I know it's a long way off, but then again, with the fast release schedule GW has been doing, who knows? Maybe early next year we could see 7th edition necrons. My problem, is I don't know what to expect. I feel we could either become the next Eldar, or they'll nerf everything good we had and we'll become the next Tyranids. I don't see much of a middle ground, honestly. Plus, I don't want to fathom what they'll take away, or what they'll screw up. But who knows?

I just mainly want to know what people actually WANT from the new codex, as well as what you EXPECT out of it, with the trend of things and such.

For me...

Hopes:

Flayed Ones becoming useful
Lychguard either getting cheaper or better in some way
Triarch Praetorians being actually good
The C'tan being more usable
Vehicle upgrades. Or gawd yes (Granted, this one will probably happen anyway, since it has for everyone)
Points for wargear being severely overhauled
Tesla being given Ignore Cover (Dunno why, but if they give us some newer rules, I feel Tesla would be the best decision to be Ignores Cover, just makes sense to me)
Gauss going back to it's old rule of also always wounding on a 6+ as well
Tomb Blades being usable
Destroyers getting cheaper
Living Metal doing something a bit more. It always struck me wrong what it actually does, since it does something completely different in fluff.
Zandrahk getting a few extra rules he can pass out and/or take away. Like, Monster Hunter, Ignores Cover, maybe Skyfire


Expectations:

Tesla being nerfed. A lot of people have said that maybe while Snap Firing, Tesla won't grant additional shots, or only gets one additional instead of two. Honestly, makes sense, and I'd be okay with it. It is very powerful.
Catacomb Command Barge being nerfed. I mean come on, it's silly good right now, it could use a tone-down.
A-barges getting a raise in price. They are silly cheap, for reals.



Just a few things that Ican think of at the moment. Like I said, not sure whether to be excited or not. What do you guys think? What are you expecting and/or hoping for with the new Necron codex? For all we know, we could be seeing it come February/March of next year.

Necrons are still mid-top tier with their current codex, so do they really need a new one?

 Random Dude wrote:
Necrons are still mid-top tier with their current codex, so do they really need a new one?

Well, fair enough. But there are a lot of points changes that need to be attended to, and if they're so powerful right now, then obviously GW is going to nerf some things and make some things better just to sell models, right?

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Random Dude wrote:
Necrons are still mid-top tier with their current codex, so do they really need a new one?

Well, fair enough. But there are a lot of points changes that need to be attended to, and if they're so powerful right now, then obviously GW is going to nerf some things and make some things better just to sell models, right?

That's the one thing that angers me most about GW. They really should separate game design from marketing.

 Random Dude wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Random Dude wrote:
Necrons are still mid-top tier with their current codex, so do they really need a new one?

Well, fair enough. But there are a lot of points changes that need to be attended to, and if they're so powerful right now, then obviously GW is going to nerf some things and make some things better just to sell models, right?

That's the one thing that angers me most about GW. They really should separate game design from marketing.

Well, part of me can't blame them, the other part of me is not looking forward to the next awesome "must-have" unit that's gonna cost 80+ dollars. That's why I haven't gotten a Hive Crone yet, and I bought an Exocrine used on eBay.

Fluff re-retconned to actual TruCron fluff.

- No Matt Ward.
- C'tan seeing a huge price reduction or power buff.
- Wraiths seeing a slight cost upgrade.
- LG removed, Pahrias reintroduced
- Sentry Pylons losing Skyfire and Interceptor with appropriate point reduction
- Monolith gains DS protection and the WBB re-rolls again
- Destroyers -10 pts, Heavy Destroyers -10 pts
- Living Metal back to Living Metal. ~30 pts increase for all vehicles.
- Matt Ward being kept away from the codex with an extremely long stick. A sharp one, preferably.
- Seriously, hire the guys that wrote Fall of Orpheus. They know how to write stuff.

In short...back to 3rd codex. Reboot. Modernize it.

Hmm, let's see.

- Gauntlets of Fire gain Rending
- Warscythe maybe up to 15pts (not sure how to price this really - its superior to our other items, but also stuck on a WS4 model with 3 attacks and I2)
- Voidblade either a free swap or gains something useful
- Phylactery gives you a bonus on your RP roll.
- Overlords WS5 (I can dream...)
- Necron Lords pay less for gear than Overlords (NOTE: I think this should apply to sergeants from all races)
- SCs revamped so that they're actually worth a damn
- Annihilation Barge, Ghost Ark and Nightscythe all get more expensive
- Flayed Ones become troops... and get something to make them useful
- Lychguard stop being inferior terminators (What's that? You'd like an invulnerable save so that you might actually make it across the field? Well then you're only allowed S5 AP3 weapons. That's what you get for not being marines).
- Triarch Praetorians stop being 40pts for 1 sodding attack (and WS4... yey for 80pts per hit).
- Necron Infantry Armies become viable (as opposed to being laughing stocks, compared to AV13 spam.)
- Destroyers either get a price reduction, or get their old guns back. Also, they're each fused to a sodding jetbike, so make them jetbikes again.

- It would be nice if Tesla weapons (other than the Destructor) had a bit more going for them. The changes to rapid-fire have left them being basically inferior - worse AP, can't touch most vehicles and can't double-tap at close range.

- What do people think of the current Gauss rules? I think someone suggested a while ago that it should be replaced with Rending. So, it's more dangerous against infantry, but its anti-vehicle capability is dependant on weapon strength and the rending roll (and so e.g. you might have to use Storm Crypteks for tougher vehicles, rather than being able to rely on warriors). I think it's an interesting idea, but I'm wondering if it would make us too strong. Any thoughts?

 Sigvatr wrote:


Fluff re-retconned to actual TruCron fluff.

- No Matt Ward.

- Matt Ward being kept away from the codex with an extremely long stick. A sharp one, preferably.


In short...back to 3rd codex. Reboot. Modernize it.

give me these and I'll be a happy man, have an exalt Sigvatr

other than the above
- Flayed Ones that are useful, or at least sculpts that don't look like complete gak would suffice
- increase the points of the Annihilation Barge & both transports
- give Destroyers (both variants) a little love
- Triarch Pretorians, give them a use or give them the chop

Well I can guarantee you they're not going to retcon the fluff. Odds are most of it will be copy n' paste.

Things I'd reasonably expect to see would be a nerf to Mindshackle Scarabs, a buff to either Praetorians, Lychgard, or Flayed Ones. I think they'll definitely leave one of those in the dust at best (a la Howling Banshees).

I sincerely doubt they will change Tesla rules. IMO, Tesla will remain the same. Necrons lack a reliable high strength firing option, so all the mid-level stuff will likely remain as is.

Monoliths will hopefully gain some buffs, but I wouldn't be on it - it's a decent size kit that they could do well to sell more of - as well as being incredibly iconic to the army.

New models. This one's a bit more difficult to predict. It's hard to imagine a walker - but there could be a new C'tan or larger canoptek item in the mix. I suppose canoptek would be the path to a walker design wise. I'd also expect a new independent character, and a dual-kit anti-aircraft/artillery model.

I don't expect any big changes to the basics like Gauss, Tesla, RP, QS, etc.

I'm hoping they DON'T get a new codex any time soon.

 Thokt wrote:
Things I'd reasonably expect to see would be a nerf to Mindshackle Scarabs

What sort of nerf are you expecting?

I ask because I've often considered how to make this item more reasonable, but haven't been able to think of any nerfs that don't make it completely worthless.

 Thokt wrote:

I don't expect any big changes to the basics like Gauss, Tesla, RP, QS, etc.

Do Tesla and QS really count as the 'basics'? I mean, they've only existed since this book.

 vipoid wrote:
Hmm, let's see.

- Gauntlets of Fire gain Rending
- Warscythe maybe up to 15pts (not sure how to price this really - its superior to our other items, but also stuck on a WS4 model with 3 attacks and I2)
- Voidblade either a free swap or gains something useful
- Phylactery gives you a bonus on your RP roll.
- Overlords WS5 (I can dream...)
- Necron Lords pay less for gear than Overlords (NOTE: I think this should apply to sergeants from all races)
- Lychguard stop being inferior terminators (What's that? You'd like an invulnerable save so that you might actually make it across the field? Well then you're only allowed S5 AP3 weapons. That's what you get for not being marines).
- Triarch Praetorians stop being 40pts for 1 sodding attack (and WS4... yey for 80pts per hit).
- Destroyers either get a price reduction, or get their old guns back. Also, they're each fused to a sodding jetbike, so make them jetbikes again.

Omg, all of the yes. All of this needs to happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Thokt wrote:

I sincerely doubt they will change Tesla rules. IMO, Tesla will remain the same. Necrons lack a reliable high strength firing option, so all the mid-level stuff will likely remain as is.

Monoliths will hopefully gain some buffs, but I wouldn't be on it - it's a decent size kit that they could do well to sell more of - as well as being incredibly iconic to the army.

You have a point, necrons don't have much mid strength shooting, except for tesla destructors. So I dunno what they'll do. Maybe make more models able to take Gauss and Tesla Cannons? Or maybe make them worth it a bit?

Also, I would love for the monolith to be amazing, hell, I'll settle for good.

I don't know quite how one can nerf MSS and still make it desirable. The problem is that Overlords aren't all that great barring a ride on a chariot - they're pretty much vehicles for three pieces of wargear - MSS, Warscythes, and ResOrbs. With MSS nerfed (and I'd say that's almost a given) it would be nice if Lords could open a Royal Court. Hell, it'd be great if the Royal Court didn't need an unlock anymore.

There's really no reason to take an Overlord if MSS doesn't work well. It's really just a cheap speed bump on an expensive model. Sure MSS is 15pts - but that Overlord isn't - and he doesn't do anything that you don't pay for him to do afterwards.

I will say that if any of the previously mentioned CC units become table worthy, then the Overlord could be worthwhile. He could be placed in said unit, unlock the Royal Court, and then place Lords in with your Warriors.

As far as shots in the dark go - a new cryptek harbinger would be fun. Scarab models in their own box would be something.

Nerfs could be a hit on the BS of Warriors (BS 3 :(), Wraiths losing their invulnerable, and points investment per level of RP (+6, +5, etc.).

Who knows? The company and studio are absolutely wild cards.

You can expect an expensive supplement that adds enough rules to fill a page or two that could have easily been included in the codex.

- Anyone else think Overlords should get IWND? (mostly because it always struck me as odd that they can self-repair... but only after being completely destroyed )

 Thokt wrote:
I don't know quite how one can nerf MSS and still make it desirable. The problem is that Overlords aren't all that great barring a ride on a chariot - they're pretty much vehicles for three pieces of wargear - MSS, Warscythes, and ResOrbs. With MSS nerfed (and I'd say that's almost a given) it would be nice if Lords could open a Royal Court. Hell, it'd be great if the Royal Court didn't need an unlock anymore.

There's really no reason to take an Overlord if MSS doesn't work well. It's really just a cheap speed bump on an expensive model. Sure MSS is 15pts - but that Overlord isn't - and he doesn't do anything that you don't pay for him to do afterwards.

I think the problem is that their stats are pretty poor, and they don't really do anything outside of those equipments you listed.

Most other commanders either have good combat abilities (Chaos Lords, SM Chapter Masters - WS6, I5 4+ attacks etc.), or act as force multipliers (Librarians, IG Command Squads etc.). But, Overlords lack combat skills - even with their best weapon, they just don't have the WS or attacks to get a reasonable number of hits - nor do they provide any buffs. All they do is unlock a royal court.

Also, they can only be equipped for combat or short-range shooting. But, Necrons specialise mainly at mid-range shooting, and generally don't want to be in combat at all. So, there's no synergy with what the Overlord actually brings to a squad. This might not be so bad if we actually had a ranged HQ. Instead, we get to choose between a melee HQ or a different melee HQ.

At best, you might be able to use them to soak some bullets for an important squad. But a) I don't think this should be the primary reason for choosing an HQ, and b) this is a mechanic I'd like to see killed with fire, so it's really not something I'd like to see Overlords built around.

Anyway, I think they need to have something more useful before gear. If they're not going to get good combat stats, then let them grant some kind of buff to a squad.

 Blacksails wrote:
You can expect an expensive supplement that adds enough rules to fill a page or two that could have easily been included in the codex.

Ans most likely a few good units removed so that they can be sold back to us in said supplements.

Because, GW feels that it still hasn't alienated quite enough of its player base.

My hopes are as follow:
-Some change to Flayed Ones.. I like them and in my opinion they could become good with just some additional rule or wargear. At least a Role-change to Troops.
-Lychguard/Praetorians, I would like them cheaper or tougher. Praetorians need more attacks.
-C'tan being reworked. At the moment they are 'meh' at best and I don't like their abilities.
-Changes to the Wargear: Point reduction, some other stuff being upgraded to make them useful besides "Warscythe on everything!!!".
-Cheaper Destroyers
-Living Metal is useless most games, could become an upgrade with IWND or something?
-Unique Characters! Necrons have a lot of force multipliers. Sadly none of them are a Unique HQ. Except for Zhandrekh most of them are boring and quite pricey for what they do.
-Monoliths need some DS-protection, at the moment they are very slow and quite lacking in firepower. Yes, they can shoot all around; but you will never do that because they only move 6" a turn.
-Take another look at Pylons with Skyfire and Interceptor.. They were heavy support that also acted as AA, but 7th made them useless.
-Triarch Stalker should have some more defensive stats.
-Death Marks could use DS without scatter OR have Interceptor! Or both as long as you do it in your own Deployment zone or within X inch of a Lord/Cryptek?

 Random Dude wrote:
Necrons are still mid-top tier with their current codex, so do they really need a new one?

They are mid to top tier with like one or two builds that I personally don't play because I dislike the spam.
I want a new codex to 'nerf' that spam and make other options more interesting and viable.
And there are just four codices left, so we will get one "soon".

 vipoid wrote:
- What do people think of the current Gauss rules? I think someone suggested a while ago that it should be replaced with Rending. So, it's more dangerous against infantry, but its anti-vehicle capability is dependant on weapon strength and the rending roll (and so e.g. you might have to use Storm Crypteks for tougher vehicles, rather than being able to rely on warriors). I think it's an interesting idea, but I'm wondering if it would make us too strong. Any thoughts?

I like where Gauss is now.
Giving them Rending might be too good against 2+ units when you have blobs of 20 Warriors.

What sort of nerf are you expecting?

Maybe they should make it so that it becomes near useless when your opponent charges you

- It would be nice if Tesla weapons (other than the Destructor) had a bit more going for them. The changes to rapid-fire have left them being basically inferior - worse AP, can't touch most vehicles and can't double-tap at close range.

How do you mean?
I always take Tesla over Gauss on my Immortals and Barges.

Kangodo wrote:
]Maybe they should make it so that it becomes near useless when your opponent charges you

I think that would qualify as just 'useless'.

Kangodo wrote:
]How do you mean? I always take Tesla over Gauss on my Immortals and Barges.

Barges I can understand, since I'm often snapshotting the secondary weapon anyway.

But, why do you like Tesla on Immortals? I just don't see the advantage over Gauss.

I am hoping that all the necrons take off mask and reveal they are actually squats wearing stilts. Then we can A) get squats back in the game and B) get necrons out!

 Saevus wrote:
I am hoping that all the necrons take off mask and reveal they are actually squats wearing stilts. Then we can A) get squats back in the game and B) get necrons out!

Can I nominate this for a conversion idea?

 vipoid wrote:

But, why do you like Tesla on Immortals? I just don't see the advantage over Gauss.

Always, always get Tesla over Gauss on Immortals.

Gauss is good when you can amass shots. If you want Gauss, take Warriors, as they are cheaper and can be taken in larger units.

Tesla is superior to Gauss in most circumstances (Gauss is better at 4+ and below 12'' - but why exactly are they so close?) so if you go for Immortals, you go for Tesla.

 vipoid wrote:
I think that would qualify as just 'useless'.

It was a joke because they already are that "useless" when it's your opponents turn

Barges I can understand, since I'm often snapshotting the secondary weapon anyway.
But, why do you like Tesla on Immortals? I just don't see the advantage over Gauss.

Because I hardly play against armies with a Sv4+
And I always take Warriors and let my Immortals fall back a couple of inches when the enemy gets close.
That means my Warrior-blob can Rapid Fire the enemy while the Immortals focus on the second wave.

Gauss is better in two scenarios:
Within 12" : I always have my Warriors closeby so I prefer the bonus at 12-24"
4+ Armour: I hardly play against armies with 4+ armour.

I only pick Immortals if I want a unit with Tesla, otherwise I will just pick up some Warriors with Ghost Arks.
The only reason I would pick Gauss-Immortals is if my opponent demands WYSIWYG and I only have my Immortals with Gauss with me.
And it's also because I've had some amazing experiences with them against Orks, Tyranids and even Terminators.

Some math: http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?347779-Immortal-Mathhammer-Gauss-Blasters-vs-Tesla-Carbines
Against anything with a save that Gauss cannot penetrate (this includes 2+ and 3+ saves and all cover), Gauss is always better in 12" Rapid Fire range, and Tesla is always better at ranges above 12". The number of hits for Tesla falls almost exactly between the difference in Gauss's number of hits at 12 and 24".

RE: 12'' advantage of Gauss:

That's correct, however, keep in mind that Tesla is vastly superior during Overwatch.

- Obyron gains an invulnerable save.
- C'tan gain jump/flying.
- Anti-psyker options.
- More AP2.
- Tomb Blades get cut.
- A Tervigon for Necron Warriors (which isn't likely to break on the first roll).
- More Zandrekh and Trazyn lore.
- The Void Dragon.
- Szarekh.

Female Necrons. Something different. Already tired of how all SM are all males. Now Necrons are all males. Be nice to see something that is more than Kill Kill Kill.

All I see is that they are just Tyranids. Just the metal versions of Tyranids.

Ironically more soul needs to be put in for the Necrons. While yes they are robots, they need to be more than husk less automatons and have live brought into them. Newcrons is a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done.

Just so sick and tired of, we are conquering the universe, if you don't comply we kill you.

Davor wrote:
Female Necrons. Something different. Already tired of how all SM are all males. Now Necrons are all males. Be nice to see something that is more than Kill Kill Kill.

I know right? Just the other day, my Tumblr friends and I were discussing how offensive it is that you can't buy female toasters ANYWHERE.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:

Davor wrote:
Female Necrons. Something different. Already tired of how all SM are all males. Now Necrons are all males. Be nice to see something that is more than Kill Kill Kill.

I know right? Just the other day, my Tumblr friends and I were discussing how offensive it is that you can't buy female toasters ANYWHERE.

Speaking of toasters, The Cylons had some great looking female Toasters.

