Is it time to return to the Water Warrior?

[Darkmagi]

Hi all ever since our new codex was forced on us it seems we have been pretty much forced into the Nemesis Strike force and Dreadknights as our primary list basis.  This got me thinking with the general trend away from melta in favor of plasma might it be time to return to a list similar to what was run during the dark days of the Daemon Hunters codex? (Mind you the Nemesis Dreadknight has been my favorite unit since it arrived on the scene despite the fluff) I came up with this List as a basis for discussion as a possible basis of an alternative to our current mono-build. Oh I almost forgot this list uses the Combined Arms Detachment instead of the NSF.

 

2k Knights

 

Hq: 135

ML3 Libby

 

Troops: 1365

5x Terminators-2x hammer 1x incenerator: 455

     God-Hammer Landraider- Extra Armor

5x Terminators-2x hammer 1x incenerator: 455

     God-Hammer Landraider- Extra Armor

5x Terminators-2x hammer 1x incenerator: 455

     God-Hammer Landraider- Extra Armor

 

Fast Attack:460

Storm Raven- TL Lascannon, TL Multi-Melta, Hurricanes: 230

Storm Raven- TL Lascannon, TL Multi-Melta, Hurricanes: 230

 

Total: 1960

 

That leaves 40 points left to play with. Of course changing some wargear can net you even more points to play with but I feel this list fits true to the old water warrior style lists and am looking to open up the discussion :-)

[Reclusiarch Darius]

My personal feeling is that melta and MC's (not to mention Knight-Titans) will still ruin your day. Necrons will also have a field day against you, as will Eldar and Dark Eldar lance weaponry. Every competitive lists takes sufficient melta to deal with high AV problems. Land Raiders are nothing new, and ours are identical in every way to other Marines. 

 

Water Warrior was never a competitive way of playing Grey Knights, even when it was first proposed back with our 3rd edition book. Silent Requiem never pretended it was, he simply presented a mech armour skew style of play that he'd had moderate success with. I found his writings interesting, although his prism of Earth, Air, Water, Fire idioms was limiting. Sadly, he's long been inactive on the forum (nearly 4 years now), so I have no idea what he'd make of our 7th edition incarnation. 

[Darkmagi]

True and unfortunately I have limited experience playing in 7th due to not being close to a LGS and no players local to me.  That's kinda why I wanted to open the discussion, besides the fact that I wanted to see if we could maby partially break out of the mono-build route

[Bionicman]

True and unfortunately I have limited experience playing in 7th due to not being close to a LGS and no players local to me.  That's kinda why I wanted to open the discussion, besides the fact that I wanted to see if we could maby partially break out of the mono-build route

...which is a honorable effort. But why take heavy incinerators due to point limitations? One or two LR could be changed to redeemers or cruisaders if dakka is the issue.

[Grand Master Caloth]

Not to mention you will want to change one LR to a LRR or LRC so you can put the libby in with a squad

[thade]

I've only ever played with as close an approximation to SR's philosophy as I think I can get. Mind you, the way of the Water Warrior isn't specifically his list (which would just NOT work now, nor has it since the end of 4th I think) but in his approach to the game. I actually would self-describe myself as a WW when I was running my Vanguard with the BA codex all the way back in 5th.

The (extremely watered down) short of it:

• take your time;
•  player psychology (including your own; I'd lump deception and psyching your opponent out here)
• clear communication with your opponent (i.e. "Do you agree that this model can see that one?")
• battlefield awareness;
• strong familiarity with your models and list (i.e. know what your units can handle, knowing how quickly (in turns) your basic unit will be in a melee, knowing how many wounds you can expect to dish out and take per turn, etc.) and their models;
• don't go in with a plan or a gimmick (or, worse, a list that's married to a plan or a gimmick) instead, respond to your opponent's actions/plans and force them to react to you;
• each model/each unit is a resource to be used, lost, or traded for removing your opponent's resources.

Honestly, I think those are rules to live by with this game. :) Read through his old bat reps, his thoughts, you'll see that some of his ideas still come through. Not the way he used specific rules, of course (don't get hung up on that!) but the way he approached the rules and game in general. His tactica is archived here.

 

I reached out to SR long ago and found he still exists :) but got more into WHFB as he enjoyed the tactical gameplay choices more there than in what 5th had become (he liked how much movement mattered in Fantasy) but he was curious about how 6th might shape up when it launched. (Should give you an idea about how long ago I talked to him.)

