I'm honestly a little surprised at the lack of rumors at this point. Sure, we're still around 2 weeks out at the soonest, but we were hearing things long in advance for other Codices. All I've seen so far is "It'll be a large codex".
I really don't think they'll hold off through the end of January. It won't be next week because of Christmas, at the earliest it'll be Jan 2nd/3rd, though even that would be pushing it with the holiday. I don't expect it to come out any later than the 9th/10th, though I retain the right to be completely wrong.
Requizen wrote: I really don't think they'll hold off through the end of January. It won't be next week because of Christmas, at the earliest it'll be Jan 2nd/3rd, though even that would be pushing it with the holiday. I don't expect it to come out any later than the 9th/10th, though I retain the right to be completely wrong.
I hope you're right. Sooner is better. I don't want to invest to much money in my burgeoning army until I know what sucks. LOL
The problems with the new c'tan formation in its current form(pre- new codex), is price and save dynamics. The absolute cheapest load out is 255 pts. That's 2 no frills crypteks with SoL(no pun intended), and an impotent c'tan sporting ES and LoF.
In a good set up, destructek, despairtek, and TT/TA w/relic costs an astronomical 375! Using a wraithknight as a control in comparison, a fully loaded one w/ SC and SS, and SL, of our charming counterpart comes to 300. When honestly you don't need the upgrades when you come with a standard of 2 WCs at 245pts.
That's 2 more Str, jump capabilities, 2 s10 weapons w/ instant death proc @36" for less than 2/3's the price. So is loosing the above, and gaining a diminishing FnP and EW comparable for the exorbitant price tag? Not on my bean counter.
Next you have an issue with the unit composition itself. Armor saves are screwed b/c the first volley is only up against a majority armor save of 4+, unless the C'tan plans to do a look out sir dance. One plasma cannon volley can potentially wipe the unit(slim but a factor nonetheless). Let's not forget how Gaze of death gets the sharp end, with 2 chaperones in tow.
The only hope or remedy would if they totally reworked points for the C'tan and gave crypteks more inv save options.
Nyghoma wrote: The problems with the new c'tan formation in its current form(pre- new codex), is price and save dynamics. The absolute cheapest load out is 255 pts. That's 2 no frills crypteks with SoL(no pun intended), and an impotent c'tan sporting ES and LoF.
In a good set up, destructek, despairtek, and TT/TA w/relic costs an astronomical 375! Using a wraithknight as a control in comparison, a fully loaded one w/ SC and SS, and SL, of our charming counterpart comes to 300. When honestly you don't need the upgrades when you come with a standard of 2 WCs at 245pts.
That's 2 more Str, jump capabilities, 2 s10 weapons w/ instant death proc @36" for less than 2/3's the price. So is loosing the above, and gaining a diminishing FnP and EW comparable for the exorbitant price tag? Not on my bean counter.
Next you have an issue with the unit composition itself. Armor saves are screwed b/c the first volley is only up against a majority armor save of 4+, unless the C'tan plans to do a look out sir dance. One plasma cannon volley can potentially wipe the unit(slim but a factor nonetheless). Let's not forget how Gaze of death gets the sharp end, with 2 chaperones in tow.
The only hope or remedy would if they totally reworked points for the C'tan and gave crypteks more inv save options.
Could be wrong on this bro, as i only skimmed through that page, but i'm pretty sure that when you buy the formation, it doesn't get fielded as a unit. Unless it specifically states so, at least.
Just got the call, Shield of Baal: Exterminatus arrived at the local game store this afternoon... I think I am getting sick a will need to leave work early...
Got Exterminatus. There is nothing else for Necrons that hadn't been leaked already, mostly nothing that makes Necrons any more competitve than they already are, the C'tan formation is the most interesting and using the relics is nice.
NecronLord3 wrote: Got Exterminatus. There is nothing else for Necrons that hadn't been leaked already, mostly nothing that makes Necrons any more competitve than they already are, the C'tan formation is the most interesting and using the relics is nice.
Thank god.
I would of been mad if they got any more pants on head crazy
Nyghoma wrote: The problems with the new c'tan formation in its current form(pre- new codex), is price and save dynamics. The absolute cheapest load out is 255 pts. That's 2 no frills crypteks with SoL(no pun intended), and an impotent c'tan sporting ES and LoF.
