Librarium Online Forums banner

Read your 5th editions

1K views 19 replies 8 participants last post by  SirPrometheus 
#1 ·
I see many people post about how Tau need many troops for 5th. Why? I'm not going to get into power gaming lists or anything but it seems many have not fully read the rules of Seize Ground nor Capture and Control. Yes you need troops to score but the thing people seem to over look is that you can also deny a scoring troop with any model. Now with how mobile most of are non scoring units are we can get away with out having many troops imo. I didn't make this post to say the only good Tau army is one with suit spam or w/e but just to point out there isn't one way to play Tau.
 
#2 ·
Indeed.

From what I've seen, most tourney winning or high-placing Tau lists at 2k consist of one 6-man fire warrior squad, 2 kroot squads with hounds, 9 fireknives (not saying they are the best option, just what I've seen winning) + shas'el FK, 3 HHs, one pathfinder squad, and 2 squads of two piranhas.

Lots of fast things to contest objectives, with only 3 scoring units.

M.O.M.
 
#3 ·
That's what I've seen, too, M.O.M. I don't have all the models to run it exactly like that myself, but I've borrowed from friends and played about a dozen games with lists just like that. It's ... eye-opening, to say the least. IMHO, it's the most potent and flexible build you can make with Tau in 5th edition.
 
#5 · (Edited)
I am not saying the list mentioned is not decent (because I know it is, Piranhas or not ;););););););) ). However one thing always strikes me when I see this list. The inherent weakness of its minimised troops choices.

In more balanced lists with more troops choices it is harder to stop the troops contingent but in the minimised list it is going to be quite easy to focus attacks on the troops and seriously damage the chances of the list winning.

Targeting the Kroot is the key to beating this list and even if the small FW unit is in a DF once it is stopped the unit is vulnerable and because the unit is so small it is easy to drop.

My list always has two near full FW squads in DF and two Kroot squads. This makes it near impossible to remove my troops presence on the field.If the opponent focuses on my Kroot the FW's are safer (in DF they are very safe anyway) and if they try for the FW then the Kroot are left to work. Either way it takes a lot to remove my troops, this cannot be said for the minimised list, the Kroot are a real liability in this list simply because they are the key to winning games and will therefore be targeted (or should be if an opponent has any sense)and nothing really exists to take this emphasis away (my FW presence helps my Kroot survive).

Simply directing fire at the Kroot in the minimised list is going to seriously hurt the armies ability to win missions.

I am interested to know why opponents are not doing this and if they are how is it stopped.
 
#4 · (Edited)
You are assuming that we haven't read the rulebooks? How typical.

Maybe you should go back and read the threads again because you obviously missed something. Check your facts before assuming that you are the only one who has read the rulebooks.

Everyone knows that any unit can contest objectives. What good is contesting objectives if you can't hold at least one? If you don't hold at least one objective, the absolute best you can hope for is a draw, and a draw is not a win.
 
#6 ·
Well I guess the word "many" means all now I don't know? I only made the post to point out to the people that say we need mad troops all the time that there isn't one way to play. And I'm not going to make a post just saying you don't need troops I'm going to back up my claim with some rules pointed out in the codex and 5th. Also the best you can hope for is not a draw if you don't contest any objectives as if you destroy their army you win.
 
#11 ·
I take bigger FW squads for one reason, Devilfish die and when this happens it is better to have a full squad on the table. The full squad deals out more damage, absorbs more damage and with a Bonding knife will stay on the table longer. Also if the FW squad is on an objective (say the DF was destroyed) it is harder for the opponent to shift a large unit. This I take two large squads of FW's
 
#13 ·
I have actually been finding my FW's less and less effective.....especially when it comes to taking and holding objectives.

I have started to take only squad of FW's, with three to four squads of kroot. The kroot can infiltrate to advantages positions on the board holding my objectives and contesting enemy ones. When they do get to the objective they are quite a bit harder to shift than FW's.

But I still say that taking 4 troops choices is pretty much required.

Dave
 
#14 ·
I have actually been finding my FW's less and less effective.....especially when it comes to taking and holding objectives.

I have started to take only squad of FW's, with three to four squads of kroot. The kroot can infiltrate to advantages positions on the board holding my objectives and contesting enemy ones. When they do get to the objective they are quite a bit harder to shift than FW's.

But I still say that taking 4 troops choices is pretty much required.
Yeah, Kroot really are so much stronger than FWs it's silly. I know several Tau players that wouldn't take any FWs if the codex didn't force them too.

As for 4 choices being "pretty much required" ... not really. I think about the recent Apocalypse game I played against Marines. I only had 4 Troops choices for a 3000 pts game (!!!), and they were all alive at game's end. They were all on an objective (one was contested) and so I won. I had atrocious dice, and had the opponent been more aggressive, he could've really taken advantage of that and probably beaten me.

But I suspect the reason he didn't is because he had faced me before and knew what to expect. If he didn't kill off my piranhas first, followed methodically by my devilfish, crisis suits, etc., he knew he wouldn't have a chance to get close to taking my objectives, with or without my units on them. And if he left those units alone, I would have wiped his scoring units out within just 3 turns or so. Regarding target priority, he did everything right, as far as I could tell. His failure was in being too cautious. I didn't have to work to win that game. He let his fear of my army beat him. I had nothing that day! :rotfl:

I've been able to win objectives games with just 6 FWs, 20 Kroot and 10 Hounds in games all the way up to 2000 pts. With the right tools supporting those few Troops, it's surprisingly possible.
 
