I will let you judge the quality of the rumour.

Sourcing goes:

Guy who is writing the Necron Codex > Someone I know > Me > You

These rumours are from the brainstorming for the new Codex and is valuable mainly for the direction GW want to head in rather than the hard "facts".

1. Necron Warriors: 19pts, I1. Feel No Pain and Slow and Purposeful. Other units not mentioned directly.

2. Phase Out goes as does "We'll Be Back". The reason is because GW is moving away from killing units and onto taking objectives, which might or might not be killing units, and so wanmts to bring Necrons in line with this.

3. This is also an attempt to make low 'Necron' model count armies more atteactive and thus make units such as Pariahs more attractive choice.

4. Gauss weaponry will remain the same in terms of auto glancing. No mention as to whether rending is gained as an army rule.

5. Feel No Pain effectively replaces We'll Be Back.


My thoughts on this.

GW seemed to have bitten the 'streamlining dogma' and are packaging non marine armies into a standard set of rules with a handful of army or unit exceptions. While this is seen as making the game more standardised and easier it actually makes the game blander.
After all Slow and Purposeful and Feel No Pain makes Necron Warriors to similar to Thousand Sons.

Phase out meant that Necrons stood seperately from the usual method of fighting. Again exeptions help rather than hinder the game. This is also important because the other real exception army, tyranids should also be allowed to keep its own objective set. I.e. Eat everyone, ignore table quarters. Both armies make more sense as exceptions to the standard grab the flag order of battle. Though in Necrons case they do go for objectives, but in a different way.

they need to keep the phase out, watching a nightbringer run at me is never fun, let alone when i cant just phase them out to make it go away.

however, i think this will make them a playable army, i may even concider them if this turns out to be whats on the cards.

The recent round of rumors has the C'Tan going away JD, so you won't have to worry about that part of it.

I think that Phase Out must go as a rule. In the objective/KP based game that 5e is now, it makes the games too all-or-nothing.

sweet
hate sending in a unit of 10 nobz as bait to keep him going for a while XD

i agree john, phase out is a bit of a piss take, all army's have a flaw, this is a bloody massive flaw, and restricts your army too

I don't find any of that surprising. Phase out needs to go. Giving all their weapons rending would be hideous, but I think that makes more sense than only auto-glancing.

I'll agree with the majority, phase out has to go. If GW wants more Necrons in the mix, just do it with the viability of the units/models, no need for the heavy handed phase out club.

I think Phase out needed to be cleaered up all unit in the army should count, so none are left out and the phase out number shifted. Well Be Back is what neededd to go, a very clunky rule that adds to book keepi9ng and made the game messy.

The idea that Necrons would keep on coming but would suddenly disappear as if they were never there is somewhat appealing as a background concept. Necrons are supposed to be different.

Also something I forgot to add.

The monolith will apparently be recosted, upwards, quite substantially.

Most of that stuff is what Necron players have been either expecting or outright calling for. So no surprises there.

If you have the ability to dig for more, see if you can find out about Lords, their various levels and how they influence army list selection. Brimstone has dropped some hints along those lines on Warseer.

1. Necron Warriors: 19pts, I1. Feel No Pain and Slow and Purposeful.

OK, that works. A Necron with FNP should still be costed at 20+ pts.

2. Phase Out goes as does "We'll Be Back". The reason is because GW is moving away from killing units and onto taking objectives, which might or might not be killing units, and so wanmts to bring Necrons in line with this.

I dunno. I like Phase Out, and think the easiest way to do this is to simply say that Necrons automatically lose if they have no Scoring units on the board. That's very easy to keep track of for both sides and keeps armies well-balanced.

3. This is also an attempt to make low 'Necron' model count armies more atteactive and thus make units such as Pariahs more attractive choice.

Sure, OK.

4. Gauss weaponry will remain the same in terms of auto glancing. No mention as to whether rending is gained as an army rule.

Rending is fine, makes more sense than a special rule that is essentially similar but more wordy.

5. Feel No Pain effectively replaces We'll Be Back.

Yes, of course.

Orlanth wrote:GW seemed to have bitten the 'streamlining dogma' and are packaging non marine armies into a standard set of rules with a handful of army or unit exceptions. While this is seen as making the game more standardised and easier it actually makes the game blander.

I disagree. It means exceptions are actually special, rather than commonplace. When every unit has an exception, it becomes odd to see a unit without any exceptions. That's not good.

Orlanth wrote:After all Slow and Purposeful and Feel No Pain makes Necron Warriors to similar to Thousand Sons.

Huh? TSons don't have FNP. Plague Marines have FNP. Tsons have Hellfire Rounds and a mandatory Psyker.

Orlanth wrote:Phase out meant that Necrons stood seperately from the usual method of fighting.

Phase out meant that Necrons had a balance against the benefit of WBB. WBB roughly doubles the survivability of a Warrior. So the value of a Necron is something like 20 to 25 pts, compared to a 15-pt Space Marine. Charging less than that means there needs to be an penalty of some sort to balance the underpricing.

After all Slow and Purposeful and Feel No Pain makes Necron Warriors to similar to Thousand Sons.

Slow moving gun platform robots filled with dust or slow moving gun platform robots filled with robot parts.

Oh damn son, your right they are exactly the same.

GW seemed to have bitten the 'streamlining dogma' and are packaging non marine armies into a standard set of rules with a handful of army or unit exceptions. While this is seen as making the game more standardised and easier it actually makes the game blander.

While removing the phase out rule does take out a large part of necron strategy removing We will be back does not. It was a stupid idea with bad rules and an incredibly poor execution. It was just a bad time on all fronts, and none of the necron players I know of liked the rule. In fact one of them kept proposing just replacing it with FNP because Well be back hijinks just broke the game (as in too many things aren't covered and rules disputes were common).

Removing phasing just gets rid of a rediculous and difficult to answer math riddle at the heart of every necron army. One that got even worse the larger the army was. That being "What is the exact number of models on the field right now." Really, no one should be asked that as a matter of importance every turn.

I would rather phase out just be a necron result of being broken. Perhaps automatic destruction as if they were run down but they only count for half a killpoint or other random crap.

Wow I really like the feel no pain trade for we will be back. Excellent! Necron armies before seemed like they ALWAYS had to haveth Orb, now, its potentially totally different.

I wonder how that might play into the rerolls for porting through the monolith?

Hmmm.

I still suspect that assault weakness is such a MASSIVE 5th ed flaw that the Necrons wil be a B army anyway, don't have to worry about FNP when they run from a Melee morale check at -4 and get overun...

ShumaGorath wrote:While removing the phase out rule does take out a large part of necron strategy removing We will be back does not. It was a stupid idea with bad rules and an incredibly poor execution. It was just a bad time on all fronts, and none of the necron players I know of liked the rule. In fact one of them kept proposing just replacing it with FNP because Well be back hijinks just broke the game (as in too many things aren't covered and rules disputes were common).

Agreed. WBB was not well-understood, even by many Necron players. FNP is much better and easier for everyone.

ShumaGorath wrote:Removing phasing just gets rid of a rediculous and difficult to answer math riddle at the heart of every necron army. One that got even worse the larger the army was. That being "What is the exact number of models on the field right now." Really, no one should be asked that as a matter of importance every turn.

I would rather phase out just be a necron result of being broken. Perhaps automatic destruction as if they were run down but they only count for half a killpoint or other random crap.

Rather than counting models, simply see whether there are any Scoring Units of Warriors remaining. There won't be more than about half a dozen of them, and converting it to all-or-none is easy to track for both players.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Phase out meant that Necrons stood seperately from the usual method of fighting.

Phase out meant that Necrons had a balance against the benefit of WBB. WBB roughly doubles the survivability of a Warrior. So the value of a Necron is something like 20 to 25 pts, compared to a 15-pt Space Marine. Charging less than that means there needs to be an penalty of some sort to balance the underpricing.

Right but WBB+ORB+Monolith increases the surviveability of Necron Units by quadruple! Which was the real problem, you could reduce enemy firepower by 75% essentially with rerolled WBB in all cases.

hmm i hope they give flayed ones and wraiths rending

Rather than counting models, simply see whether there are any Scoring Units of Warriors remaining. There won't be more than about half a dozen of them, and converting it to all-or-none is easy to track for both players.

Yeah but that would just be a lose more ability. Lose more abilities don't work just as win more abilities don't work. All it does it make it so that necron player doesn't have to play out the last turn or two of a game that he has already lost by losing all scoring units. Basically it gives the opponant the game for setting up a win condition that already existed (that being the necron players inability to score). All it would effectively do is make it slightly more difficult for necrons to salvage a tie.

Not a particularly fair compromise for a hardy and very shooty base unit for a low points cost considering it wouldn't effectively do anything other than formalize a loss that was already in place.

Phase out worked as a handicap in 3rd ed, but in 5th ed, it makes little sense. I would be willing to bet that the army would barely function any better if the army ignored the phase out rule. Phase out is like a legal way for necrons to see that they have lost the battle, so the rules tell them they can quit by saying that their force is taking their toys and going home... I suppose it could be properly tweaked to work well in the current edition, but that also largely depends on what the rest of the list constitutes.

For example, Augustus commented on how the interaction would work while porting through a monolith. Thats assuming that that ability will still even be part of the monolith.

Judging by the opportunity they are taking in doing this much needed rewrite, I have doubts as to what the monolith will actually do. Its entry is so large and convoluted for some people, that many people take forever to get the rules right for their use. GW may just take this chance to rewrite that entry and surprise everyone.

Regardless, there has been rumours for awhile concerning how necrons will change and FnP has been lauded as the best possible and most simple replacement for WBB. I happen to agree. I1 and slow and purposeful is doubtful though, as they will just crumble in assault. Grots could quite possibly make them break. If they are really going to suck that badly in assault, then they need to make their shooting attacks very powerful. Auto glancing is not powerful. I don't expect to fight many AC lists in 5th ed, unless its made into a legal list in the new IG 'dex. Its not the best idea I have seen for a unit, but its a start at least.

Also, I believe the idea that Hwang posited that necrons auto-losing when all scoring units are eliminated is a truly horrible very ill thought out idea. It not only shoe horns that army into being forced to take as many warriors as possible, (just to simply stay on the table let alone be offensive) but it removes the little bit of flexibility the army already had. I honestly can't see that being considered as a viable possibility by any game designer.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Rather than counting models, simply see whether there are any Scoring Units of Warriors remaining. There won't be more than about half a dozen of them, and converting it to all-or-none is easy to track for both players.

Yeah but that would just be a lose more ability. Lose more abilities don't work just as win more abilities don't work. All it does it make it so that necron player doesn't have to play out the last turn or two of a game that he has already lost by losing all scoring units. Basically it gives the opponant the game for setting up a win condition that already existed (that being the necron players inability to score). All it would effectively do is make it slightly more difficult for necrons to salvage a tie.

Pretty much. But then, a Necron force on the verge of Phase Out is already pretty much done. Tracking Scoring Units just makes everything simpler.

If you take Phase Out away, then Necrons need to cost at least 25 pts each and/or get much worse stat-wise.

Hellfury wrote:Judging by the opportunity they are taking in doing this much needed rewrite, I have doubts as to what the monolith will actually do. Its entry is so large and convoluted for some people, that many people take forever to get the rules right for their use. GW may just take this chance to rewrite that entry and surprise everyone.

Totally agreed. I think the Monolith remain an AV14 brick, but with Living Metal simplified to a -1 on the damage chart, with the teleport ability just placing a unit in Reserves.

Hellfury wrote:Regardless, there has been rumours for awhile concerning how necrons will change and FnP has been lauded as the best possible and most simple replacement for WBB. I happen to agree. I1 and slow and purposeful is doubtful though, as they will just crumble in assault. Grots could quite possibly make them break. If they are really going to suck that badly in assault, then they need to make their shooting attacks very powerful.

Really? WS3 S3 Guard need something like 36 attacks to drop a WS4 T4 Sv3+ FNP Necron. In other words, an *entire* squad of 10 Guardmen charging would be somewhat lucky to kill a single Necron, as, on average, Guard would need 2 such squads charging into kill a Necron, and then the Necrons would start slapping Guardsmen down.

Hellfury wrote:Also, I believe the idea that Hwang posited that necrons auto-losing when all scoring units are eliminated is a truly horrible very ill thought out idea. It not only shoe horns that army into being forced to take as many warriors as possible, (just to simply stay on the table let alone be offensive) but it removes the little bit of flexibility the army already had.

If Necrons aren't fun to play against, why should they be fun to play?

I agree with what Hellfury said.

I1 sounds bad though. Necrons are already godawful in assault. Striking second is fine. 20 Warriors getting cut down by pretty much anything isn't.

-1 for living metal sounds fine. Makes my bright lances do something.

I admit the grot example was hyperbole in the extreme.

But by your reckoning, they would be 500+ points and a drop in stats. How much does a full platoon of guardmen (that has access to special/heavy weapons and JO/sgt upgrades) cost again?

But necrons that rapid fire s4 ap5 that could possibly autoglance a vehicle (Boy oh boy stop the excitement!) should cost that much?

Regardless, much tweaking is needed by calm and competent minds as to how to tweak necrons into a viable list, like any other army.

And necrons should be fun to play with and against. They should be just as valid as any other list and deserve just as fair a shake. Hence a rewrite. Don't let your obvious anti-necron bias cloud your mind that this could be a competitive army while being balanced if done right. Such negative attitude propagates the mindset into GW to make more marine armies, and we all know we need more marine armies like we need 6 more holes in the head.

so, how many points is a fire warrior?
it has the ability to glance some vehicles, it has a stronger weapon, more range, just lower combat abilities, but doesent have a FNP rule, oh, and the necrons save is a little better.

so a necron warrior is a little better than a fire warrior, but alot more points.

So if a Warrior with I1, Slow and Purposeful, and FNP should cost 25+ points... Should a Plague Marine with I3, two CC Weapons in addition to his bolter, three kinds of Grenades, Toughness 5, and FNP cost 50 some points?

I1 is a big problem. It makes them even worse in close combat.
Here's hoping they get defensive grenades.
Balancing necron warriors is gonna be the most important part of this codex.

If Warriors are given Slow and Purposeful, and Monoliths are upcosted a bunch, what do you think they'll do to allow them to get Scoring Units across the board to objectives?

Some good ideas, but one thing irks me

Why does the removal of "phase out" make Pariahs any better? Sure, this removed the liability of do nothing points that made you easier to fade out. This does not make Pariahs any more effective than they were before. Expensive, one attack models that compete with Immortals for elite slots, yet don't really do anything that Immortals won't. They don't have the attacks to make a dent in hordes, they don't shoot hordes any better than Immortals, and the types of models that their warscythes would be points efficient against either kill them back even faster (usually before they even get to swing) or simply out maneuver them.

And if they think that making a units competition worse will make it more attractive, they are still wrong. If immortals get nerfed "to make Pariahs better", Pariahs will not be any more effective, but the army will suffer as a whole.

Thanks for the heads up. Any word on the T5 rumor for regular necrons? They'd have to do something to immortals if true.

I like the I1 from an overall standpoint. It sets Necrons apart, as no standard unit has that low of an initiative. Makes sense too for the standard necron.

Necron assault problems get a little better if WBB is replaced with FNP. WBB did not help with the assault results or getting run down, FNP does. There were rumors of giving Necrons Stubborn. That would help more so if true, as ld10 without modifiers is a hard nut to crack and one that is not taking no retreat wounds like other FNP units.