In a good set up, destructek, despairtek, and TT/TA w/relic costs an astronomical 375! Using a wraithknight as a control in comparison, a fully loaded one w/ SC and SS, and SL, of our charming counterpart comes to 300. When honestly you don't need the upgrades when you come with a standard of 2 WCs at 245pts.
That's 2 more Str, jump capabilities, 2 s10 weapons w/ instant death proc @36" for less than 2/3's the price. So is loosing the above, and gaining a diminishing FnP and EW comparable for the exorbitant price tag? Not on my bean counter.
Next you have an issue with the unit composition itself. Armor saves are screwed b/c the first volley is only up against a majority armor save of 4+, unless the C'tan plans to do a look out sir dance. One plasma cannon volley can potentially wipe the unit(slim but a factor nonetheless). Let's not forget how Gaze of death gets the sharp end, with 2 chaperones in tow.
The only hope or remedy would if they totally reworked points for the C'tan and gave crypteks more inv save options.
Could be wrong on this bro, as i only skimmed through that page, but i'm pretty sure that when you buy the formation, it doesn't get fielded as a unit. Unless it specifically states so, at least.
It is fielded as 1 unit and the Crypteks use the toughness value of the C'tan for to wound rolls. (so with god shackle thats T8, which means they are immune to bolter fire). Pretty nifty even if its exepnsive.
Could be wrong on this bro, as i only skimmed through that page, but i'm pretty sure that when you buy the formation, it doesn't get fielded as a unit. Unless it specifically states so, at least.
Getting a closer look at the New Lord Model And it is clearly not a conversion. The head is brand new and the arms have Necron symbols on the insides of the wrists that no other bit has. A very disappointing new model.
NecronLord3 wrote: Getting a closer look at the New Lord Model And it is clearly not a conversion. The head is brand new and the arms have Necron symbols on the insides of the wrists that no other bit has. A very disappointing new model.
That's disappointing. I know that some people like the "giant Scythe" thing, and I'm glad that those people now get a decent bit for it, but I'm not a fan of that personally.
Agreed but the staff is 90% the CCB overlords staff different blade. There was an opportunity to do something unique. Is Anrakyr not unique, the Stormlord, Orikon, Trayzan, Zandrek, Obyron. All stylistically similar but very unique builds. The average lord should be stock bodies! overlords unique chassis.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The warriors too upon high detailed examination, those new barrels don't look like the top piece from the immortal kit. Thinking those are a new kit.
In a good set up, destructek, despairtek, and TT/TA w/relic costs an astronomical 375! Using a wraithknight as a control in comparison, a fully loaded one w/ SC and SS, and SL, of our charming counterpart comes to 300. When honestly you don't need the upgrades when you come with a standard of 2 WCs at 245pts.
Well...there's your problem. You're using Eldar as your control. In the edition where they've seriously started slapping armies to prevent the Eldar-Tau power creep of 6th edition (as they were blatantly better than everything before them and most things after them too).
Never use another army as a Control.
Or Tyranid players will start using your Transcendant C'tan as a control for comparisons with Hierodules. To be fair, with your mandatory upgrades you come out 150 or so points more expensive than a Hierodule...
But your base stats alone are infinitely better.
(Seriously, Tyranids pay for a T6 critter with a 3+ armour save, I3 and at best WS 4 depending on if Barbed or Scythed. You get WS 9, S9 and T9 off the dot with an Invuln save. Seriously.)
Transcendent C'tan can never be buffed in anyway except by Zandrehk which really just gives it tank hunter, most other powers really aren't useful. Tyranid GC, have 10 wounds, don't explode when they die, and can be buffed by psychic powers. The Bio-Titan has a 2+/6++ with 10 wounds and regeneration for 1000pts, that's on-par with the C'tan.
NecronLord3 wrote: Transcendent C'tan can never be buffed in anyway except by Zandrehk which really just gives it tank hunter, most other powers really aren't useful. Tyranid GC, have 10 wounds, don't explode when they die, and can be buffed by psychic powers. The Bio-Titan has a 2+/6++ with 10 wounds and regeneration for 1000pts, that's on-par with the C'tan.
Not really. You're looking at the Hierophant, which is intended to be our Titan equivalent. It's the equivalent of comparing a Tau Fire Warrior to a Wraithknight to be honest.
The Hierodule is our small GC equivalent. And by all the gods the Hierodule is a sad and sorry little creature for what they have done with it.
Yes, I know the formation is not that great with its point layout...