#16 · (Edited)
All I can say in response to "what are my opponents thinking" is: target priority. You only need one more objective than your opponent to win 2/3 of standard games. All I have to do is hold one objective -- with any one of 3 units (6 FWs, 2x Kroot/Hound) -- and merely kill off everything else (or contest it) and I win. Most of my wins with that min-maxed army were 1-0 or 2-0. Close, but a win is a win is a win. And holding and keeping that one critical objective proved surprisingly easy when the enemy had to prioritize targets.

If you're mech -- and in 5th edition your really should be (all my opponents are) -- your army depends on the transports and heavy tanks. If you lose those, you're exposed and the Tau chew you up. That meant that even if they wanted to shoot at my troops -- even assuming they were in a good position to do so -- it is going to be smarter to attempt targeting Tau units that threaten the mech army's method of obtaining victory. Nearly every player will play to protect their method of victory first, and that will almost always mean targeting Tau battlesuits and anything with a railgun. Especially if you're running, say, 12 crisis suits, 4 broadsides, and a hammerhead. Mech armies hate that kind of army, especially when there are also 4 piranhas and a devilfish blocking your rhinos and land raiders from getting close enough to smash the faces in of any dismounted FWs (rare) or Kroot (more likely).

Armies like IG depend on their armour to win games, too, so they also prioritize my armour and battlesuits much higher than the Troops. They have to if they want to play to win. (Granted, I haven't yet faced the new IG, but, having seen many of the army lists floating around ... I'm a little wary. They may prove to be the best army out there. Scary, scary stuff. So many viable builds, so much speed and long-range power.... Looking forward to seeing what my first matchup will be like.)

The key to winning such battles with my style of play is to control the board space. Tau can do this exceptionally well, much better than almost any other 40K army, IMHO. If the board space is controlled properly, the enemy really isn't given a choice to do what you're recommending. It wouldn't be prioritizing threats to their army properly. Not if they actually wish to WIN. At best, they MAY be able to force a draw out of me. (Certainly no guarantee they can get all my Troops dead, not with going to ground in cover and with screening them heavily with skimmers, etc.) But they're so afraid of getting tabled (auto win even in objectives missions, and this is a real possibility with a min-maxed Tau army) that they are going to play to their strengths in an attempt to actually win rather than be so conservative as to hope to keep at least one model alive and say, "Ha! Draw!"

This probably won't satisfy you as an answer, but I don't have a better one to offer. I guess ... either it seems plausible to you, or it doesn't. Either way, it works out just fine in actual game play.
 
#17 ·
The main question I have is how that army style will deal with massed Armor Values, especially if more than one is a Russ or Raider variant. Missile Pods are all well and good, but they are NOT railguns. With only 3 in the list (that can die or be disabled very easily, I might add), heavy Armor becomes your bane. Inquisition with IG inducted took 1st at my 'Ard Boyz, and everyone there was terrified of our local IG player (who ended up missing the tournament due to a family emergency), with Necrons taking second.

Against things like Dark Eldar Wych Rush and IG Artillery Spam, this could work. Problem is that it would require a lot of good rolls and/or going first with his positioning being bad.
 
#18 · (Edited)
The answer is sorta self explanatory, isn't it? A) You need more Railguns, B ) You need more of something else, like Fusion blasters.

I like seeker missles, but don't think they really cut it for this purpose. They are pretty good for AV 12 squadrons.

So, look, everyone says "take 3 Railheads" Cuz it's kinda the obvious, simple choice. But armor is much better now, and harder to take out. Try a full unit of Broadsides, that adds some real punch. Then you'll have 5 Rail guns.

Take Fusion blasters. I like Helios suits but they're too essential to send deep vehicle hunting, you need other things to carry the fusion into their back lines. I recommend stealth suits with Fusion, outflanking, "suicide suits", typically with a twinlinked fusion and a flamer just in case, and piranhas. With these tools, you should be able to dependably savage their heavies.
 
#19 ·
Psybomb and SirPrometheus, are you talking about the list I suggested?

If you are, then how is there not enough anti-tank? There are 4 fusion blasters and 3 railguns. And we need more fusions? Sometimes people swap out one hammerhead and some kroot hounds for 2 broadsides for even more anti-tank.

At the start of 5th a lot of players, myself especially, went overboard with troops selections. Nowadays most people have rounded their lists to include 3-4 troops choices which is IMHO a good amount at 2000. It leaves room for more powerful units like hammerheads and crisis suits. As number6 has said, the non-troops units are used to protect the troops choices. They do this by controlling ground, presenting threats, and of course killing.

The reason for not having more fire warriors is that quite simply fire warriors suck. They are overpriced. I wish they weren't, but that's the way it is. Even in a squad of twelve, they usually just sit inside their devilfish until the time is right to use FoF. Even with their 24 shots I feel like ML tokens are wasted on them.

In the tournament list I suggested the fire warriors ride in the pathfinder devilfish. They rarely if ever disembark from it. All of the ML hits are used by the fireknives. Most of the strategy revolves around protecting the pathfinders and kroot, as they are the only static elements in the army.

Overall it isn't too hard to protect your troops by doing one or more of the following tactics:
- Kill the enemy threatening your troops (duh)
- Force the enemy away from your troops
- Force the enemy to target a different unit (i.e. piranhas moving close to land raider, they MUST be taken out)

You will probably find yourself doing that subconsciously. I guess what I'm saying is the amount of troops you need is dependent on the rest of your army list and your style of play.

M.O.M.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top