I'd add that surely the assaulty units in the necron codex will get improved. I'd even venture that the various Lord options will make for one tough hombre similar to C'Tan now (to replace them as rumored).

I am guessing the orb will let FNP be done an any wound now. I'd also venture to guess the monolith will allow rerolls to FNP to units nearby. Or perhaps improve FNP to 3+. Something along those lines.

Looking forward more to some new units Not expecting alot but surely there will be some?

If Warriors are given Slow and Purposeful, and Monoliths are upcosted a bunch, what do you think they'll do to allow them to get Scoring Units across the board to objectives?

Flayed ones are rumored to be troop options in the new dex. Here's to hoping they get a boost (and are not S&P, nor lower then I3-4).
Also running S&P models are still moving faster on average then without running in 4ed. That is a small consolation though. Perhaps they'll get some kind of obelisk that can port em to and fro.

Man I'm just wishlisting now. Back to your actual rumors.

Pretty much. But then, a Necron force on the verge of Phase Out is already pretty much done. Tracking Scoring Units just makes everything simpler.

If you take Phase Out away, then Necrons need to cost at least 25 pts each and/or get much worse stat-wise.

25 points for a marine with FNP and a bad statline is massively overcosted. I don't really even think 19 is that cheap personally. Plague marines are marginally more expensive and vastly superior. Even standard marines are pretty comparable due to the superior initiative and squad weapons.

Hellfury wrote:I admit the grot example was hyperbole in the extreme.

But by your reckoning, they would be 500+ points and a drop in stats. How much does a full platoon of guardmen (that has access to special/heavy weapons and JO/sgt upgrades) cost again?

But necrons that rapid fire s4 ap5 that could possibly autoglance a vehicle (Boy oh boy stop the excitement!) should cost that much?

And necrons should be fun to play with and against.

Such negative attitude propagates the mindset into GW to make more marine armies, and we all know we need more marine armies like we need 6 more holes in the head.

That's why I switched up to Guardsmen.

At 500 pts for 20 Necrons, that's a very tough unit. Currently, for 500 pts, you could get a PF JO with 4 Plas carries leading 4 Las/Plas Guard squads = 45 full-gun Guardsmen. A full Platoon of 5 squads is doable at similar points, but would require reduction in Lascannons (not good vs Necrons, as you need S9+ to have any chance vs AV14).

IMO, a FNP Necron with a S4 AP5 Rending Gun is fairly priced at 25 pts without Phase Out; a FNP Necron with a Rending Gun that can be Phased Out is worth around 20 pts.

If playing against Necrons doesn't feel like the mindless drudgery of scrubbing a pot, punctuated by repeatedly stubbing one's toes against misunderstood rules, then that would be a huge step up from the current situation.

Given that Necrons are MEQs, I'd be much happier to see GW do the 4 Powers of Chaos instead of Necrons.
____

Aduro wrote:So if a Warrior with I1, Slow and Purposeful, and FNP should cost 25+ points... Should a Plague Marine with I3, two CC Weapons in addition to his bolter, three kinds of Grenades, Toughness 5, and FNP cost 50 some points?

I3 and A2 are only worth 2 points, while Grenades are of negigable value. T5 is worth a couple points. But then you offset against a Rending gun, and the PM is fair at 26 pts.

Da Boss wrote:I1 is a big problem. It makes them even worse in close combat.

I1 vs I2 makes no difference, as they're still slower than regular Marines & Guardsmen. Besides, FNP covers for a lot problems.

ShumaGorath wrote:25 points for a marine with FNP and a bad statline is massively overcosted. I don't really even think 19 is that cheap personally. Plague marines are marginally more expensive and vastly superior. Even standard marines are pretty comparable due to the superior initiative and squad weapons.

If he has a semi-Special Rending Bolter, he's not so bad at all. 19 would be cheap - you can't cost them less than 20 pts, because they're still a flavor of Cult Marines, and SM are now 16 pts. Plague Marines are good, no doubt, which is why they're 26 pts each.

19 Points for a warrior seems fine to me. Remember you wont get FNP on AP 1 and 2 weaps, instant kill weapons (strength double their toughness), or anything that disallows armor saves (Power Weapons, Rending, Tzeentch Flamers etc).

Hmm... if Necrons are getting a new kit, then these rules wouldn't make any sense. But let's think critically about this for a second, and apply the GW design process to the Necron Codex.

Things get better for two reasons:

1. No one bought it in the last edition because it sucked or wasn't as good as somthing comparable (eg. Assault Terminatotrs in the last Codex compared to this one).
2. There's a new model kit coming out (eg. Stealth Suits).

So it comes down to what are people using, and what are people not using?


Lords - People have to use Lords. There's no ways around that. They can release a new one or a plastic one to entice people to buy them, but otherwise there's no much chance for dramatic change here. Rules can change, but that will only really happen with a new model, or because they're getting rid of something else... there are rumours about removing the C'Tan, afterall. Might get a fully plastic Destroyer Lord, meaning that Destroyer Lords will get killer new rules.

Immortals - People use Immortals because they rule. Now, like the Stealth Suits in Tau Empire, they can't just nerf them because everyone already owns them, that's too obvious a change. So, like the Stealth suits, what they have to do is make them slightly better, and give them some fancy new options, and then make a new kit that is incompatible (both aesthetically and structurally) with the previous kit (compare metal Stealths to plastic Stealths and then tell me I'm wrong). Still, that means plastic Immortals, and that's awesome.

Destroyers - They won't get a new kit. They'll be toned down actually because everyone already owns them.

Heavy Destroyers - Not a huge winner, more of a necessary evil in Necron armies, but I can see these getting better as they move away from hybrid kits and a combined Destroyer/Heavy Destroyer kit arrives.

Monolith - They won't redo the Monolith. They'll tone down the rules and put the price up.

Necron Warriors - Now people use these because they have to, and this is unlikely to change. So GW is faced with two options - people already have to buy them, so they're garenteed sales, so they don't need to be better and no investment in a new kit is necessary. So they'll either stay as they are, get worse (doesn't matter to them - you still need to buy the models) or we'll get a recut sprue and a boost in rules. From these rumours I'm suspecting that they know that people need Warriors anyway, so they don't really lose anything by making them worse and avoiding a costly new plastic mould.

What are people not using?

Wraiths - As everyone takes Destroyers and Scarabs as their Fast Attack choices, everyone ignores the anemic Wraith (I even forgot it when I posted this, so this is an edit). Now, as everyone owns Destroyers (and there's nothing to be gained by boosting their rules as it won't drive sales of something people already own), Wriaths are a prime candidate for a big boost in rules. No one owns any unless they're machocistic or they came with something (my two came in the original Necron Army box), so a significant jump in rules, combined with a nerfing of Destroyers, will swing that pendulum in the Wraith's favour as people who already own Destroyers (which is all Necron players) rush out to buy their 'replacement' - the now uber-cool Wraiths. No need for a new kit because of this either, as people don't buy the existing one but will once the rules get better.

Pariahs - No need for a new kit here. No one buys them as they're junk, so like no one buying Assault Terminators (because 6-man double AssCan Termy squads were infinately better in the previous Codex), all they have to do is boost their rules. This will drive Pariah sales.

Flayed Ones - Applies to them as well. I can see a plastic kit, a boost in rules, and a transfer over to Troops. The reasons for this is A). it boosts the sales B). gets rid of a fiddly metal model and C). People who own lots of (nerfed) Warriors will want something to replace them - and plastic Flayed Ones as Troops are a perfect fit.


And now a separate category for oddities:

Tomb Spyders - If I had to pick one unit as the 'new kit that gets crap rules' (like Possessed and the Thunderfire Cannon), I'd pick the Tomb Spyder. A fancy new look, metal or plastic, really doesn't matter, and rules that leave you scratching your head.

Scarabs - What happens to them depends on what happens to Necron Warriors (as they're on the same sprue). Having said that, as everyone owns Scarab Swarms and I seriously doubt it's worth their effort making a new sculpt, they have nothing to lose by nerfing these guys to drive the sales of newer kits.

BYE

JohnHwangDD wrote:
I1 vs I2 makes no difference, as they're still slower than regular Marines & Guardsmen. Besides, FNP covers for a lot problems.

There is one difference, whether you hit before or simultaneously with Power fists or Thunderhammers.

Yup, that's what I was thinking. And of course, the +1 to escaping being over run.

"After all Slow and Purposeful and Feel No Pain makes Necron Warriors to similar to Thousand Sons. "

Papa Nurgle gonna smack you.


Heh, I am expecting the new pariahs to turn out like Khorne Berzerkers but with FNP. Which would totally kick ass!

How so?

The overwhelming bulk of the time, opponents have already made their attacks, so you're only killing guys who've already swung. Whether you simul or go first vs the PF, you still get all of your attacks. So you kill a few guys, he kills a few guys and it's a wash.

The only time it matters is when the PF is the last guy standing. In this case, you get the chance to kill him before he kills a couple of your guys. But as PFs were nerfed to not gain the +1A except when paired, this isn't nearly as common.

And the +1 to escaping over run?
Btw, PMs are cheaper than 26 points.
And they get transport options.
And they get defensive grenades.
And they get special weapons.
And they get more attacks.
And they get squad leaders.
And they get I3.
And they get T5.

But they don't get SAP, so I suppose that's alright.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

If you take Phase Out away, then Necrons need to cost at least 25 pts each and/or get much worse stat-wise.

Like I1?

@ H.B.M.C.

Wait one second... So everyone already bought destroyers and lords and warriors and whatnot. They bought them because they were good. In a few cases too good in others just functional. Thus because people already own them the powers that be will tone them down. Can't it just be said that people buy the powerful stuff because it is powerful then GW tones it down because it was too powerful?

Throw out that whole "games workshop makes the new models good!@1!1 stuff for a bit. Your saying that people buy the models that are powerful because they are powerful thus GW gives them new models before releasing a codex. Then in subsequent versions reduces their power. But model ranges like the necrons tend to get overhauled in large segments. The last major overhaul happened all at once. They couldn't have "powered up the new models!" because they were all new. In fact the newest ones if i remember right were all universally bad (pariahs and wraiths).

By that same logic the land speeder storm should have been amazing, the thunderfire canon should have been a masterpiece, scout bikes should have been awesome, the master of the forge should have been fantastic, the ironclad dreadnaut should have been.. Well.. You get the idea.

Things get better for two reasons:

1. No one bought it in the last edition because it sucked or wasn't as good as somthing comparable (eg. Assault Terminatotrs in the last Codex compared to this one).
2. There's a new model kit coming out (eg. Stealth Suits).

So it comes down to what are people using, and what are people not using?

If something wasn't bought in the last edition because it wasn't as good as something comparable (eg. assault termies) then it was underpowered (eg. assault termies). That is a reason in and of itself to overhaul and improve, beyond the need for driving sales.

And really, the new model thing just doesn't work. Too many new releases in the past few years have been crap. Practically nothing in the new marine book that has a new model is particularly good, and very little new in the chaos book was either. Going back the last few years there's only a few examples of large rules improvements to new models especially when compared to new models with rules that virtually insure no one will buy them.

Its a dead horse. Put the bat down.

ShumaGorath wrote:Thus because people already own them the powers that be will tone them down. Can't it just be said that people buy the powerful stuff because it is powerful then GW tones it down because it was too powerful?

It's actually a bit of both. Sometimes they will tone something down because it actually needs to be toned down, Assault Cannons being a good example.

However, historically, GW has shown to be either a bit ancient in their revisions (ie. something that was powerful in 3rd and then wasn't in 4th getting toned down when it's Codex gets updated becuse it was powerful in 3rd), or they over balance things (decrease power of assault cannons... and then reduce their numbers... and then increase their price... then make you feel guilty for taking them... and so on).

But GW have nothing to gain by up-powering Destroyers. They also have nothing to gain by leaving them as is. However, if they make something else that no one took (like Wraiths) into an awesome unit, then they don't have to worry, as everyone will rush to buy them.

ShumaGorath wrote:Throw out that whole "games workshop makes the new models good!@1!1 stuff for a bit.

Why?

They're a business Shummy. Their goal is to make money. GW does this by selling miniatures. The best way to drive sales is to change rules. So if something has already sold a bundle, there's no sense in upping its power because people who already have them are unlikely to buy more of them. It makes far more sense to up power something that nobody bought, especially if it replaces the thign that peoiple already own, so everyone goes out and buys those.

GW gets more $$$, therefore they win.

ShumaGorath wrote:Your saying that people buy the models that are powerful because they are powerful thus GW gives them new models before releasing a codex.

People buy models that are effective, yes. This isn't a revelation, it's normal. Not bad, evil, underhanded or even good - just normal. And I don't know what you mean about "giving them models before releasing a Codex".

ShumaGorath wrote:Then in subsequent versions reduces their power.

Or, like with Stealth Suits and probably with Immortals (and maybe even Destroyers, given their popularity), they give them a suite of new options, but only make them available on a completely new kit. That way the options are only available on a new model which people have to buy, or convert the old one, which also involves buying more stuff. So, again, a win for GW as they get more $$$.

And, as I said, this isn't 'evil' of them. It's not them being 'dishonest' or 'bad'. It's just standard - normal - unremarkable.

ShumaGorath wrote:But model ranges like the necrons tend to get overhauled in large segments.

What model ranges are there like the Necrons?

ShumaGorath wrote:The last major overhaul happened all at once.

I think you mean the only overhaul for the Necrons there Shummy. Plus I wouldn't call it an overhaul either. Remember that Necrons didn't even have a Codex until their 'overhaul'. They were a test race developed towards the end of 2nd Ed to test the waters. They proved popular enough, with releases for Immortals and (hideous) Destroyers coming after the original Warriors, so they were given a 'to get you buy' list at first (like Sisters in 3rd), and then finally a full Codex with a new art style and a model release to go with this new art style.

ShumaGorath wrote:They couldn't have "powered up the new models!" because they were all new.

The race was new. You don't have to power up everything in a new race. It being new is often enough to make people buy it. There's the "Oooh! Shiny!" factor in here. Look at the Tau. They sucked in 3rd yet everyone still went out and bought them... then subsequently sold them off.

Besides, the units that were often the best (Destroyers, Scarabs, Monolith) were in plastic, which also just happens to be the most expensive type of mould to produce. Funny that.

ShumaGorath wrote:In fact the newest ones if i remember right were all universally bad (pariahs and wraiths).

Takes a while for the Codex to disseminate throughout the community. Within 6 months some of the 'Ooh shiny!' will wear out on the Marines as well and people will start taking hard looks at which of the new stuff is really worthwhile. Moreover, as it was a new race for 40K, rather than a test-race like it had been in 2nd Ed, there were bound to be mistakes. Mistakes are human, and GW seem more human than most when it comes to mistakes, so it's to be expected really.

ShumaGorath wrote:By that same logic the land speeder storm should have been amazing

What... being more frightening than a Bloodthirster isn't good enough for you?

ShumaGorath wrote:the thunderfire canon should have been a masterpiece

I already said that there's usually one new unit per Codex that gets a new kit but actually sucks. Possessed and Tank Bustaz are two good examples. The Thunderfire Cannon joins them.

And as I said, GW makes mistakes. You could even go so far - I won't, but you could - to say that some new things are left bad so that they can up-power them next time they revise it without needing to make a new model.

ShumaGorath wrote:scout bikes should have been awesome

Scout Bikes have been given every special rule under the sun.

