# Tau and Necron Rumours



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

Courtesy of Stickmonkey:



Stickmonkey said:


> Well kids, I managed to get a few rumors from my sources that seem worthwhile to post. Same caveats as always.
> 
> Tau and Necrons are still a long way off, so no one go off the deep end in excitement. I have done what vetting I can on these, but it is way too early to not have loads of salt on hand.
> 
> ...


----------



## Deux (Apr 24, 2009)

I want new Necrons!!! Any idea of at least a general area of a release date? (ie before 2012 I hope.  ) These new models sound exciting!!!


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

this is the latest ( with some older stuff) that i found
"Release Date

They will be released during 2011. Most likely Summer 2011.


Rules & Codex

- Written by Matt Ward
- Complete overhaul of rules
- Much more "Immortal" theme, less "Terminator" ([email protected] says: I took this to mean more organic based and asked, and was told "no, not organic, they will still be undying machines")
- WBB (at least as we know it) is out. It will be changed or replaced by FNP
- Phase out has been changed
- There will be several types of Lords. With different wargear options and special rules
- Gauss weapons rules will be changed
- The forces are going to change in the FOC a bit
- Flayed ones will have new rules changes but no new model
- Warriors will become one of the more all-around usefull troops
- "psychic power" -type upgrades for some units. These are actually "tech upgrades" with the same or similar rules as psychic powers.


Miniatures 

- Forgeworld will be releasing a new Necron model sometime after games day UK. This was mentioned by forgeworld staff at games day Baltimore. New model will look kind of like a cross between a mechanical Trygon, and a Centipede. There is a rumour that this is, in fact, the Necromancer model.

Multi part plastic kits: 
- Immortals. Immortals are on a large base; they are redesigned as larger, bulkier and more dynamic.
- Spyders. Spyders have 3 different builds on 60mm base.


Unconfirmed stuff (only one source so take with extra salt) 

[email protected]:
- The Necromancer multi-part plastic kit. The Necromancer is the central sell of the line expansion and has been the focus of much of the early design process. It has been through several incarnations (and names), but is essentially of the same principle as the Bone Giant for the Warhammer Fantasy range. It has a mechanised skeletal torso housing a suspended crystal, and will likely have a choice between two horrific weapons. 

[email protected]:
- Like the previous releases, there will be 3-4 new plastic kits, but possibly only 3-4 new metal kits. They are keeping *most* of the old line 
- Necrons will move even further from marine statlines 
- Warriors will be one of the more all around usefull troops in the game again 
- Possible weapons platform vehicle
- Multiple people are involved in writing the book

[email protected]:
- Flayed Ones will be a Troop choice 
- New HQs will be: Gold, Silver and Bronze level Lords 
- Rules for ALL FOUR C’tans 
- Most units in the necron army will be subject to the 'necron' special rule, in 5th ed. this grants them acute senses, deep strike, feel no pain an stubborn 
- Phase out has been changed, apparently it will work on a unit level rather than on a whole army level, and a necron unit will phase out at any point where it fails a leadership test 
- Gauss weapons now work in a similar manner to poisoned weapons in that they always wound on a fixed number

[email protected]
- There will be immortals and flayed ones in plastic
- There will be a new vehicle and a MC sized creature
- Wraiths will be changed enormously
- Warriors will return being one of the best, maybe the best, troop in 40k, although their points will be increased."

a new salt mine may need to be opened for this stuff


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

I personally don't like the Necrons at the moment but with some of those changes they are sounding like a contender again. +rep for the Info!


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

You can pretty much ignore anything Specteral Dragon says. He's been outed as being fed false rumours by his contacts...


----------



## KahRyez (Sep 7, 2010)

I like seeing Necrons get some love, even if it takes a while.

I'd prefer that the Flayed ones became the troop instead of the Immortals, as the Flayed ones seem more like scouts to me and the Immortals _are_ elite warriors. 

Although if all four C'tan do show up, it will be unsettling to see how the Void Dragon dug his way out of Mars, much less where the Outsider has been hiding.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I do find additional C'tan rules to be disturbing to say the least.

I would like to see immortals as troops BUT only if a C'tan is leading the army since they are their most dedicated units. FNP does not surprise me with their intention of simplifying rules. However I do not like the new phase out. A few dodgy leadership tests, even on LD 10 can result in some easy victories against them.