But I think giving a C'tan a 3+ FNP might just be a factor in that. You know.
NecronLord3 wrote: Transcendent C'tan can never be buffed in anyway except by Zandrehk which really just gives it tank hunter, most other powers really aren't useful. Tyranid GC, have 10 wounds, don't explode when they die, and can be buffed by psychic powers. The Bio-Titan has a 2+/6++ with 10 wounds and regeneration for 1000pts, that's on-par with the C'tan.
Since when is the exploding a bad thing?
I always like two Deep Strike a Monolith or two and sling the C'tan to the middle of their base.
Last time his explosion took out more points than the two turns of shooting he had before.
NecronLord3 wrote: Transcendent C'tan can never be buffed in anyway except by Zandrehk which really just gives it tank hunter, most other powers really aren't useful. Tyranid GC, have 10 wounds, don't explode when they die, and can be buffed by psychic powers. The Bio-Titan has a 2+/6++ with 10 wounds and regeneration for 1000pts, that's on-par with the C'tan.
Not really. You're looking at the Hierophant, which is intended to be our Titan equivalent. It's the equivalent of comparing a Tau Fire Warrior to a Wraithknight to be honest.
The Hierodule is our small GC equivalent. And by all the gods the Hierodule is a sad and sorry little creature for what they have done with it.
Yes, I know the formation is not that great with its point layout...
But I think giving a C'tan a 3+ FNP might just be a factor in that. You know.
And what do you think our titan equivalent is? Surely not our other super-heavies (/cough skyfire.... ). The TC is our apex. The cheapest TC load out is still more expensive then a Hierodule.
But in any event, units of that caliber are in class by themselves, surmounted on who gets to throw the 1st punch.
I'm speaking of MCs in general. Cost vs efficiency, Necrons fall flat. The truth is the supplement MC's(tomb ---) are our better choice over C'tan shards. It's such a shame and squander considering how comely the models are. At least for me, the c'tan fluff and appearance is what got me hooked on these ancient aliens to begin with. I really want such a pivotal cog to be useful for something other than friendly games.
I mentioned it in another post. All the c'tans need are a revision of their point costs across the board and means of travel, rather then the tenuous footslog. 1st turn deep strike options(Ala drop pod) or jump/jetpack/Fmc swap would suffice.
I know, I'm asking a lot, lol.
FYI the new formation gives them stock FNP, not 3+++
Hey maybe I am blind or the list just doesn't list it but with the god shackle and the other relics there isn't the normal "a model can only have one relic/ only one of each relic per army" or am i missing it and I'm just blind?
NecronLord3 wrote: Transcendent C'tan can never be buffed in anyway except by Zandrehk which really just gives it tank hunter, most other powers really aren't useful. Tyranid GC, have 10 wounds, don't explode when they die, and can be buffed by psychic powers. The Bio-Titan has a 2+/6++ with 10 wounds and regeneration for 1000pts, that's on-par with the C'tan.
Since when is the exploding a bad thing?
I always like two Deep Strike a Monolith or two and sling the C'tan to the middle of their base.
Last time his explosion took out more points than the two turns of shooting he had before.
No offense but that sounds like your opponent was a pretty new player.. Deep strike a monolith *or two* ? That's a lot of monoliths.. Why wouldn't they simply *move* 6" away from the C'tan before shooting it? Do they just stand there, surround it then let it blow up ontop of them?
NecronLord3 wrote: Getting a closer look at the New Lord Model And it is clearly not a conversion. The head is brand new and the arms have Necron symbols on the insides of the wrists that no other bit has. A very disappointing new model.
Is it just me or does it look like a pair of pants on his head
NecronLord3 wrote: Getting a closer look at the New Lord Model And it is clearly not a conversion. The head is brand new and the arms have Necron symbols on the insides of the wrists that no other bit has. A very disappointing new model.
Is it just me or does it look like a pair of pants on his head
Well, I know who I'm going to be modeling him after, now...
Does anyone else feel that giving a character with a 2+/3++ save the ability to re-roll 1's, as well as better str weapons, for only 25 points is a bit insane. He is the ultimate bullet sponge.
I actually like the fact that the new lord is very unoriginal. First of all, they are Necrons, they are tools for the C'tan, weapons...or rather bullets, if you want to, and individualism wouldn't fit to begin with.
Secondly...with all Special Characters looking so similar, you can convert them from a regular Overlord at ease and everyone already has too many Overlords anyway (CCB / AB).