ShumaGorath wrote:the master of the forge should have been fantastic

He ain't getting a new model (that we know of).

ShumaGorath wrote:the ironclad dreadnaut should have been.. Well.. You get the idea.

AV13 Dread > AV12 Dread, so I don't know what you're saying here.

ShumaGorath wrote:If something wasn't bought in the last edition because it wasn't as good as something comparable (eg. assault termies) then it was underpowered (eg. assault termies). That is a reason in and of itself to overhaul and improve, beyond the need for driving sales.

But selling miniatures is what counts. They're a miniature company, not a rules company. Again, not a conspiracy, or them being 'evil', it's what they are. It's their business model, and I hold no grudges against them for it.

Using Assault Termies as the example, they didn't sell not because they were an inherently bad unit, but because the alternative (2 AssCan Termy Squads) were so much better. Now AssCans have been (over) balanced, and regular Termies aren't the New Hotness any more, and now that Storm Shields have been beefed up, Assault Termies are better than Termy Squads (which, like with the opposite, aren't bad units, but Assault Termies are just better units). So they drive sales for Assault Termies without having to make a new kit because the majority of people wouldn't've bothered with them, so didn't own any in the first place.

Instant $$$ for GW. They win again.

ShumaGorath wrote:Its a dead horse. Put the bat down.

It's a logical assessment of their business model. Only the most extreme apologist here will deny the GW pendulum style of rules design (even my main man DD agrees here), and their pendulum style of rules design fits directly with their plan for selling models. Those on the upswing get new model kits, or if they're not getting new model kits it's because they were on the downswing last edition so no one reallay bought them last time.

As I've said, this isn't a conspiracy. This isn't GW being sneaky, underhanded. This isn't some 'evil empire' theory. GW aren't evil. Their rules writers are imbeciles most of the time, but they're not evil. It's just how GW operate, and as long as they keep making cool new models, it's fine.

BYE

though it may pain me to say it: Point to HMBC

Also, please for the love of god don't give Necrons rending on Gauss Weaponry, we don't need necrons auto-killing Wraithlords and near wiping out terminator units due to sloppy rules writing.

On the other hand, Flayed ones, and wraiths, deservedly need rending.

All I know is that Necrons as they stand in 5th are complete junk.

strange_eric wrote:though it may pain me to say it: Point to HMBC

One of these days I'm going to hunt down that HMBC fella and kill him for stealing all of my points, kudos, congratulations and witty retorts!!!!!

strange_eric wrote:Also, please for the love of god don't give Necrons rending on Gauss Weaponry, we don't need necrons auto-killing Wraithlords and near wiping out terminator units due to sloppy rules writing.

I doubt they will, but that doesn't mean Rending is out for certain types of Gauss weapons, like the Gauss thingy that Destroyers have. Then again, that up-powering would require a new kit, but if they're doing a combined/non-hybrid Destroy/Heavy Destroyer kit, that might be enough to drive the sale.

And Wraiths don't need Rending. Wraiths need power weapons. About as much as Lictors need 'em.

BYE

I really hope that they keep phase out and make the nercons much more customisable and give thema bigger army list or even just armoury

But GW have nothing to gain by up-powering Destroyers. They also have nothing to gain by leaving them as is. However, if they make something else that no one took (like Wraiths) into an awesome unit, then they don't have to worry, as everyone will rush to buy them.

They have nothing to gain by powering up destroyers because yes, everyone already owns the models and because they are fine in the current ruleset. If everyone already bought the model because it was powerful then powering it up would in fact be detrimental to the game. It would cause armies to consist of little other than the unit in question because it is too powerful. This would effectively drive down the sales of the other more standardly powerful units from the book. There is market incentive to good rules. A balanced codex will sell MORE models more evenly across the board then one with little variety.

They're a business Shummy. Their goal is to make money. GW does this by selling miniatures. The best way to drive sales is to change rules.

Incorrect. The best way to drive sales is through a solid ruleset that encourages new players and vets to maintain a stream of new alternative purchases. They don't make their money through flavor of the month overpowering of new model kits. They make the VAST majority of their money through army sales. A first time player collecting his first army doesn't really care about "new" models because they are all new. And a veteran starting a new army doesn't care about "new" models because they are all new to him as well. The incremental purchases to an existing army over time after the initial spending spree has ended accounts for very little profit by contrast to the initial expenditure.

So if something has already sold a bundle, there's no sense in upping its power because people who already have them are unlikely to buy more of them. It makes far more sense to up power something that nobody bought, especially if it replaces the thign that peoiple already own, so everyone goes out and buys those.

The minor sales spike a model line experiences pales in comparison to its long term profitability. By designing an unbalanced ruleset that favors a small list of newer models you inevitably harm the sales of the older models in the long term. Which is the term that matters. A newer model doesn't make the company any more than an older one.

People buy models that are effective, yes. This isn't a revelation, it's normal. Not bad, evil, underhanded or even good - just normal. And I don't know what you mean about "giving them models before releasing a Codex".

I should have said "as they were releasing".

Or, like with Stealth Suits and probably with Immortals (and maybe even Destroyers, given their popularity), they give them a suite of new options, but only make them available on a completely new kit. That way the options are only available on a new model which people have to buy, or convert the old one, which also involves buying more stuff. So, again, a win for GW as they get more $$$.

This is yet another logical fallacy. To improve upon stealth suits they had options. They could use the same models and simply up the statline of everything involved, irrevocably changing the way in which its unit entry would function with the rest of the book. Or they could simply give it upgrade options. Stealth suits sucked before. They do not now. I'm not denying it. But the method by which they upgraded the unit makes more sense then the alternative that would not require a new model. This was an incidental upgrade to the model line that sat well with the upgrade to their rules. Was it a required model update? Yes. However it was better than the alternative methods of improving the very static previous ruleset.

model ranges are there like the Necrons?

The tyranids had a near total overhaul with their fourth edition codex and the only unit that came out of it well was the carnifex. Lictors suck, raveners suck, zoanthropes are marginal, biovores are terrible, broodlords were terrible, etc. By underpowering the other choices and perhaps making the carnifex too good they did in fact increase carnifex sales. However the sales of all of the other models I have listed dropped by comparison. At best it was an even split in profitability, at worst they lost money on expensive molds for models that saw sales and use very rarely.

I think you mean the only overhaul for the Necrons there Shummy. Plus I wouldn't call it an overhaul either. Remember that Necrons didn't even have a Codex until their 'overhaul'. They were a test race developed towards the end of 2nd Ed to test the waters. They proved popular enough, with releases for Immortals and (hideous) Destroyers coming after the original Warriors, so they were given a 'to get you buy' list at first (like Sisters in 3rd), and then finally a full Codex with a new art style and a model release to compensate.

So they had a soft release, an overhaul, then a total overhaul. Got it. Keep in mind I've been playing necron armies since I started this game back when my tyranids came out of a third edition rulebook. They've changed several times in that span.

The race was new. You don't have to power up everything in a new race.

Except they weren't new.

Besides, the units that were often the best (Destroyers, Scarabs, Monolith) were in plastic, which also just happens to be the most expensive type of mould to produce. Funny that.

Produce yes, but not to maintain. While the initial cost of plastic injection molds is high the long term profitablity is superior to that of pewter molds because they last forever. When you underpower units constructed with metals youre losing money by requiring that those same models remain on shelves and in warehouses. They absorb tax dollars and while you may theoretically make up the lower cost of the mold more quickly, in effect you do not by diminishing sales by overpowering that which is plastic molded. Again, it is at best a tie and at worst a self destructive market strategy that will cause minor sales increases but a long term decline in market share and profitability. Which, despite the fact that that is happening. Is not what GW is shooting for.

What... being more frightening than a Bloodthirster isn't good enough for you?

Yeah, your going to have to explain that one.

I already said that there's usually one new unit per Codex that gets a new kit but actually sucks. Possessed and Tank Bustaz are two good examples. The Thunderfire Cannon joins them.

And flash gitz. And chaos spawn. And deathkoptas. How many new models have to suck before you become wrong? Or is there no limit on the cieling?

Scout Bikes have been given every special rule under the sun.

And yet they are still marginal.

AV13 Dread > AV12 Dread, so I don't know what you're saying here.

AV 13 Dread with no gun. A dreadnaut without a gun is a dreadnaut thats not making back its points any time soon. One more armor value doesn't help the fact that its in the same place as the close combat carnifex. A hardy unit that has to walk across the board so that if it lives it can maybe kill enough to make up its points in the two turns of combat it gets.

But selling miniatures is what counts. They're a miniature company, not a rules company. Again, not a conspiracy, or them being 'evil', it's what they are. It's their business model, and I hold no grudges against them for it.

Actually they are a company that by and large functions by IP. Miniature sales may make up a large percentage of its market but liscensing, expanding, and maintaining its IP while introducing continually tight rulesets are how it survives. Dark heresy doesn't make them much of a profit in minis sales. Neither does Dawn of War. But by having a sensical and stable base game to pull from they make more money in the long term by gaining a reliable and multifaceted customer base. A consistent ruleset with balance will make them more money than flash in the pan flavor of the month units because a balanced ruleset will attract new customers and maintain old ones. It's a long term strategy, the methods you describe for profitability are at once very short term and not particularly profitable. They are also self destructive.

Using Assault Termies as the example, they didn't sell not because they were an inherently bad unit, but because the alternative (2 AssCan Termy Squads) were so much better.

Assault termies were pretty terrible. They were a high cost slow moving unit that could easily be avoided or sand trapped. They were very hard to kill, but they accomplished very little.

Now AssCans have been (over) balanced, and regular Termies aren't the New Hotness any more, and now that Storm Shields have been beefed up, Assault Termies are better than Termy Squads (which, like with the opposite, aren't bad units, but Assault Termies are just better units). So they drive sales for Assault Termies without having to make a new kit because the majority of people wouldn't've bothered with them, therefore don't own anyway.

I also don't believe that assault canons have been overbalanced. It's still the best gun in the game. They have just shortened the gap between the usability of both units. This is how a book becomes balanced and it is WHY the longterm strategy of balance leads to more sales. Because when both options are good people will buy both options. You don't need to force them to do so by over or underpowering one of the two. It will happen anyway if they are both good choices.

It's a logical assessment of their business model.

It's an illogical conspiracy laden rant that takes many liberties with the ideas of profitability and sustainability and ignores reality.

Only the most extreme apologist here will deny the GW pendulum style of rules design (even my main man DD agrees here), and their pendulum style of rules design fits directly with their plan for selling models.

There is a pendulum style of rules design in codexes because they are idiots and cant seem to balance between rulesets. Not because they are trying to drive individual model sales. A bi polar and unbalanced ruleset loses far more money in lost customers than it does in flash in the pan short term model sales. You're just projecting your bias onto the coincidental human capacity to make mistakes (with GW a lot of mistakes).

As I've said, this isn't a conspiracy.

Yes it is, stop trying to ligitimize yourself. For every stealth team there is a sky ray. For every carnifex there is a ravener. And for every plague marine there is a possessed. These imbalances occur due to lax playtesting and poorly concieved design. Not due to some ridiculous conspiracy theory about sales drive.

This isn't GW being sneaky, underhanded. This isn't some 'evil empire' theory. GW aren't evil. Their rules writers are imbeciles most of the time, but they're not evil. It's just how GW operate, and as long as they keep making cool new models, it's fine.

Its true, they can be imbecilles. It's true they are not evil. And its true that thats just how they operate. As a company. Developing a game on a continual quest to maintain the precarious sense of balance inherent with being as large and multifaceted as it is.

[DOUBLE POST]

ShumaGorath wrote:It's an illogical conspiracy laden rant that takes many liberties with the ideas of profitability and sustainability and ignores reality.

You're the only one saying it's a conspiracy... look:

ShumaGorath wrote:Yes it is

See??? OMG!!!



I tried to be civil, but you went for the jugular, went with the adhominems and generally BS'ed your way through your post.

So let me respond in kind - get right down your level:


You're too stupid to live ShumaGorath, and I wish you didn't post here. I'm done with you.


Now go on. Change your Location to "Trying to kill HBMC" or "Loading my pistol and planning his death" or whatever else obsessed bs you've got running through that malfunctioning brain. You know you want to.

BYE

And thus we get to the core of the internet tough guy. When you can't just use aggression or a text wall to win an argument you fall apart. Sorry for interrupting the cycle of overt aggression maintained by lax moderation and random Kudos by disenfranchised teens that has supported your posting.. But here we are.

If you don't want me to say its a conspiracy stop saying its not, then treating your opinions as generally accepted facts being spoken down to one of the unlearned chuds from the sewers. People often times believe differently than you and if you fall apart every time one refuses to go away or give in you're going to be falling apart a lot.






In retrospect, did you put me on ignore..? Huh, thats going to be an odd question to have answered in the affirmative.

Also in retrospect its only ad hominim if I attack you. By calling your argument a conspiracy laden rant I was attacking the argument, albeit in a way that isn't a well formed counterargument. Though I had a lot of those too. It would have been ad hominim if I said it was a conspiracy laden rant because your a heroin addict or something. I have to actually attack you somehow for it to be ad hominim.

I think what would be nice is an evolution of the Necrons as a race, rather than just a pendulum swinging to make good bad and bad good.

The Necrons are, currently, a raiding force - the forces of a race that is still sleeping. I think that the next stage would be to overhaul the race into a fully fledged army, and make them the newest 'Greatest threat to the Imperium EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!@{" (y'know, after every other race).

So give them new models, take them from 'raiders' to 'army'. Still keep the core concepts of the Necron race - timeless warriors that are in no hurry, are virtually impossible to kill, and wield weapons of unimaginable power. Boils down to more variety I suppose.

Necrons suffer from being a 'boring' race because everything is exactly as you see it. Necron Warriors only ever do one thing. Flayed Ones do exactly one thing and never deviate. They're great bad guys, but they have no real personality. I love them, but mainly because I always loved Undead in Warhammer and these guys are the 40K version of that, but even Undead have a wealth of different units and options. Necrons are very much 'first gen'.

It's time to open up the Tombs and show us what the C'Tan's creations are really capable of!!!

BYE

I think I'm being ignored.

Think what you like, but as I said, I'm done with you.

Now do you want to discuss Necrons, or continue stalking me?

BYE

We can do the necron thing.

Wow! That was better than UFC Unleashed! Seriously, H.B.M.C. is right, the Necrons are still finding their way. Of course, the last Chaos Space Marine codex pretty much took almost everything distinctive about the traitor legions and threw it in the garbage, so in 6th edition, the Necrons will have whatever cool personality they get in their next codex taken away. One of these days GW will learn, or we'll wise up and stop buying their stuff. Yeah, right.

ShumaGorath wrote:A balanced codex will sell MORE models more evenly across the board then one with little variety.

I'm not at all sure that even sales should be the goal. Lately, I'm of a mind that GW deliberately over- or under-prices various units based on what they think an army should field more (or less) of. That is, any given Codex can be defined as containing things the army does well (underprice slightly), does poorly (overprice slightly), or not at all (remove from Codex).

In the case of Necrons, if they're the key to the army not phasing out, and players are forced to take them, then GW can "pull an Eldar" and deliberately overprice them by 10% or 15%. Whereas things like Monoliths and such are clearly good for their points, so they can be made effectively underpriced. On net, the tension of having expensive mandatory units balances against having more attractive optional units.