I just want necrons to badly get more variety!


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

this is just total speculation, but what would you think of phase out, in a unit based format, sending units back into reserve?


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

I must comment on:



> Pylon may make codex as heavy option


If this is true it had better get a step change in its power level, or I will point blank refuse to play against one - this unit is hardcore in apocalypse let alone standard 40k and being living metal its a complete headfuck to kill off


----------



## InquisitorTidusSolomon (Mar 7, 2009)

These sound like nice changes. It'll be nice to be able to take my Necrons out and not get wasted by my mates' Mech Guard and Wolves, but for Christ's sake, I hope Mat Ward doesn't get anywhere near this codex. I'm sick and tired of Ward breaking the codexes of my favorite armies. Every time he touches a codex that I play, I get non-stop shit from my regular gaming buddies for playing OPed armies. They should give it to Phil Kelly. He'd probably do a pretty nice codex for the Crons. Sorry for the rant.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

InquisitorTidusSolomon said:


> but for Christ's sake, I hope Mat Ward doesn't get anywhere near this codex.


Oh dear


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

> Tau
> New Heavy support platform. Basically immobile deep striked! heavy weapon and crew. Rail and Ion Cannon, and missile launcher are all obvious options here, but nothing solid with the rumor.
> 
> Assault Skimmer. Something between size of piranha and hammerhead, fast skimmer open topped, assault on disembark.
> ...


Regarding the last part about the suits, Stickmonkey on Warseer clarified that the suits aren't supposed to change all that much so I would imagine it will just be a recut to get rid of the hybrid kits. I hope to hell that he is wrong however as I would love to see them make the suits look like the newest FW models. The rest, meh, we will see. I can't see the use of an assault ready skimmer for Tau since it is the very last place anything in the current codex wants to be.



> but for Christ's sake, I hope Mat Ward doesn't get anywhere near this codex.


Fuck that! He better damn well write every codex they have now, if only so that they are all equally broken. Maybe if he writes the Tau codex I will actually have a chance against Blood Angels, Space Wolves, etc.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

"pariahs no longer 0-1" what does that mean?

if immortals get bigger bases seems like they would still be an elite choice.

I think getting rid of we'll be back is a good idea, its such a damn hassle on the table. additional c'tan worries me as well though. I can see the marketing value of it, but if there are already plans to make more Lord variations then I dont think they are needed. Just more risk of something being over-powered

_once a turn, on a 6, the void dragon turns the machine spirit in all enemy vehicles against their owners, which must then fire everything possible at the closest enemy units. This takes place during your opponent's next shooting phase_ :laugh:


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

unxpekted22 said:


> "pariahs no longer 0-1" what does that mean?


0-1 means that you can only ever have a single unit of that entry in an army. Either 0 or 1, but never more. Removing this restriction would allow you to take multiple units of Pariahs.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

do you think people would take them more often if that's the case?

...though I suppose if immortals are troops there's be more room for them regardless.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I think Pariahs need more than a change away from 0-1 to make them popular, and to be included in more armies. Their points per model are double that of a Warrior, but without double the benefit.

Negative aspects:
Not Troops
No WBB
No upgrades
Can't VoD
Can't Portal
As an Elite they have very low 'I'
Only average armour save
4-10 unit size, and a 0-1 option

They are one of the very slowest units in the codex, along with Tomb Spyders, C'tan and the Monolith.

Definitely, it will take more than the removal of the 0-1 restriction to promote them as a popular choice.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

they need WS:5 ,initiative:4 at least, 23 points. they keep the warscythes and blasters, but give them at least 2 base attacks. maybe, to make them customisable, they should have an option of warscythes or a bonus strength weapon of some sort.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I call BS on additional C'tan. They have stated that only 4 remain and unless GW make a giant plothole to somehow allow the Void Dragon to escape Mars and the Outsider to return to the galaxy without being consumed by the nightbringer.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I call BS on additional C'tan. They have stated that only 4 remain and unless GW make a giant plothole to somehow allow the Void Dragon to escape Mars and the Outsider to return to the galaxy without being consumed by the nightbringer.


all it would take is a little retconning and et voila - 5 C'tan or the outsider comes forth, just don't go betting on the void dragon


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Yeah, I think that guy was making stuff up.
The Void Dragon CANNOT enter the game, or the core of the Imperium will collapse, he'll fuck Mars up real bad.
Outsider isn't unreasonable, because currently he's just not there, him BEING 'there' would be of little consequence.