[jeffersonian000]

You can still "Water Warrior" in 7th, as it is a strategic mind set rather than a specific list build. The original Water Warrior list was only 1000 points, and based around using what at the time was considered non-standard tactics. I use to run a 3-Land Raider GK list at 1500 points using the same "Water Warrior" strategic model, to some good success ... until the 5th Ed GK codex came out. The multi-Land Raider army list is not a good way to play 40k in the current environment do to the ready availability of cheap anti-tank weaponry found in every army other than Grey Knights. This is why I moved from Land Raider heavy "Water Warrior" to a TDA heavy "Ghostwing", which is still my favored playstyle with a NSF based Draigo-Shunt-Bomb. Very very "Fire", with just of enough flexibility to warrant a "Water" way of strategic thinking.

 

In essence, "Water Warrior" tells you to think outside the box, play defensively when aggression is expected, or aggressive when defensive is expected. The use of Land Raiders in 3rd gave GK a method of being static or dynamic as needed. 5th refined GK as a non-static army, requiring a very dynamic playstyle. Our 7th Ed codex is still a very dynamic army, where moving fast and playing within your opponents decision making loop is vital to success. At the moment, we don't do "Earth" well, yet can fake a good "Air" while being very "Fire" in demeanor, which lets us still "Water" if by "Water" we actually mean "Steam".

 

SJ

[thade]

Water Warrior was never a competitive way of playing Grey Knights, even when it was first proposed back with our 3rd edition book. Silent Requiem never pretended it was.... 

Sorry, sir, but this is patently false on both counts.

 

Count the first: he played near 140 games in '06 and lost two.

 

Count the second: he presented his record as evidence that his methods were competitive. He was very humble about it, but the implication is pretty clear: it was remarkably effective for him and people kept asking about how it worked and duplicating his army without his results.

 

++ EDIT. Error corrected. -t ++

++ EDIT. Clarification. -t ++

[Brom MKIV]

I dig the twin ravens and I assume the libby will roll on strategic and divination as defaults.

 

Anyway I think its worth exploring, however I would lose the godhammers for better FW options with armoured ceramite instead. I'm thinking specifically spartans but an achilles would be well served here as well. They bring melta resistance and better firepower/transport capacity.

 

From there I think some diversity would be welcome. With the hvy armour I wouldn't think you need TDA as much as more bodies. This is theory on my part though and I might be taking the list in a different direction then you envision.. idk.

 

Another idea to consider would be an allied IK. Nothing says durable like bubble wrapping an IK with ceramite land raiders.

 

 

 

Edit- Aaand I just remember GK don't have access to those. NM.

[Rurik the blessed]

I am a fan of this Raider's lists... I think  AV14 combined with the power of Nemesis Dreadknights is a vvery hard to kill army... all enemy fire is usually concentrated onto NDKs or Raiders... but 3 of each? woo, I want to see the enemy's face

[Grand Master Caloth]

There aren't any dks in the list

[Reclusiarch Darius]

The (extremely watered down) short of it:

• take your time;
• player psychology (including your own; I'd lump deception and psyching your opponent out here)
• clear communication with your opponent (i.e. "Do you agree that this model can see that one?")
• battlefield awareness;
• strong familiarity with your models and list (i.e. know what your units can handle, knowing how quickly (in turns) your basic unit will be in a melee, knowing how many wounds you can expect to dish out and take per turn, etc.) and their models;
• don't go in with a plan or a gimmick (or, worse, a list that's married to a plan or a gimmick) instead, respond to your opponent's actions/plans and force them to react to you;
• each model/each unit is a resource to be used, lost, or traded for removing your opponent's resources.

Which is fine, but it has nothing to do with the actual lists he used. By his own admission, his lists were weak, even in 4th edition. All of that stuff you just listed should be 40k 101, not tied to SR's particular style of play. When you say 'Water Warrior', to my mind at least you're referring to the list and strategy he used (armour skew mech). The other stuff is good and should be followed anyway, but it's not relevant to this discussion persay.

I reached out to SR long ago and found he still exists but got more into WHFB as he enjoyed the tactical gameplay choices more there than in what 5th had become (he liked how much movement mattered in Fantasy) but he was curious about how 6th might shape up when it launched. (Should give you an idea about how long ago I talked to him.)

I imagine the rumours about 9th are not sitting well with him then. I wish he'd come back to 40k and Grey Knights. He had a lot of great ideas but was limited by the tools of his time here (3rd and 4th edition Daemonhunters were...terrible, lets be honest).