DarkStarSabre wrote: Or Tyranid players will start using your Transcendant C'tan as a control for comparisons with Hierodules. To be fair, with your mandatory upgrades you come out 150 or so points more expensive than a Hierodule...
But your base stats alone are infinitely better.
(Seriously, Tyranids pay for a T6 critter with a 3+ armour save, I3 and at best WS 4 depending on if Barbed or Scythed. You get WS 9, S9 and T9 off the dot with an Invuln save. Seriously.)
FWIW, Hierodules are S10 T8. They're basically Wraithknights at double the cost. Still not as good as a C'tan of course, but way better than T6.
NecronLord3 wrote: Is Anrakyr not unique, the Stormlord, Orikon, Trayzan, Zandrek, Obyron. All stylistically similar but very unique builds.
You must be joking... With the exception of Orikon the others all look extremely similar, even to the standard overlord models.
No they don't. Orikon isn't even a lord he's a Cryptek.
OK
A: You lumped Orikon in with them, not me.
B: Yes, in your context they do all look very alike. If your going to say the new lord is not, with his one of a kind weapon and hat, I have no idea what would appease you. They are all just metal skeletons, their is only so much they can do to models that literally have a a mere handful of options for weapons.
Reposting this question. Hey maybe I am blind or the list just doesn't list it but with the god shackle and the other relics there isn't the normal "a model can only have one relic/ only one of each relic per army" or am i missing it and I'm just blind?
If they aren't then you aren't looking at just t8 anymore.
Oberron wrote: Reposting this question. Hey maybe I am blind or the list just doesn't list it but with the god shackle and the other relics there isn't the normal "a model can only have one relic/ only one of each relic per army" or am i missing it and I'm just blind?
If they aren't then you aren't looking at just t8 anymore.
The way it's written in that spoiler, isolated to that info alone, yes you can have multiples. Though keep in mind, the latest 7th edition trend has kept relic list items unique. This may also be the case depending on our new codex. So until then, go nuts with s10/t10 c'tans. Just don't put the relic on the crypteks in the formation...(protip)
I see Necrons getting their new Codex with book 3 of Shield of Baal or Directly After the Campaign is finished. Exterminatus does have a lot of Necron love both in the Fluff and in the formations. I feel the Warlord Traits are by far the best I have seen. Relics are ok. Also book 3 Devourer will no question be a lot of Necron love.
Fireraven wrote: I see Necrons getting their new Codex with book 3 of Shield of Baal or Directly After the Campaign is finished. Exterminatus does have a lot of Necron love both in the Fluff and in the formations. I feel the Warlord Traits are by far the best I have seen. Relics are ok. Also book 3 Devourer will no question be a lot of Necron love.
You only think the relics are ok? The God Shackle potentially makes the C'Tan worth it and the +1 str, re-roll 1s relic will be in almost every necron army.
Warmonger2757 wrote: You only think the relics are ok? The God Shackle potentially makes the C'Tan worth it and the +1 str, re-roll 1s relic will be in almost every necron army.
It might make a bad unit less worse in an army that cannot really support it and already has good lists?
It has the Necron-problem: Quite good, but no place for it.
I fail to see how the C'Tan Shard would suddenly arise from trash tier. So, the most overcosted unit in the entire codex that can offer nothing another unit would not be able to offer at a lower price, now has +1S / +1T? Uhm?
Sigvatr wrote: I fail to see how the C'Tan Shard would suddenly arise from trash tier. So, the most overcosted unit in the entire codex that can offer nothing another unit would not be able to offer at a lower price, now has +1S / +1T? Uhm?
Does it make Necrons suddenly beat Tau and Eldar? No. Does it make them better? Yes, small arms fire not longer threatens them since s4 can't wound T8. This is why they were so good in the old dex, they've gotten more mobile since a cryptek can be upgraded with VoD and you can use the Crypteks to tank with 3+/3++ saves. However, they still will die easily to poison weapons, but they went from being unusable to at least considered to be taken. Transcendent C'tan is still the better option and should be allowed in tournaments.
Sigvatr wrote: Ahhh, so GW changed the wound tables back to "Hey, this actually makes sense!" in 7th just as in 4th? Sounds good. Need GC though.
Not sure how the meta changed, but the TC'tan used to be hilariously broken and should not even be considered to be used in a competitive environment.
