This email came in yesterday regarding the rumors of a Giant Krootox Giant and Firewarriors moving up in the world to BS4.


I want to say that this bit comes from a very much in the know source, who occasionally helps us filter through some of the rumors. The last few days we have had 4 sets of Tau rumors, and this email is in response to this one, and clarifying other rumors that are putting Firewarriors at BS4.

the krootox giant has the following rules and stats - these I believe will change as we have had much discussions upon this unit and cannot be certain if it is powerful enough for a competitive environment.
Krootox Giant:   WS   BS   S    T   W    I    A    LD    SV                                6      3    8   6     4    1   5     7       4+
Special rules:  Smash, monstrous creature, rage,mental without control, move through cover,fleet
mental without control: If your krootox giant loses his krootox rider then the Giant must pass a leadership test every turn otherwise will attack the closest enemy unit. If the Giant cannot reach a target then it misses it next turn while it cools down.

via the Faeit 212 inbox (has to remain anonymous)
I've never seen those kroot giant rules before (currently named the Krootonne).

There is a new large kroot model, but it's nothing like what's written, doesn't have a rider and doesn't have guns.

Fire warriors can't be upgraded to bs4, the squad leader has an upgrade that raises their BS though for (currently) 50 points and goes away if he dies.

I have like three versions of the rules, but I think some people are wish listing after getting hint of some stuff that's leaked.


50 Comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Sorry, that Krootonne just makes things a bit too fishy for me. I think it's too tongue in cheek for the current GW.

      Delete
    2. Something tells me that it's a working title. Kroot + Tonne :P

      Delete
    3. Sounds like something they'd throw together to see who was doing the leaking.

      Delete
    4. Or it could be a play-test name, like Magic: the Gathering does with future sets. They will label a block "Bacon, Lettuce, Tomato" when in the play testing phase, for example.

      Delete
    5. How would they categorize different Tau playtest items? We already have the Crouton, so by drawing some parallels:

      Megasuit: Texas Toaster
      Thespids: Thaesar Thallids
      Firewarrior Upgrade: Lean Mean Cajun Sardine
      Ethereals: Lite Dressing


      Delete
  2. 50 pts for BS 4 that is 4 point average per fire warrior. So 4 pts for +1 BS. I might just use sisters of battle now. Least stat line is better with BS 4 and Save of 3.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But Sisters dont all have 30" S5 guns that Rapid Fire at 15"...

      Delete
    2. If BS4 costing 4 points extra is enough for you to throw out a whole army, it sounds like you're playing the wrong army. Tau aren't the best warriors in the world, but they have the best stuff.

      Delete
    3. @ CPYKE what im saying is if I want BS 4 i might as well go with sisters. I will play my Tau just no BS 4. 5 extra firewarriors have better odds at the same cost and give you more wounds for those pointst. I am just sick of Tau getting boned on cost. I know its a rumor just if true I do not see why BS 4 at the cost would help. So if I want BS 4 on a T3 model I might as well take sisters. I enjoy my firewarriors now with BS 3 and do good with them. Everyone scales models by their abilities offensively no one looks at defensively. So 4 points more on a model that cost anywhere from 10 maybe reduced to 8 or 9 just does not make since and adds more uselessness to the Tau codex.

      Delete
    4. Especially 50 points that go away with the leader dying. This is as bad as the Sniper drone spotter dying taking the whole squad with him. We got marker lights. BS should only cost a model with that statline 1-2 points per model, not based on a leader at 50 pts.

      Delete
    5. I want a codex I can use till next release. I want stuff that provides options offensively and defensively as well as heavy armor or horde. Also gain standard issue wargear such as if I buy a shas'ui i get a bonding knife free, not an extra attack. Shaper is useless he needs fixed. I dont need a model who really only gives me 1 leadership but cost me 4 models( which would have 1 more wound, 7 more attacks, and 3 more range weapons) The shaper needs to give stubborn, or hit and run. Something to allow one model to sweep a unit of 12 models. The Tau 4th edition models they added since 3rd are all now useless (Vespid, Sky Ray, Aun' Va, and Sniper Drones). The priahna compared to a land speeder is 10 points more for what one extra front armor. Its open topped with half range weapons and one less BS. Also cant deep strike. I dont like running a set list of firewarrior and crisis spam just to play a good game.