And the Gold/Silver/Bronze Lords shit is just no, GW isn't that stupid.

In summary, I think CaptainJones is full of shit.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Winterous said:


> And the Gold/Silver/Bronze Lords shit is just no, GW isn't that stupid.


The grading by colour is pure speculation, but that there are different types of Lord is not. Lords that are similar to C'tan is confirmed in the BRB.

Also, it looks like there might be as many as 18 C'tan, and only 4 are known about. There are some subtle hints in the BRB about this too...


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

darklove said:


> The grading by colour is pure speculation, but that there are different types of Lord is not. Lords that are similar to C'tan is confirmed in the BRB.
> 
> Also, it looks like there might be as many as 18 C'tan, and only 4 are known about. There are some subtle hints in the BRB about this too...


Oh yeah, different types of Lord is a great idea, but not 'colour coded', that's just utter stupidity.

And hmm, I thought there were actually only 4 left, but eh.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

Winterous said:


> And hmm, I thought there were actually only 4 left, but eh.


This galaxy is vast, and hides many secrets... Some of which should not be discovered...


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

darklove said:


> The grading by colour is pure speculation, but that there are different types of Lord is not. Lords that are similar to C'tan is confirmed in the BRB.
> 
> Also, it looks like there might be as many as 18 C'tan, and only 4 are known about. There are some subtle hints in the BRB about this too...


Subtle hints are there? Any chance you could suggest a page number for these hints because I had a scan through the BRB and I can't find them myself.


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

Doelago said:


> This galaxy is vast, and hides many secrets... Some of which should not be discovered...




QFT, that's why I hope they never reveal the identities of the two missing Priarchs and their legions. Although I kinda fond of the whole Sigmar is a missing Primarch theory, as silly as it is.


----------



## Imperious (May 20, 2009)

I see no problem with the Outsider showing up. It would have no major effect IMO. 

Now the void dragon...

IMO the only way the void dragon shows up is when the Emperor dies!


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Apart from 2 things:

1. He is in hiding because the nightbringer is said to consume him the moment he appears back in this galaxy and

2. It is a popular theory that he sent the tyranid race to consume this galaxy. How is this meant to work if it is true (presumably GW just say nah it is BS but that feels lame).

A void dragon mini would be SICK though!


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Apart from 2 things:
> 
> 1. He is in hiding because the nightbringer is said to consume him the moment he appears back in this galaxy and
> 
> ...


1) Not heard that before.

2) How is it lame that GW might outright say that a lightly supported fan theory was incorrect?


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

darklove said:


> Also, it looks like there might be as many as 18 C'tan, and only 4 are known about. There are some subtle hints in the BRB about this too...


18?, where did you get this figure from?, was it from one of your many, many chats with the design team



Stephen_Newman said:


> 1. He is in hiding because the nightbringer is said to consume him the moment he appears back in this galaxy


this is the sort of thing that is easily and regularly solved by the retcon hammer


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

18 c'tan would be ridiculous even if they were a lot weaker than the current two, but then they wouldn't be god-like. 

though it is their game, they could probably change the entirety of the necron fluff as we currently know it. I honestly dont think it would change anything too drastically. it would be annoying though.


----------



## Imperious (May 20, 2009)

Nemesis-The-Warlock said:


> 18?, where did you get this figure from?, was it from one of your many, many chats with the design team
> 
> 
> 
> this is the sort of thing that is easily and regularly solved by the retcon hammer



Exactly. Except you wouldn't need a hammer for that. A flick would suffice. But the void dragon would need a "retcon deathstrike missile" to explain. Or as I said earlier, the emperor dies, the void dragon coincidencely appears, and the ad mech now worship the voidus draconis...


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

We just have to be straight. A VOID DRAGON WILL NEVER BE REPRESENTED IN THE RULES. EVER!


----------



## slaaneshy (Feb 20, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> We just have to be straight. A VOID DRAGON WILL NEVER BE REPRESENTED IN THE RULES. EVER!


If Matt Ward is writing this codex, then anything is possible I am afraid. Probably get a deep striking void dragon with a scary mask of death and the ability to win the game on the first turn by rolling a 2+ (re-rolling any 1s). The guys a freaking tool...