Yeah along with Wave Serpents, Ad. Lance, and summoning. As long as those are in play, the T. C'tan is fair game.
Sadly, most TOs don't agree with that assessment. An annoying holdover from when the TC'tan was the be all end all model on the table, but honestly it's not anymore.
col_impact wrote: It appears that you can put 3 God Shackles into a list to make the shard s10 and t10. Definitely pumps it up to Imperial Knight point/power level
I expect the FAQ to come out in short time. Obviously, RAI, Relics should be 1 per army.
But yes, atm, you can have a T10, S10, teleporting C'Tan shard with FNP and an extra shooting attack from either a Stormtek or a Destructek. Do not expect this to last too long, and while it does, don't use it if you want to keep friends. This is as good as a Transcendent C'Tan in all but shooting prowess and Stomp.
col_impact wrote: It appears that you can put 3 God Shackles into a list to make the shard s10 and t10. Definitely pumps it up to Imperial Knight point/power level
I expect the FAQ to come out in short time. Obviously, RAI, Relics should be 1 per army.
But yes, atm, you can have a T10, S10, teleporting C'Tan shard with FNP and an extra shooting attack from either a Stormtek or a Destructek. Do not expect this to last too long, and while it does, don't use it if you want to keep friends. This is as good as a Transcendent C'Tan in all but shooting prowess and Stomp.
Well you can't upgrade the formation crypteks to Harbingers, so no putting a Veiltek or Stormtek or Destructek in that formation. The crypteks have to be part of a royal court to upgrade to Harbingers per codex and the formation crypteks aren't in a royal court. So currently it isn't broken RAW.
col_impact wrote: It appears that you can put 3 God Shackles into a list to make the shard s10 and t10. Definitely pumps it up to Imperial Knight point/power level
I expect the FAQ to come out in short time. Obviously, RAI, Relics should be 1 per army.
But yes, atm, you can have a T10, S10, teleporting C'Tan shard with FNP and an extra shooting attack from either a Stormtek or a Destructek. Do not expect this to last too long, and while it does, don't use it if you want to keep friends. This is as good as a Transcendent C'Tan in all but shooting prowess and Stomp.
Well you can't upgrade the formation crypteks to Harbingers, so no putting a Veiltek or Stormtek or Destructek in that formation. The crypteks have to be part of a royal court to upgrade to Harbingers per codex and the formation crypteks aren't in a royal court. So currently it isn't broken RAW.
That's a good point. Please give codex because right now this is a fraking mess.
skoffs wrote: They haven't, but there's a decent chance they will next month if he's included in the codex.
Not going to happen without invalidating Escalation as a core rulebook, which right now it is. I expect a cut and paste of the T. C'tan(if included at all) from escalation, just like the Stompa. GW needs to sell those plastic Vaults.
I think you guys are bananas. First, what gives you the notion that crypteks in the formation won't be able to upgrade to harbingers? This formation breaks all the existing rules for crypteks, why not upgrades too?
And even a s/t10 c'tans nowhere near the potency of imp knights. Nor is this formation comparable to a watered down Transcendent.
D Str weapons are a huge contrast. That difference alone disqualifes a shard from the heavy weight class. Similar to a Wraithknight, sure. Dreadknight, ok. Riptide, hmmmmm....why not. But you need to put things into perspective. This formation, with an ideal set, is still 100pts more than the aforementioned. The package is the price of a imp knight with no d attack and an ablative USR bundle. I won't even touch on the TC exaggeration.....
Nyghoma wrote: I think you guys are bananas. First, what gives you the notion that crypteks in the formation won't be able to upgrade to harbingers? This formation breaks all the existing rules for crypteks, why not upgrades too?
And even a s/t10 c'tans nowhere near the potency of imp knights. Nor is this formation comparable to a watered down Transcendent.
D Str weapons are a huge contrast. That difference alone disqualifes a shard from the heavy weight class. Similar to a Wraithknight, sure. Dreadknight, ok. Riptide, hmmmmm....why not. But you need to put things into perspective. This formation, with an ideal set, is still 100pts more than the aforementioned. The package is the price of a imp knight with no d attack and an ablative USR bundle. I won't even touch on the TC exaggeration.....
Bananas? No, we just read the rules.
Necron Codex
Spoiler:
Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger.
The crypteks attached to the C'tan Shard in the formation are not part of any Royal Court so they can't be upgraded to a Harbinger.
