distribute my ML presence throughout the list. Having the ML’s spread around aids in redundancy and survivability of the ML presence and also means more units benefit from the ML’s.
I could have gone for Fireknives in the elite slots but they would not have been as efficient and they would have relied on Markerlights which would have meant other units would not benefit from them. (Remember I am discussing my list here and I am not saying Fireknives are bad, just they do not fit the balance of my list)
Elites
Deathrain squad
2 X XV8 with twin linked Missile Pod, Targeting array
106pts
Deathrain squad
2 X XV8 with twin linked Missile Pod, Targeting array
106pts
Torch squad
1 x team leader with twin linked Flamer, Missile pod, HW Multi, HW Drone controller and 2 Gun Drones, BK
2 x XV8's with twin linked Flamers, Missile Pod
164pts
The overriding factors I was aiming for with the elites were:
(a) Autonomous usage. By this I mean the units should be able to operate on their own for the majority of the game with no support from other units especially Markerlights.
(b) Optimised offensive ability. I wanted each unit to be able to work at near optimised levels when attacking.
(c) Redundancy. The units should add redundancy to the army list.
The units do the above and I will explain why. The Deathrain squads do not need Markerlight support (in fact using the ML’s to boost to BS5 is a waste of resources). The configuration of the unit has been balanced to offer the best balance of offense and cost. Taking three man DR units would not offer enough of an increase to justify their cost.
When you consider that the DR unit’s main task is stopping transports that this should be accomplished in the first two turns and the actual number of transports in an average list then it is actually counterproductive to spend another 106pts making the teams each 3 strong.
More can be accomplished by taking Missile pods on another unit but on one that can work against other targets, hence the Torch squad. The inclusion of 6 BS3 Missile pods on the three man Torch squad makes more sense than taking two more Deathrains.
I still have redundancy with the Missile pods but I gain effective anti infantry with the Flamers. However I am also gaining in another area because the Torch squad can work autonomously, is optimised at its anti-infantry role (needing no roll to hit and re-rolls wounds) and does not rely on ML’s for the Flamers to improve BS or to remove cover saves (Flamers ignore cover).
So my entire elite section is tuned to provide an alpha strike at maximum efficiency (for those who do not know an alpha strike is the first round of shooting from your forces in a game). To illustrate I will list what my units can provide:
4 BS5 Missile pod shots (plus 2 or 4 BS Plasma dependent on target range)
8 BS4 twin linked Missile pod shots
6 BS3 Missile pod shots (dependent on Markerlight usage BS can be and often is raised to BS4 or BS5)
2 BS4 minimum Railgun shots from two hammerheads, dependent on target priority these will usually be hitting at BS5 with ML help but even without it BS4 is good
Up to 6 Seeker missiles. Again dependent on targeting priorities or cover save removal priorities I can vary my Seeker delivery
Two BS4 Fusions on the piranhas
The point here is that because the two Deathrian units and the HQ are not ML reliant I can utilise my Markerlights to help to provide a massively accurate alpha strike or to help remove cover saves.
The structure of my Markerlight contingents also means I can help 5 units achieve greater efficiency but it also has the side effect of making the Markerlight presence much harder to stop if the opponent gains the alpha strike. It is nigh on impossible to quickly stop 4 units of Markerlights.
So I have 18 MP shots, 2 accurate Railguns and Seeker missiles. I would be happy facing any list with that amount of first turn highly accurate firepower. It should also be noted that the Missile pods are spread throughout 5 units, which greatly aids their redundancy. To remove my MP output the opponent has to target 5 separate units spread around the field.
This also makes it much harder for the opponent to keep his vehicles vulnerable armour facings hidden from the MP’s, Seekers and Railguns but also from the multiple Markerlight sources (2 of which are mobile).
This shows how carefully balancing a unit’s firepower output can have cascading effects throughout the list. Balancing the Deathrain and HQ units cost to accuracy ratio carefully has given me the points to spend on units that benefit other units by making their output more efficient.
So already we have balance in the following areas:
Offensive output
Defence
Redundancy
Next we come to the troops.
Troops
9 Fire Warriors one upgraded to Shas'Ui with Bonding Knife (will use Pathfinders Devilfish)
105pts
9 Fire Warriors one upgraded to Shas'Ui with Bonding Knife (will use Pathfinders Devilfish)
105pts
10 Kroot and 6 Kroot hounds
106pts
10 Kroot and 6 Kroot hounds
106pts
This is an area that is notorious for its ability to generate debate. I have given a lot of thought to the most beneficial balance for this force slot.
What do we need to achieve with troops? Well first thing to understand is troops are vital (also one unit of Fire Warriors is compulsory), they are needed to take and hold objectives in 2/3rds of missions. Now despite what various people/forums say if you want to play competitive games (especially against high standard tournie players) you need to consider three areas in regards to troops.
(1) Objective taking and holding
(2) Keeping troops alive
(3) Offensive power
(4) Balancing all the above
As we are talking about the Tau we need to address one thing first ‘Kroot’. In my opinion kroot are compulsory in a Tau list, if you want to win consistently with Tau you need Kroot.