----------



## Balord (Sep 22, 2010)

Sick. Necrons are pro- even though, to be honest i thought the older guys were cool


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> A void dragon mini would be SICK though!


C'tan represented by Lords who have changed the bodies to suit their will is a very possible way of representing the C'tan, rather than having them actually there.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

slaaneshy said:


> If Matt Ward is writing this codex, then anything is possible I am afraid. Probably get a deep striking void dragon with a scary mask of death and the ability to win the game on the first turn by rolling a 2+ (re-rolling any 1s). The guys a freaking tool...


I'm still new in gaming terms. is that referencing an actual model?


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

slaaneshy said:


> If Matt Ward is writing this codex, then anything is possible I am afraid. Probably get a deep striking void dragon with a scary mask of death and the ability to win the game on the first turn by rolling a 2+ (re-rolling any 1s). The guys a freaking tool...





unxpekted22 said:


> I'm still new in gaming terms. is that referencing an actual model?


Its a follow up on the "good ole classical" 
*Master Rune of Dwarfs always wins* - 2000 pts: you win the game, regardless of everything. GG


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

MaidenManiac said:


> Its a follow up on the "good ole classical"
> *Master Rune of Dwarfs always wins* - 2000 pts: you win the game, regardless of everything. GG


Unless your opponent has the same Rune, then you both have to sit quietly and wait to see who gets bored the quickest and leaves, granting the player with the greatest patience (lack of social life) the winner.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

None of my 'chats with the design team' have included anything to do with C'tan, lets get that clear right now. This isn't anything coming from my contacts, and I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm claiming to know more than I do.

What I do find interesting is noting the locations in the galaxy where the C'tan are known to have been in stasis, and comparing that to galactic Necron activity. This predates the VD's encounter with the Emperor of course. If you look at the level of galactic activity of the Necrons it closely matches these locations as major hubs. Tomb Worlds of a size worthy of a C'tan. It looks like there are about 18 such major Tomb Worlds, surrounded and supported by countless smaller ones. So from the number of these Tombs and their locations, and the fact that so little is actually known about the C'tan, it is possible to infer the existence of several more C'tan.

All I'm really saying is that GW have left themselves a trap-door to do an easy retcon at any time by elaborating on any one of the several grey areas in Necron/C'tan fluff. This could include many more C'tan than just the four mentioned in the current codex.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

darklove said:


> and I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm claiming to know more than I do.


well that makes a nice change


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

To the person posting above. What is up with all the snide comments? Not cool man!


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> To the person posting above. What is up with all the snide comments? Not cool man!


This
if you have a problem with a poster use the ignore function for them.


However if like me you have 20000 + people on your ignore function then you will find the forum a bit boring


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Well observed Darklove, have some delicious candy.


----------



## Salahaldin (Aug 15, 2009)

darklove said:


> What I do find interesting is noting the locations in the galaxy where the C'tan are known to have been in stasis, and comparing that to galactic Necron activity. This predates the VD's encounter with the Emperor of course. If you look at the level of galactic activity of the Necrons it closely matches these locations as major hubs. Tomb Worlds of a size worthy of a C'tan. It looks like there are about 18 such major Tomb Worlds, surrounded and supported by countless smaller ones.


Where did you find out where the C'Tan were supposed to be in stasis? I didn't even know the C'Tan were in stasis; aren't they just Gods?


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

They went into stasis so they could awaken later since the enslaver plaque kind of destroyed a lot of prey. What darklove says makes sense, especially if they have not yet woken up. Makes me wonder what kind of funky powers they would have. Enough variety to make up 18 C'tan?


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

I think that a likely necron possibility would be a combined warriors/flayed ones box, with options to put claws or gauss flayers and normal bodies with an option to put on bits of flapping skin.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Salahaldin said:


> Where did you find out where the C'Tan were supposed to be in stasis? I didn't even know the C'Tan were in stasis; aren't they just Gods?


C'tan are very real, although immortal, physical beings. They are the oldest known things in the galaxy. They are not 'gods' in the sense that they are not creatures of the Warp, although they are sometimes called Star Gods or Star Vampires. They do not need worship or the leeching of emotional energy to sustain their powers. They have complete control of the physical realm, manipulating the laws of physics, matter and reality at will.