As a non-necron player:

Mindshackle Scarabs reduce WS, BS, and I to 1 in a challenge. No LD test.
Phylactery becomes relic Res Orb that makes bearer and unit pass RP and IWND on a 3+

Ever-Living replaced with It Will Not Die. Res Orb increased the IWND to a 4+ like Reanimation protocols
Living Metal reduces damage on the pen chart by 1 and grants IWND
Tesla Weapons replace Tesla rule with Shock rule from Living Lightning (Same as tesla but does not work on snap shots)

Destroyers/Heavy Destroyers/Destroyer Lords become Jet Infantry. New kit adds options for Heavy Gauss Cannon, Tesla Destructor, or Particle Shredder to Heavy Destroyers

Flayed Ones replace Deep Strike with Scout, Move Through Cover, Rending, and Fear. Option to upgrade to pair of lightning claws.
Add Flayed Lord option- Overlord with Scout, Move Through Cover, and Fear, some options reduced.

Deathmarks: Ethereal Interception grants them the Interceptor rule against units that deep strike. Hunters from Hyperspace does not pass on to attached characters. Disintegrator rifle gains Pinning.

Night Scythe: Replace Invasion Beam with "An Embarked Unit may disembark even if the flier is currently Zooming. They may only snapshoot this turn."

Catacomb Command Barge: Remove Sweep Attack, replace with Vector Strike.

Triarch Stalker: ive the dispersed Heat Ray the Torrent rule.

Lychguard: +5 PPM, bump to 2+ armor.

Annihilation Barge: Bump to 125 points

Transcendent C'Tan: Drop Seismic Assault from 6d6 to 3d6. Bump base price by 180 points. Add it and Obelisk to the Codex. Obelisk is fine as is.

Remove the Royal Court. Make Lords, Crypteks, and Pariahs individual HQ choices that have the rule (this model may attach to a unit of Warriors, Immortals, Lychguard, Deathmarks, or Triarch Praetorians at the start of the game. If they do, this model does not take up a FOC slot)
Pariahs return as S/T 4 Lords with no wargear options, and Ever-Living replaced with Fear and Adamantium Will.


Kits:
Lord/Pariah/Cryptek box set of 5 models with 5 staff of light, 2-3 war scythes, and one or two each of hyperphase blade, gauntlet of fire, void blade, Tremorstave, abyssal staff, eldrich lance, aeonstave, or voltaic staff.
Destroyer/ Heavy Destroyer/ Destroyer Lord 3 pack
Flayed One 5 pack with option to make Flayed Lord.
C'Tan single box
Clampack Overlord

 MajorWesJanson wrote:


Transcendent C'Tan: Drop Seismic Assault from 6d6 to 3d6. Bump base price by 180 points. Add it and Obelisk to the Codex. Obelisk is fine as is.

Um, no. It would be unusable at that point. It's already extremely expensive for only 6 wounds. Powerful, yes. But expensive.

speak of 6s while snap firing, its pretty obvious that tesla WILL be nerfed

just check SW 's psychic "tesla" rules, more hit when you roll 6s, but not when you snap

 Sigvatr wrote:

Always, always get Tesla over Gauss on Immortals.

Gauss is good when you can amass shots. If you want Gauss, take Warriors, as they are cheaper and can be taken in larger units.

Tesla is superior to Gauss in most circumstances (Gauss is better at 4+ and below 12'' - but why exactly are they so close?) so if you go for Immortals, you go for Tesla.

I don't follow your logic.

- Gauss is superior against vehicles (not as good as on warriors, but still very good).
- Gauss is superior against anything with a 4+ (or worse) save
- Gauss is superior at 12"

Tesla is better at 12<24", if the target has a 3+ or 2+ save.

For me, I just don't see enough circumstances where Tesla is superior (both in terms of mathhammer and on the field). On the other hand, as well as obliterating squads with rapid-fire, I've also just had so many situations come up where Gauss was better - either because of AP4, or because I needed a vehicle dead and had run out of other stuff to shoot at it.

Tesla meanwhile has only ever been good on those occasions where the planets align and half your to-hit rolls are 6s. Which, admittedly, do make me want to use more tesla.

Kangodo wrote:

Because I hardly play against armies with a Sv4+
And I always take Warriors and let my Immortals fall back a couple of inches when the enemy gets close.
That means my Warrior-blob can Rapid Fire the enemy while the Immortals focus on the second wave.

Interesting.

Kangodo wrote:

Some math: http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?347779-Immortal-Mathhammer-Gauss-Blasters-vs-Tesla-Carbines
Against anything with a save that Gauss cannot penetrate (this includes 2+ and 3+ saves and all cover), Gauss is always better in 12" Rapid Fire range, and Tesla is always better at ranges above 12". The number of hits for Tesla falls almost exactly between the difference in Gauss's number of hits at 12 and 24".

Well, also bear in mind that Gauss gives you a good chance of chipping a hull point or two off something. It's not amazing unless you're in rapid-fire range, but it's often a very useful option to have.

 Sigvatr wrote:
RE: 12'' advantage of Gauss:

That's correct, however, keep in mind that Tesla is vastly superior during Overwatch.

Hardly vastly. Remember that a Gauss unit will likely be getting twice as many shots against the charging unit (and, if it matters AP4 ones).

I'd rather have more shots at full BS than start relying on overwatch.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Mindshackle Scarabs reduce WS, BS, and I to 1 in a challenge. No LD test.

That would be too much of a nerf.
The biggest strength of MSS is the psychological factor because everyone thinks this will wipe an entire unit away.
If you charge a Lord, you can always make sure it effects a normal Infantry-model.

Tesla Weapons replace Tesla rule with Shock rule from Living Lightning (Same as tesla but does not work on snap shots)

Strongly disagree, it's not that strong at the moment.
Snapshotting is usually done at Flyers or when being charged.
So removing the bonus on snapshots would either mean we get an additional Overwatch rule, like the Tau, and we'd need another AA-model.

Lychguard: +5 PPM, bump to 2+ armor.

At the moment they never see play. So I would go with only a 2+ and even then they will hardly be used.

Annihilation Barge: Bump to 125 points

100 points, at max.

Transcendent C'Tan: Drop Seismic Assault from 6d6 to 3d6. Bump base price by 180 points. Add it and Obelisk to the Codex. Obelisk is fine as is.

But that would make the attack entirely useless in Apocalypse.
I think that 200 points is more than fine for a 6D6-attack. It also doesn't need a price-bumb unless you give it more wounds and T10.
Obelisk is NOT fine, Obelisk is terrible.

Remove the Royal Court.

That would work, but it makes it less fluffy and I dislike that.

 vipoid wrote:
I don't follow your logic.
- Gauss is superior against vehicles (not as good as on warriors, but still very good).
- Gauss is superior against anything with a 4+ (or worse) save
- Gauss is superior at 12"

Tesla is better at 12<24", if the target has a 3+ or 2+ save.

For me, I just don't see enough circumstances where Tesla is superior (both in terms of mathhammer and on the field). On the other hand, as well as obliterating squads with rapid-fire, I've also just had so many situations come up where Gauss was better - either because of AP4, or because I needed a vehicle dead and had run out of other stuff to shoot at it.

Tesla meanwhile has only ever been good on those occasions where the planets align and half your to-hit rolls are 6s. Which, admittedly, do make me want to use more tesla.

You are not quite correct.
1) Gauss is superior against AV12 and up, but you would need a lot of shots and you're better off with Warriors.
2) Gauss is only superior against 4+; Tesla is better at 2+, 3+, 5+ and 6+ and everything with cover.
3) Yes, it is. But Tesla is superior at 12+ inch.

The entire point is that if you face situations where Gauss would be superior, you could also use Warriors.
The +1S and 3+ Save isn't really worth the additional four points to me, so I only take Immortals when I want access to Tesla.

If you are actively trying to get Immortals within 12" of the enemy, than it might be better to use Gauss.
But in every single battle I've played, they usually end up outside the Rapid Fire range and then it's better to take Tesla.
Also remember that Tesla is superior to Gauss when there is cover involved!

The math-spreadsheet can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AiEZVcuAv9CDdEtld1dwUTVRWFVrMjJtMHZpdUpTNUE#gid=0

So in short:
In my opinion Tesla is superior at all times because I never let things come within 12" of my Immortals. The only exception is 4+ with no cover and AV12.
In the cases where Gauss might prove to be more valuable, I will include Warriors because they are cheaper and in those cases the improved S and Sv is not really important.

Kangodo wrote:
That would be too much of a nerf.
The biggest strength of MSS is the psychological factor because everyone thinks this will wipe an entire unit away.

The other aspect I find is that, even with warscythes, Overlords don't have the skill or weight of attacks to bring down most enemy characters/MCs in any reasonable time frame. So, you're reliant on MSS to make them kill themselves.

Kangodo wrote:

You are not quite correct.
1) Gauss is superior against AV12 and up, but you would need a lot of shots and you're better off with Warriors.

True, though AV12+ accounts for quite a lot of vehicles - including walkers like Dreadnaughts.

Kangodo wrote:

2) Gauss is only superior against 4+; Tesla is better at 2+, 3+, 5+ and 6+ and everything with cover.

Well, Tesla has a very small advantage against 5+ saves, and a larger advantage (~10% I think) against 6+ saves. But, at 12" Gauss is far superior against both.

You're right in terms of 12" though. I hadn't looked at the numbers in a while and was misremembering.

Kangodo wrote:

The entire point is that if you face situations where Gauss would be superior, you could also use Warriors.
The +1S and 3+ Save isn't really worth the additional four points to me, so I only take Immortals when I want access to Tesla.

Thing is, whenever I use warriors, I find that they just don't seem to do anything against infantry. Maybe I just don't roll well with them, but their shots just seem to end up doing negligible damage, whereas Immortals seem far better at winning shooting-wars.

Also, maybe it's just the armies I play against, but I seem to come across a lot of AP4 weapons - so the extra point of save makes quite a bit of difference.

Kangodo wrote:

If you are actively trying to get Immortals within 12" of the enemy, than it might be better to use Gauss.
But in every single battle I've played, they usually end up outside the Rapid Fire range and then it's better to take Tesla.

Again, perhaps it's the armies I play against, but I tend to see a lot of CC units used - so enemies frequently end up close to my Immortals.

Kangodo wrote:

In the cases where Gauss might prove to be more valuable, I will include Warriors because they are cheaper and in those cases the improved S and Sv is not really important.

I might try a mix of warriors and Tesla Immortals in my next game and see how it goes.

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

Always, always get Tesla over Gauss on Immortals.

Gauss is good when you can amass shots. If you want Gauss, take Warriors, as they are cheaper and can be taken in larger units.

Tesla is superior to Gauss in most circumstances (Gauss is better at 4+ and below 12'' - but why exactly are they so close?) so if you go for Immortals, you go for Tesla.

I don't follow your logic.

- Gauss is superior against vehicles (not as good as on warriors, but still very good).
- Gauss is superior against anything with a 4+ (or worse) save
- Gauss is superior at 12"

Tesla is better at 12<24", if the target has a 3+ or 2+ save.

For me, I just don't see enough circumstances where Tesla is superior (both in terms of mathhammer and on the field). On the other hand, as well as obliterating squads with rapid-fire, I've also just had so many situations come up where Gauss was better - either because of AP4, or because I needed a vehicle dead and had run out of other stuff to shoot at it.

Tesla is superior in every case but 4+ saves and 12''. The advantage vs. vehicles is neglible as you pay more points more the same effect. The question is why you take Immortals in your army. Gauss would be a good choice if:

a) You know you will be playing exclusively against 4+ saves
b) You want your immortals to be close to the enemy

The latter certainly isn't desired

Immortals have two advantages over Warriors:

a) They have access to Tesla weapons
b) They have a better armor save
c) They have AP4

In every other regard, they are worse than Warriors due to a worse points-efficiency. Immortals are most often taken to have a unit that allows for better objective holding due to a higher resiliency. On the other hand, a blob with a GA does this job better as well.

tl;dr: If you go against tons of 4+ saves, take Gauss. In every other case, Tesla is superior. More Gauss? More Warriors.

Okay, might need to rephrase that.
Sometimes they do come close, but that means two things:
1) They had to walk over to me, usually by using cover and than Tesla is better.
2) If they are moving towards the Immortals, they are not moving to something I actually care about

I think the biggest factor for Gauss VS Tesla is how you position and play the Immortals.
In my battles I've never had a moment where I wish I had used Gauss.

Kangodo wrote:
2) If they are moving towards the Immortals, they are not moving to something I actually care about

Out of interest, what do you care about?

Kangodo wrote:
In my battles I've never had a moment where I wish I had used Gauss.

I'm actually the opposite - usually whenever I use Tesla, I end up wishing I'd brought Gauss instead.

Kangodo wrote:


I think the biggest factor for Gauss VS Tesla is how you position and play the Immortals.

Pretty much. When they sit on an objective, enemies coming close is unavoidable. Tesla still has an advantage, though, as they get more hits in overall due to Gauss only double-tapping at 12''.

 Sigvatr wrote:

Pretty much. When they sit on an objective, enemies coming close is unavoidable. Tesla still has an advantage, though, as they get more hits in overall due to Gauss only double-tapping at 12''.

How is Tesla getting more hits overall? Could you explain that?

If an enemy is within 12" while I sit on an objective, it's usually because he moved and is now going to charge.
The Tesla in the turn before combined with the Tesla on overwatch usually makes up for the loss of shots within 12".

 vipoid wrote:
Out of interest, what do you care about?

The Arks, perhaps a Warrior blob, maybe a Pylon or Barges.
They hardly ever get charged, because they would "tarpit" units long enough for my Wraiths to arrive and kill the unit.
And if a unit comes close, the Immortals usually already did what I included them for: Wiping out big blobs.

And it's like I said: Positioning!
My Immortals have a clear role, that does not include being an extremely-close range extermination unit.
Having them close to the enemy would feel the same as keeping Wraiths on a 24" range.

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

Pretty much. When they sit on an objective, enemies coming close is unavoidable. Tesla still has an advantage, though, as they get more hits in overall due to Gauss only double-tapping at 12''.

How is Tesla getting more hits overall? Could you explain that?

Aye

Gauss deals more hits at 12'', but at 24'', Tesla deals more. Enemies usually do not spawn outright in 12'', they approach your unit. Usually, you can have about 3 turns of shooting at a distance of +12'' when actively keeping distance. If you amass the average amount of hits, Tesla will net you quite a few more hits than Gauss could.

 Sigvatr wrote:

Gauss deals more hits at 12'', but at 24'', Tesla deals more. Enemies usually do not spawn outright in 12'', they approach your unit. Usually, you can have about 3 turns of shooting at a distance of +12'' when actively keeping distance. If you amass the average amount of hits, Tesla will net you quite a few more hits than Gauss could.

Really? 3 turns of shooting at 12-24" seems incredibly optimistic.

Usually, when units are heading towards my lines, I'm looking at 2 turns of shooting if I'm lucky - before said units are on my doorstep.

Maybe my group just uses more fast units than most. Certainly, if I was frequently looking at 3+ turns of 24" shooting, I'd probably be more generous towards Tesla.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Fluff re-retconned to actual TruCron fluff.

- No Matt Ward.
- C'tan seeing a huge price reduction or power buff.
- Wraiths seeing a slight cost upgrade.
- LG removed, Pahrias reintroduced
- Sentry Pylons losing Skyfire and Interceptor with appropriate point reduction
- Monolith gains DS protection and the WBB re-rolls again
- Destroyers -10 pts, Heavy Destroyers -10 pts
- Living Metal back to Living Metal. ~30 pts increase for all vehicles.
- Matt Ward being kept away from the codex with an extremely long stick. A sharp one, preferably.
- Seriously, hire the guys that wrote Fall of Orpheus. They know how to write stuff.

In short...back to 3rd codex. Reboot. Modernize it.

While I love it, I know it would really, really jar with some of the other 'cron players out there.

- Re-integrate some of the Oldcron fluff. The good stuff.
- Retcon shards, because that was a stupid ass thing to do... however, having the C'tan lose a ton of power, opening the way for more diverse dynasties is a pretty cool option.
- Give us back our 3+.
- Make the monolith into the powerhouse it used to be. Melta immune, no DS mishaps... ah, the good ole' days.
- Keep certain 'crons with personality. However, make them a rarity. We don't need every Necron under the sun to be a reeferhead, crazy cat 'cron or Lady 'cron trapped in a man 'cron's robotic not-body.
- Take out any notions of unnecessary mercy. No "letting them live" kind of gak without a really good reason - whether that's to screw with them later on or because you have all of five guys left after that Tyrranid invasion. Speaking of which...
- Remove the BA/Necron brofist moment. Please.
- The glorious return of the Pariahs.
- Deceiver unleashes shenanigans out the wazoo. He bests Farseers, Greater Daemons, Cegorach and even Tzeench himself in games of the mind, sowing discord and confusion around the galaxy. However, a certain single Cadian continues to outsmart him at every turn...

I realise this is a pipe dream that will never see fruition, but hey. We all have dreams, right?

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

Gauss deals more hits at 12'', but at 24'', Tesla deals more. Enemies usually do not spawn outright in 12'', they approach your unit. Usually, you can have about 3 turns of shooting at a distance of +12'' when actively keeping distance. If you amass the average amount of hits, Tesla will net you quite a few more hits than Gauss could.

Really? 3 turns of shooting at 12-24" seems incredibly optimistic.

Usually, when units are heading towards my lines, I'm looking at 2 turns of shooting if I'm lucky - before said units are on my doorstep.

Maybe my group just uses more fast units than most. Certainly, if I was frequently looking at 3+ turns of 24" shooting, I'd probably be more generous towards Tesla.

Target iteration. If enemies decide that a unit of Immortals is the most dangerous target, then I've won the game already

 Sigvatr wrote:


Target iteration. If enemies decide that a unit of Immortals is the most dangerous target, then I've won the game already

Out of curiosity, what does your army have that the enemy should be focussing on instead?

Used to have

Mainly Sentry Pylons. Those things are extremely nasty and if not paid attention to from turn 1, you lose the game in turn 3 or before.

I usually had Zahndrekh in a Warrior blob, 1 GA with 10 Necrons and 1 GA with the Destrocourt, a Destroyer Lord in a unit of Wraiths, 2 AB and a squad of Sentry Pylons. Immortals if I felt like it, but they never really felt like having a place in a Necron army. More often than not, I caught myself thinking "Well, you got the models, field them already!".

They really are in a weird spot. You don't need more Gauss, there's Warriors for that. You don't need more Tesla, there's AB for it. The better armor save wasn't a big advantage given the tons of AP2 stuff flying around in my general direction so there barely was any incentive to field them.

Now that I am back to 4th, they finally become useful again. T5 (!), 3+ and Gauss Blasters being Assault is a huge advantage or Necron Warriors who are T4, 3+ but have Rapid Fire that can only shoot 24'' if you did not move.

Nerfing the Immortals to the point of them being a Warrior "upgrade" was never a good idea. They did not fill any gap that needed to be filled and the smaller max unit size really hurt.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Used to have

Mainly Sentry Pylons. Those things are extremely nasty and if not paid attention to from turn 1, you lose the game in turn 3 or before.