Kroot offer various benefits to the tau player they have various deployment options (infiltrate, outflank and normal placing on the table), they offer shooting, assault and good defensive options.
However to work effectively you need to ensure they are not needed for objective control, without that constraint they can then be fully and freely utilised in those offensive and defensive roles without any reservation.
To do this we need a decent Fire warrior presence and again this is a real balancing trick.
The number of Fire Warriors in each of my units is calculated to allow for a reasonable amount of firepower, casualty absorbtion, and resistance to fall back tests plus decent defensive capability.
Nine Fire Warriors in a unit is a good balance as it offers:
18 shots at rapid-fire range
It takes 3 casualties to force a fall back test
It is a decent size to offer resistance when occupying objectives
To survive the Fire Warrior units need a Devilfish, which luckily enough the two Pathfinder units happen to be forced to take. This combination of units just happens to provide a good balance in various game play elements.
For one it means we have the two Pathfinder units, which provide the ML support AND means we do not have to spend extra paying for two more Devilfish. The Fire Warrior unit and Devilfish combo make the Kroot units more effective and give the army good balanced ability in any mission type.
Back to the Devilfish for a moment; these are a very good example of balancing various elements to provide a benefit to the army and/or other units. For example the way I have set up the Devilfish means it provides five Fire warriors worth of firepower no matter how far it moves (two Drones and the Burst cannon = five shots).
So simply by leaving the Drones on the DF and taking a Multi tracker instead of paying for a smart missile system means I have more than a full Fire Warrior squads worth of firepower.
Taking flechettes also allows the DF to perform another role, one of a defensive support for the Fire warriors. The taking of the Flechettes means any unit attacking a Devilfish will suffer hits. Objectives can be held by FW’s in Devilfish, so the DF provides protection and offense with its Burst cannon, Drones and Flechettes for FW untis on objectives.
Devilfish's basically provide a mobile bunker with firepower for Fire warriors and the way I have equipped it makes it a very effective offensive and defensive asset.
Holding an objective is made much easier with a Devilfish with Drones, Flechettes and its Burst cannon, it gives a multi-layered defence for the objective (I/E Devilfish, Drones then Fire warriors).
The Kroot unit are made more effective because the Fire Warrior units are there to take, hold and contest objectives. This means the Kroot are freed from this task so the are free to provide protection for other units or to be used as attacking units and even as sacrificial units. Conversely the Fire Warriors are less put upon to provide offensive output.
Having two units of Fire Warriors also provides redundancy to both the FW units and the Kroot. Having four troop units’ means the opponent has to work harder to prevent the Tau player taking/holding objectives.
What has to be remembered is Kroot are (despite all their advantages) a fragile unit and they cannot be relied upon to hold or take objectives, even getting to an objective is fraught with danger for Kroot units. Even the Kroots famous ability to go to ground in wooded terrain is negated by flamers or template type weapons.
Having the two units’ of FW’s means more flexibility.
For example the Tau player can:
(a) Hold both Fire Warrior and Devilfish units in reserve until late in the game
(b) Hold one FW unit and a DF in reserve but have the other holding an objective
(c) Use both units as offensive units in kill point missions
(d) Have one FW/DF unit in reserve and use one to help the Kroot in objective missions with fewer objectives or in combined KP/objective missions
And so on and so on! The point is that having the two FW units means it is easier to handle any mission type and balances the roles of the FW’s and the Kroot allowing both to perform much more efficiently.
Having two Kroot units and one FW unit simply puts to much pressure on the Kroot and restricts the player’s use of them, this is not a balanced approach because the opponent can apply pressure to either the Kroot or the lone FW unit, either way it restricts the usage of each unit.
The Kroot units are also balanced to provide balanced offensive power, the inclusion of Kroot hounds means they can perform well in assaults as well as shooting. Having the hounds also means the unit performs better at protecting other units and as an area denial unit. Any enemy unit attacking the Kroot will be faced with either a decent amount of shooting attacks or a formidable amount of assault attacks.
The Kroot also have various deployment options, which makes them very good at responding to the differing mission types available. Basically there are no missions in which the Kroot cannot be deployed favourably or in response to your opponent.
So as can be seen the number of troops and their construction plus their transport options has all been carefully thought out to provide multiple benefits to the list.
Now for the fast attack
Fast attack
5 Pathfinders
60pts
Devilfish with Disruption Pod, flechettes and multi
105pts
5 Pathfinders
60pts
Devilfish with Disruption Pod, flechettes and multi
105pts
2 x Piranha with Fusion, TA and DP’s 150pts
When considering what to take in the fast attack slots the need to provide Devilfish for the Fire Warriors and the need for Markerlights pretty quickly decides two of the slots. However taking two full units of PF’s is overkill.
Having 16 Pathfinders (2 full units) is expensive and the returns are negligible. Each 5 man unit will return a minimum of two tokens a turn and this is usually enough, offering either a 2pt BS boost, 1pt BS boost and a 1pt cover save reduction or a 2pt cover save reduction.