The minor sales spike a model line experiences pales in comparison to its long term profitability. By designing an unbalanced ruleset that favors a small list of newer models you inevitably harm the sales of the older models in the long term. Which is the term that matters. A newer model doesn't make the company any more than an older one.

I don't think GW favors newer models. The Eldar Wraithlord is a perfect example of this. In 3rd Edition, the Wraithlord was great. Totally worth his points. And a 2nd Edition model. In 4th, he got worse because of how the new rules worked. In 5th, he's hardly playable, having been nerfed pretty heavily. And all this despite a brand new plastic model that required tremendous setup costs.

Or what about Terminator Lords, Possessed, Spawn, and Daemonettes / Bloodletters (possibly Defiler, depending on who's reviewing) relative to the current CSM book? All of these are roundly derided, but they got shiny brand new plastic model kits...

And then, there's Codex Daemons, which is practically all new stuff representing a high development effort. Is that army overpowered? The recent GT results don't seem to show it.


If GW really were trying to push new models via rules, I think they could have done a much better job of it.


Personally, I think GW has this pendulum effect because they *intend* to overcorrect things that players complain about. "See? You have no basis for complaint : we *listened* to you!"

mattyboy22 wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
If you take Phase Out away, then Necrons need to cost at least 25 pts each and/or get much worse stat-wise.

Like I1?

Well, you can't go to I0, or they can't fight in HtH.

Da Boss wrote:And the +1 to escaping over run?

But they don't get SAP, so I suppose that's alright.

I'm assuming they get Gauss = Rending, which should be expensive ranged and en masse.

strange_eric wrote:Also, please for the love of god don't give Necrons rending on Gauss Weaponry, we don't need necrons auto-killing Wraithlords and near wiping out terminator units due to sloppy rules writing.

200 pts of Terminators would be 8 Necrons at my proposed 25 pts each. That's 16 shots; 11 hits; 2- Rends, 4 Wounds; about 2 kills total. If they could be Phased Out at 20 pts each, then it's 20 shots, 14 hits, 2+ Rends, 5 Wounds; still 2 or 3 kills total. Of course, that would be after the Termies killed about 1 Necron via shooting, Of course, those 2 or 3 remaining Termies would clean up big time with their PFs in HtH...

I'm gonna have to side with DD here and say that the difference between I1 or I2 is really a much of a muchness. Whatever the case you're swinging after Guardsmen and that's the way it is. Power Fists (and their ilk) aren't what they once were in 5th, so it's not a huge deal.

They should also be WS3, as having the same combat skills as a Marine or Banshee just doesn't make sense.

BYE

HBMC is right about GW tendency to boost anything with new models and nerfing the things everyone already uses. There is also the trend that GW goofs when it comes to writing rules for new units.

The thing I suspect we'll see is more fleshing out of the differences between the necrons that follow each of the C'Tan. Necron lords will probably get a boost that ties into that.

To flesh out the Necrons from raiding force to army, they need additional units. I think they need a vehicle smaller than a monolith, bigger than destroyers, either a dedicated transport that ties into the whole teleporting networking thing or a big gun tank. Kinda like either of the two aspects of the monolith. A jump pack type unit.

And knowing GW we'll probably see a new unit that's done in a lazy way, like just an extra part on an existing kit. Probably a new type of Destroyer.

I'm just going to add: WBB and Phase Out are cool rules. Thing is you can't WBB a Power Weapon or a Russ template anyway, so nothing is lost really (fluff/ game-wise) going to FNP. They are confusing rules that make the game slower, especially in the BANG-BANG 5th edition.

They should keep Pariahs the same but give them two wounds and FNP and be done with it.

They could keep the Necron rule and make it so only Necron units can teleport/ deep strike. The rest of them have to deal.

I1 seems silly but at least they differentiate. It also gives other units a role, with close combat units at higher I. Or Necron lords that give Necron Warriors bonuses, which I believe was rumoured, especially Special Characters.

Railguns wrote:Why does the removal of "phase out" make Pariahs any better? Sure, this removed the liability of do nothing points that made you easier to fade out. This does not make Pariahs any more effective than they were before.

I've somewhat loudly advocated transforming Pariahs into a specialized psychological weapon that's an upgrade for Warrior units. Someone suggested that they'd work even better if you could buy multiples in HQ and then disperse them as you see it, and I like that even better.

But I think Pariahs don't need a combat boost, but a refocusing around the Soulless rule (which may need to be adjusted too). If Jervis means what he says (about rules reflecting fluff), it'll happen. That's why the Necrons harvest them, according to the background. It has nothing to do with their ability to swing an axe. Necrons are meant to be *scary*, and Pariahs need to be the scariest.

On Warseer, Brimstone would only say that Pariahs work quite differently now. I hope that's a positive sign. Oh, and Brimstone also indicated that Necron assault capability should be much improved. So I'm guessing Flayed Ones and Wraiths get boosts.

aka_mythos wrote:The thing I suspect we'll see is more fleshing out of the differences between the necrons that follow each of the C'Tan. Necron lords will probably get a boost that ties into that.

Rumors seem to focus around different levels of Lords affecting the org chart -- the idea being different levels of Lords have designated roles. So a gold Lord or whatever that's designated for assault duty might get a Destroyer body and then be able to take extra Destroyer units or something. Don't read what I said literally -- that's just the general idea and specifics seem hard to come by.

To flesh out the Necrons from raiding force to army, they need additional units. I think they need a vehicle smaller than a monolith, bigger than destroyers, either a dedicated transport that ties into the whole teleporting networking thing or a big gun tank. Kinda like either of the two aspects of the monolith. A jump pack type unit.

I think Brimstone hinted at another vehicle. Most think it's going to be an Obelisk or something like that...again, something that's been on Necron players' wish lists for a long time.

I don't think they need much else unit wise. They have enough units, the problem is not enough of them are effective. That's why I really hope Phil Kelly is writing it, but since we've heard nothing on that front, it might be in Alessio's hands. So I worry that they'll be just as cookie-cutter in their next incarnation.

I do think the Tomb Spyder should get the Carnifex treatment in terms of customizability and plastic kit. That's one of the Necron units with the most untapped potential.

One thing Shuma pointed out (before his post descended into madness) that I would like to counter is the notion that GW doesn't boost a new model's rules to sell more, because new models don't make more money than old models.

That is true, but ignores the fact that new models COST more than old models. Old models have (likely) already payed off their initial start up cost of moulds and design. New models start off in that hole, and need to sell to get back into the black as it were. When it comes to plastics and their high expense, I think we find that that explains the somewhat odd fluxuation of power pretty well when mixed with an appreciation for human error in rules writing.
In other words, we can probably assume that if GW comes out with a new plastic kit, it is because they expect to sell a great many of the kit in a reasonably short amount of time, which is why most armies have plastic troop choices at least, and usually have plastic transport vehicles and/or tanks, while retaining metal elites and HQs (where those are not just slightly fancier versions of troops).

Now, this theory does not mean that EVERY new kit will get great rules, especially if it is a relatively cheap to set up metal. I think GW does try to make things reasonably balanced. However, I think it does point to there being a bias towards making whatever the new plastic kits will be "special" to encourage purchases, with the result of "special" generally being "with really great rules" as an emergent property of a system that 1) rewards selling new models, and 2) does not necessarily reward excellent rules design. I posit 2) because it seems to me, and is generally accepted I think, that GW does not worry about producing tight, highly balanced and well written rules so much as it could or should.

One thing Shuma pointed out (before his post descended into madness)

It didn't descend into madness until after HBMC replied. Sorry I don't agree with your games workshop shot kennedy conclusions.

That is true, but ignores the fact that new models COST more than old models. Old models have (likely) already payed off their initial start up cost of moulds and design.

But that doesn't actually matter. Businesses operate in the overall longterm. Not by concerning themselves with individually recouped costs of production. There are far too many variables, and again far too many examples of it just not happening. The sky ray is plastic. The possessed were plastic. The standard marine dreadnaut is plastic. Yet the venerable is metal. The venerable is clearly superior, and indeed appears more often in marine armies. Yet it is the less expensive and shorter term pewter mold that is being used to push production. No to mention the higher cost of metals related, which further drives down profits.

I think we find that that explains the somewhat odd fluxuation of power pretty well when mixed with an appreciation for human error in rules writing.

Actually all it does is add a layer of conspiracy where a clear answer already existed. That being the lax testing and rife human error.

In other words, we can probably assume that if GW comes out with a new plastic kit, it is because they expect to sell a great many of the kit in a reasonably short amount of time,

Actually, given that plastic kits make back their cost in the long term not the short term due to the cheaper cost of plastics versus metals and the larger inherent cost of a plastic mold what your saying doesn't even make sense. They use plastic kits for volumous models such as vehicles or very large and complex kits like ork and gaunt sprues because it is far cheaper to produce in the end and yields better results. Not because of some wacky short term sales scheme. And on the reverse metal molds are superior for smaller less volumous models where lower sales are expected because the initial cost to produce them is cheaper and the wear on the mold and higher cost of metals won't impact as much.

Now, this theory does not mean that EVERY new kit will get great rules, especially if it is a relatively cheap to set up metal. I think GW does try to make things reasonably balanced. However, I think it does point to there being a bias towards making whatever the new plastic kits will be "special" to encourage purchases, with the result of "special" generally being "with really great rules

There are simply far far too many examples conflicting with that for it too be true.

I think the part of the discussion focusing on GW tendencies really should be moved to a new thread in General Discussion.

gorgon wrote:Rumors seem to focus around different levels of Lords affecting the org chart -- the idea being different levels of Lords have designated roles. So a gold Lord or whatever that's designated for assault duty might get a Destroyer body and then be able to take extra Destroyer units or something. Don't read what I said literally -- that's just the general idea and specifics seem hard to come by.

That whole tier-ing lord concept though has little to do with what I said. The tier system is no different than say having Marine Commander/Captain/Chapter Master, its just a hierarchy of progressively better stats. Personally I hope they do it a little differently than other Codices, where its less a hierarchy and more just a matter of specializing in a different combat method. Also if they go with "silver/gold /platinum lord," the bling lord naming convention I will not play with or against necrons.

What I was talking about before was more like a Necron lord who follows the Nightbringer might be able to get a upgrade that say... makes so any unit shooting at him has too follow night-fight, for example. So I was really saying more like C'tan worshiping specific wargear.

gorgon wrote:I think Brimstone hinted at another vehicle. Most think it's going to be an Obelisk or something like that...again, something that's been on Necron players' wish lists for a long time.

I don't think they need much else unit wise. They have enough units, the problem is not enough of them are effective. That's why I really hope Phil Kelly is writing it, but since we've heard nothing on that front, it might be in Alessio's hands. So I worry that they'll be just as cookie-cutter in their next incarnation.

I do think the Tomb Spyder should get the Carnifex treatment in terms of customizability and plastic kit. That's one of the Necron units with the most untapped potential.

I agree on the Tomb spider, as it is now it seems less like a weapon and more like a piece of construction equipment. I think it'd be neat to see a close combat dreadnought sized model, whether its a tombspider or destroyer variant.
I think a large amount of the armies problem can be solved with re-writes. But I also have to say that Necrons are losing one of their most unique aspect with phase out and wbb gone. The other things I think do an ok job of representing them, but wbb and phase out really gave them an alien feel by the unorthodox rules.
Some unit needs to be a second troop choice. They need a less pricey vehicle option for smaller games.

The whole applying universal special rules to the necrons certainly sounds like Alesso's mantra. If Alesso writes we'll all open it up and be like "Hey, this looks exactly like the old one... wait wait, there's a new picture."

aka_mythos wrote:I agree on the Tomb spider, as it is now it seems less like a weapon and more like a piece of construction equipment. I think it'd be neat to see a close combat dreadnought sized model, whether its a tombspider or destroyer variant.

The whole applying universal special rules to the necrons certainly sounds like Alesso's mantra.

Given that I *just* played against a Necron player who didn't know his own Codex and the vagaries of WBB, making WBB into FNP would have been a huge help in speeding gameplay along. Where a Special Rule is essentially similar in effect to a USR, just make it a USR.

And, yes, the Tomb Spyder is a problem. It doens't look like a weapon at all, and I always figured that to be intentional.

I'd very much like to see Combat Destroyers - those would be great substitutes for Jump Packers, and the model conversion would be easy - just a single new sprue for the squadron.

If the Tomb Spyder gets properly redone to be styled more like a Destroyer, then an AV12 Living Metal "Dreadnought" with 2 DNCCWs and a shoulder-mounted cannon would be great. This could also be used to provide the basis for Ordnance fire support, taking on the Predator / Whirlwind roles.

aka_mythos wrote:The tier system is no different than say having Marine Commander/Captain/Chapter Master, its just a hierarchy of progressively better stats. Personally I hope they do it a little differently than other Codices, where its less a hierarchy and more just a matter of specializing in a different combat method. Also if they go with "silver/gold /platinum lord," the bling lord naming convention I will not play with or against necrons.

I think they're going with the bling lords. Remember that they're saying to look to Apoc and new rulebook fluff for hints about thing to come.

What I was talking about before was more like a Necron lord who follows the Nightbringer might be able to get a upgrade that say... makes so any unit shooting at him has too follow night-fight, for example. So I was really saying more like C'tan worshiping specific wargear.

I think the rumor was that Lords would get the option to become an "avatar of the C'tan," or some kinda thing like that. C'tan themselves would be gone from the codex (which I think is appropriate), but it'd be a way for Necron players to field a mini-C'tan and still use their existing C'tan models (which I also think is appropriate).

But i'm not sure we'll see C'tan-specific stuff. Just a gut feeling, with C'tan making an exit and Dragon and Outsider models presumably never to come (outside of FW, maybe).

JohnHwangDD wrote:If the Tomb Spyder gets properly redone to be styled more like a Destroyer, then an AV12 Living Metal "Dreadnought" with 2 DNCCWs and a shoulder-mounted cannon would be great. This could also be used to provide the basis for Ordnance fire support, taking on the Predator / Whirlwind roles.

My wishlist includes a customizable Tomb Spyder -- something that can be geared for assault, shooting or support. I agree with the concept that the majority of the Necron army should be light on upgrades. But I think Lords and Spyders have great potential for customization, and lots of upgrades/choices can be centered on those two models without harming the dedicated nature of the rest of the army.

The Spyder is actually a robot anyway...it only makes sense they'd have different variants or be able to retrofit them as need.

The "avatar of C'tan" thing sounds like the Nightbringer feature in Dawn of War: Your Lord can acquire an ability that allows the Lord to temporarily manifest as the Nightbringer.

The big problem with Necron Phase out is that it's a neat rule but the implementation encourages simple armies. It's a major drawback to take any units without the Necron rule.

It would be kind of neat to see Lords and perhaps other units getting options to represent following different C'Tan, but I wouldn't want it to be too much like Chaos' "marks".

ecrons wil be more fun to play and play aganst so peaple will by them and like they sad its a companie if they don't sell stuff how ever they do it dey will be broke.
I new the rule's for a thunder canon an now they arent the best but still bote 2 of them cose its a cool moddel.
( and I em making a compleet chapter so I atliest want evry kind of unit 1s)

Make Necron Warriors fearless.
Give Wraiths power weapons.
Give Pariahs FNP, fleet and an extra attack.

That should fix my Necrons!

The shift needed with Pariahs, and at the same time fixingmuch of the rest of the Ncrons book is that they need to be toned down, cut in price and made Troops. Yes, strange it sounds but hear me out.