You can still "Water Warrior" in 7th, as it is a strategic mind set rather than a specific list build. The original Water Warrior list was only 1000 points, and based around using what at the time was considered non-standard tactics. I use to run a 3-Land Raider GK list at 1500 points using the same "Water Warrior" strategic model, to some good success ... until the 5th Ed GK codex came out. The multi-Land Raider army list is not a good way to play 40k in the current environment do to the ready availability of cheap anti-tank weaponry found in every army other than Grey Knights. This is why I moved from Land Raider heavy "Water Warrior" to a TDA heavy "Ghostwing", which is still my favored playstyle with a NSF based Draigo-Shunt-Bomb. Very very "Fire", with just of enough flexibility to warrant a "Water" way of strategic thinking.

In essence, "Water Warrior" tells you to think outside the box, play defensively when aggression is expected, or aggressive when defensive is expected. The use of Land Raiders in 3rd gave GK a method of being static or dynamic as needed. 5th refined GK as a non-static army, requiring a very dynamic playstyle. Our 7th Ed codex is still a very dynamic army, where moving fast and playing within your opponents decision making loop is vital to success. At the moment, we don't do "Earth" well, yet can fake a good "Air" while being very "Fire" in demeanor, which lets us still "Water" if by "Water" we actually mean "Steam".

This is kinda the problem I always had with SR and his ideas. They worked for him, and they were certainly very interesting. But getting caught up in his idioms and nomenclature could get very confusing fast, and tie you down in precepts that don't exist in the game. Water Warrior is the past, and as much as I'd like his ideas to be updated for 7th, the guy isn't around to assist in that. I'm more interested in what works, versus what fits the elemental quadrants SR envisioned.

Sorry, sir, but this is patently false on both counts.

Count the first: he played near 140 games in '06 and lost two.

Thade, I'm not disputing he had success with his ideas and list locally. But he never won a tournament with them, nor did it make any kind of waves in 3rd or 4th (which was just about the only time it could have, given how 5th completely invalidated a lot of his stuff). Raider armour skew lists died when 5th edition Guard came on the scene, and they've never really recovered. 7th if anything only further encourages bringing hard counters to high AV, due to Knight-Titans being on the scene.

Count the second: he presented his record as evidence that his methods were competitive. He was very humble about it, but the implication is pretty clear: it was remarkably effective for him and people kept asking about how it worked and duplicating his army without his results.

>anecdotes

The fact his ideas never worked more broadly is kinda indicative of what I mean man. It was really good for him, and I have no doubt he crushed face locally. But that doesn't mean his list or ideas were competitive. All kinds of things can skew results in a small sample size, ie just games he's played. I think the prevailing thing (IIRC) was he fought Orks regularly and found the armour skew and flame+charge methods of his list were really good against them. I'm sure he fought other armies, but I seem to recall Orks being a particular example he liked to give of when the army was strong. Which is fine, Orks are probably the most consistent second-string army in the game (ie they've only once been top dog, and at all other times they're regularly around in the tourney scene, they just never win top places).

I am a fan of this Raider's lists... I think AV14 combined with the power of Nemesis Dreadknights is a vvery hard to kill army... all enemy fire is usually concentrated onto NDKs or Raiders... but 3 of each? woo, I want to see the enemy's face

Yeah but that's only doable at 2k, and only if you run almost no upgrades.

[thade]

The discussion was "Should we return to the way of the water warrior" and SR's tactica about that very topic specifically says the list is irrelevant.

 

Soooooo...? haha <3

[thade]

Just to be crystal clear, if we want to talk about lists, okay, we're talking about lists. But the "Way of the Water Warrior" isn't lists. Right? I mean, his list was weird then and can't be fielded now; it depended on and worked around rules that don't exist anymore. But his methodology and views on the game are still interesting to talk about.

 

++ EDIT. Addendum. -t ++

[Reclusiarch Darius]

The discussion was "Should we return to the way of the water warrior" and SR's tactica about that very topic specifically says the list is irrelevant.

 

Soooooo...? haha <3

 

So he claims. But I think it's pretty clear you can't do Water style lists (by whatever metric you evaluate it) without making a list like his. Grey Knights back then didn't have Storm Ravens, or Razorbacks, or Allies (at least not in the modern incarnation of that). Land Raiders were pretty much it. Likewise, we didn't have the variety of squad types. You had PAGK and GKT...one had S6 and S6 power weapon status on the Justicar, the other was all S6 power weapons with free swaps to hammer+storm shield (I really miss those days). Purgators were medicore and rarely taken, and we were actually more expensive back then. 