That will usually be enough ML tokens to serve one unit in most situations.
Having 5 or 6 tokens against one target is often just a waste of tokens so the points can be better spent elsewhere. The other benefit of smaller units is they are easier to hide and can utilise smaller pieces of cover.
Having two smaller units also aids their survivability and provides redundancy because the ML presence is not concentrated in one unit. 60pts for each unit is also not a big sink in points but the benefits they provide to the list far outweigh their cost.
The Piranhas are taken to provide in order of importance:
(a) Blockading of the opponents dangerous/fast units
(b) Anti armour with their Fusion blasters
(c) Objective contesting
I had to consider whether it would be better taking two separate units consisting of one Piranha each or taking a two Piranha unit. The problem with taking two separate Piranhas is they need a Fast attack slot each and this would mean losing a Pathfinder squad. This would have serious implications for the list balance.
It would mean paying extra for another Devilfish for the second Fire warrior unit or forsaking the second FW unit all together. Either option is bad because paying for the extra Devilfish means taking points from another unit, taking one unit of FW’s has all the disadvantages I mentioned earlier for the Kroot units etc.
Losing a Pathfinder squad means the remaining squad is going to get more attention from the opponent and will be much less survivable, I lose some redundancy and I am going to lose a units worth of ML support so a unit is either going to be hitting less often or an opposition unit is going to be benefiting from improved cover saves. All in all taking two individual Piranhas is not worth the mass of downsides (for this list).
Having the two Piranhas has some advantages. The unit offers decent firepower, two BS4 Fusions is not to be sniffed at and the Drones offer nice backup. The two Piranhas offer a good decent sized frontage for blockading. The downside is the squadron rules but these are not that important when we are using the unit to block anyway. Another benefit is any assault attacks have to be split between the two Piranhas which means they should stay around longer when assaulted (which is a good thing).
Heavy support
Hammerhead
Railgun, Burst Cannons, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod
165pts
Hammerhead
Railgun, Burst Cannons, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod
165pts
Skyray
Burst cannons, Targeting array, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod, Blacksun filter
160pts
2000pts
The Hammerhead is a great example of a perfectly balanced unit. It offers balanced offense against infantry and vehicle type units when the Railgun is taken. Both the solid shot and the submunnition are both extremely effective against their respective targets, which makes the Railhead Hammerhead a valuable asset to any list.
Taking the Skyray helps to make the Hammerheads more effective by upping the BS which either helps the hit rate of the solid shot or reduces the scatter of the subs round.
Taking the Skyray also means the other Markerlights are free to help other units, reduce cover saves or to launch the Skyrays seekers.
A small touch is the Black sun filter on the Skyray, this is deliberate because the BSF can be used to fire the Markerlights which in turn can be used to negate the effects of night fight for up to two units (usually the Hammerheads).
Having the two Hammerheads also offers some redundancy and also means they offer offense throughout the whole game, first couple of turns they hit armour and then can switch to infantry killing for the rest of the game. Same goes for the Skyray it offers Marker light support throughout the game and heavy fire support but it also offers that important redundancy to the ML presence.
So as can be seen balance is very important to lists effectiveness. The thing to remember is that the balance has to be built up from an understanding of the mechanics of good Tau gameplay. Basically what this means is the understanding of which tactics work best for the Tau player and building the list to exploit them. Tau work best when delivering withering amounts of firepower fast while utilising board control to keep enemies at bay and to control objectives.
Denial of targets is also important to successful play and the best way to accomplish this is using board control. So what is board control, well it consists of different things.
Alpha strike: using the early strike to cripple transports and make units walk across the field, also stopping the enemies tanks, dreads etc to prevent the opponent from destroying our transports and reducing our mobility.
Blockading: using Tau units to prevent dangerous units from gaining ground. The Piranha is good for this but the Devilfish can be used and so can the Kroot at a push.
Preventative deployment: using units such as kroot and XV8’s to deter the opponent from areas of the field.
Mobility: using mobility to respond to the opponents game-play, to gain line of sight to better stop units, to control objectives or to contest them.
Infiltration: using the Kroots infiltrate ability (or Stealth’s) to respond to the opponent’s deployment, to blockade areas of the field, to directly attack areas of the field or to provide assault screens.
Use the above list of requirements as a template is a good start to building an effective list. I have tried to show how I have built the balance into my list to best utilise the list of traits above. I hope it has gone some way to helping you to better understand how building balance into a list works and how it can really improve a list.
Please understand that I am not saying that the above army list is the best ever example of balance because it is not. What it is, is a good example of balance in a list and I have included it to explain the ‘principles’ of balance and not to say “my list is the best example”.
I hope this article has succeeded in explaining some of the more esoteric, less obvious theory behind Tau list building. As always any critiques are welcome or pointing out of errors.
Most of all this is a starting point and not definitive by any means. I am hoping others will post with examples of balance in their list because there is no perfect “one” way of doing things and units and lists can work and be balanced in different ways.