The name Star Vampires is the best description of these beings. They feed on stars. Their favourite food, though, is the emotionally tainted flesh/soul of mortals.

They all went into stasis in Tomb Worlds, for a specific reason that I won't go into here, and are not starting to be awakened. There are only four known C'tan, and only two of those have awoken. There are direct declarations and indirect hints about the locations of the C'tan's Tomb Worlds in many novels and codices. The Nightbringer had his Tomb on Pavonis for example. 

I am speculating that, based on the official materials available, that there are more than just four locations in the galaxy of significant Necron Tombs that are capable of being C'tan stasis chambers. Clues are in the codex and the 5th ed. BRB.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

"In the war between the C'tan and their slaves the Necrons, against the Old Ones and the younger races, their red harvests slaughtered millions upon millions1. Gradually, they ran dry, and eventually, the C'tan consumed each other until only 4 remained"

from lexicanum, says its taken from the codex.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

unxpekted22 said:


> "In the war between the C'tan and their slaves the Necrons, against the Old Ones and the younger races, their red harvests slaughtered millions upon millions1. Gradually, they ran dry, and eventually, the C'tan consumed each other until only 4 remained"
> 
> from lexicanum, says its taken from the codex.


That is sort of right, but in the sense that you could say 'The Western Roman Empire collapsed in 476CE when Romulus was forced to abdicate, eventually the Nazis controlled Europe'. A lot of important information is left out and you might get the false impression that the separate elements are causal.

It was trickery on the part of the Deceiver, surprise surprise, that led the C'tan to start eating each other. It was made easier to trick the C'tan to eat each other because they were bored with very little left to fight or harvest; just as something to do.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

mcmuffin said:


> I think that a likely necron possibility would be a combined warriors/flayed ones box, with options to put claws or gauss flayers and normal bodies with an option to put on bits of flapping skin.


I really can't see this working, flayed ones outer skin looks very different and there is very little metal showing beneath.
It would call for kits where the outer skin would be in seperate pieces, can you imagine just how incredibly fiddly that would be?





unxpekted22 said:


> "In the war between the C'tan and their slaves the Necrons, against the Old Ones and the younger races, their red harvests slaughtered millions upon millions1. Gradually, they ran dry, and eventually, the C'tan consumed each other until only 4 remained"
> 
> from lexicanum, says its taken from the codex.


it's quite possible that it will be retconned so that another appears, possibly even two. 
However the idea that 18 are out there though is just wild speculation.


----------



## foulacy (Nov 24, 2007)

Their is only 4 left, so it is unlikely.


----------



## foulacy (Nov 24, 2007)

unxpekted22 said:


> "In the war between the C'tan and their slaves the Necrons, against the Old Ones and the younger races, their red harvests slaughtered millions upon millions1. Gradually, they ran dry, and eventually, the C'tan consumed each other until only 4 remained"
> 
> from lexicanum, says its taken from the codex.


Pretty sure its written differently to that in the codex.

They didn't turn on eachother because their was none left, I'm sure the laughing god tricked the outsider into consuming other C'tan, and the Nightbringer by the Deciever?

Something like that, don't have my codex on hand though and haven't read it in a while.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

"Holy fluff cows" have been brutally butchered by GW before. Just because the current fluff says that there are only 4 C'Tans left doesnt mean that the next codex will....


----------



## smfanboy (Apr 1, 2009)

yeah you could consider them left 4 dead 

if the new necs will be just as good as the new de models I will be jizzing my pants


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

The new necrons are a new threat to the imperium so it is not so inaccurate to assume that more C'tan could exist since perhaps more wake up from stasis.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

All I want to see is...

...XV25 Stealth Suits no longer 0-0 because anyone who'd use one would be instantly recognized as a RETAAAAAAAAARD.

Translation: Stealthies are about 6 points too expensive per model, needs a 2nd wargear option on EVERY SUIT and T4.

As of now, either make them better or melt them down and use the plastic for MOAR Crisis suits, because they are WORTHLESS.

A shame the coolest unit in the army is also the most lolbad.

EDIT: The stealth "crisis" can also be solved by just making them cheaper, but also make them available as a troops choice.