I usually had Zahndrekh in a Warrior blob, 1 GA with 10 Necrons and 1 GA with the Destrocourt, a Destroyer Lord in a unit of Wraiths, 2 AB and a squad of Sentry Pylons. Immortals if I felt like it, but they never really felt like having a place in a Necron army. More often than not, I caught myself thinking "Well, you got the models, field them already!".

They really are in a weird spot. You don't need more Gauss, there's Warriors for that. You don't need more Tesla, there's AB for it. The better armor save wasn't a big advantage given the tons of AP2 stuff flying around in my general direction so there barely was any incentive to field them.

Interesting.

I definitely see what you mean, and it probably doesn't help that I field footslogging armies (I'm determined to make them work...), without much vehicle support.

 Sigvatr wrote:

Now that I am back to 4th, they finally become useful again. T5 (!), 3+ and Gauss Blasters being Assault is a huge advantage or Necron Warriors who are T4, 3+ but have Rapid Fire that can only shoot 24'' if you did not move.

Nerfing the Immortals to the point of them being a Warrior "upgrade" was never a good idea. They did not fill any gap that needed to be filled and the smaller max unit size really hurt.

I really don't understand why they were nerfed in that way - it just didn't seem to accomplish anything (other than making them more bland, and making their bulkier forms seem pretty pointless - because that extra armour amounts to virtually sod-all). I'd have much rather see them be a bit more expensive, but keep their old stuff.

Also, it probably doesn't helped that their models are ludicrously overpriced. Sorry GW, but no way are Immortals worth £5 per model.

After talking with my friends, here's my list.

* Gauss returning to wounding on a 6+. Don't see it happening because it would make Tesla even more less attractive than it is now.

* I'd like to see Tesla gain something to make me want to take it. I've read the math, and seen the debates. I like the idea of ignore cover that was suggested. Right now Tesla is like a Blind Date profile, she looks good on paper, but doesn't really put out.

* Tomb Blades are here to stay. Give the Gauss/Tesla Cannons or an increase in unit size.

* Triarch Stalkers gaining a 2nd Weapon, or count as Dread CCW.

* I'd LOVE to see Pariahs return, I think as a Royal Court option to give units some individual Psychic Defense.

* Doomsday Arks getting Variable fire modes not based on movement. Like the SW Flyer where they have a single Lance shot option.

* Some Giant Canoptek MC, that we'll want to pay an ungodly amount of money for.

* A 'Lesser' HQ for smaller point games. Not because we need one, but just to avoid an argument with those who think that there are restrictions automatically in place when playing 'Unbound'.

* Wishlisting on this one: GA option/working on Flayed Ones since they are essentially corrupted Warriors. It would require a small change in fluff, but 'he that shall not be named' has already destroyed that.

What I am expecting:
* A COMPLETE overhaul of how Royal Courts work, especially Cryptek gear.
* Several units not changing much, but getting a points reduction.
* CTan shards getting a work over, and yet another fluff change.
* Trans CTan getting included, and adjusted down. I don't use LOW, but I'm expecting this.
* Imotek or new HQ being put in as LOW slot. Possibly with his own Formation.
* Some AA unit, or option.

Things I don't care about:
* MSS. They're only impressive now because Cron players tend to use them incorrectly. They'll probably change them, but I do just fine w/o them, so makes no difference.
* CCB. I don't think anyone thinks they're going to stay this way. I don't like Characters that don't boost units abilities and this has been one of the Strongest elements of the Necrons so there is zero appeal now. Unless they grant an Auralike ability I'll probably skip looking at them.
* Anni. Barges. I'm expecting changes here but they're fine the way they are. Unlike other players, I've not been impressed with the 2 I have, so I think they're right on as they are. A points increase is due since vehicles in General got better.

I completely forgot that actually.

- Save Flayed Ones, move them to Troops with an option for a Flayed Lord. Make them worth taking too. Rending out the wazoo.

- Include the word "Wazoo" somewhere in the codex. Actually, don't.

- Less "Necrons are crazy" vibe. Zanny Boy can stay crazy. It'll be his shtick.

Tesla is better at 12<24", if the target has a 3+ or 2+ save.

For me, I just don't see enough circumstances where Tesla is superior (both in terms of mathhammer and on the field). On the other hand, as well as obliterating squads with rapid-fire, I've also just had so many situations come up where Gauss was better - either because of AP4, or because I needed a vehicle dead and had run out of other stuff to shoot at it.

He's playing against Space Marines.

Yeah, as Tesla is not only better vs. 2+ and 3+, but also vs. 5+ / 6+ due to the higher volume of fire

I was just looking at the Ork-detachments and I have a new thing I would really, really love!
Space Wolves get 6 HQ's or 8 elites, Orks get 5 elites and 8 troops.

How about a Detachment with 0-6 Heavy Support slots?


*BAM* Blew everyones mind.

If we get Living metal monoliths back, GW just made a sale of 6 monoliths.

Kidding, Ebay did.

Monoliths not having to snap fire their gauss flayer arcs would be nice. That alone will not make them good, though. More sturdiness or fire power needed. Or something. Perhaps the portal will be changed to spewing out random amounts of free warriors, if recent changes are an indicator.
Most necron melee units need to either be a lot cheaper or get better. Mediocre stats and I2 is a huge downside, warscythes are terrifying yes, but super expensive melee units will still simply get swept even if they make it to the enemy. Wraiths are really good, still, as they are durable, hit fairly hard and do not cost too much.

Imhotekh needs changes if he is to become a LOW, currently his night fighting rules are bad, since night fighting got worse. Being able to deep strike flayed ones without scattering is meh. His challenge rules are cool but a bit lacklustre since he is terrible in a challenge.

I expect some way of dealing with psykers. Currently that is really harsh, taking allies of convenience for just some die is a huge point tax. The other option would be to give them something equally dangerous as psykers that no one can deal with. I guess they might have been imagined like that, but it simply does not hold true.
Command barges, night scythes, annihilation barges and wraiths will get nerfed.
Praetorians, lychguard, monoliths, cthans, flayed ones, destroyers, doomsday arks, tomb blades, triarch stalkers and all unique characters except zhandrek are all terrible. They need changes to be used even if the underpriced things get nerfed.

What I hope for is long range fire power, it would go a good way toward, at least in my opinion, making other builds than mobile Tesla destructor / Wraith spamlists more viable. Maybe steal a page from IG and hand us some artillery to shell the enemy while we walk up. Necrons are still a strong shooting army in 12-24", just not strong enough to warrant being ass in long range and assault.

As someone who has to play against Necrons, I just hope they clean up some of the more broken rules. Clean up reanimation protocols and everliving. Right now they are simply too good and don't interact with the current rules well at all. I personally think reanimation protocol should be FNP 5+ with the stipulation that more than 1 model of the original unit type must be alive to get the roll. Everliving is just FNP without the stipulation. It would work much simpler like this, work better within the 7th edition rules, and is both a nerf in some scenarios and a buff in others.

Give warriors and immortals options for special weapons, like a heavy gauss cannon or something. Make cryptek powers work the same as psychic powers. Improve the pratorians and lychguard. Push up the points cost on wraiths, A-barges, and night scythes. Bring back pariahs and give the C'tan back their personality.

Things we will definitely see....Tesla loses extra hits when snap firing, MSS nerfed or removed completely, and the CCB cleaned up and likely losing the sweep attack.

Here's what I'd do personally.



I'm hoping Mindshackle scarabs go bye-bye or get changed so they don't make combats (and especially challenges) practically auto-wins with such a Lord stuck in.

I'd either drop the points costs on Destroyers to 30ppm or give them a 3rd shot. Make Heavy Destroyers only 50pts instead of 60pts.

Likewise, Tesla should probably either be toned town to only one additional hit per 6 or not work on Snapshots. As is you can just have an Annihilation barge or Nightscythe run around jinking the entire game and still average as many hits as a BS3 unit. The "jump" to additional units is also highly unnecessary. Maybe just reduce the Destructor to 3 shots?

I'm redo the monolith, make it really expensive but very powerful. As is, it's not terrible, but it's not really particularly impressive either.

Dump the movement restriction on the Doomsday ark, that's just silly.

Make Flayed Ones troops insted of Elites

Give Praetorians 2A each and dump "Unwieldy" from the Rod of the Covenant, that'd make them worth 40pts.

Also, the Stormlord needs to be less of a "I'm simply included in the army list and get to take potshots at every unit on the table and there's nothing you can do about it". Awful game mechanic.

I'd also up the cost on Spyders to 65pts (50pts for a T6 W3 3+sv MC is loooow) and change the functionality of their Scarab feeding so they can't pull off a "went first, assault turn 1" like they can now.

Bump Scarab price up a bit, as is they've got a crazy number of wounds and an insane amount of speed to get stuck in with enemy armor before they can chew through 30 wounds.

Give Lychguard a 5+ invul base, have shields increase to 3+, get rid of redirect mechanic.

I'd get rid of the Solar Pulse, being able to just declare nightfight is a bit absurd, also redo the Voltaic Staff, that many Haywire shots makes deleting heavy tanks absurdly easy.

Allow Destroyer Lords to take Phase Shifters

Drop Triarch Stalker to ~130pts.

If I may ask, and I do apologize if this post sounds hostile, it is really not meant to. Any of these changes does not seem inappropriate by their own, though the gathered impact of them would more or less just be taking the necrons out back behind the shed and shooting them. The suggested buffs are minor in nature, the suggested nerfs are major.

I can sympatihze as while I do not only play necrons, I also play against them, and some of their mechanics can be annoying, such as Mindshackle being a bandaid for being absolutely awful in assault despite having access to warscythes. Though it should be noted that mindshackle only does jack if the enemy unit only contains one character model that is the brunt of the units power. And even then it is a 50/50 shot. I think it is not unreasonable for necrons to have clearly defined weaknesses, but I think it is too harsh to at the same time make them mediocre at best in all areas where they are currently strong. There has to be clearly defined strengths.

I do not really intend to start an argument about specific changes suggested, since that may not really be in the nature of a wishlisting thread. I thought that we could perhaps discuss the matter conceptually though, such as what is needed in broad strokes rather than specific changes on a detailed level. If anyone is interested, that is.

 Sigvatr wrote:


In short...back to 3rd codex. Reboot. Modernize it.

That's what the 5th edition codex was, a reboot.

I'd rather not go back to having only 6 different guns and half the amount of units; I'm not sure what incentive GW would have to do that.

I would be very surprised (judging by the past few codices) if the 7th ed. Necron codex wasn't essentially 90% copy-paste replica of 5th edition as far as fluff is concerned, but Matt Ward's name not being on the book will make all the difference.

 Truth118 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:


In short...back to 3rd codex. Reboot. Modernize it.

That's what the 5th edition codex was, a reboot.

I'd rather not go back to having only 6 different guns and half the amount of units; I'm not sure what incentive GW would have to do that.

I would be very surprised (judging by the past few codices) if the 7th ed. Necron codex wasn't essentially 90% copy-paste replica of 5th edition as far as fluff is concerned, but Matt Ward's name not being on the book will make all the difference.

I don't know why Matt Ward's being brought up anymore, all of them have been writing gak fluff and rules lately.

Something tells me we're going to get a minor update.

Necrons have become a well selling army in the recent years since their reboot, and making them mediocre will only kill that sales group. We should be able to get an idea of how the "new" codex's will be when GK drop. Since that was rebooted into a upper tier codex back at the end of 5th, if that only gets a moderate update, I get the feeling that Necrons will get a similar treatment.

Supplements for anything decent, naturally.

MSS will get a nerf. That's a given. Though I would like to see several of the units get something better than I2 to replace it. Seriously, MSS is our only defense in CC against high initiative.
Wraiths will get a minor point increase. With a full unit of Wraiths costing about $100, I don't see that model getting nerfed enough to get people to stop buying them.
Night/Doom Scythes will get a point increase.

I know that it is highly unlikely this will happen, but I wish they could undo a lot of the Ward did to the fluff. I hate how now they are just Tomb Kings in space.

Ratflinger wrote:

Praetorians, lychguard, monoliths, cthans, flayed ones, destroyers, doomsday arks, tomb blades, triarch stalkers and all unique characters except zhandrek are all terrible.

Uhhh...Triarch Stalkers are awesome. Especially combined with either Deathmarks or Tesla Immortals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
As someone who has to play against Necrons, I just hope they clean up some of the more broken rules. Clean up reanimation protocols and everliving. Right now they are simply too good and don't interact with the current rules well at all. I personally think reanimation protocol should be FNP 5+ with the stipulation that more than 1 model of the original unit type must be alive to get the roll. Everliving is just FNP without the stipulation. It would work much simpler like this, work better within the 7th edition rules, and is both a nerf in some scenarios and a buff in others.

Give warriors and immortals options for special weapons, like a heavy gauss cannon or something. Make cryptek powers work the same as psychic powers.

First off, RP is not THAT good. If you're playing against any competent player, they'll just focus fire, and there goes your "FNP". So making it a straight up FNP would be stupid, and it would take away from the whole feeling of the army. But on that note, anyone here who has played DeathWatch, the Fantasy Flight DnD of 40k, a lot of cool Necron stuff comes from there, and I wish it worked in the tabletop. Like, raise the price of the Phylactery to 25 points or so, and make it give the bearer FNP, straight up. Also, characters should have IWND. I know it's a straight buff, but considering our HQs typically don't do much anyway other than ride in a Barge and kill vehicles, or go with Wraiths for Preferred Enemy, it wouldn't be that good. Plus, the fact that our HQs don't do much, an Overlord costs 90 points BASE. A chaos Lord is only like, 65. Yeah, an Overlord is S5 and T5. Okay? Still I2 with access to half of the options of most other HQs, and WS4. Plus, I really wanna see a shooty HQ, I would love that. Or an Overlord that has a Voidblade AND a Particle Caster? That wouldn't be that good, but it would be effing awesome.

Warriors and Immortals having access to Heavy or Special weapons is cool in theory, but A.) Doesn't fit with Necrons at all, and B.) I would feel more like I'm playing a Space marine/imperial army, whom I despise. What's next? Every squad can take a lord as their Sergent? No, I like the idea of a Royal Court. Phalanxes of pretty much mindless robots, even with the reboot that's pretty much what Immortals and warriors are.

Cryptek power as Psychic powers......I will love GW forever. I've been wanting that, so, so, so bad. That would be awesome. But as it stands, it would actually be a straight nerf, depending on how they do it, and it would never happen, because most of it is because of special alien technology or wargear, not actual powers. But, having a generic Cryptek HQ would be cool, and having the "Harbringers" be different disciplines and you can take powers from it, that would be awesome. But then, how the hell would perils work? Or anything else that involves psychic defenses or stuff. "Oop, Dave tried to cast Solar Pulse, but his head exploded cuz Tyranids are close" Hmmmm, no thanks.

I guess they will randomly change a few rules and pt costs here and there. Nothing really specific.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
As someone who has to play against Necrons, I just hope they clean up some of the more broken rules. Clean up reanimation protocols and everliving. Right now they are simply too good and don't interact with the current rules well at all. I personally think reanimation protocol should be FNP 5+ with the stipulation that more than 1 model of the original unit type must be alive to get the roll. Everliving is just FNP without the stipulation. It would work much simpler like this, work better within the 7th edition rules, and is both a nerf in some scenarios and a buff in others.

So, basically, you want them to kill the entire flavour of Necrons. Got it.

 krodarklorr wrote:

First off, RP is not THAT good. If you're playing against any competent player, they'll just focus fire, and there goes your "FNP". So making it a straight up FNP would be stupid, and it would take away from the whole feeling of the army. But on that note, anyone here who has played DeathWatch, the Fantasy Flight DnD of 40k, a lot of cool Necron stuff comes from there, and I wish it worked in the tabletop. Like, raise the price of the Phylactery to 25 points or so, and make it give the bearer FNP, straight up. Also, characters should have IWND. I know it's a straight buff, but considering our HQs typically don't do much anyway other than ride in a Barge and kill vehicles, or go with Wraiths for Preferred Enemy, it wouldn't be that good. Plus, the fact that our HQs don't do much, an Overlord costs 90 points BASE. A chaos Lord is only like, 65. Yeah, an Overlord is S5 and T5. Okay? Still I2 with access to half of the options of most other HQs, and WS4. Plus, I really wanna see a shooty HQ, I would love that. Or an Overlord that has a Voidblade AND a Particle Caster? That wouldn't be that good, but it would be effing awesome.

Agreed.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Cryptek power as Psychic powers......I will love GW forever. I've been wanting that, so, so, so bad. That would be awesome. But as it stands, it would actually be a straight nerf, depending on how they do it, and it would never happen, because most of it is because of special alien technology or wargear, not actual powers. But, having a generic Cryptek HQ would be cool, and having the "Harbringers" be different disciplines and you can take powers from it, that would be awesome. But then, how the hell would perils work? Or anything else that involves psychic defenses or stuff. "Oop, Dave tried to cast Solar Pulse, but his head exploded cuz Tyranids are close" Hmmmm, no thanks.

What if Crypteks weren't psykers, but counted as psykers for the purposes of generating warp charges in your opponent's psychic phase?

So, they don't have any psychic powers themselves, but they give you a few extra dispel dice to try and stop your opponent's psychic powers.

What if Crypteks weren't psykers, but counted as psykers for the purposes of generating warp charges in your opponent's psychic phase?

So, they don't have any psychic powers themselves, but they give you a few extra dispel dice to try and stop your opponent's psychic powers.

I'd say baseline Crypteks gain +1 baseline.

With some restructuring to Harbingers of Despair or Eternity to give them some anti-psyker weapons/items, with Nightmare Shroud being changed to allowing for that Cryptek to instead dispel on a 5 or 4+ for example.

I wish they would streamline the codex again. It's a clunky mess. Why not have 1 Cryptek for each variant? Choose a loadout that best fits the variant and be done with it.

The codex is so terribly written. It just seems like tons of ideas and someone just tried to squeeze all of the min. Like the Aeon Staff. Most useless piece of wargear in the entire game. "Dude, the Cryptek is about time, let's give him a time weapon!". And you ended up with a long stick of trash.

 Sigvatr wrote:
I wish they would streamline the codex again. It's a clunky mess. Why not have 1 Cryptek for each variant? Choose a loadout that best fits the variant and be done with it.

Sorry, but could you explain this? I'm a little confused as to what you mean when you say '1 cryptek for each variant'.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The codex is so terribly written. It just seems like tons of ideas and someone just tried to squeeze all of the min. Like the Aeon Staff. Most useless piece of wargear in the entire game. "Dude, the Cryptek is about time, let's give him a time weapon!". And you ended up with a long stick of trash.