A good question. OK in various recent topics the subject of balance within Tau lists has been raised quite a lot and it is something that is often mentioned when discussing what makes a good list.
With this in mind I thought it would be quite interesting to discuss what is meant by balance in regards to Tau army builds and use my list as an example to try and explain how balance plays a part in how it was built.
To start with lets look at the Tau army and its strengths and weaknesses because to build a balanced effective list we need to have a decent understanding of what works or does not work in the Tau army.
The first and most obvious strength the of the Tau is its powerful shooting output. So obviously this needs to be optimised; however one thing I have noticed is when a lot of new players build a list they go overboard incorporating lots of awesome guns. Sounds good but too much spent on firepower impacts on other strength aspects of the list.
Which are?
Mobility: It can be argued quite strongly that mobility is equally as important as firepower for Tau and is another of its strengths. Luckily for Tau players above average mobility is something many Tau units have as standard but for some units it has to be paid for. A lack of mobility will result in defeat for Tau players so mobility has to be factored into the balance.
Flexibility: Another Tau strength, we are blessed with a few units that can be outfitted to cope with whatever type of opponent we face. The XV8 is our most flexible unit with enough options in weaponry and wargear to tailor them to deal with pretty much any opponent. Problem is this bewildering amount of variation can lead to an unbalanced and overly expensive reliance on the XV8.
The Hammerhead has the Railgun, which is good against armour and also infantry and can also be fitted with the Ion cannon.
Stealth units can be equipped with Fusion blasters, which gives them the capability to take down armour with the rest of the team dealing with infantry. Lastly we have the Kroot! This unit is extremely flexible in that it can be deployed in various ways (reserves, infiltration, outflank) can be carried in a Devilfish, has good shooting but also has decent close combat skills. They can be used equally well in defense and offense.
Enhancement: The Tau army has the ability to enhance certain characteristics or game mechanics either by using wargear or by the use of the Markerlight. This as will be shown is a major and incredibly important strength.
Weaknesses
Assault: Well the overriding weakness for Tau is its lack of close combat ability. Yes we have the Kroot but they can only do so much. Most other armies most basic units have decent CC abilities but the Tau’s CC abilities are woeful. Even our XV8’s are only blessed with initiative 2 and weapon skill 2. Kroot with Hounds are formidable but Tau should never have assault as part of a list building strategy.
Whenever we build a list avoiding or mitigating an opponents assault superiority is possibly one of the most important considerations we need to take into account.
Average ballistic skill: Now as someone who shall remain nameless :sinister: keeps telling me opinions are not facts. Well OK but it is my ‘opinion’ that the average BS of the Tau is a weakness.
When you consider that the overriding way we can win is to inflict more damage by shooting then the enemy then having something that restricts the ability to maximise this ability can I think quite rightly be called a weakness.
If we take standard Codex Tau units then only two units have above average BS, the HQ commanders and Hammerheads. All other units are saddled with BS3. BS3 sucks noodles in regard to the Tau. If we take no enhancements then an average 50% of shooting output will fail. This is a major weakness that needs addressing. Luckily we can address it but that balance we are discussing needs taking into consideration.
A Lack of choice in most force slots: yes we can tailor certain units but the one thing you will notice with Tau lists is the same units appearing over and over again in lists. This is a weakness because it makes it easier for opponents to judge what tactics we are going to employ because a lack of variety means a lack of variation in tactics.
Consider for instance the Marine player and just how many variations he can field in just the HQ slot, Tau have two options (XV8 or Ethereal) unless special characters are used. Consider the elites (8 choices), Fast attack (9 choices), Transport (7 choices), Heavy (8 choices). Compare that lot to what the Tau can field.
When we face Marines we cannot really prepare with any certainty for what we are going to face because there is simply so much variation.
Just try thinking about a game facing the Tau for a second, I bet you have a pretty good idea what you will be facing:
XV8 HQ
XV8 elites (usually Fireknife or Deathrains)
1 maybe 2 units of Fire Warriors in Devilfish
Kroot (usually a couple of units)
Pathfinders
Hammerheads (usually two)
Piranhas
XV88’s or Skyray
Stealths
Rarely seen Vespids and Sniper Drones
There will be slight variations but essentially that is it. A saying comes to mind “familiarity breads contempt”. Just think about varying your Tau list for a while and I bet you will be quite frustrated because you will inevitably end up very close to what you already use.
OK so we have some idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the Tau army.
How does this translate into game play? Well on the most basic level we need to ensure the opponent does not reach Tau units while we punch the living daylights out of their army.
On a more advanced level we need (in no particular order)
Board control
Effective firepower application
Unit synergy
Equality of army effectiveness regardless of mission type
The ability to be effective against as many army types as possible
Redundancy
Solid defensive capability.
How do we build a list to build on the strengths and alleviate the weaknesses? Well we try to achieve balance. What is balance? Or to put it another way, define balance in respect to Tau.
First thing we need to do is define what we need to balance in respect to 40K and more specifically Tau. Well balance in this context is 'the utilisation of the individual components of the army to ensure that army as a whole works in an effective way across the largest amount and variation of games encountered'.