EDIT 2: O'Shaserra's XV22 put into mass production by the earth caste, now available as a heavy support choice selected like normal stealth suits.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Only super humans get T4, and you need to be mega bad ass to get T5+. I don't really see Tau as being especially tough, they are a GEq army after all.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

darklove said:


> Only super humans get T4, and you need to be mega bad ass to get T5+. I don't really see Tau as being especially tough, they are a GEq army after all.


T3 isn't unreasonable for them, but they're FUCKING expensive for how shit they are.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Friends, I give you T:5 Tau. 









And yes, they're Scottish.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Well, this is easy: get a Space Marine, then an XV25 stealth suit - put them next to eachother. Now use your eyes, for seeing. There is not much size difference is there? Actually, the XV25 seems to have more hardpoints and a considerably thicker chest armor, no? Yes, it does.

There is no real good explanation why an XV25 has T3. It's downright preposterous.

Anyway, they don't even need to be made tougher, as long as they get considerably cheaper and gets more options.

They are basically as of now 30 point jet pack guardsmen it is kind of difficult to see in the dark with your hands covering your eyes. Plain retarded, is what they are.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> Friends, I give you T:5 Tau.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Difference between armor value and T. Take away the armor and you have just a T with no armor. Think of it this way: 
SM without armor:Badass.
Battle Suit pilot - suit: Small ass blue dude.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> There is no real good explanation why an XV25 has T3. It's downright preposterous.


Herpa derp, I don't understand the prospect of Toughness.
Toughness and Armour Saves are distinct for a reason.

Toughness is how hard it is for a shot to cause mortal or crippling damage to the target.
An Armour Save is how likely your armour is to deflect a shot, how little weakness it has.

The XV25 is designed to offer hardy protection, and also a stealth functionality (which is pretty useless).
The suit still requires the wearer to move it though, unlike the XV8 which is actually a mechanical body of its own.
The XV25 is basically just a suit of armour, whereas the XV8 is closer to a dreadnought, or a mech.

If you shoot the Tau operating the XV25, penetrating its armour, then it's likely to just fall over.
However, if you shoot at an XV8, which has much greater protection for the wearer, then you need to kill the operator to shut it down, or blow it limb from limb.

If you shoot the XV8 with a heavy weapon (causing Instant Death) you're going to bust right through the protective barriers and kill the guy inside with the one shot.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Winterous said:


> T3 isn't unreasonable for them, but they're FUCKING expensive for how shit they are.





darklove said:


> Only super humans get T4, and you need to be mega bad ass to get T5+. I don't really see Tau as being especially tough, they are a GEq army after all.





gen.ahab said:


> Difference between armor value and T. Take away the armor and you have just a T with no armor. Think of it this way:
> SM:Badass in armor.
> Battle Suit: Small ass blue dude in armor.


The resilience of an exoskeleton towards outside influences (shooting, corrosian, stabby bits) is the same regardless if what's inside is a bag of eggs or a very large brick.

Take the armor off a Space Marine, he's out of the game.

Take the armor off an XV25 he's out of the game.

EDIT: Also, I don't really care. The critical flaw of the stealth suit is not their toughness, it's the fact that the stealth functionality might fool a bipolar grot, nothing else.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> The resilience of an exoskeleton towards outside influences (shooting, corrosian, stabby bits) is the same regardless if what's inside is a bag of eggs or a very large brick.
> 
> Take the armor off a Space Marine, he's out of the game.
> 
> ...


You do care, because you're the one who brought it up.

I explained why T3 for them is reasonable, because they're ultimately just wearing a big bulky suit of armour, if you get through the armour they're just as squishy.
Toughness is how likely a shot is to inflict an incapacitating injury.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Ok, you don't seem to be able to grasp this so maybe is simpler version will help; blue dude no strong, he little man. SM big man, very strong. Armor on marine is the SV value. The armor doesn't give a higher T value. This means armor doesn't mean jack shit for his T value. If S:6 weapon goes through the armor the tau will go pop.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> Ok, you don't seem to be able to grasp this so maybe is simpler version will help; blue dude no strong, he little man. SM big man, very strong. Armor on marine is the SV value. The armor no give higher T value. This mean armor on tau don't mean jack shit for his T value. If S:6 weapon go through armor tau go pop.