 

My point being, there was really only one way to do Water Warrior lists with Grey Knights. These days, we actually have a fair variety of ways to do a mixed force. I'm not going to claim we're viable outside of 1-2 builds...but for casual games you can experiment a lot more than back in 3rd and 4th. Like I said earlier, SR was severely limited by his times. We all were. 

Just to be crystal clear, if we want to talk about lists, okay, we're talking about lists. But the "Way of the Water Warrior" isn't lists. Right? I mean, his list was weird then and can't be fielded now; it depended on and worked around rules that don't exist anymore. But his methodology and views on the game are still interesting to talk about.

 

Like I said earlier, all the things you listed should be 40k 101, and I even argued with SR back in the day that point. All that stuff is great and should be what people are doing anyway. If they're not, they'll get beaten by people who do think critically and are dispassionate about their army, initial plans etc. I'm sure if you showed that list of things to any competitive players, they'd broadly agree with it. 

 

SR's list was tied directly to his ideas. It was informed, and in turn informed, his understanding 40k and its meta (as he saw it). He was successful with that list, not any other. So I think it's next to impossible to separate the old armour skew list SR favoured from his ideas. Maybe the stuff relating to how to be a better player, but not the Water, Fire, Air, Earth etc dichotomy. His theories on how armies operate and are focused were precisely why he envisioned his list and strategy. Water is supposed to be superior to an Earth, Air, or Fire list. It's supposed to flow around them, and exploit their weaknesses. 

 

The only way Water Warrior can be resurrected anew is for SR to return and revamp it for 7th. Seeing as that's not going to happen, I think it's better we let this stay in the past. It's very interesting, and I agree his broader ideas about being a better player are worth following. But so much is incredibly outdated and based off things that largely don't exist anymore...it's very hard to make that square peg fit into the round hole of current 40k. 

[thade]

I mean, I disagree with you on two counts again, haha: whether the lists are the focus; whether WotWW still holds water...but I don't want to steer us in circles.

Indeed, his list was tied to his ideas, but his ideas aren't tied to that list. But I don't think you're saying it is. I think what you're saying is that there are only a few ways we can build a list with the pure GK dex that we can be reactive with. Is that fair to say?

 

When I see the GK dex I see better-than-average threat range (storm bolters instead of boltguns) and impressive mobility with shunts and Ravens, in addition to the standard Astartes fair of Rhinos and Raiders. While the details are different, the core ideas still seem to hold. Can we not still play the core game that SR once did? Use vehicles to present obstacles, keep distance and punish anybody that gets close: recognize the Beatdown, respond.

 

Certainly we can each build lists that are very clearly Earth or very clearly Fire, even Air, but I feel like (perhaps you'll agree) those would each qualify in for those classifications due to very overt gimmicks the lists are tailored to?

 

++ EDIT. Font size got weird. Fixed it. -t ++

[Darkmagi]

Hmmm maby I titled the topic wrong... The big thing I wanted to bring out was a discussion on the fact that the Mono Build was our only viable choice.  Granted I used SR's armor heavy list as a basis but in the few games of 7th I have played I have seen far more plasma and Str 7 weapons then the dreaded melta or even lascannons. Also I don't think anyone noticed but my idea used the CAD instead of the NSF meaning those land raiders are objective secured giving us a way to play to the objectives rather then just playing Purge the Alien all the time. not to mention you can deploy the raider then deep strike the termies if your afraid of losing them in a ride. I really want to open up the List ideas to bring something that can compete with the mono build. As for MC's unless its flying you have 6 lascanon shots TL at 48" just from the raiders... thats enough to put down most MC's before they cause serious harm, not to mention the ravens adding 2 more TL LAs and 2 TL Melta.

[thade]

You got my hopes up! Water Warrior or bust. <3

 

As you were.

[Darkmagi]

You got my hopes up! Water Warrior or bust. <3

 

As you were.

Well to be honest I really liked SR's ideas and tactica and wish he would come back to update the ideas... I also agree with that quote in your sig from him. :-) hence why I started with his list as a basis

[thade]

Not sure I should belabor the point further, but juuuuust a moment longer as this is my Achilles Heel right here.