Here is what I think we need to balance to achieve the above:
Firepower
Mobility
Survivability
Offensive capability against a range of differing army types
Assault mitigation and offensive power
Defensive ability
Competitiveness across different scenarios/mission types
Redundancy
Every single one of the above categories needs to be taken into account individually but also needs to be balanced against every single one of the other categories. Concentrating to much in any one single area will result in detriment to other areas.
First I am going to discuss firepower. To state the obvious, if Tau players get this wrong the game is over. There are differing schools of thought regarding Tau firepower:
(1) Torrent of fire
(2) Optimised firepower
(3) A combination of the above
All the above have merits but focussing solely on either of the first two will result in failure. The best approach is number three, a combination of both.
Take for instance the torrent approach. This usually consists of taking as many guns as possible with the hope of just wiping the opponent of the board with lots of shots. Only problem is unless the shots are accurate the advantage of the volume of shots is mitigated by the reduced hit rate. For instance 36 shots at BS3 are basically the same as 24 shots at BS4 but you have to pay for the extra 12 shots. In the case of Fire Warriors this would entail buying an extra unit at a minimum of 120pts.
The problem is though to get 24 shots at BS4 we have to pay for Markerlights and again these cost points but because we have paid for lots and lots of guns we have less points to spend on the Markerlights.
We should also remember that ML’s might not be the only thing we struggle to pay for if we go for to many guns. So we need to assess which option gives us the best (yes you guessed it) ‘balance’. So lets discuss balance in regards to accuracy and firepower.
Given that accuracy is so important it helps to take as many units that are inherently accurate without external help as possible. Following this simple rule will ensure we go a long way to gaining the optimisation of firepower.
To illustrate my list includes Shas’Els (BS5 with a targeting array), XV8 Deathrains (with Targeting arrays) a torch squad with Flamers that do not roll to hit and Hammerheads. Any unit that can deliver firepower at optimal or near optimal levels (cheaply if possible is a bonus) is a real asset to the list and as long as they fit your overall plan for the army they should always be maximised.
Remember the majority of units in the Tau army are BS3 but additionally we have the problem of a higher availability of cover saves for the stuff we are firing at. So if possible it is nice to have at least some Markerlight support. Ideally any list should have at least two sources of Markerlights. Having one unit while useful is obviously limited by the fact that it can only provide marker light hits against one unit and there is no redundancy, if your one unit is killed then you have no ML support.
Markerlights offer many nice advantages chief amongst them as I said earlier are BS upgrades and the removal of cover saves. These benefits are so attractive it is often tempting to cram as many ML’s as possible into a list, big mistake. The key is taking just enough and it is quite a hard balance to achieve.
As detailed above having units that do not need ML help to up their BS or that can work at a reasonable level (but do work better if the ML’s are available) without the ML support means that (a) we do not need to take as many ML’s and (b) the ML’s we do take can be used in a much more effective and targeted manner. We are starting to balance the army.
Having the weapons:
Balance of weaponry is another priority. I think it is fair to say (and I think most will agree) that high on the list of target priority in an opponents army are transports and armour. Of course depending on the army faced other units will present themselves as the priority but in general terms Tau players need to maintain as much distance between the Tau units and the opponents as is humanly possible.
Luckily we have some really good weapons to aid us in stopping vehicles, notably the Railgun and the Missile pod. The ideal situation is to stop tanks shooting back and to put passengers in transports on foot on the table. So we know we need the heavy stuff to handle vehicle type units but these are not the only unit types on the table.
If it’s not a vehicle then it usually fits into one of the following categories:
(a) Infantry type units these include any unit with stat lines similar to standard troops
(b) Slightly enhanced elite infantry type units (Termies, Wyches etc)
(c) Non-vehicular armoured units (Dreadnoughts, Warwalkers etc)
(d) Bike type units or fast attack light vehicles such as speeders etc
If we do not take enough to handle whatever combination of the above is thrown at us then games will be lost. Deathrains are great but they suck against a unit of 24 Hormegaunts a twin linked Flamer equipped XV8 on the other hand will do the job quite nicely. Ideally we need redundancy in every aspect of attacking weaponry and this can be quite hard to achieve. I think the best way to show how this balance is achieved is to describe how I built my list.
Here is the breakdown of my list and how it is tuned for balanced performance against a wide variety of opponents, unit types and missions. Now this is only one type of list and one way of attaining balance but it is a good illustration of the thinking that should go behind any list.
HQ
Shas'El
Plasma, Missile Pod, Targeting array, HW multi tracker, HW Target lock, HW BSF, HW Drone controller, Marker Drone 135pts
Shas'El
Plasma, Missile pod, Targeting array, HW multi tracker 97pts
Ok first of all we have ‘two’ HQ XV8’s. This is not extravagance but carefully thought out. Missile pods are vital and having two at BS5 is well 'nice'. Taking two Shas’El’s means I have redundancy and having two individual models means it is harder for the opponent to stop both. Having two BS5 Plasma’s also helps the army against MEQ type opponents.