You're being exaggeratedly condescending, it's not appropriate dude.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Winterous said:


> You do care, because you're the one who brought it up.
> 
> I explained why T3 for them is reasonable, because they're ultimately just wearing a big bulky suit of armour, if you get through the armour they're just as squishy.
> Toughness is how likely a shot is to inflict an incapacitating injury.


Well, in a real situation, the shot would not care what's inside for the purpouses of being a more effective shot. You either go through or you don't. The structural integrity is still determined by the exoskeleton.

I'm just pointing out the realistic difference between an XV25 and an SM, not the design difference. As it is realistic to be T4, noone is really going to mind that it's made T4 if that's what GW finds to be a more efficient way to bring the XV25 up to scratch.

It might be reasonable for the XV25 to be T3, but it's equally reasonable for it to be T4.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Winterous said:


> You're being exaggeratedly condescending, it's not appropriate dude.


How did you get the non-edited version of my overly cruel remarks? :shok: Witch!


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> Well, in a real situation, the shot would not care what's inside for the purpouses of being a more effective shot. You either go through or you don't. The structural integrity is still determined by the exoskeleton.


You don't seem to understand the situation.
If you shoot a guy with a gun, and a Space Marine with the same gun, the Space Marine is less likely to be incapacitated.
If you dress them up in leather, they're just as likely to fall over from the shot.
If you dress them up in Power Armour, they're still just as likely to fall over if the shot gets through the armour.

A XV25 operator actually uses his body to move and aim, if he gets shot in the leg he can't walk anymore, if he gets shot in the arm he can't aim very well any more.
A XV8 operator does not do these things, he doesn't have to walk or aim manually, he just controls a robot that does it for him, in a way.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Winterous said:


> snip


Dude. I understand. I'm not dense.

This is how the game is designed.

Yet, it's not the best way to design the game. Putting a big hole in the power armor and putting a big hole in the XV25 is just as likely to put both out of the fight.

I understand they should be different as to instant death.

I understand they both have only 1 wound, making it irrelevant.

For the purpouse of a shot actually rolling to wound, they should not be the equivalent difficulty of a guardsman to kill, simply because their exoskeleton is so bulky. The armor save is nice and dandy, but it still doesn't change that the roll to wound is preliminary to the save, causing the save to happen.

Structural integrity of an exoskeleton _should_ matter to T stat, realistically. Then you can argue that this is not a realistic game, but it shouldn't be an illogical one either.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

By that same logic terminators should be T:5 because the armor is more resilient than anything the tau produce. It would break the game. And if it puts a hole in the armor it is a low ap weapon so it probably wounds both of them on a 2+. Personally, the game is as it should be.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> By that same logic terminators should be T:5 because the armor is more resilient than anything the tau produce. It would break the game.


Is the Broadside T5? No. Should it be? No. Broadsides are even tougher than Terminators, yet T5 is a tall threshold to cross. In the Broadside's case, the beefiness of it compared to a Terminator is represented with the extra wound.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> -snip-


I'm not calling you stupid at all.

Realistically, you should roll to hit, to pass their armour, and then on their Toughness to see if the wound is mortal or not.
But that's not how they chose to do it.

If you blow a hole in their armour, it doens't mean you're automatically going to wound them.

Take a Carnifex for example, it's fucking hard to wound them in a way that will seriously hinder their performance, hence their high Toughness value.
They also have a dense outer shell, which will stop an awful lot of the shots from getting close to hurting them.

On the other hand, you have a Guardsman.
If, by some miracle, a shot manages to pierce his armour, then it's not automatically going to cause a nasty wound; it could miss any vital organs, it could only affect unimportant muscles which don't hinder his performance in battle, it could just stop after hitting him in the rib.

Yes, there is SOME logical cross-over between Toughness and Armour, but it's little enough to be diregarded.
The only real connection is that if a shot has to get through all that armour, it's probably going to get slowed down a bunch.
It could have just been ignored for simplicity's sake, with good reason.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Terminator armor is better, as in the material, but yet there is more armor on a broadside. And there is also a huge difference between T:3 and T:4. Really, I don't see why they should have that much of a T increase.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Winterous said:


> Yes, there is SOME logical cross-over between Toughness and Armour, but it's little enough to be diregarded.
> The only real connection is that if a shot has to get through all that armour, it's probably going to get slowed down a bunch.
> It could have just been ignored for simplicity's sake, with good reason.


I think you just formulated my point.