Really, it seems like GW don't understand their own game. I mean, that time staff thing might have worked as a ranged weapon. Sure, most of the time it wouldn't do much, but at least it wouldn't rely on getting a 1-wound T4, I2 model into combat, and hoping that his 4+ save is enough to pull him through so that he can utilise his wopping 1 attack at WS4.

And, apparently they think that combat is a great place for crypteks to be, because the cryptek hero has 4 attacks.

Also, what the hell is the attraction of a Voidblade? A Destroyer lord has to pay to upgrade his WARSCYTHE to one of these. It's like if TH/SS terminators were given the option of paying 10pts to upgrade their Thunderhammers to chainswords.


Also, going in a different direction... what's wrong with normal capes? I like the Necron Lord's cape because it's a nice, simple design. However, every overlord seems to have decided to steal some bead-curtains and use them as capes like they're 3 years old.

Im hoping a huge nerf bat is taken to these metal gits, the get back up should be changed to feel no pain, if i hit you with demolisher shell you shouldnt be getting back up, I killed a lord 3 times to try and get the slay the warlord with absolutly no luck

A nice new cover.

Will the Necrons be the first army that currently has a fairly strong codex to get a 7th edition update? I can't think of any other armies in 7th/late 6th that were arguably top 3-5 which got a new book. Thus far it seems like the trend has been to take mid-tier/lower-tier armies and make them a little better without dramatically raising their power level. As good as the Necrons currently are, even a lateral shift of the kind GW seems to prefer with the new books would still be considered a win overall wouldn't it?

The more I think about it, the more a new Cryptek variant with accompanying $20 model seems likely.

 Thokt wrote:
The more I think about it, the more a new Cryptek variant with accompanying $20 model seems likely.

Perhaps we could persuade a store manager to film one of these boxes on camera.

That way, we could create a time-lapse film of cardboard slowly decaying on a store shelf.

 krodarklorr wrote:

First off, RP is not THAT good. If you're playing against any competent player, they'll just focus fire, and there goes your "FNP". So making it a straight up FNP would be stupid, and it would take away from the whole feeling of the army. But on that note, anyone here who has played DeathWatch, the Fantasy Flight DnD of 40k, a lot of cool Necron stuff comes from there, and I wish it worked in the tabletop. Like, raise the price of the Phylactery to 25 points or so, and make it give the bearer FNP, straight up. Also, characters should have IWND. I know it's a straight buff, but considering our HQs typically don't do much anyway other than ride in a Barge and kill vehicles, or go with Wraiths for Preferred Enemy, it wouldn't be that good. Plus, the fact that our HQs don't do much, an Overlord costs 90 points BASE. A chaos Lord is only like, 65. Yeah, an Overlord is S5 and T5. Okay? Still I2 with access to half of the options of most other HQs, and WS4. Plus, I really wanna see a shooty HQ, I would love that. Or an Overlord that has a Voidblade AND a Particle Caster? That wouldn't be that good, but it would be effing awesome.

Actually, given the other abilities and points cost for basic warriors and immortals, RP and especially Everliving is THAT good, but that isn't the biggest problem with those rules. They simply don't work without breaking alot of core rules and its extremely clunky as a mechanic. As it is currently, its better than FNP and Invulnerable Saves in most aspects. Its a save that negates the ID USR, and even allows you to save against attacks that remove the model model with no save possible. Whats more, it allows you to rearrange the returning models unit after making the saves, potentially taking them out of assault range. There is a reason that the 6th edition FAQ for Necrons had the highest page count, and its broken mechanics like Reanimation Protocols and Everliving (along with a few others).

Changing it to a modified type of FNP doesn't do anything to the Necron flavor, it just eliminates a broken mechanic. Necrons with FNP are still extremely durable, just not to to the extent of absurdity that it is now. Originally, Necrons had limitations to RP (it was called We'll Be Back then), and the less broken of those limitations would be brought back with FNP (the power weapon negating the save was dumb and needs to stay away). If anything, FNP would be more useful against non-ID attacks because it allows the front models to tank wounds, and reduces the chance of wiping the whole unit out. It would just be a nerf against ID and remove-as-casualty weapons, which in all honesty, SHOULD happen. A 14 point Necron Warrior should NOT be more durable than a 130 point Space Marine Chapter Master.

To me, changing it to a FNP mechanic is both a nerf where its needed and a buff to help take the sting off what is lost, which really should be how GW tries to fix broken rules to begin with. I feel it would certainly go a long way to help with the external balance of the army.

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I wish they would streamline the codex again. It's a clunky mess. Why not have 1 Cryptek for each variant? Choose a loadout that best fits the variant and be done with it.

Sorry, but could you explain this? I'm a little confused as to what you mean when you say '1 cryptek for each variant'.

Sure! What I meant was that there is not "one" Harbinger of the Storm, but just "the" Harbinger of the Storm. It's one special character with the same loadout and special rules. You could take multiples of them, but all are the same. Let's face it: a lot of the Cryptek gear is terrible and never sees use anyway.

And...seriously, whoever suggests that WBB is removed from Necrons should really just....ugh. It's the core mechanic of the entire army and if you think that this is what's making Necrons overpowered, then sorry, but the problem lies with you, not the army.

 Ciciro wrote:
I know that it is highly unlikely this will happen, but I wish they could undo a lot of the Ward did to the fluff. I hate how now they are just Tomb Kings in space.

It's objectively superior to being Metal Tyranids.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I wish they would streamline the codex again. It's a clunky mess. Why not have 1 Cryptek for each variant? Choose a loadout that best fits the variant and be done with it.

Sorry, but could you explain this? I'm a little confused as to what you mean when you say '1 cryptek for each variant'.

Sure! What I meant was that there is not "one" Harbinger of the Storm, but just "the" Harbinger of the Storm. It's one special character with the same loadout and special rules. You could take multiples of them, but all are the same. Let's face it: a lot of the Cryptek gear is terrible and never sees use anyway.

And...seriously, whoever suggests that WBB is removed from Necrons should really just....ugh. It's the core mechanic of the entire army and if you think that this is what's making Necrons overpowered, then sorry, but the problem lies with you, not the army.

Actually, if it was WBB instead of Reanimation Protocols, I would feel better about it. WBB had built in limitations that balanced it out, such as ID and Power weapons negating it. That still doesn't change the fact that its a clunky mechanic that doesn't interact well with the current (or even 6th edition) rule set. It needs to be overhauled in a major way, and my suggestion was to use FNP as the basis (with some tweaks to make it fit better). It wouldn't change the flavor of the Necrons one whit, it just removes a clunky and broken mechanic.

 Psienesis wrote:


It's objectively superior to being Metal Tyranids.

So, in short, you don't know / understand the TruCron fluff and think that personal opinions can be objective. You sound like a very trustworthy person

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Actually, given the other abilities and points cost for basic warriors and immortals, RP and especially Everliving is THAT good, but that isn't the biggest problem with those rules. They simply don't work without breaking alot of core rules and its extremely clunky as a mechanic.

I know, right? Thank goodness there isn't some other mechanic that breaks a ton of core rules. *cough* ATSKNF *cough*

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
As it is currently, its better than FNP and Invulnerable Saves in most aspects. Its a save that negates the ID USR, and even allows you to save against attacks that remove the model model with no save possible. Whats more, it allows you to rearrange the returning models unit after making the saves, potentially taking them out of assault range. There is a reason that the 6th edition FAQ for Necrons had the highest page count, and its broken mechanics like Reanimation Protocols and Everliving (along with a few others).

That seems a very biased way of looking at it.

- Unlike an invulnerable save or FNP, RP doesn't prevent casualties being taken at the time - so can still cause you to take a break test or lose combat.
- Falling back/fleeing prevents RP
- Wiping out the unit prevents RP

Even on characters, your best bet is to try and stop them dying in the first place - otherwise you're gambling an awful lot on a 1/3 chance to get back up.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Changing it to a modified type of FNP doesn't do anything to the Necron flavor, it just eliminates a broken mechanic.

The whole point is that Necrons repair themselves - not that they avoid damage. Changing RP to FNP would kill their flavour stone-dead.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
It would just be a nerf against ID and remove-as-casualty weapons, which in all honesty, SHOULD happen. A 14 point Necron Warrior should NOT be more durable than a 130 point Space Marine Chapter Master.

And isn't.

Hence the CM's 4 wounds and better save - which will give him a lot more durability against most weapons. And, even if you're talking about a S8 AP2 weapon, the CM still has a 4++ save (not to mention LoS) - so remains tougher than the warrior.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

To me, changing it to a FNP mechanic is both a nerf where its needed and a buff to help take the sting off what is lost, which really should be how GW tries to fix broken rules to begin with. I feel it would certainly go a long way to help with the external balance of the army.

As a question, how would you feel if it was changed back to the old WWB mechanic? Whereby it works on a 4+, but ID prevents WBB.

quote=Sigvatr 609472 7106065 143e30eaa2b1f83bf89eee1359542fc8.jpg]
Sure! What I meant was that there is not "one" Harbinger of the Storm, but just "the" Harbinger of the Storm. It's one special character with the same loadout and special rules. You could take multiples of them, but all are the same. Let's face it: a lot of the Cryptek gear is terrible and never sees use anyway.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


Actually, if it was WBB instead of Reanimation Protocols, I would feel better about it. WBB had built in limitations that balanced it out, such as ID and Power weapons negating it. That still doesn't change the fact that its a clunky mechanic that doesn't interact well with the current (or even 6th edition) rule set. It needs to be overhauled in a major way, and my suggestion was to use FNP as the basis (with some tweaks to make it fit better). It wouldn't change the flavor of the Necrons one whit, it just removes a clunky and broken mechanic.

It's...different. WBB had the drawback, but said drawback was easily countered with a Regeneration Orb that always grants the unit a 4+++ - and not only the Lord's unit, but ALL units in 6''. But yeah, the concept was MUCH better in Codex:Necrons 2002 because it fit perfectly to the fluff: some weapons are so powerful that they can destroy a Necron Warrior beyond hopes of immediate repair on the battlefield and force it to be teleported back the base. This was perfectly reflected in the rules by disallowing WBB if hit by a ID-ish weapon. The new rules for WBB is just...expectable. GW thought "Yo, let's just...well...change it...I guess? So...uh...make it worse but better!" And what happened? A new rule that is less connected with the fluff and even clunkier with ANOTHER rule squeezed in, Everliving.

I'm currently writing a post at why Codex:Necron (2002) was the epitome of a good codex (in regards to the writing, not the fluff ) and will explain more in said post / thread.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:


It's objectively superior to being Metal Tyranids.

So, in short, you don't know / understand the TruCron fluff and think that personal opinions can be objective. You sound like a very trustworthy person

Lets see:

C'tan want to close off the warp, remove souls, feast on the living afterwords because its far more succulent then stars.

Necrons, being without personality by "Trucron" despite xenology debunking it, just do as the hivemind...Sorry, C'tan say.

Oldcrons are metal Tyranids.

Because tea parties in space are so much better.

Can we not get into this "debate" again?

When I say "debate", we all know I mean "Futile argument in which neither side will back down, concede a point, or convince the other they're right or wrong."

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:


It's objectively superior to being Metal Tyranids.

So, in short, you don't know / understand the TruCron fluff and think that personal opinions can be objective. You sound like a very trustworthy person

Lets see:

C'tan want to close off the warp, remove souls, feast on the living afterwords because its far more succulent then stars.

Necrons, being without personality by "Trucron" despite xenology debunking it, just do as the hivemind...Sorry, C'tan say.

Oldcrons are metal Tyranids.

From a very high level, yes, you are right, Oldcrons were essentially metal Nids (Nidcrons?). However, I think you are glossing over the level of detail the individual C'Tan brought. I didn't like that they were the 40K McGuffins that were behind ever major event, but I did like the idea behind them being very different individuals that had their own goals.

Personally, I'd like to see a combination of the two fluffs, bring back the C'Tan with personalities instead of this shard nonsense, but also keep the ruling caste of Necrons that have unique personalities as well. Maybe make them autonomous servants who chafe under the yoke of the C'Tan and while still doing their bidding, are looking for ways to get rid of their C'Tan masters. That opens up bigger opportunities to maybe expand their story, maybe have a Necron civil war, where some of the Overlords have broken free and have their own empires, while those still under C'Tan control are working to re-incorporate the rebels back into their empires. The "transcendant" C'Tan are "true" C'tan who use the tesseract vault as a way to form a physical shell, while C'Tan shards are just that, remains of C'Tan shells that have been salvaged and still hold power but no free will.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:


It's objectively superior to being Metal Tyranids.

So, in short, you don't know / understand the TruCron fluff and think that personal opinions can be objective. You sound like a very trustworthy person

Lets see:

C'tan want to close off the warp, remove souls, feast on the living afterwords because its far more succulent then stars.

Necrons, being without personality by "Trucron" despite xenology debunking it, just do as the hivemind...Sorry, C'tan say.

Oldcrons are metal Tyranids.

According to you, every IG officer, Space Marine sergeant etc. are "Hivemind". The Chaos Gods are Hivemind too now. Was the Hivemind actively trying to destroy itself?

You make the same mistake a lot of NewCrons do: you just skim the fluff and then make a (false) conclusion. The reason for this mistake is that both Necrons and Tyranids have an extremely similar goal: the former strife to destroy the entire universe and all life (well, most of them...can never be too sure with The Deceiver) whereas the Tyranids want to eat everything because. The important difference, that NewCrons mostly forget about, is the entire past - Tyranids have never been more than a huge swarm of nomnomnom. The Necrons were so much more - they were an entirely different race, extremely technologically advanced and were driven into their current fate by hate and a downright gakky short life full of misery, just to be then betrayed by the C'tan and forever being enslaved. There's more to it, check the internet, there still are countless sites telling you the TruCron fluff.

I can understand why you make that mistake, just saying that stating that there's an "objective opinion" immediately strips all crediblity you have.

Both fluff versions are basically this: versions. If you like NewCron fluff, great. If you don't want to see me ramble about TruCron fluff, ignore me. Both versions are fluff, both can be liked, be it TruCron or NewCron. It's personal taste, it's a personal decision which one you prefer and there are arguments for either. However, there isn't any sort of "objectively better". Claiming that there is makes you look...funny. So don't do it

Personally, I'd like to see a combination of the two fluffs, bring back the C'Tan with personalities instead of this shard nonsense, but also keep the ruling caste of Necrons that have unique personalities as well. Maybe make them autonomous servants who chafe under the yoke of the C'Tan and while still doing their bidding, are looking for ways to get rid of their C'Tan masters. That opens up bigger opportunities to maybe expand their story, maybe have a Necron civil war, where some of the Overlords have broken free and have their own empires, while those still under C'Tan control are working to re-incorporate the rebels back into their empires. The "transcendant" C'Tan are "true" C'tan who use the tesseract vault as a way to form a physical shell, while C'Tan shards are just that, remains of C'Tan shells that have been salvaged and still hold power but no free will.

Actually I do enjoy the thought of the shards, many of them do actually gain personalities as they grow in power and recover their thoughts and minds, maybe instead there should be a C'tan or two who has managed to recover rather then starting under C'tan they are forced back into their old protocols as their thoughts and minds slip away and are forced to see their hard work and freedoms fade away as their control does, their minds regressing to the point where they only know that they are ready to serve. Y'know, grimdark,

The thing about Transcendent being multiple shards grown into a super power and then gaining more and then becoming a full C'tan again is something I do want to see, and infact it should happen next time, with the C'tan being angry at losing, at being hateful at their very essence being used by their slaves as if they were just pets, spiteful at the fact that their slaves have regained it.

The C'tan may not be fully back, but the ones that are, they are prepared to shatter the prisons, gather more shards for their battle and prepare to return the Necrons back to the Age of the C'tan.

The Necrons were so much more - they were an entirely different race, extremely technologically advanced and were driven into their current fate by hate and a downright gakky short life full of misery, just to be then betrayed by the C'tan and forever being enslaved. There's more to it, check the internet, there still are countless sites telling you the TruCron fluff.

I can understand why you make that mistake, just saying that stating that there's an "objective opinion" immediately strips all crediblity you have.

Might want to learn the difference between names because I never said such a thing about objective.

Also I have the oldcron codex, along with the books, so don't try that "I don't understand it because" because I actually did understand them, also so they had a past, we know nothing of the Tyranids past and all that.

Also Hivemind Sarge? Really now, a commander can order his troops to battle, but all the C'tan needs to do is give an order and it'll be done without a second thought, because there is no thinking. The C'tan said go and so we go. A better example would be the Tech Priests and their Servitors, with the C'tan as the Priest and the Servitors being the Necrons.

Actually, I can only recommend people to look into Fall of Orpheus. It's a great compromise between TruCron and NewCron fluff and a really well-written piece.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


Also Hivemind Sarge? Really now, a commander can order his troops to battle, but all the C'tan needs to do is give an order and it'll be done without a second thought, because there is no thinking. The C'tan said go and so we go. A better example would be the Tech Priests and their Servitors, with the C'tan as the Priest and the Servitors being the Necrons.

The C'tan are gods. Corporeal gods. If a god was to give me, a human, on the same side, a command, I'd damn well do it.

/e: Arf, sorry about the names mix - similar avatar colors deceived me D:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Actually, I can only recommend people to look into Fall of Orpheus. It's a great compromise between TruCron and NewCron fluff and a really well-written piece.

I'll agree on that, it was really well written.

The C'tan are gods. Corporeal gods. If a god was to give me, a human, on the same side, a command, I'd damn well do it.

Even Chaos doesn't obey their masters that erringly, Skarbrand is truth that they will strike their own gods if they feel to it.

Also they are just stronger aliens really, sure they feasted on stars and all that but they were just far bigger and more powerful 'alien' creatures.

To be fair so are the Chaos "Gods", but hey, there is no gods, only monsters in 40k.

Kangodo wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Mindshackle Scarabs reduce WS, BS, and I to 1 in a challenge. No LD test.

That would be too much of a nerf.
The biggest strength of MSS is the psychological factor because everyone thinks this will wipe an entire unit away.
If you charge a Lord, you can always make sure it effects a normal Infantry-model.

Sure, if you ignore challenges. And GW tends to nerf the overpowered mechanics hard. See Jaws of the World Wolf.

Kangodo wrote:

Tesla Weapons replace Tesla rule with Shock rule from Living Lightning (Same as tesla but does not work on snap shots)

Strongly disagree, it's not that strong at the moment.
Snapshotting is usually done at Flyers or when being charged.
So removing the bonus on snapshots would either mean we get an additional Overwatch rule, like the Tau, and we'd need another AA-model.

Why? Tesla getting bonuses on snapshots does not fit common sense or game mechanics. Other effects that normally trigger on a 6 to hit, like precision shot, don't work on snapshots, so what makes Necrons so special? And there is something wrong with the rules when a flier that jinks, a mechanic desined to give a defensive boost in exchange for weaker offense, does statistically more hits after jinking. And a new AA model? GW would love to sell new models. Or ive some rules to say the Triarch Stalker, make it more appealing.