I also have the Marker light Drone on one of the Els’s which helps to distribute my ML presence throughout the list. Having the ML’s spread around aids in redundancy and survivability of the ML presence and also means more units benefit from the ML’s.
I could have gone for Fireknives in the elite slots but they would not have been as efficient and they would have relied on Markerlights which would have meant other units would not benefit from them. (Remember I am discussing my list here and I am not saying Fireknives are bad, just they do not fit the balance of my list)
Elites
Deathrain squad
2 X XV8 with twin linked Missile Pod, Targeting array
106pts
Deathrain squad
2 X XV8 with twin linked Missile Pod, Targeting array
106pts
Torch squad
1 x team leader with twin linked Flamer, Missile pod, HW Multi, HW Drone controller and 2 Gun Drones, BK
2 x XV8's with twin linked Flamers, Missile Pod
164pts
The overriding factors I was aiming for with the elites were:
(a) Autonomous usage. By this I mean the units should be able to operate on their own for the majority of the game with no support from other units especially Markerlights.
(b) Optimised offensive ability. I wanted each unit to be able to work at near optimised levels when attacking.
(c) Redundancy. The units should add redundancy to the army list.
The units do the above and I will explain why. The Deathrain squads do not need Markerlight support (in fact using the ML’s to boost to BS5 is a waste of resources). The configuration of the unit has been balanced to offer the best balance of offense and cost. Taking three man DR units would not offer enough of an increase to justify their cost.
When you consider that the DR unit’s main task is stopping transports that this should be accomplished in the first two turns and the actual number of transports in an average list then it is actually counterproductive to spend another 106pts making the teams each 3 strong.
More can be accomplished by taking Missile pods on another unit but on one that can work against other targets, hence the Torch squad. The inclusion of 6 BS3 Missile pods on the three man Torch squad makes more sense than taking two more Deathrains.
I still have redundancy with the Missile pods but I gain effective anti infantry with the Flamers. However I am also gaining in another area because the Torch squad can work autonomously, is optimised at its anti-infantry role (needing no roll to hit and re-rolls wounds) and does not rely on ML’s for the Flamers to improve BS or to remove cover saves (Flamers ignore cover).
So my entire elite section is tuned to provide an alpha strike at maximum efficiency (for those who do not know an alpha strike is the first round of shooting from your forces in a game). To illustrate I will list what my units can provide:
4 BS5 Missile pod shots (plus 2 or 4 BS Plasma dependent on target range)
8 BS4 twin linked Missile pod shots
6 BS3 Missile pod shots (dependent on Markerlight usage BS can be and often is raised to BS4 or BS5)
2 BS4 minimum Railgun shots from two hammerheads, dependent on target priority these will usually be hitting at BS5 with ML help but even without it BS4 is good
Up to 6 Seeker missiles. Again dependent on targeting priorities or cover save removal priorities I can vary my Seeker delivery
Two BS4 Fusions on the piranhas
The point here is that because the two Deathrian units and the HQ are not ML reliant I can utilise my Markerlights to help to provide a massively accurate alpha strike or to help remove cover saves.
The structure of my Markerlight contingents also means I can help 5 units achieve greater efficiency but it also has the side effect of making the Markerlight presence much harder to stop if the opponent gains the alpha strike. It is nigh on impossible to quickly stop 4 units of Markerlights.
So I have 18 MP shots, 2 accurate Railguns and Seeker missiles. I would be happy facing any list with that amount of first turn highly accurate firepower. It should also be noted that the Missile pods are spread throughout 5 units, which greatly aids their redundancy. To remove my MP output the opponent has to target 5 separate units spread around the field.
This also makes it much harder for the opponent to keep his vehicles vulnerable armour facings hidden from the MP’s, Seekers and Railguns but also from the multiple Markerlight sources (2 of which are mobile).
This shows how carefully balancing a unit’s firepower output can have cascading effects throughout the list. Balancing the Deathrain and HQ units cost to accuracy ratio carefully has given me the points to spend on units that benefit other units by making their output more efficient.
So already we have balance in the following areas:
Offensive output
Defence
Redundancy
Next we come to the troops.
Troops
9 Fire Warriors one upgraded to Shas'Ui with Bonding Knife (will use Pathfinders Devilfish)
105pts
9 Fire Warriors one upgraded to Shas'Ui with Bonding Knife (will use Pathfinders Devilfish)
105pts
10 Kroot and 6 Kroot hounds
106pts
10 Kroot and 6 Kroot hounds
106pts
This is an area that is notorious for its ability to generate debate. I have given a lot of thought to the most beneficial balance for this force slot.
What do we need to achieve with troops? Well first thing to understand is troops are vital (also one unit of Fire Warriors is compulsory), they are needed to take and hold objectives in 2/3rds of missions. Now despite what various people/forums say if you want to play competitive games (especially against high standard tournie players) you need to consider three areas in regards to troops.
(1) Objective taking and holding
(2) Keeping troops alive
(3) Offensive power
(4) Balancing all the above
As we are talking about the Tau we need to address one thing first ‘Kroot’. In my opinion kroot are compulsory in a Tau list, if you want to win consistently with Tau you need Kroot.