 

His list worked for him for reasons that may be (I suspect are) secondary to his philosophy; if his list works for you, or some variant thereof, and you use the same list all the time and find you succeed a lot with it or at least have a great time with it, you then have "your list". I think most of us use several "lists" for fun and maybe tailor lists for tournies depending on our comprehension of meta (well, I don't do tournies anymore, but that's how I think it goes still) so few people I know have a single "list"...but they're out there.

 

Also, we don't need Silent Requiem (as awesome as he is) here to discuss our feelings on his Tactica; it's okay to talk about it with him absent, I swear. <3 We can't guess his mind or reach conclusions, but the guidelines are pretty clear and the only thing Darius and I agree on in this thread. :) SO there's definitely merit to them.

 

Also, it has the coolest name for a tactica on the board.

[boreas]

Maybe I never understood the WOTWW, but I've never liked it. First, the few times I played those lists, I've felt like playing point-denial. Those were the most boring games of 40k I've ever played. Shifting around 3 kleenex-box sized vehicles while pot-shotting lascannons was incredibly non-cinematic!

 

Second, I've never understood how things like "play agressive when defense is expected" really applied beyond making cool motivational posters. My opponents aren't comupter-bots or morons. They can usually react as well as I can. If I play agressive when defense is expected, they'll shift their own tactics accordingly. All those real-life Sun Tzu theorems never worked for me on the table-top. When my turn is over, my opponent can ask questions about my units and their abilities, if needed. Then, he makes intelligent decisions based on known rules and statistical probabilities.

 

Unless I'm really mistaken, the best way to play GKs in order to win is to take the best units (libbies-termies-interceptors-NDK) and to ram them down the opponent's throat while hoping the dice go your way.

 

That or take sub-par lists with fluffy allies and play a really cool scenario game while having a (preferably homebrewed) beer with chums!

[thade]

I've already beaten the "WotWW isn't SR's list, forget the list" hobby horse to death. <3 That's especially true post-5th, his list is just insanely bad; I think part of this thread's purpose was to try and "update" SR's list...which is an exercise in futility since we're not SR and whatever list he would run nowadays would work for him and maybe not for us.

 

If both players at the table are playing WW (if that's what you mean by 'they react as well as you') that's kind of a treat, no? In my experience, the most engaging games are the games where both players are deeply thoughtful and responsive to what's happening on the table. They're the most tactical.

 

I also find that the "showmanship" aspect (taking my time, asking questions) engenders precisely the kind of atmosphere I like to play in.

 

That or take sub-par lists with fluffy allies and play a really cool scenario game while having a (preferably homebrewed) beer with chums!

This I am on board with. :)

[boreas]

What it boils down to, in my opinion, is that water-warrior style is basically refusing to engage your units. It migt be a good way to win games (although a standard table is pretty small to only "react" when there is so much mobility in the game now), but it's essentially a very boring way to win.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Indeed, his list was tied to his ideas, but his ideas aren't tied to that list. But I don't think you're saying it is. I think what you're saying is that there are only a few ways we can build a list with the pure GK dex that we can be reactive with. Is that fair to say?

I'll be even more clear. I don't think we're a reactive army. I think we're an aggressive army that wants to alpha strike an opponent and never let up the pressure. We're like Dark Eldar, only instead of spamming lances and fast skimmers, we go TDA heavy with JMC backup.

When I see the GK dex I see better-than-average threat range (storm bolters instead of boltguns) and impressive mobility with shunts and Ravens, in addition to the standard Astartes fair of Rhinos and Raiders. While the details are different, the core ideas still seem to hold. Can we not still play the core game that SR once did? Use vehicles to present obstacles, keep distance and punish anybody that gets close: recognize the Beatdown, respond.

No, for several reasons;

- Storm bolters don't mean anything. I'm serious. I'm regularly outshot by most opponents, because I'm normally outnumbered (and thus outgunned) by 2 or even 3 to 1. It's great for Overwatch, or for killing chaff or MSU units, but against anythign with meat (10-man Marine units, heavy infantry, multi-wound), storm bolters plink off a lot of the time.

- Shunt moves yes, Ravens less so (they're expensive and its a rare list that can fit one, never mind two or more). Shunt does give us great positioning, but we do pay for it (neither Interceptors or Dreadknights are cheap). The shooty lists that dominate 7th largely don't care, they can table us from long or short range.

This is what I mean. SR's concept of 'beatdown' is outdated heavily. These days, you can't just sit behind AV14 at long range and feel safe. Fast units and Deepstrikers packing melta are currently the new black, as they can get to Knight-Titans and rek them in short order. Fire and manouvre is a big part of 40k right now, especially the firepower part.