Kangodo wrote:

Lychguard: +5 PPM, bump to 2+ armor.

At the moment they never see play. So I would go with only a 2+ and even then they will hardly be used.

Maybe

Kangodo wrote:

Annihilation Barge: Bump to 125 points

100 points, at max.

A mere 10 point increase is not really going to help balance them at all.

Kangodo wrote:

Transcendent C'Tan: Drop Seismic Assault from 6d6 to 3d6. Bump base price by 180 points. Add it and Obelisk to the Codex. Obelisk is fine as is.

But that would make the attack entirely useless in Apocalypse.
I think that 200 points is more than fine for a 6D6-attack. It also doesn't need a price-bumb unless you give it more wounds and T10.
Obelisk is NOT fine, Obelisk is terrible.

6D6 Krak missiles at BS6 was balanced back when Destroyer weapons always ignored saves, and when they were an Apoc only unit. Destroyer got nerfed, with no points drops, so why did the 6D6 attack stay the same? Especially when it is one of the few superheavies that can drop fliers easily, on a model small enough to easily hide? More wounds possibly, but T10 would be a mistake as long as it is allowed in normal games. Already with a 4++ and FNP, it is saving 2/3 of any wounds, and even Las-cannons only hurt it on a 4+ The only real threat to it is the 6 result on a destroyer weapon, and unlike most other models with a D Weapon, they are small enough to easily hide out of line of sight.

Obelisk- give it quantum shielding. Fixed.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

To be fair so are the Chaos "Gods", but hey, there is no gods, only monsters in 40k.

There are no monsters, there is only war

/e: GRIMDAAAAAAARK!

 Sigvatr wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

To be fair so are the Chaos "Gods", but hey, there is no gods, only monsters in 40k.

There are no monsters, there is only war

/e: GRIMDAAAAAAARK!

No kings! Only slaves and those who call themselves masters who grind themselves on the grindstone of waaaar!


Seriously though, I honestly wouldn't mind some old 'trucron' leanings as I posted before, with C'tan who have broken free (New SC's/Lords of War, I'd hope for the Firelord myself, and the one who invented the flayer curse). Maybe some shards have recovered themselves and are manipulating themselves into being used more and more often, tricking the ones who control them (Deciever), or who is causing the Necrons under them fear of their own destruction, forcing them to use their shards more as they begin to coalescence into their old self once again (Nightbringer). With the fully formed C'tan over-riding the Necrons in their control into their older selves. Because Grimdark, also it would give them some sort of personality as they know they've lost yet again, their minds and souls being cleansed as they know their freedom was only temporary.



Personally I want to see more stuff done with the Shards, also better options for the Flayed ones and Guard, That shield is so cool and all...But useless!

Gauss no longer glancing on 6.

Give them weapon options in the squads for anti vehicle.

I would like to see all the never used units get adjustments.

Destroyers and heavy destroyers, give them another wound or lower the points a bundle, preferably both.
Any and all melee units - revamp, they just straight up suck right now. At least let them take ghost arks as transports (though the ghost ark will probably move to a slot and allow that to happen)
Tomb blades, let me take a unit of 10, 5 is too little.
Warlord traits should be interesting. I full expect to see something about res protocols as a warlord trait.
MSS will be nerfed, no sure how or to what, but I am sure it will be nerfed. Maybe it will happen at the necron players initiative step, or the end of combat?
Wraiths will probably get a wee price hike, I am thinking 40pt base.
Night scythe and ghost ark are solid vehicles.
Doomscythe though, it will have a complete re-wording of its gun. Honestly surprised they never added anything into the FAQ about it.
Doomsday ark might get a wee change.
Monolith, give it ceremite plating, remove ordinance from the blast and make the 4 guns better than basic warrior guns, at least immortal guns? Weird strength test thing will not work on MCs.
Special characters? They all kind of suck right now, maybe one or two will become useful.
Flayed ones will still suck
Lychguard will still be the necron TDA. you want them to be good, they look cool, but they are too expensive.
Royal court will be changed into a character upgrade for every unit. So when you make your list, warriors will say something like add a royal court member for 10pt. Then on the armory there will be costs and upgrades for different royal court members.
yeah, tesla might not work on 6s, honestly it is my favorite gun in the game. The lack of AP balances it out pretty well in my eyes.
Would love to see C'tan get a points rebalance, just too expensive for what they do. Perhaps a flying option?

As for a new big model? I don't really think they need one. If they get one I feel like it will be a vehicle of some sort.

 Bulldogging wrote:
Gauss no longer glancing on 6.

Give them weapon options in the squads for anti vehicle.

Nah, leave Gauss as is. Its kind of a counterpart to their eternal enemy, the Eldar. Eldar shuriken weapons auto-wound with a 6, Necron gauss weapons auto-glances on a 6.

If trazyn is warlod in an unbound list, treat all necron models as lychguard. In addition independant characters in his ally detachment are treated as necron lords for the purpose of surrogate hosts. trazyn will revive with wounds equal to the replaced models wounds

Flayed ones disappear forever

Gauss weapons have a stacking effect if enough hit a unit. If a unit is hit 20+ times by gauss weapons in a single turn the next turn the unit suffers -1 to their armor save for that turn.

New unit: super scourge doomsday genocide death beam launcher cannon v2.5

No! You stay away from my Flayed Ones.
I just got 20 of them and I want to field them for the coming years.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Sure, if you ignore challenges. And GW tends to nerf the overpowered mechanics hard. See Jaws of the World Wolf.

Question:
9 ASM and a Sergeant charge into a mob with MSS-Lord.
Which model will hit itself and its unit?

Why? Tesla getting bonuses on snapshots does not fit common sense or game mechanics. Other effects that normally trigger on a 6 to hit, like precision shot, don't work on snapshots, so what makes Necrons so special?

So? How many rules do we have that actually do something special on a to-hit of 6? At the moment it's 1:1.
It doesn't make sense for Precision Shots to work on Snap Shotting, since Snap Shots are shots that you can't really aim for.
Tesla has nothing to do with aiming, it's about lightning chaining around.

A mere 10 point increase is not really going to help balance them at all.

Perhaps, but you can throw them all with the trash if you add a 38% increase.

6D6 Krak missiles at BS6 was balanced back when Destroyer weapons always ignored saves, and when they were an Apoc only unit. Destroyer got nerfed, with no points drops, so why did the 6D6 attack stay the same?

Because the number of attacks are fine?
Maybe a drop in AP together with a drop in point-cost?

Obelisk- give it quantum shielding. Fixed.

And then what? People are still not going to use it.
If I want AA, I'll take my Pylon that suddenly only fires at Flyers.

 Sigvatr wrote:


- No Matt Ward.
- Matt Ward being kept away from the codex with an extremely long stick. A sharp one, preferably.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/609856.page#7106550

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:


- No Matt Ward.
- Matt Ward being kept away from the codex with an extremely long stick. A sharp one, preferably.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/609856.page#7106550

Agreed.

There may yet be hope my Trucron brother.

Don't be too happy.
Now we'll get the same fluff but with a shittier rule-writer.

 Dylanj94 wrote:
Gauss weapons have a stacking effect if enough hit a unit. If a unit is hit 20+ times by gauss weapons in a single turn the next turn the unit suffers -1 to their armor save for that turn.

Now all I want is a big gun that shoots scarabs.

Kangodo wrote:
Don't be too happy.
Now we'll get the same fluff but with a shittier rule-writer.

Or fluff writer, Kelly wrote the Ultramarines as gods in that one book vs the Necrons.

Give me Pariahs back.

Just a few more options really.
HQ wise i find them pretty damn good.

Troops wise though, just seems a bit plain with the weapons.
Even orks have access to upgraded weapons.

Also, destroyers need some kind of a fix.
As it stands they are pretty fragile for a hefty price tag, even more so when upgraded to a heavy.

Flayed ones need a bit of use for something.

Lychguard and triarch need some form of use.
Both are dedicated CC units, but neither are even close to solid at the role.
A jump in both A and I would be nice though as hitting 1st is 1 thing, but hitting 1st with barely any attacks seems worthless.

Pariahs should absolutely be back. They were perfect. They weren't good models, but they fit perfectly. The Necron's main weakness is The Warp and Pariahs fit perectly into that gap as a countermeans to enemy Psykers. It makes so much sense from a fluff perspective and ditching them just showed that Ward did not care for a coherent concept.

Pariahs should be back definitely.

Just replace Lych Guard with Pariahs. Same models bar the shields and nobody will miss them anyway.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Give me Pariahs back.

I've heard multiple people say how awesome it would be if they were a new anti-Psyker model.
Would be awesome if they became a new Royal Court-model.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Or fluff writer, Kelly wrote the Ultramarines as gods in that one book vs the Necrons.

Damnos? Yeah.. that was.. painful to read.
If it were up to him, each Codex would be filled with Battle Reports on how awesome the Ultramarines are.
The worst part was how they killed the C'tan in that book.. Painful to read.

I like Lychguard...

I can agree that Pariah's should come back, but Lychguard need not be excised for that.

So pretty much what I understand is that necron players want their good units to stay the way that they are and their bad units to be improved. Meanwhile, everyone who plays against necrons wants their good units nerfed and their bad units to stay the same. Hmmmm, just like every other release.

Personally, I'd like to see MSS removed and replaced with a useful melee option. Basically give them some sort of protocol which would up their WS and initiative so that they could fight on equal terms with other models. Maybe also lower the price a bit.

Also asking for RP to be removed is like asking for drop pods to be removed. Yes it's a very annoying rule to fight against, but its not overpowered.

Give us back the pariahs.

My experience with Necrons is that the opponent's threat assessment is way off.
From this forum and conversations with players there are three things that people see as overpowered:
-MSS
-Reanimation Protocols and Resurrection Orbs
-Gauss

The usual response when I do the math and explain the 'real issues' (like zooming flyers that can disembark scoring Units, Barges being "slightly" too cheap and Wraiths having almost no weakness) is something along the lines of "Lol, Necrons are all overpowered. You just don't want to see that."
That's despite Necrons doing good at tournaments, but not too good.
It's even more frustrating when those things come from players that usually play against Tau/Eldar.

The "big evil three" - as I like to call them - sound ridiculously overpowered, but really aren't if you do the math and know how to counter it.
Army-wide FNP, as some suggest it, would be much stronger than RP but it would also destroy the fluff.
Nearly any good CC-item would probably beat MSS, but it'd be less cool.

I am perfectly happy with removing overpowered stuff.
But I don't want to remove stuff that sound more awesome than it actually is, just to have it replaced with a stronger option that is less Necron-like.

Kangodo wrote:
My experience with Necrons is that the opponent's threat assessment is way off.
From this forum and conversations with players there are three things that people see as overpowered:
-MSS
-Reanimation Protocols and Resurrection Orbs
-Gauss

The usual response when I do the math and explain the 'real issues' (like zooming flyers that can disembark scoring Units, Barges being "slightly" too cheap and Wraiths having almost no weakness) is something along the lines of "Lol, Necrons are all overpowered. You just don't want to see that."
That's despite Necrons doing good at tournaments, but not too good.
It's even more frustrating when those things come from players that usually play against Tau/Eldar.

The "big evil three" - as I like to call them - sound ridiculously overpowered, but really aren't if you do the math and know how to counter it.
Army-wide FNP, as some suggest it, would be much stronger than RP but it would also destroy the fluff.
Nearly any good CC-item would probably beat MSS, but it'd be less cool.

I am perfectly happy with removing overpowered stuff.
But I don't want to remove stuff that sound more awesome than it actually is, just to have it replaced with a stronger option that is less Necron-like.

While the other less focused on issues are still very real issues, I think you are glossing over how jacked up the "big evil three" can be in certain situations. MSS don't impact a Guard, Tau, or even Eldar armies, but a Chaos Marine, SW, Chaos Daemon, or Ork army can get completely hosed by it. Its about the match up. Shooty armies don't care about MSS, but for an assault army (or one that is forced ot issue challenges), they can be pretty obnoxious, especially given how cheap they are when coupled with a warscythe.

RP/EV is a bit OP in the fact that it allows Necrons (and their characters) a way to save against casualties that remove the model without inflicting wounds, allow the Necron units to be rearranged in an opponent's own phase (to their advantage), and the rules simply don't mesh well with the current rule set as there are simply too many conflicts. Heck, returning to the WBB rule would be an improvement, but the mechanic is still too wonky and needs to be overhauled completely. My suggestion for FNP was just that, a suggestion, an alternative using the existing special rules we have instead of trying to create something completely out of left field. I fail to see how using a modified FNP mechanic "ruins the fluff". Its a rule mechanic, fluff wise, it doesn't impact anything in the fluff (FNP="Oh, I blew a hole in that Necron warrior, but look, he just stood right back up" versus Base RP= "Oh, I blew a hole in that Necron warrior...<1 second later>....Oh look, he just stood right back up"

Gauss I don't really personally have a major problem with, but I can understand why alot of people hate it. Its very annoying to watch a 140 points worth of warriors hull a 230 point LR to death in one turn, especially given how easy it is to teleport warriors squads around. To me, its more of a problem with the whole Glancing rule to begin with (IMO vehicles should get a save against glancing hits).

But you are right, NS embarking/disembarking rules need to be changed, at least make the disembarking unit snap fire. Barges are too cheap, but I think its a given that they will see a points increase. Wraiths do have a small weakness (being T4), but it requires basically either a dumb Necron player or a castled up shooty army to really exploit it. To me, a simple points increase is warranted, or drop them down to 1 wound, either one would fix them. All three of those problem areas are easy to fix, while fixing MSS, RP/EV, or Gauss is going to be a bit trickier. How do you still make them worthwhile AND nerf them to a level where opposing players don't just roll their eyes everytime the rule is called upon (something I find myself doing waaaay to much against my regular Necron opponent)?

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Its very annoying to watch a 140 points worth of warriors hull a 230 point LR to death in one turn, especially given how easy it is to teleport warriors squads around. To me, its more of a problem with the whole Glancing rule to begin with (IMO vehicles should get a save against glancing hits).

Ehm...that's a unit of 10 Necron Warriors. At 24'', that's 10 shots and thus 7 hits - to destroy the LR, you'd have to roll 4 6s with these 7 dice and...why doesn't the LR have cover or use smoke launchers? I'm not doing the math for 12'' as...well..if you let a unit of Necron Warriors get into 12'', the problem's with you, not the unit itself

 Sigvatr wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Its very annoying to watch a 140 points worth of warriors hull a 230 point LR to death in one turn, especially given how easy it is to teleport warriors squads around. To me, its more of a problem with the whole Glancing rule to begin with (IMO vehicles should get a save against glancing hits).

Ehm...that's a unit of 10 Necron Warriors. At 24'', that's 10 shots and thus 7 hits - to destroy the LR, you'd have to roll 4 6s with these 7 dice and...why doesn't the LR have cover or use smoke launchers? I'm not doing the math for 12'' as...well..if you let a unit of Necron Warriors get into 12'', the problem's with you, not the unit itself

Well, its not that difficult to move large blocks of warriors around the table so they can get into rapid fire range. But admittedly, its an extreme example that I have only personally ever seen happen once (much to my dismay). More often than not, that small warrior squad does the final 1-2 HP in a turn to finish off the LR. Also, you have to consider that LRs are assault vehicles primarily, so its not hard for anything to get into rapid fire range if the LR is being used in that manner.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Ehm...that's a unit of 10 Necron Warriors. At 24'', that's 10 shots and thus 7 hits - to destroy the LR, you'd have to roll 4 6s with these 7 dice and...why doesn't the LR have cover or use smoke launchers? I'm not doing the math for 12'' as...well..if you let a unit of Necron Warriors get into 12'', the problem's with you, not the unit itself

Yeah, I think a lot of people exaggerate the anti-vehicle potential of warriors (and gauss in general).

Personally, even though my armies include a lot of gauss, I find that it's rarely what destroys vehicles - usually it just strips off the last hull point after my Storm Crypteks or Annihilation Barges have done most of the work.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Well, its not that difficult to move large blocks of warriors around the table so they can get into rapid fire range.

Actually, it kinda is. Unless the enemy is kind enough to park their land raider opposite your warriors, then they'll frequently lack both the speed and manoeuvrability to get near it.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
More often than not, that small warrior squad does the final 1-2 HP in a turn to finish off the LR.

Yeah, that's what I've found too.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Also, you have to consider that LRs are assault vehicles primarily, so its not hard for anything to get into rapid fire range if the LR is being used in that manner.

Indeed. Especially since LRs frequently carry terminators or other elite assault units - so moving within 12" to destroy it this way could easily doom your entire warrior squad.

I would never voluntarily let my Necrons near a LR. The Heavy Flamer alone will deal so much damage and if the content assaults - good night, sweet prince.

I concur with the Gauss part. Gauss can be deadly to vehicles, but more often than not, it takes more than one turn to wreck a vehicle. Unless they're in the danger zone.

Space Wolves have so many special rules and special-snowflake units that I find it laughable that they have any room to complain about Necrons, and I don't even play Necrons.

 Psienesis wrote:
Space Wolves have so many special rules and special-snowflake units that I find it laughable that they have any room to complain about Necrons, and I don't even play Necrons.

While I don't play SW, the new codex is not bad at all from what I've read of it. It seems to be very balanced externally (points costs are more in line with other similar armies) and internally (there seem to be alot of decent and useful units without any one thing completely overshadowing most of the others). While the 5th edition codex was full of special snowflake goodness, this new one seems to be far more reasonable, they balanced out the overly good units like Grey Hunters and Long Fangs, while beefing up a few others to make them more useful, like venerable dreads and blood claws. They even added a new weapon type that looks to be decent but not so OMG powerful that it will cause rage (could be wrong in actual practice though )

I'm hoping GW does the same sort of treatment for Necrons. I play against them alot, and Necrons have more than their fair share of special snowflake units and rules that I'd like to see balanced out a bit more, and they have so many units that never get used but look so cool. As I said in a previous post, I find myself rolling my eyes alot whenever I play against my regular Necron opponent, and I hate that.

I'd like to be able to make an army of entirely Canoptek units with no RP.

A cheap Troops choice like everyone else has, perhaps something like a Canoptek Automoton, would be cool as well.

We just need a Scarab themed Overlord for scarabs as troops. OS Scarabs would be an awfully hilarious/dumb thing.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


While the other less focused on issues are still very real issues, I think you are glossing over how jacked up the "big evil three" can be in certain situations. MSS don't impact a Guard, Tau, or even Eldar armies, but a Chaos Marine, SW, Chaos Daemon, or Ork army can get completely hosed by it. Its about the match up. Shooty armies don't care about MSS, but for an assault army (or one that is forced ot issue challenges), they can be pretty obnoxious, especially given how cheap they are when coupled with a warscythe.