On a background basis it is defensible. The Necrons are waking up ready for their next round of extermination before going to sleep for another few million years. This time tyere is a lot of life to extinguish, far more than usual and I am refering to the nids.

What would the Necrons do. Their primary limitation is a recruitment problem, principly there are no new necrons. Each Necron lost is irreplacable, which is why Phase Out is important part of their strategy, dont throw good robots after bad. At least for as long as they keep the rule.

Now there is one exception. the Pariah is a new necron recruit made from machine parts and ahem recruits. So why not make a new mass produced variant that can stem the tide of the foul living Tyranid manace that is infecting the universe.

This could account for Pariahs being downgraded to S4 and T4, cut heavily in points and given cut down rules for the Warscythe, at least the version they carry.

as far as the game rules are concerned this will wrom because it is the sort of change Pariahs need.

Finally the whole army improves because one of the critical failings of the army list is how bland it is. Tau and necrons were made with just enough Fast Attack, Heavy Support, Elite and HQ choices to fill out a detachment. troops were sadly lacking. Kroot mediocre though they can be greatly flesh out Tasu by providing a second Troops choice.

Necrons desperately need that. While they are at it scarabs should be troops also. Withy three troops choice Necron armies will diversify quickly and lose a lot of their staid reputation.

What would be the point of Flayed Ones then? I can take a Troops HTH choice that can also shoot, or an Elite HTH choice that can't shoot.

Why would you bother with Flayed Ones?

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:What would be the point of Flayed Ones then? I can take a Troops HTH choice that can also shoot, or an Elite HTH choice that can't shoot.

Why would you bother with Flayed Ones?

BYE

Hmm, let's see...

1. They get 2 attacks not 1.

2. Terrifying Visage.

3. Move through cover.

4. They can flank or...

5. They can deep strike.

6. Most importantly, they have initiative 4. Meaning they don't go last against everybody. Which means they might actually do some damage in an assault unlike warriors or immortals.

BYE

So in that case, Pariahs are just troops, but they still suck as much as they used to?

What I want to see is:

Pariahs - 50 points per model.
Elites - 4-12 per Squad.
WS4 BS4 S5 T5 W2 I4 A2 Ld10 Sv2+

Warscythe w/Built-In Gauss Blaster
Souless

BYE

I like that, but add Feel No Pain and only cost 35 points a piece.

haven't read all this thread so forgive if this has been suggested...

to me phase out is part of what made necrons different from other races, especially marines (3+saves and all that).

I vote to keep the rule but for it to be squad based and 'replace' morale. no morale modifiers, if a squad fils a check or drops below 25% it phases out automatically. yes it's not great for holding objectives/contesting or whatever, but it's part of the character of the army and I've never seen necrons as being a beginers army anyway. Taking the rule away is taking out a large chunk of the background feel to the army. Might as well take away power armour from marines while their at it, it's old, everyone's forgot how to make it properly, it's expensive. lets just have more fleshy guys! (ok, a bit exagerated there...)

Pariahs as Troops don't make sense to me, just because the pariah gene isn't supposed to be a common thing. It's hard to envision them as the frontline foot soldier in the same way that Warriors are.

The reason I think Pariahs need a total rethink and not a stat tweak is because all the CC units you need are there already...it's just that 2/3rds of them don't work properly. With Scarabs serving as the h2h tarpit, an improved FO serving as the basic Necron h2h unit, and powered-up Wraiths that actually work as elite killers, that's really all you need. And if Spyders get more interesting/variable, there might be your dread/MC level CC unit.

Pariahs seem a little directionless as a mixed CC/shooting unit, and if the poor units in the army get buffed, I'm not sure there's room as either dedicated CC or dedicated shooting. That's why I say they ought to recenter it around the only thing that makes them unique -- their psych role. Just my $0.02.

You could cut the range on their shooting ability from the new second gen mass produced Pariahs and deny them Feel no Pain (they are not true Necrons). Flayed ones will be far nastier.

In any event the first fix must be to expand troops choices. Scarabs and downgraded Pariahs are the only solutions I see.

Well the direction is certainly right! Looking forward to lots of Necron rumors and then great models and a solid codex.

In any event the first fix must be to expand troops choices.

I put money on one or both of the following as their expansion of troop options

1) Lords with certain gear open up spots to put certain non-troops as troops ala orks. Limited numbers like orks but enough to add variety to scoring abilities.

2) Flayed ones become troops -- or basically an optional upgrade to warriors. Would prolly lose deepstrike or other special ability but would still be a good scoring option.

I wouldn't bet on any other option, especially not downgraded pariah as troops.

1) Lords with certain gear open up spots to put certain non-troops as troops ala orks. Limited numbers like orks but enough to add variety to scoring abilities.

Sounds reasonable

2) Flayed ones become troops -- or basically an optional upgrade to warriors. Would prolly lose deepstrike or other special ability but would still be a good scoring option.

I think you'd have to apply your first point before this occurred.


IIRC Scarabs will be troop choices but I don't know if they will be scoring or not.

Swarms are never scoring.

Aduro wrote:Swarms are never scoring.

Very true, but just remember though that a major theme of the newer codices are exceptions to rules. For example, Pedro Kantor making Sternguard Vets, an Elite FOC choice, scoring. It's not unreasonable to wonder if scarabs can be made scoring in the new codex.

Nah... They'd just be WAY too good if they were. Turbo boosting jetbikes with a 2+ cover save darting around the board taking objectives? I just can't see anything like that. They're good enough as they are and as Fast Attack IMHO. Flayed Ones I could see as Troops however.

It would be nice to see Flayed as Troops, it would make it more balanced with the option to take either H2H or Shooting as troop instead of just shooting.


And I can't help but notice that more then half of you that post here are just hating on the Necrons and want to make them even worse then they already are.

Fluff bases, WBB was great for necrons, it worked fine, giving them FNP is just killing the fluff of Necrons. Also, removing C'tan would be like removing the big daemons from Chaos! (Ya, I don't know there name, leave me alone) Or the Carny from Nids, your taking away the one giant ass kicking unit we get that can be thrown out there and just kill some gak.


Over all, necrons need to be expanded, moving one or two units from category A to category B wont help, there is still the same limited selection there.

And I1? We already suck H2H! Why make us suck more?

I don't hate on the Necrons, believe me. They should drop WBB for FNP. They do the same basic thing in the end, and it's easy to keep the fluff of them getting the save from a self repair, but FNP is simply a much cleaner rule in a game that's trying to stream line itself more.

I'm also fine with them taking the C'Tan out of the codex if their intent is to make bigger badder meaner guys who more fit the fluff of an uber tough star god in Apoc. Having powerful Lords as avatars of their chosen deity is a good idea to replace them.

The Int thing isn't a really big deal to me either way.

Thanks Brimstone, made my night. You shoulda waited though, I might have been able to get Orlanth to bet some sterling

What about the basic warrior stats? Some above posters have mentioned lowering I, but I think the other stats should also be reviewed - currently they're far far too similar to MEQs. I'd like to see something more robotic and very different to any other race.

Just for a laugh, how about WS1, A1, S5 (and counts as power weapon), I1, T7 and no armour save - i.e. terrible in close combat but will hit back very hard if it gets lucky, and very hard to kill.

Augustus wrote:

I still suspect that assault weakness is such a MASSIVE 5th ed flaw that the Necrons wil be a B army anyway, don't have to worry about FNP when they run from a Melee morale check at -4 and get overun...

I think that they will be stubborn

If not full on Fearless.

if you want to increase the cost of necrons you need to make them better.

FNP, while a much needed rules change, is worse than WBB for the simple reason that you cant use FNP against AP1 and 2. admittedly it gives a slight boost in combat, but in an army where combat is a huge disadvantage, its basically no boost at all.

similarly SAP is a disadvatage. it fits the fluff, but because necrons have no transport options, it basically measn that any objectives on the otherside of the board are unreachable. an army where all of your scoring units cannot reach objectives is an army beyond the realms of unplayability. they would be worse than pure GK armies.

phase out should also go because it just doesnt suit an objective based game. i know its nice and fluffy, but if they get the points correct (yeah like thats ever going to happen) then they just wouldnt need it. big army wide disadvantages like this distorts the way the game works and unnecessarily complicated things.


these changes would require a rework of the necron codex overall, not just a 'tune up' so i think looking at some early brainstorming ideas and arguing about it is a waste of time.

dietrich wrote:I don't find any of that surprising. Phase out needs to go. Giving all their weapons rending would be hideous, but I think that makes more sense than only auto-glancing.

If only 19 pts per model, it would not be hideous but BROKEN. Come on a space marine with FNP, Slow and Purposeful, and Rending. That is more like a necron players wet dream .

FNP vs WBB is more of a wash. Sure, you don't FNP vs AP1 or 2, but you don't get WBB if they wiped out your three man Wraith unit either. FNP is also significantly more helpful in assaults than WBB, as it will negate your loses and help out your resolution in your favor more.

Augustus wrote:Right but WBB+ORB+Monolith increases the surviveability of Necron Units by quadruple! Which was the real problem, you could reduce enemy firepower by 75% essentially with rerolled WBB in all cases.

Necrons will still proabably get some slowed version of the orb that grants them immunity to the stuff that ignores FNP (I doubt we will see much difference there).

I am curious about the fate of the Monolith. Maybe it will just teleport units. Or maybe GW will grant Necrons the old WBB rule via teleporting through the Monolith in addition to FNP (Insert Sarcasm Here ).

JD21290 wrote:so, how many points is a fire warrior?
it has the ability to glance some vehicles, it has a stronger weapon, more range, just lower combat abilities, but doesent have a FNP rule, oh, and the necrons save is a little better.

so a necron warrior is a little better than a fire warrior, but alot more points.

Necron BS 4 T 4 Armour 3+ FNP Auto Glance a LR

Firewarriors aren't even in the same ball park

Yeah, I'm sure the Resurrection Orb will be made to let you ignore the exceptions to Feel No Pain rolls.

I'd love to see the Monolith made more terrifying. I mean sure, it's nice and tough now, but I'd like to see it just get big and imposing. Maybe something like being able to use the Particle Whip and the Flux Arc in the same turn. I could see it costing more at the same time as well, especially if they get rid of Phase Out.

I would like the monolith to be worked on and improved, how ever I can see them making it weaker, Simply because a lot of people like to complain about it being over powered now, even tho they like to ignore that its the only vehicle Necrons get and it is under powered compared to a lot of the other tanks given.


And you don't get a WBB roll if the killing wound was taken with out armor saves, so instant death and AP1-2 still right out kill any necron units, switching from WBB to FNP doesn't do much other then change when the roll is taken.

Losing WBB to weapons that deny armor saves is an assault thing that only applies to power weapons, not high AP weapons.

Aduro wrote:FNP vs WBB is more of a wash. Sure, you don't FNP vs AP1 or 2, but you don't get WBB if they wiped out your three man Wraith unit either. FNP is also significantly more helpful in assaults than WBB, as it will negate your loses and help out your resolution in your favor more.

Great point Aduro , may I expand it to say that you don't get your WBB rolls on your wraiths, or immorals or ect, ect, ect if I shoot them all down and there isn't a unit within 6". Yes you lose out to AP 1 and AP 2 with FNP but you gain your 4+ save in instances where not being able to make your 4+ save right away would result in your unit getting wiped out otherwise. Taking your 4+ save sooner is better than later. Besides as I have stated before (OK more like complained actually) chances are you are going to get the stupid res orb that will allow you to completely ignore the down side of FNP untill your opponent is able to kill the annoying IC carrying the thing.

What I'd really like is some personality.. like virus ncrons or infected necrons who dont follow the c'tan but some rogue ideal/programming, seeking to gain something. Or just crazy outsider necrons.

HBMC is a psychic who has predicted the new necron dex! The only thing he missed (or maybe I missed him write) was his vision of the new unit the necrons have gained. I consulted my own crystal ball and believe it will be a light vehicle thing I dub mini pyramid. It role will be to help necron warriors (slow and purposeful = lose) move across the battle field. Perhaps several mini pyramids will allow a relay type move.. give em a hvygun charge 50 points = money spinner. popular cause monolith will now cost 350pts.

Feel No Pain sounds a lot simpler than We'll Be Back, and I think getting rid of Phase Out is for the best. I'd say it's a painful mechanic, but they can keep it part of the fluff (like saying Necrons all phase out after losing the battle, instead of the rules forcing them to phase out and thus lose).

Give them something that makes them stand apart from the other races.

A lot of abilities such as affecting a units ability to shoot for instance the unit has to reroll successful hits.

Instead of having weapons that flat out kill , have something flavorful that would add a interesting strategy to the army.


As far as a I know there are not any affect units armies.

I would be a nice change of pace.


Here is a awesome phase out .


Phase out
A necron unit or independent character may select to phase out at the end of its own or enemies players shooting phase. Treat this unit as if it is pinned for it's following turn and it may not make an assault this turn. A necron unit that phases out may not be assaulted or selected as a target for shooting attacks, psychic abilities affect the unit as normal. If a necron unit is engaged in combat then the enemy squads engaged may make a consolidation move. A unit that is phased out at the end of game is considered destroyed and may not claim or contest objectives.


Makes it a pretty good tactical decision to phase out. You can avoid a assault but you are not doing gak next turn.

i say res orbs should give "well be back" to units within a certin range

i could also see games workshop giving the necron lord a item which gives him regen

speeking of the lord i would be a sad panda if there is not a large multipart necron lord kit.


plastic immortals also

Phase Out is supposed to be punitive, so how about this:

Phase Out
Instead of falling back, a Necron unit will Phase Out instead. Remove the entire unit from the board.

Simple.

I never really had a problem with phase out or WBB. They do give the army something distinct, which is nice, and I'd like something of them to remain in some way. I can see the advantages of FNP, and I'm willing to go with it, I just don't want to wind up playing nurgle marines, I want to play Necrons. I would really like an update to the FAQ while we're waiting for the new codex that made gauss weaponry AP1 vs vehicles (only). The 5E change really hurt their anti-vehicle capabilities.

I like the idea of taking the pariahs out and essentially making them sergeants in various squads. Spread out the soulless, and the feeling of dread that way. Drop the shooting from them down, trade the warscythe for a power weapon, and let either the pariah, or something else in the squad take upgraded gear.

Lords changing what can count as scoring, is nice, I prefer the same sort of treatment though as Belial gives deathwing, make the units count as troops. Difference is you can take more of them, as you aren't limited to just the standard 3 the FOC would allow, and you can avoid taking warriors if you like. A destroyer lord with a bunch of wraiths or destroyers without having warriors along makes for a nice skirmishing force, and gives the army more options. Also would like a kit for putting a lord on a wraith body, granting him their ignore terrain, or an update to the phase shifter that does the same.

Fix terrifying visage. The idea is nice, but with the prevalence of fearless throughout the game, it hardly ever comes up or is effectively ignored.

Wraiths - I use them all the time. I would love power weapons on them, or even better warscythes. Considering how their claws are phasing in and out of reality with the rest of them, warscythe like attacks make sense. But if you do that, I'd keep the unit size where they are. With powerweapons, perhaps increase to 5-6 for a unit.

I do and I don't like the idea of making the tomb spyders into dreads. Would be nice to have a support unit like people have mentioned earlier posts, but that's one step closer to playing marines, or nurgle marines. If you want to keep inline with the fluff, give them a repair ability. Able to repair a monolith (or other vehicle if they get one), perhaps able to resurect a squad of warriors if they come close (leave models on the table so long as the tomb spyder is on the table, if it gets within 6" of the unit, fallen models get back up on a 5+, just a thought). It keeps them utility, inline with the fluff (and similar to how they work in dark crusade, and as something other than just another way to do damage).