Certainly we can each build lists that are very clearly Earth or very clearly Fire, even Air, but I feel like (perhaps you'll agree) those would each qualify in for those classifications due to very overt gimmicks the lists are tailored to?

Maybe that's true, but I think 7th edition GK are Fire purists. We may have flavours of Air with our mobile units, but we're really a melee army firstly, with good firepower to back it up and soften up the enemy on the approach.

Hmmm maby I titled the topic wrong... The big thing I wanted to bring out was a discussion on the fact that the Mono Build was our only viable choice. Granted I used SR's armor heavy list as a basis but in the few games of 7th I have played I have seen far more plasma and Str 7 weapons then the dreaded melta or even lascannons. Also I don't think anyone noticed but my idea used the CAD instead of the NSF meaning those land raiders are objective secured giving us a way to play to the objectives rather then just playing Purge the Alien all the time. not to mention you can deploy the raider then deep strike the termies if your afraid of losing them in a ride. I really want to open up the List ideas to bring something that can compete with the mono build. As for MC's unless its flying you have 6 lascanon shots TL at 48" just from the raiders... thats enough to put down most MC's before they cause serious harm, not to mention the ravens adding 2 more TL LAs and 2 TL Melta.

MC's don't care about 6 piddly lascannon shots. Riptides shrug that off with ease, Tervigons and Exorcrines have too many wounds and 'Catalyst' FNP to back it up, FMC's literally don't care...if all your opponent have are Carnifex or Talos, sure Godhammers matter. But otherwise, I don't see a lot of the common problem MC's being phased by a couple of Land Raiders.

Ravens do have good firepower, but they have to contend with Interceptor shots when they arrive, and the Skyfire most lists bring to hard-counter FMC or Flyer skew lists. 2 is enough to ensure one will live long enough to be a threat.

His list worked for him for reasons that may be (I suspect are) secondary to his philosophy; if his list works for you, or some variant thereof, and you use the same list all the time and find you succeed a lot with it or at least have a great time with it, you then have "your list". I think most of us use several "lists" for fun and maybe tailor lists for tournies depending on our comprehension of meta (well, I don't do tournies anymore, but that's how I think it goes still) so few people I know have a single "list"...but they're out there.

Yeah I agree totally. We're all a pro with our favourite build or list, because we know it inside and out.

Also, we don't need Silent Requiem (as awesome as he is) here to discuss our feelings on his Tactica; it's okay to talk about it with him absent, I swear. <3 We can't guess his mind or reach conclusions, but the guidelines are pretty clear and the only thing Darius and I agree on in this thread. SO there's definitely merit to them.

There is merit, but mainly from a theoretical standpoint. The game is so different to when SR wrote his treatise, it's very hard to transition it to the 40k we know today. 7th is really, really different from 3rd and 4th.

I've already beaten the "WotWW isn't SR's list, forget the list" hobby horse to death. <3 That's especially true post-5th, his list is just insanely bad; I think part of this thread's purpose was to try and "update" SR's list...which is an exercise in futility since we're not SR and whatever list he would run nowadays would work for him and maybe not for us.

I suspect SR would be pretty over the moon about DK's...or think they're abominations :P.

If both players at the table are playing WW (if that's what you mean by 'they react as well as you') that's kind of a treat, no? In my experience, the most engaging games are the games where both players are deeply thoughtful and responsive to what's happening on the table. They're the most tactical.

Oh yeah definitely man. It is frustrating to watch a list run you over regardless of player skill though :( . Tau are really like that at the moment.

What it boils down to, in my opinion, is that water-warrior style is basically refusing to engage your units. It migt be a good way to win games (although a standard table is pretty small to only "react" when there is so much mobility in the game now), but it's essentially a very boring way to win.

Well, irrespective of its 'boringness', more important denial lists simply don't exist anymore. Deathstars do, and they're annoying, but 7th is easily the bloodiest edition of the game I've ever played. Things die a lot, even if you build for an attrition game.

[thade]

What it boils down to, in my opinion, is that water-warrior style is basically refusing to engage your units.

This isn't WW at all.

 

Sometimes you're "the Beatdown" and you need to get in there and go heavy pronto.

 

Sometimes you're "the Control," at which point you need to take your time, bait, switch, and be choosy about your engagement...but you do still shoot and then charge at need.

 

Read his Tactica, it's not that long of a read and it's pretty enlightening. <3