Nyghoma wrote: I think you guys are bananas. First, what gives you the notion that crypteks in the formation won't be able to upgrade to harbingers? This formation breaks all the existing rules for crypteks, why not upgrades too?
And even a s/t10 c'tans nowhere near the potency of imp knights. Nor is this formation comparable to a watered down Transcendent.
D Str weapons are a huge contrast. That difference alone disqualifes a shard from the heavy weight class. Similar to a Wraithknight, sure. Dreadknight, ok. Riptide, hmmmmm....why not. But you need to put things into perspective. This formation, with an ideal set, is still 100pts more than the aforementioned. The package is the price of a imp knight with no d attack and an ablative USR bundle. I won't even touch on the TC exaggeration.....
Bananas? No, we just read the rules.
Necron Codex
Spoiler:
Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger.
The crypteks attached to the C'tan Shard in the formation are not part of any Royal Court so they can't be upgraded to a Harbinger.
Yeah I know the rule. You just chose to ignore my point in the very next sentence of that post. Read something more than just the rules.. For example the rest of what I said before you make smart-alek snaps
Nyghoma wrote: I think you guys are bananas. First, what gives you the notion that crypteks in the formation won't be able to upgrade to harbingers? This formation breaks all the existing rules for crypteks, why not upgrades too?
And even a s/t10 c'tans nowhere near the potency of imp knights. Nor is this formation comparable to a watered down Transcendent.
D Str weapons are a huge contrast. That difference alone disqualifes a shard from the heavy weight class. Similar to a Wraithknight, sure. Dreadknight, ok. Riptide, hmmmmm....why not. But you need to put things into perspective. This formation, with an ideal set, is still 100pts more than the aforementioned. The package is the price of a imp knight with no d attack and an ablative USR bundle. I won't even touch on the TC exaggeration.....
Bananas? No, we just read the rules.
Necron Codex
Spoiler:
Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger.
The crypteks attached to the C'tan Shard in the formation are not part of any Royal Court so they can't be upgraded to a Harbinger.
Yeah I know the rule. You just chose to ignore my point in the very next sentence of that post. Read something more than just the rules.. For example the rest of what I said before you make smart-alek snaps
What's your point? Is your point that we no longer have to follow the rules?
I am just pointing out how you play it RAW until we get FAQ or additional rules or the new codex
Look here are the facts. Right now the formation functions on its own, with no permission to take upgrades not otherwise allowed in the current codex. Being a Harbinger isn't allowed.
My suggestion though is don't play Necrons until the new book comes out. Things will be different. Do t get in arguments that will be pointless in a month.
Sorry I wasn't trying to be combatative. Text is mute of tone. I'm from NY and they're just expressions=p.
Back on topic. I get that idea. For me, I don't think "no frills" cryptek chaperones were in the spirit of this formations design. Again, it's all conjecture until they release the floodgates.
skoffs wrote: They haven't, but there's a decent chance they will next month if he's included in the codex.
Not going to happen without invalidating Escalation as a core rulebook, which right now it is. I expect a cut and paste of the T. C'tan(if included at all) from escalation, just like the Stompa. GW needs to sell those plastic Vaults.
I have never seen anyone use the original model for the T-C'tan
All this talk about not being able to upgrade the crypteks seems silly, what's stopping me from taking an entire list of stormteks and playing unbound? If i want to play unbound none of this argument is valid. And there's no restrictions on the formation so any cryptek wargear is allowed. In the codex the only way to take a lord or tek was via a royal court, so in this brave new world of detachments and formations and unbound, anyone can truly take whatever tek they want for the formation.
Unbound allow my 15 cryptek on the field, 10 lords, 5 destroyer lords, 5 overlords, to hit the gaming table. Also it allows my opponent to run 10 purgation squad with psycannons, and 10 strikesquad with incinerators. Fun times!
skoffs wrote: They haven't, but there's a decent chance they will next month if he's included in the codex.
Not going to happen without invalidating Escalation as a core rulebook, which right now it is. I expect a cut and paste of the T. C'tan(if included at all) from escalation, just like the Stompa. GW needs to sell those plastic Vaults.
I have never seen anyone use the original model for the T-C'tan
I have 6 of the original model for the T-C'tan. Pics available.
legions_no_more wrote: Unbound allow my 15 cryptek on the field, 10 lords, 5 destroyer lords, 5 overlords, to hit the gaming table. Also it allows my opponent to run 10 purgation squad with psycannons, and 10 strikesquad with incinerators. Fun times!
skoffs wrote: They haven't, but there's a decent chance they will next month if he's included in the codex.
