Random typo:

In the Kroot Master Shaper's text : kindred’s should be kindreds (No apostrophe)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

question:

No ethereal?

Isn't the ethereal a character, so added to one of those units anyway?

oh. I was confused by Kroot shaper, who WAS mentioned. then I found out that he's NOT a character(which is strange)

OK I have spotted two small mistakes (above and beyond the usual formating and spelling stuff).

The Custodan Battleship has lost slow and steady from its datafax.

The Orca Gunships Aircraft Seeker Missiles are mistakenly listed as AP5+/AT6+ when they should be AT6+

In a break from tradition in both cases the quick reference sheet is correct

Interestingly though the mistake on the Custodan does raise the question should it be left without Slow and Steady. as its loss makes the Custodian at least a viable choice (probably still not great). I personally dont have access to a copy of IA3 so dont know what the correct stats for a Custodian Battleship are and have basically just been using the stats I inherited from earlier versons of the Tau list. Its interesting to note (unless I am being blind) that the massive Explorer class ships dont seem to have Slow and Steady in the Specialist games BFG list? Should the supposedly more advanced Custodian have Slow and Steady in this case?

As you say, if its loss takes the Custodian from an abysmal choice fit only for scenarios to a sub-par choice fit for friendly play (If not tournament play), then I'm all for it.

The custodian doesn't seem to have the S&S rule in BFG (Just checked IA:3)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

This is just a comment/observation on the recent 6.3 series and it's game play from a now consistent opponent of the Tau.

1. Never see Fire Warriors. Ever

2. Orca + Crisis or Orca + Broadsides are the main strike arm.

3. Manta is being played at least 50% of the time at all point levels. It is quite a brutal beast and very difficult to take on in AA as it's long burst cannon out range T-bolts. It takes quite a bit of firepower to down, which I don't see as being bad, just that it has become a very effective tool now.

As an opponent of Mantas, I don't like them.

4. Hammerhead formations seem just fine.

5. All Pathfinder stands with Sniper are quite brutal. Any Commissar/SC/Leader etc. are very unlikely to survive a run in with PFs. I was against the all stands Sniper upgrade and still am.

6. Games played range from standard 3,000 pts to 10,000 pts.

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Interesting there’s such a range of opinions being expressed on the Tau. Honda - did you see the thread where I recently asked for help with Tau tactics and Yme-Loc posted saying he plays Fire Warrior heavy and never uses a Manta? I've not played them enough yet personally to be able to comment on your points.

I think it's symptomatic of a well designed list that multiple styles of play / list construction are viable.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Agreed E&C. The only question here is whether the styles of play fall into the two 'historical' Tau styles or not, and from what Yme-loc has posted, at least the 'Patient Hunter' style seems viable.

A couple of points:

1. I am in no way complaining about the Manta. I think it works. I don't like facing it, but I'd say the same thing about a Warlord titan. I think being able to add it to the Tau toolbox is a good thing.

2. My comment about FW's is an observation or set of observations from several games. I agree that a well crafted list should feature multiple builds and I think that the Tau list does this.

3. Having said that, I find it interesting that FW usage has disappeared. My regular Tau opponent is a very solid player, more tournament oriented than fluff, and doesn't tailor his list to whatever I or others bring.

4. So I find it interesting, as in statistically worth watching, that his Tau are very assault oriented, with air mobile assault supported by Recon formations and HH formations. Not saying it's bad or broken or anything like that. I'm saying that it appears to be a very effective set of formations. I'm still in the "jury's out" side of whether or not things are costed correctly for those combinations.

5. However, since he as the Tau player is trying to get the best bang for his buck, it is worth mentioning that FWs don't seem to fit into his set of optimal formations. I will attempt to get him to comment.

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

I don't think it has... It's just missing from your group. Several players I know swear by fire warriors and say they're fantastic.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Haven't played a game with the Tau in ages, but dropping by to note that the list looks great. The jet packs rule seems elegant and unique. I also like what you guys have done by dropping a few unit types and limiting the formation choices.

I took my Tau to Small Arms 2011 today and managed to win.

List was:

FW + FW + Pathfinder + Ethereal
Mech FW + Skyray
Crisis + 1 Crisis + SC
Broadsides
Stealth
Recon (3/3 split)
Recon (3/3 split)
Fusionheads + Fusionheads + Skyray
Railheads + Railheads
Barracuda Squadron

A couple of things stood out for me, Yme.

Fire Warriors - My jury is out on these guys really. I can't ever seem to make much use of them tactically (except as road bumps) before they're smashed apart by harder infantry formations. I thought today's strategy was solid and they ended up broken and crippled with very little to show. Can't figure out what I'm doing wrong really. It must just be my luck as i can't work out why. Hopefully I can do something decisive with these guys one day. They've yet to show me that in any of the games I've played with them either in FF assault or in shooting. They get bucket loads of shots yet they still often fail to achieve anything of great note. They look dangerous but boy are they girly-fish.

example: I took 12 FWs + 2 Pathfinders + Ethereal for my BTS. When assaulted by 7? World Eaters+lord, out of 11 possible Pulse rifle and carbine (on 3+ & 4+ for MLs) OW shots and the ensuing assault I managed to kill a single berzerker stand (good saves here by the boys in Red BTW)! Thank heavens the Recon group was there to provide "heavy fire support" with 2x 6+ FFs (thus confirming their 175 point price tag... ) and tip over a couple more berzerkers. Even the support fire from 2 crisis suits nearby and 4+ cover saves didn't help. In the end I lost the engagement and the 5 surviving FWs ran off and failed to rally in the last turn. Pansies! Well at least I managed to keep 5 alive thanks to the Recon group otherwise there would have been only 3 from 14 units left. Soft! Thankfully the berzerkers were broken after the assault but it wasn't because of the FWs.

Rail Gun HHs - They're still just on the meh side for me - even with 6 in the formation for 300. They just never seem to hit the enemy's hard units very hard. Don't get me wrong they're a great stand off ranged weapon - if you're shooting Eldar tanks or APCs. Fusion heads OTOH, now they're the beast the Tau need - they are shooty death. I wish I had 3 formations of these things. 4+Fusion heads are now a very nice formation (well if you can get them to actually activate. In 9 turns across 3 games I rolled 1's 7 times to use these guys! Including SC re-rolls, rallying and just simple activating)

Stealth group - spiffy troops but an enigma . They're like gnats - mostly annoying but sometimes hard to kill. They died like flies versus a guardian formation assault with Wraithguard support... but they tied up a WE terminator teleport team (and broke it with disrupt albeit after the termies landed with 2 BMs) and soaked up a Chosen assault to hold the Blitz from turn 2 to the end of turn 3 and distracted the Banelord as well. I wish I had more of these minis

One last thing - Pleeeease increase the size of the reference sheet in the back! Ohhh, my straining eyes!!

Overall though, the list is pretty good now. Well done.