If it up until this point has been ignored for simplicity's sake, then there is no reason they wouldn't stop ignoring it if it's the only way to make a turd unit come into it's own right. There are cross overs in SV, T and W.

Just look at it this way; if GW decides to give XV25 a T value of 4 next codex, is anyone going to get bent out of shape about it? Most likely very few.

Similarly, should they choose to do this, are any players who were unaware of their previous T value going to reel if told an XV25 were T4? React in a "that's not plausible" way? Hardly.



gen.ahab said:


> Terminator armor is better, as in the material, but yet there is more armor on a broadside. And there is also a huge difference between T:3 and T:4. Really, I don't see why they should have that much of a T increase.


They're both Adamantium.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> They're both Adamantium.


Terminator is constructed with plasteel and ceramite with the adamantium only used as external supports for the armors weight.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I think that the stealth suits should have access to long range weapons. As it stands the short range of the weapons means that they have to get close to the enemy to be effective. If no weapon swap then perhaps change the stealth suit rule so that it acts like the harlequin veil of tears power.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

the idea of tech upgrades for necrons, i am still undecided whether i think it is a good idea. i would agree more if they were anti-psyker powers and commandeering of vehicles etc. what do you think.


----------



## Hurricane (Feb 27, 2010)

New Necrons in summer of 2011 you say? I can't deny that I jump around to different armies like no one I've ever met and the only ones I've stuck with entirely are my nids and necrons. Unfortunately due to underperforming, I shelved the crons. I was severely tempted by the dark eldar but I held off on any purchases so I can flesh out my nids but damn when necrons finally return I'll be ready to bust out my necron army again!


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

The Stealth Suits are one (of many) weird Tau units that are a really good concept, but extremely poorly designed.
Stealth Suits, Vespids and Sniper Drone Teams (mainly) lack rules/stats/guns/propper FO placement/whatnot to actually be able to fulfil their roles

I dont care shit for T3 or 4, I would rather see some decent unit synergy with itself from the stealth suits.
A model that costs as much as a CSM terminator but with insanely inferior stats (with targetting arrays they cost as a SM terminator instead puke and are almost capable of the shooting part of their job), that is equipped for short range shooting, is horribly weak in CC and rely on staying far away from their enemies for survival needs some kind of redesign. These factors doesnt mix up at all......

Giving them real long range weapons would make them viable with their current rules I suppose. Missile Pod tooting Stealth Suits sounds like ace to me! But not even near likely...

Making them good in CC wont happen, as that contradicts the whole Tau way of war.

If the stealth generator worked like the Veil of Tears they might be usable, or at least survive so long that they might get the chance to do their job, and make the Fusion Blaster almost look like its a viable choice.


As a first start though: give every damn suit BS4. Seriously. Just do it. Remove the Targetting Array as an option as a whole. It should be integrated on both suits and vehicles. There is simply no valid reason for not using the best targetting systems available everywhere. Even less so for an army that dont understand the idea of "sacrificing" units:no:


Tau units have never been allowed to be _really_ dangerous for the points, just like no units were in 3d and 4th. with the 5th ed codices armies are once again allowed to be really good at their way of waging war. See the coming DE codex, they have the whole feeling of a lethal glass jaw, just like they should have. This brings hope for the upcoming Tau Codex!
When there finally comes a 5th ed Tau codex (around the end of the world) its going to be extremely fun to get 1 game in before the apocalypse


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

MaidenManiac said:


> As a first start though: give every damn suit BS4. Seriously. Just do it. Remove the Targetting Array as an option as a whole. It should be integrated on both suits and vehicles. There is simply no valid reason for not using the best targetting systems available everywhere. Even less so for an army that dont understand the idea of "sacrificing" units:no:
> 
> 
> Tau units have never been allowed to be _really_ dangerous for the points, just like no units were in 3d and 4th. with the 5th ed codices armies are once again allowed to be really good at their way of waging war. See the coming DE codex, they have the whole feeling of a lethal glass jaw, just like they should have. This brings hope for the upcoming Tau Codex!
> When there finally comes a 5th ed Tau codex (around the end of the world) its going to be extremely fun to get 1 game in before the apocalypse


You make a lot of sense there. Adding a plasma rifle or missile pod option to the mix, and we have something useful for 12 points less than today's point cost.


----------