      Delete
    6. Jeez man, it's a rumoured option, not compulsory. If you don't like it then don't pay the points for it, right?

      Delete
    7. Thats what the underlying comment was, that it is an option, but an option that does not seem applicable to a Tau player. I'm just saying my opinion is it does not seem viable and probably is untrue, but if true those are my reasons why I dont think they are serious about making the Tau a good army. The evolution of the Tau codex from 3rd to 4th did not show much in terms of growth of a codex. If you compare all they did was copy paste, combined kroot to one unit, and add 3 units that no one uses. Then got rid of a great special character and added a useless space pope. I dont want options that take up areas for something I could actually use.

      Delete
    8. @Demon Hound:
      If you want a codex you can play until the next release, then I think you're playing the wrong game. GW has shown, again and again, their willingness to ignore armies for the better part of a decade.

      Their business model does not revolve around a game with 16(off the top of my head?) balanced armies that are viable for an entire edition and which are FAQed so they remain balanced.

      Their business model is to get new players to buy what ever shiny is current when they join and for existing players to buy the latest codex so they can win tournaments and/or take advantage of either Codex Power Creep or the brokenness of a new codex.

      It has been like that for a very very long time...

      Delete
    9. This business plan you speak of is not new. I am aware of it and also their price hikes and other perceived strategies. Heck I laugh when they say by the bundle its easier for you. You get all these models, but its the same price if you buy them separate. These so called tactics and strategies have made me move over to games systems that are more proactive in the community of gamers, such as Privateer Press. They are a great example of how a company should actively put their games out there. They went digital and offer apps along with a forum that allows feedback direct from consumer. Also they actually participate in the forum giving insight. No OP or huge balance shifts on their releases. I dont want a company (GW)saying their stores that only sell their product are hurting and are raising prices to compete with the online competition. I say leave it to FLGS. Flawed Strategy and changes have been occurring in recent.

      Delete
  3. Mehhh anything that hails from the eastern part of the galaxy is just silly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shrug!

    That's why I don't pay much attention to rules rumours.

    For all those saying giant Krootox and big battlesuit sound stupid, I remind you that many people though a "dragon" for Chaos Space Marines was rubbish and would never happen.

    "Heldrake, sounds too silly to be true."

    I rest my case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob, what should a mutated biomech flying daemon engine look like for a new codex? The Heldrake is very roughly based on the old FW Hell Blade & Talon's forward-swept design and let's face it, it's Chaos so the design isn't exactly limited.

      Large Tau walker (that I would actually like) = no
      Large Kroot unit = more logical

      Delete
    2. And yet people thought the "dragon" rumour was fake.

      My point is a simple one, don't dismiss a rumoured unit just because it sounds odd.

      A monstrous battlesuit I can see happening. Though I doubt it'll be as big as a Dreadknight.

      Delete
    3. The giant krootox thing seems off to me cause of the rules. If its a animal y does it have a BS. Unless that stat line includes its rider. Then theres the special rule if the rider dies but if its all one stat line how do you kill the rider separately? And if the rider is separate whats his stats and wouldn't you use his BS. Then "mental without control" rule, so it has to take a LD test every turn or it attacks the closest enemy unit but if no unit is in range it calms down. Then does it take a LD test next turn, and if a unit is close it goes crazy again? It just seems like none of that has been thought out to well.
      I know its a rumor of playtesting and the rumor could be leaving something out or the writer misunderstood or misinterpreted it but it just seems off to me.

      Delete
    4. What's wrong with idea of a large tau battlesuit? Fluff for the dreadknight said it was developed from alien tech and I've always thought that the 3-toes was a hint at tau. Besides, who else would you want to be designing a giant über suit?