Kroot offer various benefits to the tau player they have various deployment options (infiltrate, outflank and normal placing on the table), they offer shooting, assault and good defensive options.
However to work effectively you need to ensure they are not needed for objective control, without that constraint they can then be fully and freely utilised in those offensive and defensive roles without any reservation.
To do this we need a decent Fire warrior presence and again this is a real balancing trick.
The number of Fire Warriors in each of my units is calculated to allow for a reasonable amount of firepower, casualty absorbtion, and resistance to fall back tests plus decent defensive capability.
Nine Fire Warriors in a unit is a good balance as it offers:
18 shots at rapid-fire range
It takes 3 casualties to force a fall back test
It is a decent size to offer resistance when occupying objectives
To survive the Fire Warrior units need a Devilfish, which luckily enough the two Pathfinder units happen to be forced to take. This combination of units just happens to provide a good balance in various game play elements.
For one it means we have the two Pathfinder units, which provide the ML support AND means we do not have to spend extra paying for two more Devilfish. The Fire Warrior unit and Devilfish combo make the Kroot units more effective and give the army good balanced ability in any mission type.
Back to the Devilfish for a moment; these are a very good example of balancing various elements to provide a benefit to the army and/or other units. For example the way I have set up the Devilfish means it provides five Fire warriors worth of firepower no matter how far it moves (two Drones and the Burst cannon = five shots).
So simply by leaving the Drones on the DF and taking a Multi tracker instead of paying for a smart missile system means I have more than a full Fire Warrior squads worth of firepower.
Taking flechettes also allows the DF to perform another role, one of a defensive support for the Fire warriors. The taking of the Flechettes means any unit attacking a Devilfish will suffer hits. Objectives can be held by FW’s in Devilfish, so the DF provides protection and offense with its Burst cannon, Drones and Flechettes for FW untis on objectives.
Devilfish's basically provide a mobile bunker with firepower for Fire warriors and the way I have equipped it makes it a very effective offensive and defensive asset.
Holding an objective is made much easier with a Devilfish with Drones, Flechettes and its Burst cannon, it gives a multi-layered defence for the objective (I/E Devilfish, Drones then Fire warriors).
The Kroot unit are made more effective because the Fire Warrior units are there to take, hold and contest objectives. This means the Kroot are freed from this task so the are free to provide protection for other units or to be used as attacking units and even as sacrificial units. Conversely the Fire Warriors are less put upon to provide offensive output.
Having two units of Fire Warriors also provides redundancy to both the FW units and the Kroot. Having four troop units’ means the opponent has to work harder to prevent the Tau player taking/holding objectives.
What has to be remembered is Kroot are (despite all their advantages) a fragile unit and they cannot be relied upon to hold or take objectives, even getting to an objective is fraught with danger for Kroot units. Even the Kroots famous ability to go to ground in wooded terrain is negated by flamers or template type weapons.
Having the two units’ of FW’s means more flexibility.
For example the Tau player can:
(a) Hold both Fire Warrior and Devilfish units in reserve until late in the game
(b) Hold one FW unit and a DF in reserve but have the other holding an objective
(c) Use both units as offensive units in kill point missions
(d) Have one FW/DF unit in reserve and use one to help the Kroot in objective missions with fewer objectives or in combined KP/objective missions
And so on and so on! The point is that having the two FW units means it is easier to handle any mission type and balances the roles of the FW’s and the Kroot allowing both to perform much more efficiently.
Having two Kroot units and one FW unit simply puts to much pressure on the Kroot and restricts the player’s use of them, this is not a balanced approach because the opponent can apply pressure to either the Kroot or the lone FW unit, either way it restricts the usage of each unit.
The Kroot units are also balanced to provide balanced offensive power, the inclusion of Kroot hounds means they can perform well in assaults as well as shooting. Having the hounds also means the unit performs better at protecting other units and as an area denial unit. Any enemy unit attacking the Kroot will be faced with either a decent amount of shooting attacks or a formidable amount of assault attacks.
The Kroot also have various deployment options, which makes them very good at responding to the differing mission types available. Basically there are no missions in which the Kroot cannot be deployed favourably or in response to your opponent.
So as can be seen the number of troops and their construction plus their transport options has all been carefully thought out to provide multiple benefits to the list.
Now for the fast attack
Fast attack
5 Pathfinders
60pts
Devilfish with Disruption Pod, flechettes and multi
105pts
5 Pathfinders
60pts
Devilfish with Disruption Pod, flechettes and multi
105pts
2 x Piranha with Fusion, TA and DP’s 150pts
When considering what to take in the fast attack slots the need to provide Devilfish for the Fire Warriors and the need for Markerlights pretty quickly decides two of the slots. However taking two full units of PF’s is overkill.
Having 16 Pathfinders (2 full units) is expensive and the returns are negligible. Each 5 man unit will return a minimum of two tokens a turn and this is usually enough, offering either a 2pt BS boost, 1pt BS boost and a 1pt cover save reduction or a 2pt cover save reduction.