Not going to happen without invalidating Escalation as a core rulebook, which right now it is. I expect a cut and paste of the T. C'tan(if included at all) from escalation, just like the Stompa. GW needs to sell those plastic Vaults.
I have never seen anyone use the original model for the T-C'tan
I have 6 of the original model for the T-C'tan. Pics available.
And this kind of thing is probably why Unbound gets a bad rep, but the freedom to take whatever tek you want for the formation shouldn't amount to cheese or spam, just sound tactics on what would probably be a mediocre (with current rules) unit. If the new codex is more balanced you won't see the spam lists that necrons had to resort to in sixth to stay competitive. Better dex overall will lead to more variety in lists, and hopefully break people of the opinion that necron players are waac players.
legions_no_more wrote: Unbound allow my 15 cryptek on the field, 10 lords, 5 destroyer lords, 5 overlords, to hit the gaming table. Also it allows my opponent to run 10 purgation squad with psycannons, and 10 strikesquad with incinerators. Fun times!
and so much more,
Unbound is what GW created so you can enjoy the true hobby of collecting ALL GW miniatures.(not just a single army)
so yes field your 15 upgraded crypteks all will the same unique wargear AND include in your army an Imperial Knight, a big mek with shokk attack gun, a chaos Rhino, a squad of death company, thunderwolf Calvary, one or two wave serpents, a flyrant, a soulgrinder, some marine scouts, 3 raven wing bikers, 2 wyches, and a Riptide.
Unbound specifically says "simply use whichever units from your collection you want" If i have all of the things listed in the above example in my collection then it satisfies the unbound army.
Unbound is what GW created so you can enjoy the true hobby of collecting ALL GW miniatures.(not just a single army)
so yes field your 15 upgraded crypteks all will the same unique wargear
You might want to familiarize yourself with the rules for Unbound. Specifically what it allows and what it does not allow.
I don't get how people think that Unbound = ignore all rules.
Without the rulebook in front of me and you implying you're more familiar with the rulesame please by all means enlighten me as to how I'm getting it wrong? As it stands you're just telling me I'm wrong in how I remember reading it?
Actually, I think you can make the Crypteks of the Shard formation into Harbingers.
The Cryptek entry list itself grants broad permission to upgrade to a Harbinger by exchanging staff of light for a Harbinger weapon. The asterix then clarifies "Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger. Whilst you can have any number of Harbingers of a specific type, each of the Harbinger's unique wargear options can only be chosen once in each royal court"
In other words it's important to distinguish between these two reads of the rule.
"Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger"
"Crypteks that are in a Royal Court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger"
So basically you can upgrade the Crypteks of the Shard formation into Stormteks and Veilteks, which would make the formation bordering on playable.
FYI... the eBook version of Codex: Necrons is no longer available on BlackLibrary.com. I'm not sure when it was taken down, but it's definitely not there now.
I wish I were. that was said with a heavy dose of sarcasm unfortunately even the example in the rulebook for unbound suggests just throw whatever you want in. "for example Jon uses unbound method, He chooses some of them from Codex: Space Marines and some from Codex: Tau Empire"
Desubot wrote: Well unbound tells you that you need to still follow all rules for the unit creation.
AKA if i wana take conscripts i still needa buy the whole infantry platoon squad to unlock it.
Will you please point me in the direction of these rules? Looking at the rulebook under Unbound Armies says the following.
Spoiler:
The unbound method is the easiest way to organise an army: simply use whichever units from your collection you want. Besides being the quickest way to get your models on the tabletop, the unbound method also allows you to try out exciting new combinations in your army such as fielding a whole force of tanks or flyers, or even special characters.
The only requirement to field a unit that I see in that rule is it has to be a unit from your collection... which is not really a requirement at all.
Furthermore looking at "The Primary Detachment" "Of course, in an unbound army, these models are not bound by any detachment restrictions and do not receive command benefits."
Bold is important
I wish I were. that was said with a heavy dose of sarcasm unfortunately even the example in the rulebook for unbound suggests just throw whatever you want in. "for example Jon uses unbound method, He chooses some of them from Codex: Space Marines and some from Codex: Tau Empire"
Desubot wrote: Well unbound tells you that you need to still follow all rules for the unit creation.