I dont mind phase out going, so long as we'll be back goes as well.

Sorry I'm joining this tread fairly late but are there any more rumours about the Necrons?
Personally I was'nt to happy with the loss of the WBB rule but me and my mate seemes to have used the FNP one for ages just to make it a bit simpler so I guess it's just a name-thing for me, anyway: it works pretty well.
I'm thrilled about a new light vehicle and the plastic Immortals, the metal ones cost a bunch and if they'll do the same thing for the Flayed Ones and the Pharias aswell I'll kiss the sculptor a plastic lord with nice bitz in the sprue would be cool too
Hopefully they don't tinker with the gauss weapons to much, it's only right that even a lowely warrior can zap a rhino up some-one's power armoured butt ( since we've been around for eaons and such )
New/Renewed/Lesser C'Tans..... I've never used the old ones TBH, same goes for the Monolith since it chewes up 235 points worth of Necrons thus vastly enhancing your PO risk.
If they'll drop the PO, I'll include a Monolith anyway.
I've heard that Scarabs will come in 2 'flavours': the ones we got now and repair Scarabs, dunno if it's true.
Anyway, we and the DE need a new codex and units PRONTO!!!!

FNP is worse than WBB, as with WBB, you take a wound, fail, and have a chance to get up next turn - but while down you are unable to be shot at, and extra attacks do nothing for you.

FNP means that if you fail, you die, just like failing a WBB roll. But if you succeed, other units can still shoot the model in the same turn, or different initiative brackets can put further wounds on the individual model.

True, it will get rid of the clunky distance requirements if a squad is wiped out to be able to WBB etc, but still.....

Year old thread guys.

Before it gets closed due to Necromancy some work has been completed on the Necrontyr including some amazing lord models.

Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

However this is a long way off yet, possibly late 2010/early 2011.

Brimstone wrote:Before it gets closed due to Necromancy some work has been completed on the Necrontyr including some amazing lord models.

Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

However this is a long way off yet, possibly late 2010/early 2011.

Yeah, I agree, it's absolutely terrible that someone would bring up an old topic for discussion. ESPECIALLY one that isn't about Space Marines.

BLAM! And the shot from Brimstone makes the Threadromancy worth it!

Brimstone wrote:Before it gets closed due to Necromancy some work has been completed on the Necrontyr including some amazing lord models.

And I personally cannot wait until they start hyping the new release at the upcoming UK Games Day, preview the rules in White Dwarf, and give us a breakdown of some of the great new upcoming releases.

Oh wait... sorry, I'm an idiot. We're talking about Games Workshop, aren't we? So what will really happen is that we'll know sweet-feth-all until a month or so before they come out, and all our info will come from rumours, not from the source...

I dont know i think getting ridd of phase out is a mistake maybe it's just me but i think it still has it's purpose it just needs to be tweeked out a little lol

Thanks Brimstone for the news snippet!

Cilithan

Due to Brimstone update I am leaving open. Any more news Brimmy?

Only what I've said, I'd treat any rules rumours with a pinch of salt as their development comes later than the models so the no phase out/FNP etc. rumours may prove to be inaccurate in the final codex (or they may be correct, I just don't know at the moment).

It should represent the next stage in Necron awakening as they get more of their toys out of storage.

What sort of Lords are we looking at Wraith Lords (pun not intended)? Or just more guys on foot?

More toys eh? That could be interesting. Ive actually played a few games before where we left out the phase out, and to be honest we all liked it better. Phase out kind of sucks, and it really limits the Necrons. You end up hiding the troops (which personally I LOVE warriors)

I heard very reliably from the best friend of the sister of a Black Shirt's uncle that there will be a new Special Character.

Just one?

Try 8, 4 of which will alter the way your army works, one of which will appear in every Necron force from the moment of release onwards.

About half of them won't get models, and half of those won't even get on in the second wave.

if these rumours are true then heres what i think:

1)- Removing we'll be back and replacing it with feel no pain kind of goes against the whole background info of "necrons have a remarkable ability to self repair even the most horrendous damage" (quoted from codex necrons). So basically what their saying is their walking husks of metal which makes them more resilient to ranged attacks. However it seems they've completely forgotten how to self repair themselves and instead decide to take a little nap when they get shot down.

2) Removing Phase out. It seems the necrons have also completely forgotten any strategy and instead will hold an objective or try to capture an objective despite the damage it could do to their own army/force. We'll i guess they dont need teleporters anymore!

3) The possibility that gauss weapons will not rend. Well, it seems that being a highly technological race with incredible weaponry doesnt actually count anymore so the necrons must have just decided to turn off the rending effect of their weapons.

4) Slow and purposeful. I can kind of understand this as some necrons have become automatons due to repeated repairs/new bodies. Still though, i would have thought their burning hatred of the living would still guide them on what to do? Perhaps their about peace and love now.

5) Removing the c'tan. Possibly the worst thing i have seen so far. Yes the c'tan are VERY powerful, yes they are possibly too good at the moment but they are after all the equivalent of a GOD. I don't see why they just couldnt wack the points up on the C'tan rather than removing them all together. To me removing them is essentially removing the head from someones body. The c'tan direct the necron forces and will happily engage in battle themselves for the sheer pleasure of killing and feeding. I dont see why all of a sudden the c'tan have decided to take a back seat. Perhaps the nightbringers hunger has finally subsided and just wants a nice long nap. The other thing is, it seems the whole eldar prophecy about the four c'tan rising up seems to have gone right out the window:

"The vaulmoon shall bring forth the dragon" (vaulmoon is what the eldar call a forgeworld e.g mars.). Looks like he isnt going to be doing anything though is quite happy being caged up.

" The master of death will drink deep from Ishas eye" Looks like the nightbringers all full up on stars and humanoids and just wants a nap.

"That which lies outside will be drawn to the harvest". Looks like the outside likes his comfy disonsphere and doesnt want to move out his home just yet.

"The jackal god shall turn brother against brother". The deceivers done manipulating people, it seems he decided to go to therapy and has all that compulsive lying out of his system! He's off for a better life now.


Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex (lol chaos spacemarines. Lord of change with no psychic power?).

They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

Hey, c'mon now Minaith! Won't it be good though to finally have a power build, y'know, rather than no power builds.

H.B.M.C. wrote:What sort of Lords are we looking at Wraith Lords (pun not intended)? Or just more guys on foot?

IIRC not all of them will be on foot.

Theres no WAY the rumor of them cutting the rending rule is true. NO WAY. thats what Necrons are known for. THAT CHANCE of being able to down armor. That be like saying... well Orks cant have a WAAGH! anymore.

KingCracker wrote:Theres no WAY the rumor of them cutting the rending rule is true. NO WAY.

Calm down. Of course you'll get Rending for your Gauss Weapons.

Assuming you take the correct Special Character that is...

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

gorgon wrote:

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

Star Gods are no more or less appropriate than having a named character appear in every battle that army has participated in across the whole galaxy, AT THE SAME TIME.

And that is before we get in to what happens when Eldar fight Eldar and Eldrad is in both armies.

Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual. And except that *star gods* represent an entirely different scale of conflict. And except that there ARE only 4 star gods per the fluff, and you could have the same C'tan on either side of the table.

C'tan never should have been in the book in the first place, or at least not as star gods.

gorgon wrote:Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual.

Oh well if GW said it, then it must be ok.

Game on double-Vulkan surprise!

gorgon wrote:

Brimstone wrote:Plus the background will include some WTF moments.

You mean moreso than the last one? Yeesh.

Thanks for the tips, Brim!

@Minaith: WWB is a horrendous mechanic that requires, what, a couple hundred words of FAQ? FNP is a far better game mechanic. Regarding C'tan, I dunno what to say when someone thinks star gods are appropriate for a game in which we've never even received rules for a SM primarch. The rumored "c'tan avatar" idea seems like a nice compromise that'd allow people to use their existing models.

Space marine primarchs were either dead, missing or simply corrupt and ruling their own daemon world? The C'tan however are actually out there feasting and becoming stronger.

Also in regards to two players with the same c'tan either side, if theres such an issue to it they could simply not choose to use the special characters. As for special characters possibly representing their archtype i find it a little amusing. I cant imagine using commander azrael to represent another dark angel commander since he's walking around with a helmet bearer. Does that mean i shouldnt use azrael in a dark angel army simply because of the unique lion helm?

If they remove all of the rules that made the Necrons unique they basically become fancy robo-SM, that are way slower.

And no a peek into the alternate dimension called 'Nottingham' where this logic makes sense:

GW Rep #1: So, Necrons.
GW Rep #2: New models?
GW Rep #3: A given.
GW Rep #2: New fluff?
GW Rep #1: Make it fit the new models.
GW Rep #2: New rules?
GW Rep #3: Make the new stuff good, the old stuff bad, and then do whatever with the new metal models. They're cheap to make anyway and we can fix 'em next time around.
Jervis: Organising a painting day with friends is a great part of the hobby.
GW Rep #1: Thanks for the input Jervis.
GW Rep #2: Wait a sec... Marines sell really well.
GW Rep #3: Indeed they do.
GW Rep #2: So make Necrons like Marines.
GW Rep #1: Yeah! They don't need special rules.
Jervis: Special Characters add an interesting dynamic to your themed games. Try it out next time you get your group together.
GW Rep #3: Uhh... again, thanks Jervis. Not quite relevant, but still, thanks.
GW Rep #1: So... NecroMarines?
GW Rep #2: Sounds good to me. We'll get Arby to write it.
GW Rep #3: Done. 3 hour lunch today?
Jervis: How about a 4 hour lunch?
All GW Reps: Now you're makin' sense J-man!
Jervis: Tournament Gamers are a fringe group we don't cater to.

Minaith1989 wrote:Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex

Don't be silly. You'll get matching new models with big shoulderpads and screaming bald heads.

Minaith1989 wrote:They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

Could you honestly complain any more? This isn't a careful and precise diagnosis of rumors, this is more of a "I'm going to take anything I read and turn it into GW neutering this army wah wah wah." If you're so hung up about the fluff being represented perfectly in the rules then why not play Movie Marines?

Necrons are the Undead army of the 40k universe. Slow and Purposeful makes sense, as does FNP. Rending would also make sense but would justify an even higher cost than only 20pts

bhsman wrote:

Minaith1989 wrote:They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

Could you honestly complain any more? This isn't a careful and precise diagnosis of rumors, this is more of a "I'm going to take anything I read and turn it into GW neutering this army wah wah wah." If you're so hung up about the fluff being represented perfectly in the rules then why not play Movie Marines?

Necrons are the Undead army of the 40k universe. Slow and Purposeful makes sense, as does FNP. Rending would also make sense but would justify an even higher cost than only 20pts

Please read my post more thoroughly. I believe I put IF in there.

On the Whole auto-glance issue, it's really rather worthless. I think a much better rule would be "If a 6 is rolled when attempting to penetrate or wound (people forget Gauss works on toughness too) the shot is considered AP 1."

This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

EDIT: clarity

Minaith1989 wrote:Please read my post more thoroughly. I believe I put IF in there.

Oh, so if this was late 2010 and all of those were confirmed as true, would you have made a different post?

On the Rending idea, I wonder if Rending would be too much. It'd be fine against today's mechanized lists, but would shred infantry lists. On the other hand, that's not too different from an all-Thousand Sons list with AP3 bolters. One of those times where you'd really want GW to release the rules and let people playtest them.

EDIT:

Lordhat wrote:This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

How many Toughness 8 models are there in the game, though? Honest question, as they would be the only ones that Gauss Bolters (can't remember the name of the gun ) could wound over a regular BEQ (Bolter equivalent)

I made the post to show what i thought IF the rumours were to be true. I posted my own personal view of what those potential changes would do to my own feel of the army. I did not say that gw has definately ruined necrons for me personally as realistically those changes may not be implemented and there is the chance that the rumours are inaccurate (as so many rumours are). My post was therefore a reflection of what i thought about the possibility of new changes rather than me just completely believing a rumour and taking it as fact and having a mass moan about it. If those changes are implemented when a new codex is released then I will be disappointed.

As for gauss weaponry i think it should remain the same really. Necrons ahve some units good for assault but their main strength is their highly advanced range weaponry. I think the gauss weaponry represents that well.

bhsman wrote:

Lordhat wrote:This would have the drawback of not being able to glance or wound anything in the game, but on those times the weapon in question did so, it would truly matter.

How many Toughness 8 models are there in the game, though? Honest question, as they would be the only ones that Gauss Bolters (can't remember the name of the gun ) could wound over a regular BEQ (Bolter equivalent)

Yep, the Gauss rule has such a great effect on infantry as it is... /sarcasm.

Honestly though, this would help to alleviate the rumored I1 of the warriors. A gun line Necron army would stand a chance again, not to mention bringing Gauss weapons back in line with the fluff. It would make Gauss have an actual tangible benefit for H. Destroyers offsetting the (assumed) built-in cost of having the special rule in the first place. Not quite Rending, but a damn sight more effective than auto-wound/glance.

Minaith1989 wrote:if these rumours are true then heres what i think:

1)- Removing we'll be back and replacing it with feel no pain kind of goes against the whole background info of "necrons have a remarkable ability to self repair even the most horrendous damage" (quoted from codex necrons). So basically what their saying is their walking husks of metal which makes them more resilient to ranged attacks. However it seems they've completely forgotten how to self repair themselves and instead decide to take a little nap when they get shot down.

Feel No Pain is a much better game mechanic as it doesn't require pages of rules, already exists, and approximates being hard to kill rather nicely.

2) Removing Phase out. It seems the necrons have also completely forgotten any strategy and instead will hold an objective or try to capture an objective despite the damage it could do to their own army/force. We'll i guess they dont need teleporters anymore!

I don't know what to say. You want to keep the ability for me to win (with full Massacre in a tournament) by killing enough of your squishy dudes? As Brimstone said, this is supposed to be the next step in Necron awakening, who knows what their objectives are going to be now. They may want to capture that computer node and hold it to learn all about the Imperium and what makes humans tick. You seem to have a very limited imagination when it comes to this game.

3) The possibility that gauss weapons will not rend. Well, it seems that being a highly technological race with incredible weaponry doesnt actually count anymore so the necrons must have just decided to turn off the rending effect of their weapons.

It's been awhile since I played Necrons so correct me if I'm wrong, but how could they "turn off the rending effect" of their weapons if they didn't have that to begin with. Gauss weapons don't have rend now, right?

4) Slow and purposeful. I can kind of understand this as some necrons have become automatons due to repeated repairs/new bodies. Still though, i would have thought their burning hatred of the living would still guide them on what to do? Perhaps their about peace and love now.

I don't know how you equate Slow and Purposeful, a rule that represents a slow moving but never stopping advance, with Necrons being about peace and love. Seems to me that S&P perfectly represents the methodical advance of an Undead Robot Horde.