I will say that as a Chaos Marine player, MSS feel like they're designed to target CSM. Our codex encourages (forces) us to make or accept challenges with our characters. This means that for 15 points necron players get at worst a 50% chance to kill of our leadership. Maybe if fearless negated MSS it wouldn't be so bad.

He could be Overlord Mykey The Multimillennial Mechanic.

He was, in the Age of Flesh, a simple, lowly mechanic within his Lord's domain, but, over the passing of aeons, was assigned Overseer of the Tomb's repair functions and command of its Scarabs.

As things went on, he lost his mind, and began to view his Scarabs as an entire Dynasty, the true path of the Necrons. So he boxed the rest of his Dynasty as "failures" and went on to command his Scarab and Spyder legions in a quest to repair ALL the things.

 Psienesis wrote:
He could be Overlord Mykey The Multimillennial Mechanic.

He was, in the Age of Flesh, a simple, lowly mechanic within his Lord's domain, but, over the passing of aeons, was assigned Overseer of the Tomb's repair functions and command of its Scarabs.

As things went on, he lost his mind, and began to view his Scarabs as an entire Dynasty, the true path of the Necrons. So he boxed the rest of his Dynasty as "failures" and went on to command his Scarab and Spyder legions in a quest to repair ALL the things.

Bob the builder!

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
I will say that as a Chaos Marine player, MSS feel like they're designed to target CSM. Our codex encourages (forces) us to make or accept challenges with our characters. This means that for 15 points necron players get at worst a 50% chance to kill of our leadership. Maybe if fearless negated MSS it wouldn't be so bad.

So? Charge them!
It's your turn, so first you force them to activate MSS and THEN you challenge, keeping your awesome Character out of harms way.

Decent rules or points for my damn lychguard.

Warlord trait and/or artifact that buffs RP.

Some kind of formations, apocalypse-based or otherwise.

Flayed ones need Shred. Just look at the models.

Cheap Canoptek troop choice.

I'm pretty happy with the rules as they are, all things considered.

 jasper76 wrote:
Decent rules or points for my damn lychguard.

Warlord trait and/or artifact that buffs RP.

Some kind of formations, apocalypse-based or otherwise.

Flayed ones need Shred. Just look at the models.

Cheap Canoptek troop choice.

I'm pretty happy with the rules as they are, all things considered.

Don't say it, they'll make the Res Orb an artifact. No, we won't get replacement wargear.

Not sure if trolling or...
Any Necrons can be female if you want: they're metal skeletons. Genderless. Hell, nothing stops you from having an all-female Necron army! What do you actually expect to see on a female Necron that's different to a male Necron?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not sure if trolling or...
Any Necrons can be female if you want: they're metal skeletons. Genderless. Hell, nothing stops you from having an all-female Necron army! What do you actually expect to see on a female Necron that's different to a male Necron?

Skeletons are NOT gender-less.

 liquidjoshi wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Spoiler:

Decent rules or points for my damn lychguard.

Warlord trait and/or artifact that buffs RP.

Some kind of formations, apocalypse-based or otherwise.

Flayed ones need Shred. Just look at the models.

Cheap Canoptek troop choice.

I'm pretty happy with the rules as they are, all things considered.

Don't say it, they'll make the Res Orb an artifact.

If they fumble that bad, I'm not going to make the upgrade.


I really think they need to tinker with the Doomsday Ark rules. Either keep it as is and make it cheaper, or else reduce the nerf that occurs when it moves (even if its just the distance).

Necrons are NOT skeletons. They are robots. They are empy metal hulls. They might look a bit like a skeleton, but they aren't skeletons. Not even close.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Necrons are NOT skeletons. They are robots. They are empy metal hulls. They might look a bit like a skeleton, but they aren't skeletons. Not even close.

I am utterly assured that when GW releases pictures or a model of that female overlord, she will have breasts for whatever reason.

1) Necrons need something to do in the psychic phase defensively. Let them make psychic tests harder for the enemy, peril more, or make an enemy unit unable to receive friendly psychic buffs. Obviously none of this should come free, it would require buying new units (pariahs!) or wargear. Now that there is a psychic phase every army should be able to participate on their own turn. Even Tau.

2) At least three new units.

3) Re-work some of the Necron advanced rules to be more clear and not conflict as much with other rules. Stop requiring base contact or having thing happen at the same time as other rules (e.g. challenges and MSS). I don't think any of them need to be nerfed or buffed, just adjusted to be implemented more straightforwardly. Death rays in particular need some work, but basically everything that made that giant FAQ necessary needs to be easier for opponents who might be unfamiliar with necrons to understand.

4) Flayed Ones need fearless. Anything else would require a point's cost increase. Even better would be a point cost decrease, along with -1 attack. Also make them troops.

5) Remove open-topped from the Triarch Stalker (and FW should remove it from the Tesseract Ark).

6) Let us choose wargear for named characters on top of what they come with. This would make them so much more usable.

7) Make destroyers jetbikes. Maybe a bit cheaper too.

8) Improvements (don't care how) to C'Tan shards, Lychguard, Tomb Blades, Triarch Praetorians, Doomsday Ark and the Monolith.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Necrons are NOT skeletons. They are robots. They are empy metal hulls. They might look a bit like a skeleton, but they aren't skeletons. Not even close.

I am utterly assured that when GW releases pictures or a model of that female overlord, she will have breasts for whatever reason.

Having a female-looking overlord would be the second worst-slowed thing GW could do. Like...really. They are soulless automatons but hey, why not slap some boobs on it...

So when an overlord was choosing their body, prior to the transfer to the metal form, you dont think a female necrontyr would maybe prefer a slightly feminine form - assuming their concept of feminine is the same as most of ours?

We don't know if their femals even had breasts or just nipples to begin with.

And I don't think there was much "choice" involved when The Deceiver worked his ways. After all, they gave up their very souls, so why would they even bother? They're nothings now, caught forever in a nigh-indestructible metal hull.

Then why do Lords etc get more "bling" than normal necrons? Status and rank clearly had some privileges when it came to choosing your shell to "live" in, so why not an expression of your previous gender?

While we dont know they had anthro female forms, the other race with known females - Eldar - do have breasts, so no reason to believe this common convergent evolution wouldnt redenr the same solution to suckling.

The codex itself tells us that the Phaerons, Overlords and Crypteks had better bodies. From page 8 of Codex Necrons:

Thus, as was ever the case, the very finest bodies went to the individuals of high rank: the Phaerons and Overlords, their Crypteks and nemesors. For the professional soldiery, the merely adequate was deemed appropriate. As for the common people, they received what remained: comparatively crude bodies that were little more than lobotomised prisons.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Then why do Lords etc get more "bling" than normal necrons? Status and rank clearly had some privileges when it came to choosing your shell to "live" in, so why not an expression of your previous gender?

Ranks matter in a new race that is purely intended to be used as weapons in a war. Gender does not. The C'tan made the Necrons to get minions, not followers. Necron Lords serve as generals and energy foci for the rest of the army. The C'tan only have them because they serve a function. Why would they let there be genders or other differences? They don't need to appease them, the Necrontyr are dead, extinct. The Necrons are a new race, however, at the same time, they are nothing but a tool.

The Necrontyr (specifically Illuminor Szeras) designed their metal bodies, and they had to agree to the process in the first place, so they definitely would have had some aesthetic input. They were not fully under control until after the biotransference.

I certainly wouldn't want to see standard human gender differences introduced into the robotic bodies of an utterly alien race though.

Tekron wrote:
The Necrontyr (specifically Illuminor Szeras) designed their metal bodies, and they had to agree to the process in the first place, so they definitely would have had some aesthetic input. They were not fully under control until after the biotransference.

I certainly wouldn't want to see standard human gender differences introduced into the robotic bodies of an utterly alien race though.

I agree with this.

We don't even know what the Necrotyr even LOOKED like, let alone if they had visible sexual dimorphism to begin with.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not sure if trolling or...
Any Necrons can be female if you want: they're metal skeletons. Genderless. Hell, nothing stops you from having an all-female Necron army! What do you actually expect to see on a female Necron that's different to a male Necron?

Skeletons are NOT gender-less.

They can be if they belong to Xenos. They aren't required to follow human anatomy.

Is there anything to even indicate the Necrontyr even had genders? Orks don't have genders after all.

One of the BL novels has a Necron comment that Humans remind him of the Times of Flesh, and he finds it ironic that they appear so similar.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Is there anything to even indicate the Necrontyr even had genders? Orks don't have genders after all.

The Maynarkh dynasty from IA12 is ruled by Phaerakh Xun'bakyr, a female Necron overlord. She does not have a model or rules though.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So when an overlord was choosing their body, prior to the transfer to the metal form, you dont think a female necrontyr would maybe prefer a slightly feminine form - assuming their concept of feminine is the same as most of ours?

The male overlords do not have dicks, so a female overlord should not have breasts or anything either.

 Ashiraya wrote:
The male overlords do not have dicks, so a female overlord should not have breasts or anything either.

B-but, what about the slightly more rounded pelvis?

Surely that alone justifies remodeling the entire faction!

The only thing I care about regarding the Necrons is Mindshackle scarabs.

I hope they get nerfed into the fething ground so that they're not auto-win for challenges anymore. All they really need is to be changed to going at initiative instead of initiative 11, then they'll be fine.

Or at the very least, change it to just a standard leadership test rather than the ridiculous 3d6 nonsense.

MSS have a roughly 50% chance against LD 10 right now. Regular LD would make them completely useless.

 Sigvatr wrote:
MSS have a roughly 50% chance against LD 10 right now. Regular LD would make them completely useless.

Do you think it would be wise to start a new thread called: "How to play MSS correctly so you stop whining about it being overpowered!" ?
Especially with some focus on being the active player and picking which to resolve first?

Nah. Good players know how to play around them, bad players won't read the thread anyway, but rather deny it

MSS are an awesome piece of war gear, hands down, but since you must tell your opponent whether you got it equipped or not, you can play around it. IC in units are safe (not going B2B, just stay 2'' behind another model and let the challenges be accepted by a lesser character), MC cannot "evade" a challenge but

a) Why do you send a single MC against an (Over)lord?

b) It's a 50% chance vs. LD 10.

 Sigvatr wrote:
MSS have a roughly 50% chance against LD 10 right now. Regular LD would make them completely useless.

Average roll on a 3d6 is 11, so they pass against Ld10 on average, and do even better going down from there. On a regular leadership test they'd be going through around 40% of the time.

A good player would know how to play around that to not make them useless.

Like, why are you sending your overlord against a Hive Tyrant?

Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
MSS have a roughly 50% chance against LD 10 right now. Regular LD would make them completely useless.

Average roll on a 3d6 is 11, so they pass against Ld10 on average, and do even better going down from there. On a regular leadership test they'd be going through around 40% of the time.

A good player would know how to play around that to not make them useless.

Like, why are you sending your overlord against a Hive Tyrant?

Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

Because without it, my 175 point IC sits there at I2, letting everything smash on his T5 body.

Get rid of that I2, at an army wide level, and there isn't a need for MSS.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Like, why are you sending your overlord against a Hive Tyrant?

Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

An Overlord can easily be 200 points too, and unlike the Hive Tyrant (which is a psyker, can fly, can shoot and can cc depending on load out) is essentially cc-only.

Without MSS the expensive Necron cc HQ would get annihilated in cc. Overlords would need huge buffs if MSS got nerfed.

I was more thinking of MSS activation before the challenge, seems most people don't know how that works.

 BlaxicanX wrote:


Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

First of all, as pointed out above, MSS are far away from rendering anything useless in a combat as it's not a 100% chance.

Secondly, you are willingly throwing a melee model against a model you know that has a good chance of winning against it in combat. Your mistake.

Thirdly, the "15 pts" are on a model that costs, at the very least, 135 pts. Realistically, you're looking at a model that costs 150-200 points. An infantry model that has I2 and T5. Woop.

Fourthly, you can completely negate MSS by charging the Overlord in your own Assault phase. Why didn't you?

Scythes and Annihilation Barges need ~50 pt bumps.

Lych Guard could be cooler and more useful.

Kangodo wrote:
I was more thinking of MSS activation before the challenge, seems most people don't know how that works.

Necron players have no motivation to go around advertising that. I personally have never even seen it played like that in a game.

"Excuse me opponent, would you like some sound tactical advice? Due to MSS and challenges technically happening at the same time during the fight sub-phase, during your active turn you can force me to expend it uselessly before the challenge puts us in base contact, thereby robbing me of my best chance to live to see the I2 step and fight back. You are welcome!"

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

Thing is, you're taking a big risk that it will make said MC completely helpless.

I mean, there's usually going to be a 50% chance that said MC won't be affected - and can proceed to mash the overlord to a pulp.

RivenSkull wrote:
Get rid of that I2, at an army wide level, and there isn't a need for MSS.

I disagree.

I2 isn't the issue - the issue is that even our HQs are WS4, 3 attacks and can't upgrade either. Also, they don't get an invulnerable save as standard, and there's no way to get a cheap one - you either fork out 45pts, or you rely on just a 2+ save.

Really though, the problem is that Overlords seem purpose-built to not do anything. They're just big, slow-moving blocks. Sure, they can be a pain to kill, but they rarely do enough to even warrant the effort. What they really need is more purpose.

- Are they meant as force-multipliers? Ignoring for now they crypteks and a SC have already stolen some of their best support-wargear, if they're meant to be force multipliers then they should be able to do it without upgrades. Otherwise it would be like if marines were charged 75pts for Psykers with 0 mastery levels, and asked if they wanted to pay extra to give them some psychic powers.

- Are they meant to be combat support? If so, why are they so abysmal in combat? Even with a decent weapon (which there are exactly one of) you've got 3 attacks at WS4. Their main weapon is getting enemies to kill themselves - because the overlord is aware that if he tried to do it himself, he'd only cock it up.

- Are they meant to be shooting-support? If so, why do their guns have a maximum range of 12"? In fact, why don't we have a sodding shooty HQ? We are a shooting army, aren't we? Are Tau commanders made to take a HQ who can only take power weapons? Are IG Command Squads made up entirely of models with Chainswords? No? Then why are all our HQs tailored for melee-combat?

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Scythes and Annihilation Barges need ~50 pt bumps.

I don't know about Scythes, but I think +30pts would be more reasonable for barges.

 vipoid wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Scythes and Annihilation Barges need ~50 pt bumps.

I don't know about Scythes, but I think +30pts would be more reasonable for barges.

Scythes are better than Valkyries in literally every way except AV, yet cost less.

Better cargo, safer transports, dedicated transports, better weapons, can fire its primary weapon if it jinks, etc.

How does that work?

 Ashiraya wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So when an overlord was choosing their body, prior to the transfer to the metal form, you dont think a female necrontyr would maybe prefer a slightly feminine form - assuming their concept of feminine is the same as most of ours?

The male overlords do not have dicks, so a female overlord should not have breasts or anything either.

Armour tended to not include dick shaping. Femae armour, on the other hand, tended to.

Sig - the necrontyr specifically designed their own bodies - overlords did, at any rate. The codex covers this, so your opinoipn is noted, but is belied by the written words otherwise.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Scythes and Annihilation Barges need ~50 pt bumps.

I don't know about Scythes, but I think +30pts would be more reasonable for barges.

Scythes are better than Valkyries in literally every way except AV, yet cost less.

Better cargo, safer transports, dedicated transports, better weapons, can fire its primary weapon if it jinks, etc.

How does that work?

It works because Necrons are a well balanced army that are highly competitive without being overpowered. Those vehicles may look cheap, but as an army Necrons do not benefit from psychic force multipliers or AM orders and so on, relying almost entirely on a core of solid, good value for points units.

A 50% nerf to two of the best Necron units like you are proposing would simply drop them out of contention for being a strong army. It would also reduce the number of models they can field in a battle, hurting GW sales figures.

Tekron wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Scythes and Annihilation Barges need ~50 pt bumps.

I don't know about Scythes, but I think +30pts would be more reasonable for barges.

Scythes are better than Valkyries in literally every way except AV, yet cost less.

Better cargo, safer transports, dedicated transports, better weapons, can fire its primary weapon if it jinks, etc.

How does that work?

It works because Necrons are a well balanced army that are highly competitive without being overpowered. Those vehicles may look cheap, but as an army Necrons do not benefit from psychic force multipliers or AM orders and so on, relying almost entirely on a core of solid, good value for points units.

A 50% nerf to two of the best Necron units like you are proposing would simply drop them out of contention for being a strong army. It would also reduce the number of models they can field in a battle, hurting GW sales figures.

The aforementioned advantages and the changes to Jink in this edition account for a points increase of that magnitude.

Vendettas received a 40 point increase and multiple nerfs mainly due to a change in Flyer rules in 6th edition. Expecting Anni Barges and Scythes to stay the same cost despite two successive editions worth of buffs is kind of crazy...

RivenSkull wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
MSS have a roughly 50% chance against LD 10 right now. Regular LD would make them completely useless.

Average roll on a 3d6 is 11, so they pass against Ld10 on average, and do even better going down from there. On a regular leadership test they'd be going through around 40% of the time.

A good player would know how to play around that to not make them useless.

Like, why are you sending your overlord against a Hive Tyrant?

Also, why do you think it's balanced for a 15 point piece of wargear to make a 200 point MC completely helpless in a challenge?

Because without it, my 175 point IC sits there at I2, letting everything smash on his T5 body.

Get rid of that I2, at an army wide level, and there isn't a need for MSS.

Necrons are not the only I2 army out there. Tau and Orks fall into that category, and neither of them has something even remotely as powerful as MSS. Ork ICs don't even have access to an invulnerable save in combat, unlike Necron ICs, and Orks are SUPPOSED to be in close combat.

Also, keep in mind that the "assault during your own turn" only works if that charge doesn't put you in BtB with the IC to begin with. As a CD player, I can say its not easy at all for a MC to avoid getting into BtB with a Necron IC because they are often used to tank wounds with their 2+/3++ save while protecting the crypteks or destroyers. About the only time that doesn't happen for me is when a Destroyer Lord is with a squad of Wraiths.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


Necrons are not the only I2 army out there. Tau and Orks fall into that category, and neither of them has something even remotely as powerful as MSS. Ork ICs don't even have access to an invulnerable save in combat, unlike Necron ICs, and Orks are SUPPOSED to be in close combat.

Also, keep in mind that the "assault during your own turn" only works if that charge doesn't put you in BtB with the IC to begin with. As a CD player, I can say its not easy at all for a MC to avoid getting into BtB with a Necron IC because they are often used to tank wounds with their 2+/3++ save while protecting the crypteks or destroyers. About the only time that doesn't happen for me is when a Destroyer Lord is with a squad of Wraiths.

Tau, for example, have vastly superior fire power to compensate for their inferior melee abilities. And...sorry, but I don't see how it's "easy" for a MC to be "caught" by a Necron Overlord. And again: why aren't you assaulting them in your own turn?