      Delete
    5. I agree with Jon. I don't know why there's so much hate towards the idea of a bigger crisis suit. It's not as outrageous fluff-wise as so many people are making it out to be. I don't think it's such a ridiculous notion that an army full to the brim with big robot battlsuits should have a really big robot battlesuits.

      Delete
  5. I’ve been a long time fan of the site and it’s good to see lots of rumors.

    Personally what I would like to see is a compilation of what new units are listed in the rules. Is there a way of a credible source to say “New units that Have Been seen are N1, N2……… NX”. Rule specifics aside I find the most helpful part of rumors just listing what new units will come.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Obviously Natfka is aware where these rumours are coming from specifically. But to my mind, it seems GW is allowing selective leaks at the end of play testing in a bid to indirectly solicit feedback from the wider community. Maybe I'm just being cynical.

    If that's true though, then I reckon we won't see Tau until Q3 or Q4 at the earliest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Always thought BS4 made sense for a warrior caste training from birth. BS mod that goes when the 'vre gets hit? Sounds bad to me.

      Q3 or 4? Ah, as always, "The Tau codex is six months away, and in six months, will be six months away."

      Well GW, it's been nearly two years since I bought a kit now. Been repainting my old Tau stuff (a different shade of brown!), but not building. C'mon GW, give me something I want to buy!

      Hownowbrowntau
      Hownowbrowntau

      Delete
    2. Average Tau lifespan is around 30 years I believe. That was the justification for BS 3 anyway. It could be argued that in built tech would make them BS4 though I suppose.

      Delete
    3. Since Space Marines are kinda the norm, It's really easy to forget that BS3 represents a human who is expertly trained(IG). BS4 is an incredibly good shot. It makes sense that the Tau would be BS3. They're really good, but not the best. I agree with Calistarius though, if they had some sort of fancy stabilizers or other targeting equipment they could be BS4.

      Delete
    4. Imperial Guard Conscripts who are either too young, or untrained, and hence can be considered as untrained human civvies with weapons are only BS2.

      Just because teh tau fire caste may train from birth, does not mean that they should be BS4. If we take that argument then basic eldar troops should be BS5 since they live far longer than any (living) creature, so should have years of experience handling their weapons. As it is Guardians are BS3, while those that have dedicated themselves to war (aspect warriors), and thus conceivably trained with their weapons far longer than any human or tau, are BS4, with those trapped on the warrior path (exarchs) and hence really dedicated are BS5.

      Delete
    5. It is never stated Tau life span in any codex. The references to any age are Farsight being over 300 possibly from *Technology or *Replacement of Apprentices. Also the other Aun' Shi who just mentions he is wanting to leave his status in office as an ethereal to finish his life on a paradise planet. So at most we have an Ethereal Caste who wants to retire at 40 and no mention if that is early retirement or just the Ethereals life span. We all know each caste is different in many genetic ways and Fire Caste could have longer lives than other castes. Also the mention farsight has access to technology that keeps him possibly alive to over 300. No cut off average has been stated. Plus firewarriors only sleep 3.5 hours in one Terra day so they utilize more time during the day. Who is to say what the fluff will evolve to in the next edition. BS 4 I think is possible if used for veteran fire warriors.

      Delete
    6. Damn, cypke beat me to the point... So yeah, what they said ^_^
      On the subject of farsight, I thought his extreme longevity (which I thought even other tau noticed was rediculous) has possible links to his maybe Necrontyr/Daemon-blade?

      Delete
    7. It's also rumored that Farsight is dead, but many other Tau have picked up the name and his suit to continue his crusade.

      Delete
    8. This is why 40k used a D8-D10 system over D6.

      D6 is world less math, but it really does limit the interaction between fluff and balance. D-10 would give us so much more variety between the capabilities of units...but yeah, the math would suck ass.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. What math would you need? the use of d10 sure would have a different rule: just say: you must roll LOWER than your BS, that being ranged from 2 to 9. Even easier than adding BS to roll to opbtain 7

      Delete
  7. Lol @ Firewarrior update cost.