5) Removing the c'tan. Possibly the worst thing i have seen so far. Yes the c'tan are VERY powerful, yes they are possibly too good at the moment but they are after all the equivalent of a GOD. I don't see why they just couldnt wack the points up on the C'tan rather than removing them all together. To me removing them is essentially removing the head from someones body. The c'tan direct the necron forces and will happily engage in battle themselves for the sheer pleasure of killing and feeding. I dont see why all of a sudden the c'tan have decided to take a back seat. Perhaps the nightbringers hunger has finally subsided and just wants a nice long nap. The other thing is, it seems the whole eldar prophecy about the four c'tan rising up seems to have gone right out the window:

"The vaulmoon shall bring forth the dragon" (vaulmoon is what the eldar call a forgeworld e.g mars.). Looks like he isnt going to be doing anything though is quite happy being caged up.

" The master of death will drink deep from Ishas eye" Looks like the nightbringers all full up on stars and humanoids and just wants a nap.

"That which lies outside will be drawn to the harvest". Looks like the outside likes his comfy disonsphere and doesnt want to move out his home just yet.

"The jackal god shall turn brother against brother". The deceivers done manipulating people, it seems he decided to go to therapy and has all that compulsive lying out of his system! He's off for a better life now.

Couple things. C'tan should probably have never been in the game to begin with (the rules of the game, not the fluff). I guess you could say that the two C'tan we have now were just reawakened and therefore less powerful but if we continue the Necron Awakening theme I bet the C'tan are getting a lot more powerful now and are better suited for games like Apoc where they can go toe to toe with a Titan as it should be.

I don't understand how removing the rules for a model means that they've abandoned the C'tan fluff. No one said that the C'tan aren't going to be in the Necron fluff, just that they won't be useable as characters in normal games of 40k. Plus, most rumors have pointed to Necron lords being able to take necrodermis upgrades and act like mini C'tan so even your models will still be useable.

Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex (lol chaos spacemarines. Lord of change with no psychic power?).

They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

I've heard a lot of knee-jerking in your post, but that's about it.

Eh. A lot of the proposed changes jsut follow the current wave of 'simplification' GW is big on. Not a huge deal, if they can keep the usual over-correction to a minimum.

Losing WBB for FNP is, as others have said, replacing one rule that has a lot of weird game interactions with a simpler one that has the same net effect but is much simpler. FNP appears to be slightly weaker, of course.

Phase Out is one of those neat rules that is very flavorful at first glance, but the execution makes it something of a let-down. It disincentives taking anything that is not a 'Necron' so most of the list's cool toys have a strike against them even before battlefield value is considered. I'd guess it'll stay as a fluff reference... if the Necrons lose,t hey just 'phase out' and leave the battlefield as if they were never there.

Simplifying Gauss rules makes a lot of sense, as the Gauss rules seemed like the 'Rending Beta' anyway.

Losing the C'Tan seems like it's overkill, in my opinion. They are powerful, sure, but they can be defeated. I don't see anything wrong with them being 'gods' as they're really more like the Eldar Avatar in some ways. I think in the 40k setting, you can be a 'god' if you're powerful enugh to get away with saying you are.

Ozymandias wrote:

Minaith1989 wrote:if these rumours are true then heres what i think:

1)- Removing we'll be back and replacing it with feel no pain kind of goes against the whole background info of "necrons have a remarkable ability to self repair even the most horrendous damage" (quoted from codex necrons). So basically what their saying is their walking husks of metal which makes them more resilient to ranged attacks. However it seems they've completely forgotten how to self repair themselves and instead decide to take a little nap when they get shot down.

Feel No Pain is a much better game mechanic as it doesn't require pages of rules, already exists, and approximates being hard to kill rather nicely.

2) Removing Phase out. It seems the necrons have also completely forgotten any strategy and instead will hold an objective or try to capture an objective despite the damage it could do to their own army/force. We'll i guess they dont need teleporters anymore!

I don't know what to say. You want to keep the ability for me to win (with full Massacre in a tournament) by killing enough of your squishy dudes? As Brimstone said, this is supposed to be the next step in Necron awakening, who knows what their objectives are going to be now. They may want to capture that computer node and hold it to learn all about the Imperium and what makes humans tick. You seem to have a very limited imagination when it comes to this game.

3) The possibility that gauss weapons will not rend. Well, it seems that being a highly technological race with incredible weaponry doesnt actually count anymore so the necrons must have just decided to turn off the rending effect of their weapons.

It's been awhile since I played Necrons so correct me if I'm wrong, but how could they "turn off the rending effect" of their weapons if they didn't have that to begin with. Gauss weapons don't have rend now, right?

4) Slow and purposeful. I can kind of understand this as some necrons have become automatons due to repeated repairs/new bodies. Still though, i would have thought their burning hatred of the living would still guide them on what to do? Perhaps their about peace and love now.

I don't know how you equate Slow and Purposeful, a rule that represents a slow moving but never stopping advance, with Necrons being about peace and love. Seems to me that S&P perfectly represents the methodical advance of an Undead Robot Horde.

5) Removing the c'tan. Possibly the worst thing i have seen so far. Yes the c'tan are VERY powerful, yes they are possibly too good at the moment but they are after all the equivalent of a GOD. I don't see why they just couldnt wack the points up on the C'tan rather than removing them all together. To me removing them is essentially removing the head from someones body. The c'tan direct the necron forces and will happily engage in battle themselves for the sheer pleasure of killing and feeding. I dont see why all of a sudden the c'tan have decided to take a back seat. Perhaps the nightbringers hunger has finally subsided and just wants a nice long nap. The other thing is, it seems the whole eldar prophecy about the four c'tan rising up seems to have gone right out the window:

"The vaulmoon shall bring forth the dragon" (vaulmoon is what the eldar call a forgeworld e.g mars.). Looks like he isnt going to be doing anything though is quite happy being caged up.

" The master of death will drink deep from Ishas eye" Looks like the nightbringers all full up on stars and humanoids and just wants a nap.

"That which lies outside will be drawn to the harvest". Looks like the outside likes his comfy disonsphere and doesnt want to move out his home just yet.

"The jackal god shall turn brother against brother". The deceivers done manipulating people, it seems he decided to go to therapy and has all that compulsive lying out of his system! He's off for a better life now.

Couple things. C'tan should probably have never been in the game to begin with (the rules of the game, not the fluff). I guess you could say that the two C'tan we have now were just reawakened and therefore less powerful but if we continue the Necron Awakening theme I bet the C'tan are getting a lot more powerful now and are better suited for games like Apoc where they can go toe to toe with a Titan as it should be.

I don't understand how removing the rules for a model means that they've abandoned the C'tan fluff. No one said that the C'tan aren't going to be in the Necron fluff, just that they won't be useable as characters in normal games of 40k. Plus, most rumors have pointed to Necron lords being able to take necrodermis upgrades and act like mini C'tan so even your models will still be useable.

Basically what I'm saying is, IF those rumours are true then they have murdered yet another codex (lol chaos spacemarines. Lord of change with no psychic power?).

They truely do know how to strip the heart and soul out of armies.

I've heard a lot of knee-jerking in your post, but that's about it.

I'm beginning to think I'm not allowed to express my own opinions but w/e.

1) My personal preference would be we'kll be back, just because you may find it annoying doesnt mean that a) i cant express my opinion or that b) i think it suits them better.

2) I think the theme of phase out fits the army fine, hence why i'd personally like it to stay. Sure it means you might wine asier but i think it reflects the whole issue of the necrons being able to wait to take trhings over just fine. Agaian just a person preference.


3) I have no idea why i put rending in there, what i meant was the flaying effect of if a 6 is rolled its an auto wound. I stand corrected.

4) Necrons are automatons and some will need guidance hence why i agreed slow and purposeful would be interesting for them. However they do hate the living even if they cant comprehend much else, which is why i threw in the whole issue of they would be driven to destroy the living- they wouldnt think about it. I also dont find necrons that methodical in that the warriors would make calculated manouvers. The lord might but the warriors wouldnt stop to have a think about a situation. Again a personal opinion.

5) As for the C'tan i still think they should be in normal 40k and not just apoc. yes perhaps they would be more suited but at the same time its not like their immortal to take down. Difficult perhaps but not impossible. I also believe that in order to balance how strong they are i suggested a points increase? Again a personal opinion.

6) If you want to flame me do it in a private message rather than clog up this thread. I'm entitled to my own opinions and I will express them. I was hoping to put my own input to an adult discussion. Clearly i was wrong.

For future reference, if anyone wants to flame me then I'd rather you private message me rather than clog up topics. I also won't be responding to them either in the topic.I hope this post has clarified some things i said previously.

Thanks,
Minaith1989

Wow. Trust me, that wasn't a flame.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions. Does that mean we all have to agree with you and not call you out when something sounds absurd? Am I not allowed to respond to your opinions, especially when I think they are wrong?

Looks to me like the only one trying to stifle discussion is you.

Newsflash: disagreement isn't flaming.

Ozy wasn't flaming.

Am I the only one who already thought of the C'Tan as Avatars?

The way I understood it, the ones in 40k games were a portion of the god given a shape on the battle field. To me that is an avatar.

As long as they incorporate universal rules to rep the abilities of the Necrons, instead of a slew of new rules, I think it will work.

I like the FNP in place of WBB. Cleaner and simpler to resolve. Leaving tipped models all over was very messy.

HBMC, do you need to flog your opinions of Special Characters multiple times in one thread? I think everyone gets it. You don't like them.

For a while now you've been beating a dead horse. Let it lie. They aren't changing that method any time soon.

Yes, the C'Tan should be simplified to be more like Avatars / Greater Daemons:

- Monstrous Creature
- Jump Infantry
- Invulnerable Sv3+ (2+?)
- Feel No Pain
- Eternal Warrior
etc.

I could be wrong, but I don't think C'tan are/were ever described as being a "portion." They are the actual star god compressed into the necrodermis.

If the next codex represents the further awakening of the Necrons, it's the perfect time to say the C'tan have more fully charged up and are no longer appropriate for 40K-level battlefields.

I don't think they're going to remove the C'tan so much as..I don't know.

DoW-style C'tan, anyone? Necron Lord, C'tan is purchased as an upgrade that is 'in reserves', when it's available you roll a d3 and the Lord is whatever-scary-dude for that many turns with varying abilities.

Oh god please dont let them do to C'Tan what they did to greater daemons for Chaos Marines.

I remember looking at the newest Chaos book, seeing what they did for summoned daemons, and felt emotions I haven't felt sense the time I walked in on my parents...

Absent other rumors detailing what else is going on, here are my opinions.

Slow and purposeful is awful. We're already the slowest army on the field. Making me a roll a D6 to determine how far I move is just putting the final nail in the non-competitive coffin.

WBB has never confused me. I'm not sure why it confuses other folks either. However, FNP can be a good substitute as it prevents a model from becoming a casulty and hence losing a combat. My endorsement of that is predicated on the Res Orb removing the restrictions on FNP.

Pariahs, same points as terminators with PF and SB and make'em Necron. I saw somebody above call for Wraiths to have warscythes and while I'd probably have to change my shorts if it happened, I think rending would work fine or give'em power weapons. Failing that I'd drop the points on the Wraiths to about the same as assault marines or SM bikes.

Leave my Monolith alone. It's fine as it is. It's my only vehicle so it has to do EVERYTHING. And again, for clarity's sake my opinion here is based on the fact we don't know if Necrons are getting another vehicle or what its point cost would be.

Love the tiered lord system with wargear allowing a high level lord to channel a C'tan.

Also really like DD's build for a C'tan.

I stated in another thread I think they should have a walker/floating combat vehicle similar to a dreadnought and a redesigned tomb spyder could fill that role.

Ok, take it apart.

I would totally support the switch to Feel No Pain and no Phase Out. The tradeoff of effectively having 25% more army available to you sort of balances out the extra wounds a model can take after it would have normally been "tipped over". On the other hand, I find Slow and Purposeful to be like pouring salt in the 'you move like molasses uphill through a tar pit in january' wound. If they were to combine that with 30" Gauss rifles though...

As for the units in the army, I would certainly like to see something done with Wraiths. I would prefer a larger squad, more wounds, or at the very least - power weapons - to something like just lowering their point cost. Flayed Ones should probably get rending. It fits with the idea of having excessively sharp talons, and gives them that punch they totally lack right now. I also totally enjoy the idea of a large skimmer/walker (move through terrain/over troops, fight in assault like a walker) and also think a mid-range vehicle on the level of a predator would be ideal. Those two could possibly be combined.

Finally, I would LOVE to see the C'Tan 'graduate' to Apocalypse level. Far from being overpowered, I feel as if they are UNDERpowered for what they should be. These guys eat stars for breakfast, kill enough people to create Chaos gods, and are home in time for dinner. All Forge World has for me is a stupid pylon. I want a 2 foot tall Nightbringer I can march up to a Reaver Titan and yell "Bring it!".

@Sarge: The problem with WBB is that it has complex interactions with the Res Orb, Spyder & Monolith, along with the measuring bit. If WBB were never modified, then it'd be fine (tho FNP is still easier because it's universal and doesn't need measuring).

The Monolith has similar problems due to having rules that modify other special rules and other armies rules.

The ultimate problem with Necrons is that they have a lot of rules that confuse non-Necron players. Moving to more USRs (like my strawman C'Tan) makes it easier for everybody to understand what they're dealing with.

So that C'Tan template can make a very durable, mobile, hard-hitting model that doesn't generate as many complaints of "cheese" based on not understanding how the C'Tan works.

just a word on the c'tan i always thought they were to powerful being for the normal battlefield.

the idea of that they weren't powerful enough makes no sense to me especially as the Deciever has been about for so long the eldar are accidentally worshiping it as a god so meh.

I have a feeling that GW may want to release Necrons around summer holidays so they can run Summer Campaign showing the Re-awakening of even more of the NEcron Tomb Worlds

Guard vs Necrons would make an awesome starter set.

n0t_u wrote:

I am SOOOO stealing that pic!!!!

HBMC: Brilliant placement of that eavesdropping mic unit has really paid off. Please keep us up to date with further transcripts.

they should retire them

please take the 2 shots and 2 beers into consideration when reading my post:

WTF are Necrons??? I have over 20 Chaos androids in 40k scale and one unit in epic scale(or at least i HAD one unit before they f@#ked that entire game up!) These figures even pre-date the 1990s, 2nd edition WD Necro nArmy.

Here is the "fluf" about chaos androids from "Renegades" 1992:

"The Chaos Android is a shining skeleton of hardened plasteel. Its cunning construction is a secret know only to certain tainted Squat fabricators working in league with Chaos Renegades. Each Android contains a tiny bound deamon, an animated spirit inprisioned within its plasteel shell by the conjuration of a Chaos Sorcerer.

The Contained daemon hates being trapped in this way and will do anything to escape, but it is bound to obey any direct order it is given. The daemon will always try to interpert any comand in as perverse way as posible in order to avoid doing what it is supposed to.

Chaos Androids are just as much daemons as robots and are therefore considered to be daemons for rules purposes." the rest are rule particular to Epic: Space
Marine.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
I hope that my post ilistrates just how silly it is to "argue" over necron Rumors, and their rules. It's just a game! Anyways, I'll post a real response to this tomorrow, when I'm sober. Also more pictures of Chaos Androids! Have a good night!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just like Necrons "We'll Be Back" this post was started in 2008, how come no one called Necron-o-mance?

Zathras wrote:

n0t_u wrote:

I am SOOOO stealing that pic!!!!

I got it through google. The image itself is on cool mini or not.

I'm all for FNP and the loss of Phase out.

Necrons need the weapons to go Rending, more useful units like a smaller Monolith for transports and i'd like to see a form of Necron Walker.

Perturabo's Chosen wrote:
Just like Necrons "We'll Be Back" this post was started in 2008, how come no one called Necron-o-mance?