That will usually be enough ML tokens to serve one unit in most situations.
Having 5 or 6 tokens against one target is often just a waste of tokens so the points can be better spent elsewhere. The other benefit of smaller units is they are easier to hide and can utilise smaller pieces of cover.
Having two smaller units also aids their survivability and provides redundancy because the ML presence is not concentrated in one unit. 60pts for each unit is also not a big sink in points but the benefits they provide to the list far outweigh their cost.
The Piranhas are taken to provide in order of importance:
(a) Blockading of the opponents dangerous/fast units
(b) Anti armour with their Fusion blasters
(c) Objective contesting
I had to consider whether it would be better taking two separate units consisting of one Piranha each or taking a two Piranha unit. The problem with taking two separate Piranhas is they need a Fast attack slot each and this would mean losing a Pathfinder squad. This would have serious implications for the list balance.
It would mean paying extra for another Devilfish for the second Fire warrior unit or forsaking the second FW unit all together. Either option is bad because paying for the extra Devilfish means taking points from another unit, taking one unit of FW’s has all the disadvantages I mentioned earlier for the Kroot units etc.
Losing a Pathfinder squad means the remaining squad is going to get more attention from the opponent and will be much less survivable, I lose some redundancy and I am going to lose a units worth of ML support so a unit is either going to be hitting less often or an opposition unit is going to be benefiting from improved cover saves. All in all taking two individual Piranhas is not worth the mass of downsides (for this list).
Having the two Piranhas has some advantages. The unit offers decent firepower, two BS4 Fusions is not to be sniffed at and the Drones offer nice backup. The two Piranhas offer a good decent sized frontage for blockading. The downside is the squadron rules but these are not that important when we are using the unit to block anyway. Another benefit is any assault attacks have to be split between the two Piranhas which means they should stay around longer when assaulted (which is a good thing).
Heavy support
Hammerhead
Railgun, Burst Cannons, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod
165pts
Hammerhead
Railgun, Burst Cannons, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod
165pts
Skyray
Burst cannons, Targeting array, Multi tracker and Disruption Pod, Blacksun filter
160pts
2000pts
The Hammerhead is a great example of a perfectly balanced unit. It offers balanced offense against infantry and vehicle type units when the Railgun is taken. Both the solid shot and the submunnition are both extremely effective against their respective targets, which makes the Railhead Hammerhead a valuable asset to any list.
Taking the Skyray helps to make the Hammerheads more effective by upping the BS which either helps the hit rate of the solid shot or reduces the scatter of the subs round.
Taking the Skyray also means the other Markerlights are free to help other units, reduce cover saves or to launch the Skyrays seekers.
A small touch is the Black sun filter on the Skyray, this is deliberate because the BSF can be used to fire the Markerlights which in turn can be used to negate the effects of night fight for up to two units (usually the Hammerheads).
Having the two Hammerheads also offers some redundancy and also means they offer offense throughout the whole game, first couple of turns they hit armour and then can switch to infantry killing for the rest of the game. Same goes for the Skyray it offers Marker light support throughout the game and heavy fire support but it also offers that important redundancy to the ML presence.
So as can be seen balance is very important to lists effectiveness. The thing to remember is that the balance has to be built up from an understanding of the mechanics of good Tau gameplay. Basically what this means is the understanding of which tactics work best for the Tau player and building the list to exploit them. Tau work best when delivering withering amounts of firepower fast while utilising board control to keep enemies at bay and to control objectives.
Denial of targets is also important to successful play and the best way to accomplish this is using board control. So what is board control, well it consists of different things.
Alpha strike: using the early strike to cripple transports and make units walk across the field, also stopping the enemies tanks, dreads etc to prevent the opponent from destroying our transports and reducing our mobility.
Blockading: using Tau units to prevent dangerous units from gaining ground. The Piranha is good for this but the Devilfish can be used and so can the Kroot at a push.
Preventative deployment: using units such as kroot and XV8’s to deter the opponent from areas of the field.
Mobility: using mobility to respond to the opponents game-play, to gain line of sight to better stop units, to control objectives or to contest them.
Infiltration: using the Kroots infiltrate ability (or Stealth’s) to respond to the opponent’s deployment, to blockade areas of the field, to directly attack areas of the field or to provide assault screens.
Use the above list of requirements as a template is a good start to building an effective list. I have tried to show how I have built the balance into my list to best utilise the list of traits above. I hope it has gone some way to helping you to better understand how building balance into a list works and how it can really improve a list.
Please understand that I am not saying that the above army list is the best ever example of balance because it is not. What it is, is a good example of balance in a list and I have included it to explain the ‘principles’ of balance and not to say “my list is the best example”.
I hope this article has succeeded in explaining some of the more esoteric, less obvious theory behind Tau list building. As always any critiques are welcome or pointing out of errors.
Most of all this is a starting point and not definitive by any means. I am hoping others will post with examples of balance in their list because there is no perfect “one” way of doing things and units and lists can work and be balanced in different ways.