    IG gets +1BS, krak grenades (frag grenades they had already), and the ability to take two extra special weapons @ 2 points per model, independent of the sergeant being alive or not (ie. Veterans). Oh, and even the Guard still mops the floor with Firevarriors in CC (which is saying something). 3 points more and they get carapace armour, and would cost the same as basic Firewarriors, with crappier gun but with better nades, BS, WS, and I. Meltabombs (or the roughly equivalent EMP nade) cost the same for both, except that Guard gets the Portable Pizza-Plate O' Doom aka democharge on top of that.

    Oh well, maybe it's the codex writer's way of balancing the MC's by having meh troops choices. Or, more likely, maybe it's the marketing department's way to sell new Kroot models instead of the same old Firewarrior models.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably right on that last part. Can't have Tau folks sitting on their old models. Gotta have them dump the old and buy the new. Look at the Oldcron Warriors...

      Delete
    2. you can't compare single units to each other, you'd need to take the whole army in comparison ...

      Delete
    3. I think that you might want to wait to see what the basic FW cost actually is before assuming it'll stay the same and OLOLOLOLOLOing by comparing them to a codex that's three years younger.

      Both Chaos and DA got infantry costs decreased across the board for the most part.

      Delete
    4. @ Shadow its fair enough to compare cost and effectiveness of one model to another. It creates a whole balance.

      How about space marine chapters. How come Dark Angels have 14 point marines and can upgrade to a Sargent for 150 points. When vanilla have to pay out 170. Also Dark Angel tacs get 2 heavy weapon options and also other special rules. How does that balance on a army level?

      Delete
    5. Mauler is right the aging codex and the need for GW wanting more models in tournament size armies to sell more.

      Delete
  8. My instinct is that, yes, OF COURSE they are making there be some way give FW BS 4. It was the one thing that never felt "right" with them. (I'm talkng either as more experienced troops, or wargear, or whatever....it's fine for basic FW to be BS 3).

    AV 13 Flyer seems nuts. Maybe if it could really do (mostly) nothing but be a transport, that'd be balanced.

    I am really curious if the rumours we heard about line-effect railguns are true. Likewise curious about changes in markerlights. (I think they're too weak, now, but it seems like with would be very easy to make them broken)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would argue that Markerlights are right about where they should be. My Problem with them has always been that they are a heavy weapon (ITS A LASER POINTER!) and that they are really expensive to bring in an large amount of numbers unless you bring tetras.
      I would argue that the best way to give the tau firewarriors their BS4 is to make their Shas'ui BS4 and give him the equivalent of a Networked Markerlight(so the squad he is in can use it). That gives the Tau a fairly reliable way to get BS4 without overpricing them.
      In general I think markerlights need to be more accessible to the army.

      Delete
    2. Aye, it's a pretty heavy laser pointer that has to be kept trained on a target that might be a fair distance away in the chaos of a frickin' warzone. The poor lil' tinfoil-armoured Pathfinders risking their necks so that other people can kill stuff might be busy trying to keep their heads down and still being accurate. That's why it's a "heavy 1" weapon.

      Delete
    3. Alright, I'll give that one to you. Either way though, they need to fix something. Pathfinders are expensive, relatively low ballistic skill (this unit has a real argument for BS4), deploy like regular units, and are required to take a devilish. For a unit that is supposed to be all about markerlights, they make them really hard to utilize.

      Delete
  9. Again, no High Elves? :/

    Either its darn important for GW to keep them a secret or their release is planned way later than I expected...

    Anyone got something on the HE?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeh, they're the latest Tau allies :P

      I jest of course and sympathise, though I'd argue HE are still competitive and that other forces that sell and are out of date need updating (Dwarves).

      Delete
    2. Yeh, they're the latest Tau allies :P

      I jest of course and sympathise, though I'd argue HE are still competitive and that other forces that sell and are out of date need updating (Dwarves).

      Delete
  10. Where are my demiurgs? I really loved that design we saw a hundred years ago... please give me an option for guys like me that hate kroot parrots.

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...