Frazzled wrote:Due to Brimstone update I am leaving open. Any more news Brimmy?

There's your answer.

gorgon wrote:Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual. And except that *star gods* represent an entirely different scale of conflict. And except that there ARE only 4 star gods per the fluff, and you could have the same C'tan on either side of the table.

C'tan never should have been in the book in the first place, or at least not as star gods.

then by that same (incredibly, terribly poor) reasoning, wouldn't we be able to say that it's just an "archetype" of the star god? Like say the "Night Carrier" rather than the "Night Bringer"? Since the C'Tan are "special" characters?

or are you trying to say that YOUR "special" characters are more "special" than someone elses "special" characters?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

So that C'Tan template can make a very durable, mobile, hard-hitting model that doesn't generate as many complaints of "cheese" based on not understanding how the C'Tan works.

I'm pretty sure you have been around long enough to know that "cheese" gets thrown around whenever someone loses. Especially when they lost with their one trick pony, kiddie killer tournament list.

To add fuel to the fire, Necron Lords in Dawn of War: Dark Crusade "channeled" the C'Tan. So the precedence is there.

I think the biggest thing they have to address about the Necrons if they transition to more USRs is how they are going to handle templates. We now have guard armies on the table that can easily blast away MEQs with massed low AP templates that their codex gives out like candy.

Here is what I want to see.

Necron Warriors that cost 18 points, FNP, Rending, 3+/5++, Relentless

Couple that with improving the Monolith's rules (streamlining which USRs don't effect it and let it shoot and teleport in the same turn) and add an Obelisk tank that can teleport, some better counter assault options, and you have a pretty cool play style.

Howlingmoon wrote:

gorgon wrote:Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual. And except that *star gods* represent an entirely different scale of conflict. And except that there ARE only 4 star gods per the fluff, and you could have the same C'tan on either side of the table.

C'tan never should have been in the book in the first place, or at least not as star gods.

then by that same (incredibly, terribly poor) reasoning, wouldn't we be able to say that it's just an "archetype" of the star god? Like say the "Night Carrier" rather than the "Night Bringer"? Since the C'Tan are "special" characters?

or are you trying to say that YOUR "special" characters are more "special" than someone elses "special" characters?

If you want to field an avatar of the C'tan, you're in luck...that's probably exactly what you're getting in the new codex! *pops the champagne*

Of course I'm splitting hairs and making stuff up, but I'm giving you alternative reasoning that's just as fluffilogically supported as yours. However, the point remains that there's a difference between unnamed IG commander/SM chapter leader/Eldar farseer on a battlefield and a star god.

It's like a WWII game in which one side gets Patton and the other side gets the Archangel Michael. Patton might be a little inappropriate, but representatives of the heavenly host are really inappropriate.

I think the biggest thing they have to address about the Necrons if they transition to more USRs is how they are going to handle templates. We now have guard armies on the table that can easily blast away MEQs with massed low AP templates that their codex gives out like candy.

No need for an invulnerable save imo. Have res orbs remove the limitations on Feel no Pain (AP2, etc etc).

Then have monoliths replenish a squad whenever they teleport through it (eg roll a dice for every model missing from the unit, on a 4 they come back).

Problem solved. Basically I don't think basic warriors should be nigh unkillable on their own, but should get some serious buffs from other units to make them so.

Mahu wrote:Necron Warriors that cost 18 points, FNP, Rending, 3+/5++, Relentless

A "package" of FNP, Rending, Invulnerable, and Relentless should bump the cost to something like 25 points, so you're undercosted by quite a bit without a serious Phase Out penalty.

I disagree.

5 years ago I would say you are right, but with the current costing of units now, 18 points for a unit like that which has no transport option is fine. Or do we want to discuss how much benefits that unit gets versus a Guard army with any amount of heavy support in it.

Thinking about it further, I think the unit needs stubborn more then relentless.

You have to realize this is a unit in a codex where Monoliths should cost 300 points, and with a tiered Lord system, HQ choices will probably soak up points to adequately support the Warriors.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Mahu wrote:Necron Warriors that cost 18 points, FNP, Rending, 3+/5++, Relentless

A "package" of FNP, Rending, Invulnerable, and Relentless should bump the cost to something like 25 points, so you're undercosted by quite a bit without a serious Phase Out penalty.

I disagree as well. The unit we're talking about is going to be walking across the field. It has no weapons or transport options. The entire army is exceedingly vulnerable while it moves into position. This can be mitigated by monoliths to some extent if they deepstrike and show up early enough in the game to affect it. Marines have droped in points, as have IG, and Orks. Necrons need similar treatment.

@DD: Yes the rules need to streamlined into the USRs. What I worry about is getting hammered by those USRs. I would not be a happy camper if my monolith was suddenly USR bait AND went up in points while doing less.

Looking at the possibly new stats of warriors, again what is stopping the warriors from getting Sweeping Advanced, especially with the supposed I1?

Also, to others, I have a feeling that they'll introduce some new stupid transport option or something to keep up with the whole "You need at least 5 tanks on the field" idea

Looking at the possibly new stats of warriors, again what is stopping the warriors from getting Sweeping Advanced, especially with the supposed I1?

Durability. Make WBB affect the outcome of the combat via Feel no Pain, and combine with a boost to T5 and possibly other durability boosts via HQs or Tomb Spyders. I think that would be an interesting way to deal with necron close combat issues, instead of introducing yet another army that ignores morale.

I have no problem with warriors getting stubborn or fearless via lords or similar though. Or with immortals and destroyers and the like having stubborn stock (fits the background). But warriors should be a bit more vulnerable imo.

Oh, damn, yeah, I also forgot about FNP, which will hopefully mean less getting killed in CC too...

FNP is a bonus, sort of, but will probably make resurrection orbs (if they always allow FNP) to be even more prevalent considering the amount of melta and plasma running around now a days, probably should just make it standard equipment on the lord. Maybe if they do that we will even get it slightly cheaper

Feel No Pain and Stubborn should be good enough to handle their lack of CC. Warriors have always played that they can take a charge, hold, and teleport out of combat to shoot some more. That is their CC answer.

Pariahs need to be 2 attacks base, if there is no more phase out (which there shouldn't) that will go along way to make them valid counter assault troops and gives Necrons an answer to Terminators on their lines.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Mahu wrote:Necron Warriors that cost 18 points, FNP, Rending, 3+/5++, Relentless

A "package" of FNP, Rending, Invulnerable, and Relentless should bump the cost to something like 25 points, so you're undercosted by quite a bit without a serious Phase Out penalty.

I start with a basic Necron Warrior statline at 13 pts (like a CSM), then add 3pts per USR for 4 USRs.

The other way to look at it is like a Chaos Cult Marine, which is 20-26 pts and simpler rules-wise. Getting a 5++ combined with FNP is worth full cost as these rules complement each other. Rending on a BS4 Rapid-Fire gun is also very good. Relentless is the only USR that might not be worth full points.
____

Sarge wrote: The unit we're talking about is going to be walking across the field.

This can be mitigated by monoliths to some extent if they deepstrike and show up early enough in the game to affect it.

Marines have droped in points, as have IG, and Orks. Necrons need similar treatment.

Actually, most likely, it will be Outflanking, Deep Striking, or cascading off another Deep Striker. I don't see Transports, but I definitely see Teleport / Portal type capabilities being added to address current mobility issues.

Sounds like you're defining a standard build, akin to current SM Podding.

Yes, everything dropped in points, but the proposed statline is a considerable buff. For the 18 pts to hold, then you should only get FNP and maybe Rending without the other USRs.

They wont make it 5++, or at least i dont see any reason why they would FNP makes sense but invulnerable saves dont seem to fit.
Personally i hope they get ws3, I1, T5 4+ armor along with FNP and Rending and maybe a drop in points or more likely staying the same (they are worse against shooting as AP 4 is easy to come by and obviously worse in assault) and you have a model that is not a Space Marine with an apothecary in the squad!

True, I am basing my comments on what they can do now transport-wise. Which is nada. They may come up with some new toys to let them move about the battlefield. Hopefully they do. I'd really like to see a cascading teleport, which is currently disallowed.

What other statbuffs did I miss? I was under the impression Necrons would get FNP (rending is a new one for me).

@Sarge: With 5th being all about objectives, and 6th likely to accelerate that trend, Necrons are definitely going to gain mobility somehow, just to stay in the game, but I don't know how GW is going to do it.

The 5++ & Relentless are the actual buffs. Then assuming / hoping / wishing for Rending to replace Gauss.

I start with a basic Necron Warrior statline at 13 pts (like a CSM), then add 3pts per USR for 4 USRs.

3 points per USR to too unilateral and doesn't take into account the usefulness of the USR on that trooper or in the context of the army.

It is also hard to compare them to Cult Marines as GW always puts a higher value on Fearless then what is required.

There is no standardization for price in lists. It's impossible to have price structures and maintain balance in units.

Warriors which will always be ground pounding infantry need to have inherent survivability that other lists don't need because they can bring tanks. They are the only elite infantry in the game that doesn't have access to armored protection and there are too many armies that can exploit that.

Getting a 5++ combined with FNP is worth full cost as these rules complement each other.

Not really, though both increase the survivability of the model, it is against different types of attacks, you either will get your FNP or your invulnerable save. Rarely both at the same time. Necrons need some answer to handle Demolisher shells and Vindicators, etc. Right now they do, they simple get back up next turn.

Rending on a BS4 Rapid-Fire gun is also very good.

I would disagree with that too. It's only str. 4 so it barely effects vehicles, and shots per point barely effects infantry with how little the rend will show up and the prevalence of cover.

Relentless is the only USR that might not be worth full points.

Relentless is huge, and much more important. Being able to rapid fire and charge would help the Necrons be a little more proactive. They need stubborn or fearless to make sure return attacks don't completely demolish them. Remember, this is a group of models with no access to transports, heavy weapons, or special close combat weapons. The balance has always been that their base guys are frustratingly hard to kill.

Actually, most likely, it will be Outflanking, Deep Striking, or cascading off another Deep Striker. I don't see Transports, but I definitely see Teleport / Portal type capabilities being added to address current mobility issues.

I think teleporting should be an intrinsically part of the Necron playstyle. It highlights a uniqueness they have other other races.

The basic playstyle of the army has and will always be slow but hard to kill infantry supported by specialist units. Warriors are not meant to be the end all, but they will always be the top priority to the Necron opponent because of their scoring status. The basic warrior should be durable enough and cheap enough so you can take a respectable number of them and still have room in the list for the support units.

This thread is titled "Necron rumors" yet it seems fairly sparse on rumors lately, but I see a lot of wish lists and "this is what they'd get if I was designing Necrons" type posts. Does anyone have any actual information to share? For all of us out here who are interested in actual rumors and information, thanks in advance.

The only verifiable Rumor is Brim's post, I think the thread should be moved because it is too far out for real information

gorgon wrote:Except that GW explicitly said that said special characters can be used to rep an archetype (such as an elder Farseer) and not only said individual. And except that *star gods* represent an entirely different scale of conflict. And except that there ARE only 4 star gods per the fluff, and you could have the same C'tan on either side of the table.

C'tan never should have been in the book in the first place, or at least not as star gods.

Were does this keep coming from... I mean seriously. The C'tan that you field are not the full embodiment of the C'tan, the C'tan that are fielded are in parity with the Eldar Avatar. The C'tan on the table top are not entirety of the C'tan; they can break themselves into multiple chunks with all acting with a singular will. The C'tan are multi-dimensional entities of an order higher than ours, when they manifest themselves on the physical plane it is more like the a creature reaching out its tentacles where each tentacle can function independently. If a tentacle is chopped off, it can grow back. Losing one of its manifestations may impose a set back but it by no means damages the larger whole. We can not think of a C'tan as a Primarch or the Emperor... the was only one Emperor and he could only be in one place at a time... there is only one of each C'tan but they can each be in many places at the same time.

Across hundreds of thousands of battlefields are hundreds of manifestations of the C'tan, work in concert with the singular purpose, will, and drive to devourer the psychic presence of all life. To think of the C'tan on the table as a singular and unique representation of the C'tan shows limited dimensional thinking.

I'd like to see Obelisks as their other vehicle type thing. Have it always able to enter play via Deep Strike following the same rules as a Drop Pod, then give it the same portal capacities as the Monolith.

If they did something like that I'd be fine with Slow and Purposeful since that also gives you Relentless. A slow march forward, dishing out full range fire the whole way isn't too bad.

People think that the c'tan as they exist in the current codex are too powerful?


Really?

ROM, Spaceknight, doesn't think C'Tan are too powerful per se, but he does find them too rules complex for casual play!

Flayed ones should be in Fast before they are in Troop.

5++ sounds cool. Whole army is 5++ and FNP. Tough little bastards.

It will be interesting what they do with it, I believe the whole point to getting rid of Phase Out is simply to make games with Necrons play faster. Especially for newer gamers.

Monolith makes FNP a re-roll within 12"?

I think they'll either give Flayed Ones rending or something and leave them as elite, or keep them as is and make em troops.

JohnHwangDD wrote:ROM, Spaceknight, doesn't think C'Tan are too powerful per se, but he does find them too rules complex for casual play!

What did I say about them being too complex? I can recall no such thing.

With that said, C'tan don't belong in 40k, not because they are too powerful, but they are tantamount to forfeiting the match. Does any other army have such a blatant "I lose" option that allows you to spend 360 points on what is essentially nothing?

Flayed ones will likely take whatever points drop the warriors should get. They need to rewrite "terrifying visage" and move'em to troops. I'd like to see them retain their deepstrike ablity as well. Rending or power weapons would be awsome, but almost overkill. It's not like we're getting a Demons of Chaos codex here!

Are they going to release any ne models or characters?

Truth be told, GW hasn't said anything official regarding a new necon codex other than hiring some space laser guy to write the fluff. This came from a U.S. Gamesday I believe. I believe we are all just speculating here. Maybe some new tidbits tomorrow? The one thing we can all be sure of; is how all units get soo many options to upgrade (Flayed Ones?). All 5th edition codexs seem geared to customising each unit with all kinds of stuff. What necron warriors can possibly upgraded with would be interesting. This just seems to be the trend i noticed. I have the ork and space marine codex; they both seem to be structured in a similar way. I bet the space wolf one will be the same structure as well.

Personally i'm hoping they release plastic Flayed Ones and Immortals, and maybe a plastic lord with loads of wargear. Rules-wise wraiths definately need rending or power weapons. And maybe T5. FNP is a fine replacement, and getting rid of phase out would be great, but Warriors don't need Invun. or rending, cos they'd end up being god-knows how many points. And we want lots, and lots, and LOTS more options (you know... as an upgrade from practically nothing).

And i'm pretty sure C'tan are going bye-bye 40k.

And Pariahs need sorting out (Necron, 2 A + W, maybe an invun... the works).


Lastly, any news from GD about the neccys?

Apparently, according to a guy in my local store, they have already completed a new necron codex. Don't know how long it is going to be though.

2 years bro. That HAS to be a record.

Starting a new thread wouldn't be much better, I guess.

How do people even find threads this old to revive them? Amazing.

I was wondering about that, and then remembered how we are all advised when creating a duplicate thread to "use the search function".

Sometimes it creates a glitch in the Matrix.

I was all ready to argue with someone on the first page when I saw the date. Damn Threadromancers!!! Where's the Ordo Hereticus when you need it.