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

The aforementioned advantages and the changes to Jink in this edition account for a points increase of that magnitude.

Vendettas received a 40 point increase and multiple nerfs mainly due to a change in Flyer rules in 6th edition. Expecting Anni Barges and Scythes to stay the same cost despite two successive editions worth of buffs is kind of crazy...

I'm not saying they won't get changed, I'm saying their current price point within the Necron lineup as a whole is justified by the overall performance of the army. Every other flyer and skimmer in the game received the same buffs (albeit without the advantages of Tesla), but you are suggesting the AB should become more expensive than an upgraded Wave Serpent.

With the new codex a large amount of buffs and nerfs will be handed out and Necron players have to hope we come out no worse for it overall. But imagining we made your proposed changes right now in isolation, Necrons would drop out of top tier competitive status immediately.

The problem is that Necrons are top tier right now despite not being overpowered. The entire army is balanced around good, but not top tier, shooting that's limited by its short range and, in general, poor melee capabilities with one notable exception (Wraiths). What adds to it is the total lack of any psychic powers or psychic defense (Prisms aren't any mean of reliable defense as they cannot do anything against buffs).

Minor nerfs are very sufficient to keep the codex in place. Increases by 30+ points are pointless from an objective point of view.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not sure if trolling or...
Any Necrons can be female if you want: they're metal skeletons. Genderless. Hell, nothing stops you from having an all-female Necron army! What do you actually expect to see on a female Necron that's different to a male Necron?

Ment more character wise. It just seems everyone is a male, or is read like they are all males. Would be nice to have a Queen or what ever a Pharoe (sp?) version of a Queen is.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


Necrons are not the only I2 army out there. Tau and Orks fall into that category, and neither of them has something even remotely as powerful as MSS. Ork ICs don't even have access to an invulnerable save in combat, unlike Necron ICs, and Orks are SUPPOSED to be in close combat.

Also, keep in mind that the "assault during your own turn" only works if that charge doesn't put you in BtB with the IC to begin with. As a CD player, I can say its not easy at all for a MC to avoid getting into BtB with a Necron IC because they are often used to tank wounds with their 2+/3++ save while protecting the crypteks or destroyers. About the only time that doesn't happen for me is when a Destroyer Lord is with a squad of Wraiths.

Tau, for example, have vastly superior fire power to compensate for their inferior melee abilities. And...sorry, but I don't see how it's "easy" for a MC to be "caught" by a Necron Overlord. And again: why aren't you assaulting them in your own turn?

My regular Necron opponent knows that I can get around his large squads, so he doesn't even bother with MSS for them, but he does use them for small royal courts containing the S8 AP2 ranged staffs. Small squad of crypteks with an Overlord in the front tanking wounds....with an assaulting MC, its damn near impossible to NOT end up in BtB with the Overlord. Then there is the Wraith/Destroyer Lord squads who are typically on the offensive, and being fearless with 3++ saves its pretty much impossibl to wipe them out in one phase even if you do manage to assault first, so the "Assault during your turn" strategy isn't very effective in that case either. You also have the CCB which allows Necrons to assault rather easily (and effectively) during their own turn.

Simply put, if the MSS were as weak and easily managed as you are suggesting, they wouldn't be carried by virtually every single IC in a Necron army. It needs to be nerfed, and not just a small points increase.

Anything blast / large blast AP2. Kills of the Royal Court and even if the Overlord survives, the Court stays dead. Buff your models with psychic powers, Necrons cannot dispel them. Drop pods, DS, Infiltrate etc.

MSS aren't weak. They are pretty good. But at the same time, there are (reliable) ways to play around them. And their low price is justified by the weak body they're usually on.

Honestly? With ward gone, I can see necron and dark elder getting the tyranid/ork treatment and getting "better internal balance" while taking away any competitive edge they had. To be fair they are more shooty oriented, so probably wont be as hamstrung, but the writing is on the wall at GW. Make the goodguys powerful and heroic, and everyone else the NPC factions.

 Orock wrote:
Honestly? With ward gone, I can see necron and dark elder getting the tyranid/ork treatment and getting "better internal balance" while taking away any competitive edge they had. To be fair they are more shooty oriented, so probably wont be as hamstrung, but the writing is on the wall at GW. Make the goodguys powerful and heroic, and everyone else the NPC factions.

Uh... Tyranids are pretty awful internal wise, orks are a bit better but they still have plenty of issues between "Must Haves and Must Not have", and even then Ward had the best internal balance when it came down to it between the three main book writers.

Also Ward never wrote DE, seriously,

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Necrons are not the only I2 army out there. Tau and Orks fall into that category, and neither of them has something even remotely as powerful as MSS. Ork ICs don't even have access to an invulnerable save in combat, unlike Necron ICs, and Orks are SUPPOSED to be in close combat.

That seems a bit deceptive.

Tau might not have any combat ability as good as MSS,but they have some of the best firepower in the game. And, since necrons are more shooty than CC, I'd happily sacrifice MSS if it meant access to that kind of firepower.

Also, whilst an Ork Warboss doesn't have MSS, it can have 4 S10 AP2 attacks at WS5 - considerably better than what an overlord puts out. And, of course, it may well be cheaper. A Warboss with Power Claw is still 5pts cheaper than the base Necron Overlord.

Anyway, I honestly have no idea what should happen to MSS (I really can't think of any way to make it more reasonable, without making it worthless), nor any idea what will. But, what I don't want is for MSS to be nerfed/removed, and then Overlords being otherwise unchanged - as if they're fine.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The problem is that Necrons are top tier right now despite not being overpowered. The entire army is balanced around good, but not top tier, shooting that's limited by its short range and, in general, poor melee capabilities with one notable exception (Wraiths). What adds to it is the total lack of any psychic powers or psychic defense (Prisms aren't any mean of reliable defense as they cannot do anything against buffs).

Minor nerfs are very sufficient to keep the codex in place. Increases by 30+ points are pointless from an objective point of view.

Actually, I largely agree with this. Most of the changes that are needed aren't major. Small tweaks here, simple clarifications there, and the army should be fun to play with and against. I think from a rules perspective, the only thing that needs an overhaul is RP, and really, just a few added limitations would clean it up enough even if they keep the clunky mechanic intact.

Here are my suggestions:

MSS - seems to be a hot topic, instead of a major rules change or outright removal, how about make it 1-use only.
RP/EL - add in stipulations that it can't be used if the attack has the ID rule or if no wounds are dealt but the model is removed as casualty, to prevent conflicts with Sweeping Advance and other such rules.
Tesla - no extra hits with snap fire hits is almost a given and really is enough of a fix.
Nightscythes - points increase, unit that disembarks can only snapfire.
CCB - lose the sweep attacks, rider loses the IC rule.
Deathray - make it a beam or torrent weapon.

Finally, throw in some points increases and decreases where needed, and the jobs done.

Just revert RP to WBB. It was far superior rule.

MSS is difficult to balance because on the one hand, it's a very cheap upgrade, but on the other hand, it's part of a body that's either very expensive or sucks in melee (Phaseshifter or not), in army that, in general, sucks at melee.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

MSS - seems to be a hot topic, instead of a major rules change or outright removal, how about make it 1-use only.

If you want it to never see play, sure.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

RP/EL - add in stipulations that it can't be used if the attack has the ID rule or if no wounds are dealt but the model is removed as casualty, to prevent conflicts with Sweeping Advance and other such rules.

You could return to the old WWB rule, with Resurrection Orbs overriding that effect.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Tesla - no extra hits with snap fire hits is almost a given and really is enough of a fix.

But.. why? Are we also going to say you can't twin-link snapshots?

I mean, I thought the effect happening on 6s was one of the main paints of the rule - si that it *does* interact with snapshots.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Nightscythes - points increase, unit that disembarks can only snapfire.

No objections, but then I don't use them.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

CCB - lose the sweep attacks, rider loses the IC rule.

Might depend on what happens to Overlords.

Out of interest, how do you feel about the Overlord and barge being linked (i.e. if you kill one, both die; RP bringing back the barge as well etc.)?

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Here are my suggestions:

MSS - seems to be a hot topic, instead of a major rules change or outright removal, how about make it 1-use only.
RP/EL - add in stipulations that it can't be used if the attack has the ID rule or if no wounds are dealt but the model is removed as casualty, to prevent conflicts with Sweeping Advance and other such rules.
Tesla - no extra hits with snap fire hits is almost a given and really is enough of a fix.
Nightscythes - points increase, unit that disembarks can only snapfire.
CCB - lose the sweep attacks, rider loses the IC rule.
Deathray - make it a beam or torrent weapon.

Finally, throw in some points increases and decreases where needed, and the jobs done.

Getting the impression some Necrons have been giving you a hard time recently.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Just revert RP to WBB. It was far superior rule.

MSS is difficult to balance because on the one hand, it's a very cheap upgrade, but on the other hand, it's part of a body that's either very expensive or sucks in melee (Phaseshifter or not), in army that, in general, sucks at melee.

Aren't MSS takable on Lords as well?

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Just revert RP to WBB. It was far superior rule.

MSS is difficult to balance because on the one hand, it's a very cheap upgrade, but on the other hand, it's part of a body that's either very expensive or sucks in melee (Phaseshifter or not), in army that, in general, sucks at melee.

Aren't MSS takable on Lords as well?

Yes, on an even worse body

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Aren't MSS takable on Lords as well?

They are, though I struggle to find a reason to take Lords - with or without MSS. Like Overlords, I think they could do with having more purpose and synergy with necrons in general.

I wouldn't mind Lords losing access MSS, though I'm not sure how much that would solve.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Orock wrote:
Honestly? With ward gone, I can see necron and dark elder getting the tyranid/ork treatment and getting "better internal balance" while taking away any competitive edge they had. To be fair they are more shooty oriented, so probably wont be as hamstrung, but the writing is on the wall at GW. Make the goodguys powerful and heroic, and everyone else the NPC factions.

Uh... Tyranids are pretty awful internal wise, orks are a bit better but they still have plenty of issues between "Must Haves and Must Not have", and even then Ward had the best internal balance when it came down to it between the three main book writers.

Also Ward never wrote DE, seriously,

yes, they are pretty awful, hence the sarcastic quotes, like what they got was supposed to make up for what they lost. And I was just saying that dark elder are going to get the nid/ork treatment along with necrons, and that necrons don't have their spiritual liege matt ward to protect them from it anymore. I know he had nothing to do with the dark elder.

Tekron wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Here are my suggestions:

MSS - seems to be a hot topic, instead of a major rules change or outright removal, how about make it 1-use only.
RP/EL - add in stipulations that it can't be used if the attack has the ID rule or if no wounds are dealt but the model is removed as casualty, to prevent conflicts with Sweeping Advance and other such rules.
Tesla - no extra hits with snap fire hits is almost a given and really is enough of a fix.
Nightscythes - points increase, unit that disembarks can only snapfire.
CCB - lose the sweep attacks, rider loses the IC rule.
Deathray - make it a beam or torrent weapon.

Finally, throw in some points increases and decreases where needed, and the jobs done.

Getting the impression some Necrons have been giving you a hard time recently.

A good Necron army will give most other armies a hard time (except for maybe Eldar). They've been a top tier army ever since their 5th edition codex came out.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Tesla - no extra hits with snap fire hits is almost a given and really is enough of a fix.

But.. why? Are we also going to say you can't twin-link snapshots?

I mean, I thought the effect happening on 6s was one of the main paints of the rule - si that it *does* interact with snapshots.

Tesla predates Snap Fire, so it was never really established that is was one of the main parts of the Tesla rule. Other effects that trigger on To Hit rolls of 6 have been given this nerf, so its not unreasonable to expect it on Tesla.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

CCB - lose the sweep attacks, rider loses the IC rule.

Might depend on what happens to Overlords.

Out of interest, how do you feel about the Overlord and barge being linked (i.e. if you kill one, both die; RP bringing back the barge as well etc.)?

Actually, I don't mind the RP bringing back the barge. I do mind the free S7 AP2 Armourbane hits though, especially since my Daemon chariots lost the ability to sweep with the change in Chariot rules.

What are you Necron players thoughts on Quantum Shielding? My regular opponent is kind of torn. He likes the AV13, but hates the part about keeping up with which vehicle has the bubble popped, plus the added headache of multiple shots being resolved. Would you rather keep the same shield rule or have a blanket AV increase with a points increase to go with it?

Tekron wrote:
Necron players have no motivation to go around advertising that. I personally have never even seen it played like that in a game.

"Excuse me opponent, would you like some sound tactical advice? Due to MSS and challenges technically happening at the same time during the fight sub-phase, during your active turn you can force me to expend it uselessly before the challenge puts us in base contact, thereby robbing me of my best chance to live to see the I2 step and fight back. You are welcome!"

I do have that motivation!
Tournaments players already know this and I would happily trade in a few wins if that means people stop with the "CRONS ARE OP"-nonsense.
It's quite annoying if people look at you as if you are some WAAC-player because they don't know how something works.
And I don't like winning because my opponent is unaware of the rules, it takes the joy out of winning for me.

And I'd prefer it if people focus on the things that are actually too strong instead of the things that seems OP when you take a small peek at it.

Reanimation Protocol:
It sounds very strong, but people tend to forget Necrons pay 13 points for that.
Comparing that to Fire Warriors, Ork Boyz or Space Marines makes them look less 'OP'.
Against a wound with AP5 a Necron Warrior has a 65% chance of surviving.
A Tactical Marine has a 66% chance of survival, and for only 3 additional points they have much better rules, more power in melee, the option to take Heavy Weapons and protection from AP4.

MSS:
If you are charging, it's nearly impossible to get affected by MSS.
Besides that Overlords are around 175 points with their average equipment; Lords only 75 if you skip the 3++.
And even if you DO charge badly and get your IC to kill itself, the other models will probably win combat and you end up Sweeping the entire unit.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
What are you Necron players thoughts on Quantum Shielding? My regular opponent is kind of torn. He likes the AV13, but hates the part about keeping up with which vehicle has the bubble popped, plus the added headache of multiple shots being resolved. Would you rather keep the same shield rule or have a blanket AV increase with a points increase to go with it?

I think QS is okay, and I would prefer to keep it.
Reason: It's something special and I prefer special stuff over "AV12 all around".

The downside of QS is that:
-It only works on front and sides, which leaves them very vulnerable on the rear.
-It means they all have AV11 on the rear.
-Once you get a single pen, it leaves you with an AV11 vehicle.
-That is also open-topped and it will die.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

A good Necron army will give most other armies a hard time (except for maybe Eldar). They've been a top tier army ever since their 5th edition codex came out.

What's wrong with that? They have done well for three editions so now it's time to exile them to the display cabinet for a few years?

I don't understand these proposals to nerf them out of top tier status. Necrons are not overpowered, they are just plain good, and they are hanging in there largely on the basis of those rules you want to neuter. Don't we want more top tier armies, not less?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:

I do have that motivation!
Tournaments players already know this and I would happily trade in a few wins if that means people stop with the "CRONS ARE OP"-nonsense.
It's quite annoying if people look at you as if you are some WAAC-player because they don't know how something works.
And I don't like winning because my opponent is unaware of the rules, it takes the joy out of winning for me.

MSS avoiding shenanigans like that are a bit WAAC themselves in my opinion. It requires telling your opponent that they have to use their wargear before they want to. Really it's exploiting the fact that MSS rules were written before challenge rules were released. Technically legal but leaves a bad taste, especially when Necron CC HQs are so weak without it.

Tekron wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
I was more thinking of MSS activation before the challenge, seems most people don't know how that works.

Necron players have no motivation to go around advertising that. I personally have never even seen it played like that in a game.

"Excuse me opponent, would you like some sound tactical advice? Due to MSS and challenges technically happening at the same time during the fight sub-phase, during your active turn you can force me to expend it uselessly before the challenge puts us in base contact, thereby robbing me of my best chance to live to see the I2 step and fight back. You are welcome!"

Can someone explain that, or at least point me to a thread that does ?

New codex usually means new models, so I'm envisioning new plastic pariahs.

Seems like every race is also getting some giant walker (knight, morkanaut,etc) so I wouldn't be too surprised to see a super sized Necron or gargantuan scarab monstrosity

Kangodo wrote:

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
I will say that as a Chaos Marine player, MSS feel like they're designed to target CSM. Our codex encourages (forces) us to make or accept challenges with our characters. This means that for 15 points necron players get at worst a 50% chance to kill of our leadership. Maybe if fearless negated MSS it wouldn't be so bad.

So? Charge them!
It's your turn, so first you force them to activate MSS and THEN you challenge, keeping your awesome Character out of harms way.

The problem is that no matter what, I have to challenge or accept a challenge. The only way out of it I see is force feeding my squad leaders who are highly unlikely to last longer than one round. Then in the next round of melee combat my opponent gets to challenge first and my lord goes down because he apparently has a death wish.

 adamsouza wrote:

Can someone explain that, or at least point me to a thread that does ?

Essentially the brb rule for challenges, and the Necron FAQ rule for MSS, both have the exact same wording for when they occur. Something like (from memory, can't look it up at the moment) 'at the start of the fight sub-phase, before any blows are struck'.

According to another rule in the brb, if two things happen at the same time, the player whose turn it is gets to decide which is resolved first.

So if you are charging, you either put a grunt or no one in b2b with the MSS carrier. Then you say to resolve MSS now. You take MSS test with the grunt or it is wasted if nothing is in b2b. Then you allow challenges, safe in the knowledge MSS has been used up for this round.

 adamsouza wrote:
Can someone explain that, or at least point me to a thread that does?

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
The problem is that no matter what, I have to challenge or accept a challenge. The only way out of it I see is force feeding my squad leaders who are highly unlikely to last longer than one round. Then in the next round of melee combat my opponent gets to challenge first and my lord goes down because he apparently has a death wish.

For both an example with Assault Space Marines with a Chapter Master.
1) You charge with the unit.
2) You put an Assault Marine in base contact.
3) MSS activates and takes over the Assault Marine.
4) You challenge the Overlord with your Chapter Master or Sergeant.
5) You win combat.

6) On the small chance you don't wipe the Necrons, the Sergeant will probably be dead and now the Overlord can use MSS against the Chapter Master.

Conclusion: The 15-point upgrade hardly did anything to help in CC.

Tekron wrote:
MSS avoiding shenanigans like that are a bit WAAC themselves in my opinion. It requires telling your opponent that they have to use their wargear before they want to. Really it's exploiting the fact that MSS rules were written before challenge rules were released. Technically legal but leaves a bad taste, especially when Necron CC HQs are so weak without it.

Using the rules to correctly play a 15-point piece of wargear that is heavily underpowered if you are being charged is not something I would call WAAC.

I want people to understand how underpowered our CC-HQ's are, it means there will be less QQ and spam when they eventually get buffed.
Especially now that many people have this misconception that we are somehow overpowered in CC.

