Talk:Warhammer 40,000/6th Edition Tactics/Tau

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Updated the IA: Volume 3 Second Edition units


wacky, 6 June 2013


"Now that 6th allows one model to confer its' special rules to the unit, you can bust out some rules shenanigans. Stick in a cheap HQ with the advanced stabilization systems, hardwired blacksun filter, twinlinked flamers for anti-assault lulz (when your opponenet protests, flip open your codex, point the part where it says the equipped unit has S&P during a turn that they move, and put on your best trollface)" Doesn't this advice directly contradict the 6th ed. core book (Ref. 6th ed page 39, Independent Character - Special Rules)? "Unless specified in the rule itself...,the unit's special rules are not conferred on the IC, and the IC's special rules are not conferred on the unit." (paraphrasing and abbreviation mine).

Specifically, adding ASS to Broadsides is only 10 points/per, but that's 30 points saved if I don't have to do it...

  • EDIT Now that I reread this paragraph, is it suggesting attaching an HQ choice to the broadside team (which would appear to contradict the core book), or add ASS to the Shas'vre on the broadside squad, and the ASS benefit gets shared with the other two Shas'ui?--(null).exe 07:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

___

On the advice for Broadsides: Why the heck is a single Broadside being given two Target Locks? Target Lock is only useful if you're part of a unit, and even then, you only need to equip all but one member with a single Target Lock to get the full benefit. (Say you have a team of 3 Broadsides. If two of them have Target Locks, each of them is able to fire at a different target than the rest of the unit; the third one, without a Target Lock, is effectively shooting at its own target anyway.) ___

Well...that is what I was TRYING to say. I run broadsides in teams of three, one with drone controller, two with target locks. I will adjust the page so as to remove the discrepancy. ___

Is "Wise Words of Wisdom" supposed to be the joke section? I don't think serious advice goes there, considering it talks about Vespids and sparkly vehicles.

Yes, somebody is a tard. --Petro 01:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

... I'm confused... When in the last half decade have the Tau been a viable army? And by viable I mean win a tournament... ever. Surely this entire article is a joke section. I'm being completely serious.

3/10

___

Can someone just sync up O'Rly's article? The strike-though of a whole paragraph just looks bad. --FlintTD 07:28, 29 March 2012 (BST)

annoying hero-worship eliminated for the greater good. 130.166.220.254 18:08, 5 May 2012 (BST)

___

Since I fail at wiki, if anyone could fix Shadowsun's "face" that would be wonderful. You will see what I mean when you try to read it. --FlintTD 03:31, 9 September 2012 (BST)

___

Im' new to the game. Can you explain the use of Disruption Pods to me? You state the pod gives 4+ save in the open, 3+ if moving, and 2+ if behind cover. However, if you click on the link to Hammerhead it says you get a 5+ save from the pod in the open. Are you combining saves here to get your numbers? The codex says you count as a obscured vehicle but doesn't say what the save is. It seems in 6th ed that if a vehicle is obscured you get the save from whatever cover you are behind which would be different depending on the cover.

  • How IT works:
    • Jink save gives any moved skimmer 5+ save, upgrading to 4+ after flat-out move.
    • Soft cover (like forests or other models) provide 5+ cover, if vehicle is partly obscured by it.
    • Thick cover (like ruins, walls, craters, trenches, other vehicles, Aegis/Martyrys line) provide 4+ cover save to partially obscured vehicle. Although Tau tanks tend to fly over low cover peaces with their skimmer bases, GW had blessed them with landing gear, which grant the ability to remove skimmer base, land tank, and hide mandatory 25% of it's profile behind even half-man-sized sandbags.
    • And now Dis Pod add "Shrouded" USR to any vehicle it attached to. Shrouded gives +2 bonus to cover saving throws, basically turning no cover to 5+, 5+ to 3+, and 4+ to 2+. Thankfully, 3+ (from, say, Space Marine Forgemaster allied ability "bolster defense") would not turn to unbreakable 1+ - it would be 2+.

Sorry for terrible spelling - English is not my mother tongue.



So is O'rly apoc only? Never heard of him before, so please forgive me for my lack of knowledge on the subject

  • No, O'Rly is normal 40k model. You could find his latest rules in IA: Apocalypse SE

farsight[edit]

can someone please give me some explanations on farsight...I do not understand how his squad gets the hit and run ability...

  • through vectored retro thrusters, obviously. It's also possible to take Puretide engram for this reason

Shield of Sanguinius[edit]

Please read Blood Angels Codex: "Shield of Sanguinius: This power is used at the start of the enemy Shooting phase. The Librarian and any unit within 6" receive a 5+ cover save" And the Rulebook: "Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, targeted with psychic powers or have templates or blast markers placed over them. However, if a psychic power, scattering Blast weapon or other ability that affects an area hits some of these Allies of Convenience, they will be affected along with any friendly or enemy units until the end of the phase"

You cast Shield of Sanguinius on your Librarian, you don't cast it on any unit. It's an an area effect psychic power that affect all units, not only friendly units. This is how it's written, so, please, stop deleting my additions or write GW and ask them to change the description of the power. Meanwhile, I ask you to restore what you have deleted. Thanks.

--83.38.212.111 09:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Farsight Enclaves[edit]

Since the rules for the Farsight Enclave supplement is now out, I will add a new section discussing the changes that it brings to the army. Hopefully, this will become the "standard" format for discussing supplements, especially as they are expected to become more complex as time goes on. Dok (talk)

Supplements as Allies[edit]

Somebody has added a bunch of stuff claiming that Farsight Enclaves can be taken as an ally to Tau Empire, but I still have no idea how this is possible. The rulebook shows quite clearly that two of the same army can't be allies... they're the same army. Supplements don't change this; it's a variation of the army, but still the same army. So, would somebody mind explaining how this is possible? I don't see anything in FAQs that says this should be possible. Until then, I'm removing the stuff about two Farsights; it may be RAW, but it's clearly not the intent. Dok (talk)


there is an actual rule that says they can be allied (i think it is just called "allies" it that in addition to the following allies matrix (no matrix is listed probably a typo this book is full of them) codex: tau empire, farsight enclaves detachments and codex: tau empire detachments may ally together as battle brothers) the two farsights come from the fact that farsight is in the standard codex and the enclaves book (full stat line and points cost) and the fact that due to the allies rule he is in both codecs (and last time i checked one codex cannot interfere with another - i may be wrong though although if i am wrong then the allies rule makes no sense due to the fact that every rule in the supplement says enclaves army not detachment like the must take bonding knife rule says units in a farsight army the ork hunters rule says units in a farsight enclaves army if these rules apply to the standard codex detachment then all the allies rule is is a way of letting you take one more heavy/elite/fast unit 1 more hq and 2(3?) (and one of them has to be battle suits) more troops)

i would also like people to stop deleting what i put about the allies thing without reading the damn book

Fixed your incoherent attempt at argument in wikipage. Don't know why this lasted so long, thought somebody would've fixed this after we got five supplements

  • Thanks for your efforts, but please don't use a slash-through to cross out his argument. We're not particularly fond of that. Either edit it 'til it makes sense or delete it entirely. Thanks! Dok (talk) 13:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)