Thank you for explaining the MSS situation.

That actually makes me feel better about the 15 point cost. It's an offensive tool, not a defensive crutch.

 krodarklorr wrote:
we could either become the next Eldar, or they'll nerf everything good we had and we'll become the next Tyranids.

As a Tyranid player, I approve of the latter. Bring the nerf hammer down on Tesla, Catacomb Command Barges, Annihilation Barges and Mindshackle Scarabs. While at it, make all Necron vehicles AV10 rear so they just can't blatantly ignore all S4 units in combat. There is nothing more frustrating than the AV13 Necron wall.

 N.I.B. wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
we could either become the next Eldar, or they'll nerf everything good we had and we'll become the next Tyranids.

As a Tyranid player, I approve of the latter. Bring the nerf hammer down on Tesla, Catacomb Command Barges, Annihilation Barges and Mindshackle Scarabs. While at it, make all Necron vehicles AV10 rear so they just can't blatantly ignore all S4 units in combat. There is nothing more frustrating than the AV13 Necron wall.

And at that point Necrons become an army no one sees worth playing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Those vehicles may look cheap, but as an army Necrons do not benefit from psychic force multipliers or AM orders and so on, relying almost entirely on a core of solid, good value for points units.

A 50% nerf to two of the best Necron units like you are proposing would simply drop them out of contention for being a strong army. It would also reduce the number of models they can field in a battle, hurting GW sales figures.

Exactly. AM have good orders, and access to Psychic powers. Yeah, the A-barge is rather cheap for what it is, but at the same time, it's 90 pts. for ONE gun. (Yeah, it has a second one, but you can never fire it effectively anyway) It's a mid-range, no AP gun that just gets a lot of shots. It's good. But it's not OP in my opinion. (Though my Dark Eldar friend would disagree. He hates them.) And the Night Scythe is literally spending 100 points for 1 gun as well, but with the added transport capacity, which is really good. But here's the thing. I hate being a cheese player, and therefor don't like to spam powerful or cheap things. But when my full squads of Immortals only have ONE option for a transport, what can you really do?

 adamsouza wrote:
Thank you for explaining the MSS situation.

Here is a full discussion that we had on it not too long ago, for you and everyone else frustrated with MSS.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603819.page

Pretty much covers what's already been said without getting into the details of Necron players causing the problem in the first place (Which is the main source of all the MSS=OP posts anyways). There are 3 things that I feel need to be added that will help you get around MSS.

1) Challenges can only be issued if the models issuing/accepting are engaged. Not easy with most armies, but larger units like Orks, and blocks of Chaos Marines, can actually manage to keep their characters un-engaged until their pile-in step. Many places have house ruled this one out, and there is quite a bit of debate on it that I won't get into here. If you have a regular gaming group, be sure to discuss it with them just in case there is someone who doesn't agree.

2) If you don't manage to break the unit on the turn you charge, as the controlling player you get to pile-in first. Again, not always possible, but you want to get as many of your models in base contact with the Overlord as possible. Models in a challenge are no longer considered to be ONLY in base contact with each other. This is a carry over from the last edition and the MSS doesn't automatically work on the model in the challenge. So the Necron Player still has to randomize which models are hit, this will increase the chance that your Champion will do what he is supposed to do.

3) For the MC/Solo Characters. MSS still works when a challenge is declined if the Overlord is in base contact. So if you TRY to charge the Overlord with your Wraithknight/Hive Tyrant, with the intent of killing him first in a challenge, your opponent can always decline the challenge and still have MSS go off. Yeah, his Warscythe isn't striking, but he doesn't have to take all the hits unless/until he is the only one in base, and then he can use 'Look Out Sir'.

 Orock wrote:
Honestly? With ward gone, I can see necron and dark elder getting the tyranid/ork treatment and getting "better internal balance" while taking away any competitive edge they had. To be fair they are more shooty oriented, so probably wont be as hamstrung, but the writing is on the wall at GW. Make the goodguys powerful and heroic, and everyone else the NPC factions.

Not to say Tyranids are bad or anything, but they have terrible internal balance. It basically comes down to a flow chart of sorts..."Are you taking a Hive Tyrant? If no, you're stupid, take a Hive Tyrant. If yes, does he have wings? If yes, you're playing right. If no, give him wings. Does he have 2 TL Devourers? If yes, you're smart. If no, don't field him."

If any codex has options like that, there's bad internal balance. Orks on the other hand, are actually well balanced internally. They might not be super top-tier competitive, but good and playable IMO.

As far as I'm concerned, the internal balance aspect, there's nowhere to go but up with Necrons. They are actually doing pretty bad with internal balance. 10 points for a Voidblade, or 10 points for a Warscythe. Which one would you pick? Exactly. 40 pts. per model for 1 attack and no invuln, must take dangerous terrain tests, and attacks last in combat VS. doesn't care about terrain, makes YOU strike last, has an amazing invuln, and 3 attacks base. Which would you pick? Exactly. 15 pt upgrade on a more survivable unit for a TL 36-inch Lascannon that TLs everything else? Or a 20 pt upgrade on a one wound, 3+ armor model, and it's not TLed. Simple things like that they need to fix.

Akar wrote:1) Challenges can only be issued if the models issuing/accepting are engaged.

True in 6th. No longer a requirement in 7th. Just a note.

My hope for Necrons in 7th is a Doom Scythe worth taking. Also, C'tan that aren't boring and overpriced (with upgrades that are even more boring and overpriced) would be nice. Something like the Deceiver from the 3rd Ed. book perhaps.

I'd also put a word in for Destroyers, Flayed Ones, Lychguard, Praetorians, the Monolith, and all of the other neglected, subpar units in the book, but it wouldn't be a 40k codex without an inexplicable number of subpar units.

 whigwam wrote:

Akar wrote:1) Challenges can only be issued if the models issuing/accepting are engaged.

True in 6th. No longer a requirement in 7th.

Pg 101, last line in both the 3rd Paragraph under 'Issuing a challenge', and 'Accepting a Challenge'. In Parenthesis 'Including those that are not engaged with an enemy model'.

It just got a little cleaner from 6th, but it hasn't changed, unless I've missed something? It's possible I am wrong as it's never really come up in my games. Unengaged characters cannot issue or accept challenges. They might later become engaged on the pile-in since we check for who is engaged (vs. locked) after each Initiative Step Pile-in during the Fight Sub Phase.

Ah, yeah, missed that bit! You are correct. This came up in a local tournament the other day. Went over those passages with the TO but I guess we both overlooked it. I think we just saw the bolded "nominate a character in one of your units locked in the combat" and then our eyes got blurry.

 whigwam wrote:
Ah, yeah, missed that bit!

All good, just making sure I didn't miss something is all. I know there are some people who are passionate about parts of it, but that's off topic.

Back on Topic. Until we get our new Dex, I think Doomscythes definitely moved up in in value because they don't target. Not great, but it gets around Invisibility unless they FAQ'd it out.

Pretty much everything about the overpriced units for sure. Lychguard, Praetorians, and Stalkers need a price reduction or increase in stats somewhere along the line.

I absolutely disagree with Flayed Ones though. They're pretty good as they are, but you have to be one of those Necron players who doesn't believe all the crap about them sucking in combat. Yeah, we're I2, but so what? We're still WS/S/T 4, and that's something that catches opponents off guard. I'm not suggesting by any means that you put Necrons into combat, no we're a shooting army, but I've got no problem closing the gap. A majority of the lists I've seen run these small 5-10 man units, and so it's not surprising that they don't do well in combat. Not many units in this game do.

I'd like to see Flayed Ones moved to Troops though, I'd also like to see the Immorals go back to being Immortals, but I don't see that happening.

http://natfka.blogspot.nl/2014/08/necron-codex-mia-interesting-things.html?m=1

Interesting!

Worry and excitement!

Kangodo wrote:
http://natfka.blogspot.nl/2014/08/necron-codex-mia-interesting-things.html?m=1

Interesting!

Not really. It just proves that they didn't look hard enough...

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Warhammer-40-000?Nao=48&Nu=product.repositoryId&N=102352+4294967200&qty=12&sorting=phl&view=table Top right corner

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Codex-Necrons-EN

... and they're a few steps behind Dakka Dakka.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/609280.page

Spoiling to avoid offending anyone's eyes with a wall of text.

I completely forgot about Phaeron. Yeah, it needs to do something more than Relentless. I mean, I think Necrons should all become stubborn (A very nice rule that fits them, but isn't widely used), and if they don't get that, at least make Phaeron give the unit Stubborn. That wouldn't be too much to ask for.

I dont think We'll be back should come back, fading out when half the army is gone would suck now a days. but from some things people here would be good but i doubt much will change unfortunately.

 ChaosxVoid wrote:
I dont think We'll be back should come back, fading out when half the army is gone would suck now a days. but from some things people here would be good but i doubt much will change unfortunately.

Phase Out was a different rule to WBB.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I completely forgot about Phaeron. Yeah, it needs to do something more than Relentless. I mean, I think Necrons should all become stubborn (A very nice rule that fits them, but isn't widely used), and if they don't get that, at least make Phaeron give the unit Stubborn. That wouldn't be too much to ask for.

I think Necrons should be immune to Fear and Poison.

With regard to Phaeron, yeah it needs to do something else (or something different). Alternatively, perhaps Necrons could have some Heavy Guns in their infantry - so that Relentless might actually do something worthwhile.

 vipoid wrote:

I think Necrons should be immune to Fear and Poison.

With regard to Phaeron, yeah it needs to do something else (or something different). Alternatively, perhaps Necrons could have some Heavy Guns in their infantry - so that Relentless might actually do something worthwhile.

The first, I agree, but that would never happen. I just think Stubborn makes sense, sense we suck in CC, but we're freaking robot zombie-like things. Why would we run away and get swept that easily? It makes sense to give them stubborn. And I don't like the idea of Heavy Weapons in regular squads. It doesn't really make sense with fluff, since Warriors are literally all the same. Plus, I don't wanna feel like we're becoming Space Marines. "Yeah, this guy right here is my heavy weapons guy."

 krodarklorr wrote:

The first, I agree, but that would never happen. I just think Stubborn makes sense, sense we suck in CC, but we're freaking robot zombie-like things. Why would we run away and get swept that easily? It makes sense to give them stubborn.

Do you mean we should be Stubborn by default, or that Phaeron should provide stubborn?

 krodarklorr wrote:
And I don't like the idea of Heavy Weapons in regular squads. It doesn't really make sense with fluff, since Warriors are literally all the same. Plus, I don't wanna feel like we're becoming Space Marines. "Yeah, this guy right here is my heavy weapons guy."

Not even Heavy Weapon crypteks?

 vipoid wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

The first, I agree, but that would never happen. I just think Stubborn makes sense, sense we suck in CC, but we're freaking robot zombie-like things. Why would we run away and get swept that easily? It makes sense to give them stubborn.

Do you mean we should be Stubborn by default, or that Phaeron should provide stubborn?

 krodarklorr wrote:
And I don't like the idea of Heavy Weapons in regular squads. It doesn't really make sense with fluff, since Warriors are literally all the same. Plus, I don't wanna feel like we're becoming Space Marines. "Yeah, this guy right here is my heavy weapons guy."

Not even Heavy Weapon crypteks?

Well, preferably Stubborn by default. Mainly because I feel it makes sense, and it's an underused USR anyway. And Heavy Weapon Crypteks, I don't really see that working, or making sense. Honestly, even the "Heavy" weapons of Necrons aren't heavy. Shoot, Heavy Guass Cannons are Assault weapons...

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well, preferably Stubborn by default. Mainly because I feel it makes sense, and it's an underused USR anyway.

It would make sense, but I suspect it would often be a disadvantage. Ranged armies rarely want to stay in combat.

 krodarklorr wrote:
And Heavy Weapon Crypteks, I don't really see that working, or making sense. Honestly, even the "Heavy" weapons of Necrons aren't heavy. Shoot, Heavy Guass Cannons are Assault weapons...

Fair enough.

But, I thought Heavy Gauss Cannons were Heavy? Unless I'm thinking of the previous book.

 vipoid wrote:

It would make sense, but I suspect it would often be a disadvantage. Ranged armies rarely want to stay in combat.

Fair enough.

But, I thought Heavy Gauss Cannons were Heavy? Unless I'm thinking of the previous book.

Well, a ranged army also doesn't like being swept because they're pathetic in combat.

And yeah, in every instance the Heavy Gauss Cannon is Assault. There are few Heavy weapons that are actually on non-vehicle platforms. Like the Transdimensional beamer. Heavy Weapon, and can be taken by Wraiths. I expect them to make it not heavy anymore...

And at that point Necrons become an army no one sees worth playing.

Man, why is everyone hating on Orks? I can understand Tyranids, but Orks? They got a much stronger codex.

Remember when you said these words? Why would anyone hate orks? Well if necrons got internal balance in the form of av 10 vehicles, sensible nerfs to almost every unit, and all their units became viable due to every one of them being about as bland, why would necrons become and army no one sees worth playing? Surely you would continue to play necrons without mind shackle scarabs, av 13 shields on your vehicles, tesla shenanigans, or anything remotely good wouldn't you? I mean that would just be hypocritical to do otherwise.

10 points for a Voidblade, or 10 points for a Warscythe. Which one would you pick? Exactly

Yes, exactly. So in the next edition, I fully expect 10 points for voidblade, and 50 for warscythe. internal balance after all.

 Orock wrote:
And at that point Necrons become an army no one sees worth playing.

Man, why is everyone hating on Orks? I can understand Tyranids, but Orks? They got a much stronger codex.

Remember when you said these words? Why would anyone hate orks? Well if necrons got internal balance in the form of av 10 vehicles, sensible nerfs to almost every unit, and all their units became viable due to every one of them being about as bland, why would necrons become and army no one sees worth playing? Surely you would continue to play necrons without mind shackle scarabs, av 13 shields on your vehicles, tesla shenanigans, or anything remotely good wouldn't you? I mean that would just be hypocritical to do otherwise.

I'm honestly confused as to who this is aimed at, if you see what I mean.

 Orock wrote:
Yes, exactly. So in the next edition, I fully expect 10 points for voidblade, and 50 for warscythe. internal balance after all.

Or, you know, complete lack thereof. But it would certainly fit GW's habit of tackling minor problems with a sledgehammer.

Or maybe, 10 points for a voidblade, or 20-25 for a warscythe? Any more than that, and people won't use it. The reason it's probably so cheap now is because it's still on a WS4 I2 A3 model.

I don't understand where all of your points are coming from. You're talking about removing most of the necron codex, whereas Orks didn't lose much, and got a lot more. If Necrons get the Ork treatment, I'll be content. Maybe Tesla Immortals will be nerfed, and so will Wraiths. But Praetorians and Lychguard might get better, and therefor, I get to use them, or at least they would have an equal shot at the role.

Also, how is AV13 that big of a deal? You know that Ghost Arks don't really DO much, right? And most codexes have plenty to make short work of them anyway.

I feel like you're coming off that you got gipped with the Ork Codex, but I don't see why. If anything, you guys are stronger than ever. Yeah, you might have lost a little fluff and some fun stuff here and there. So? It was bound to happen, to keep everything in line with the USRs in the BRB.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Or maybe, 10 points for a voidblade, or 20-25 for a warscythe? Any more than that, and people won't use it. The reason it's probably so cheap now is because it's still on a WS4 I2 A3 model.

Yeah, even then, 20-25pts is a hell of a lot for a model with those combat stats. But, if Necron Overlords were given more bite in combat (e.g. WS5), I'd be less adverse to paying more for warscythes.

It's the same reason I think Power Fists should have stayed at 15pts on IG - they're less survivable than SMs, and get less use out of PFs (less WS, less strength), so it seems reasonable that they shouldn't pay as much.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Also, how is AV13 that big of a deal? You know that Ghost Arks don't really DO much, right? And most codexes have plenty to make short work of them anyway.

I'm not so sure.

Maybe top-tier lists, but in our group I've seen a *lot* of lists that struggled to down an Annihilation Barge or Ghost Ark. Also, both are pretty damn cheap for what they bring. e.g. the Ghost Ark puts out the same firepower as a 10-man warrior squad, but costs less and is immune to anything below S7. And, of course, you can have another 10 man warrior squad inside it.

Anyway, I don't think a single Ghost Ark or Annihilation Barge is a problem (unless you're playing very low points) - it's when you can have most of your army composed of them. So, suddenly your opponent is faced with a wall of AV13 and (as above) all his weapons that aren't S7 or higher are useless.

And, both the Barge and Ghost Ark are such good value that those armies are very easy to build and also very strong.

 vipoid wrote:


Yeah, even then, 20-25pts is a hell of a lot for a model with those combat stats. But, if Necron Overlords were given more bite in combat (e.g. WS5), I'd be less adverse to paying more for warscythes.

It's the same reason I think Power Fists should have stayed at 15pts on IG - they're less survivable than SMs, and get less use out of PFs (less WS, less strength), so it seems reasonable that they shouldn't pay as much.

I'm not so sure.

Maybe top-tier lists, but in our group I've seen a *lot* of lists that struggled to down an Annihilation Barge or Ghost Ark. Also, both are pretty damn cheap for what they bring. e.g. the Ghost Ark puts out the same firepower as a 10-man warrior squad, but costs less and is immune to anything below S7. And, of course, you can have another 10 man warrior squad inside it.

Anyway, I don't think a single Ghost Ark or Annihilation Barge is a problem (unless you're playing very low points) - it's when you can have most of your army composed of them. So, suddenly your opponent is faced with a wall of AV13 and (as above) all his weapons that aren't S7 or higher are useless.

And, both the Barge and Ghost Ark are such good value that those armies are very easy to build and also very strong.

Yeah, I hope the Overlord becomes WS5, that would be nice. But honestly, I love AV13 wall, not because it's really hard to deal with (I've actually lost quite a few vehicles most of them time. People I know just tend to be able to deal with them I guess), but because I love the look of Vehicles advancing, led by an Overlord on a Barge. But unless Necron vehicles get cheaper, I don't see them taking away the AV13. Because they still only have Gauss Flayers (Which snap fire if you jink now), and they're not fast, like a lot of other skimmers. So, yeah they're open topped so they have guys inside firing, but then you also have the fact that they're easier to explode as well. So, take the good with the bad I suppose.

 krodarklorr wrote:
. But honestly, I love AV13 wall, not because it's really hard to deal with (I've actually lost quite a few vehicles most of them time. People I know just tend to be able to deal with them I guess), but because I love the look of Vehicles advancing, led by an Overlord on a Barge.

I'm actually the opposite - I just don't see the attraction of vehicle lists in general - especially in terms of aesthetic.

However, I'm almost certainly in the minority on that one.

 krodarklorr wrote:
But unless Necron vehicles get cheaper, I don't see them taking away the AV13.

They'll likely keep AV13, but they may well start paying a lot more for it.