AKA if i wana take conscripts i still needa buy the whole infantry platoon squad to unlock it.
Will you please point me in the direction of these rules? Looking at the rulebook under Unbound Armies says the following.
Spoiler:
The unbound method is the easiest way to organise an army: simply use whichever units from your collection you want. Besides being the quickest way to get your models on the tabletop, the unbound method also allows you to try out exciting new combinations in your army such as fielding a whole force of tanks or flyers, or even special characters.
The only requirement to field a unit that I see in that rule is it has to be a unit from your collection... which is not really a requirement at all.
Furthermore looking at "The Primary Detachment" "Of course, in an unbound army, these models are not bound by any detachment restrictions and do not receive command benefits." Bold is important
Hmm you appear to be correct i cant seem to find where i read the must still follow the actual unit creation rules. il keep digging i might find it or i might be eating my shoe.
actually the Detachment restrictions have nothing to do with unit selection
a detachment restriction would be along the lines of trying to take 7 troops and 3 hq units that take up slots.
See my post above. You CAN make the Crypteks of the Shard formation into Harbingers. The Cryptek entry list grants broad permission to do so and then it clarifies "Any number . . ." but does not restrict that they can only be bought in a Royal Court.
I would be into them doing Dark Future. Nephew is sort of a hot wheels / Cars kid and could possibly get him interested. You have to drag the kid kicking and screaming to anything new /sigh
NecronLord3 wrote: My suggestion though is don't play Necrons until the new book comes out.
I was thinking the opposite. Now is the time to create supper cheese-wiz formations using Exterminatus and play it as much as possible before everything is re-balanced with the new codex. Also, make sure to play against people who have pet Forge World pieces or run unbound lists and tell them to cut the whining.
I really hope Necrons come out largely unscathed from their walk through the nerfing. Some stuff is going to get point increases (probably hefty ones in some cases), but the rules aren't very broken otherwise.
MaxT wrote: Well, apart from the completely broken Tesla/snapshot interaction.
What's broken about Tesla and snapshots?
Nothing? That it is only slightly better than some weapons when snap firing and yet at the same time people can't do basic Mathhammer 40k and realize they don't generate more shots than normal shooting?
Vash108 wrote: I hope we just get some kits with upgrade options for Crypteks for one.
Yesssss
Crypteks and royal courts were probably (in my mind) the coolest and most powerful change when they released the new codex. The single mono-pose poor-quality resin model was just inexplicable.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I really hope a new Transcendent C'Tan model comes out. It's ridiculous that you have to buy a $160 model to get one. Just blister pack it for $30.
Having to buy a $160 kit to get one is precisely why GW won't release a blister.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I really hope a new Transcendent C'Tan model comes out. It's ridiculous that you have to buy a $160 model to get one. Just blister pack it for $30.
Or just use a C'Tan Shard, or better yet find an "off-brand" ghosty model of similar size.
undertow wrote: I want to see Mindshackle Scarabs go away or get nerfed.
I want people to actually understand the game they pretend to play and realise that MSS, while funny, is actually a terrible piece of equipment and can be too easily countered if your opponent took the time to open his rulebook and read out of it.
MaxT wrote: Well, apart from the completely broken Tesla/snapshot interaction.
What's broken about Tesla and snapshots?
Nothing? That it is only slightly better than some weapons when snap firing and yet at the same time people can't do basic Mathhammer 40k and realize they don't generate more shots than normal shooting?
It's broken because of the 7th Ed jink/snapshot interaction. Jinking is supposed to be a meaningful tradeoff, increased survival at a cost of decreased offensive output. Any Necron models armed with Tesla weaponry that Jink currently lose barely any offensive output, thus it's broken.
MaxT wrote: Well, apart from the completely broken Tesla/snapshot interaction.
What's broken about Tesla and snapshots?
Nothing? That it is only slightly better than some weapons when snap firing and yet at the same time people can't do basic Mathhammer 40k and realize they don't generate more shots than normal shooting?
It's broken because of the 7th Ed jink/snapshot interaction. Jinking is supposed to be a meaningful tradeoff, increased survival at a cost of decreased offensive output. Any Necron models armed with Tesla weaponry that Jink currently lose barely any offensive output, thus it's broken.
It's not broken is Matt Ward wanted it to be that way. Maybe Matt Ward wanted Necrons to not suffer as much while snap shooting as other armies. Maybe he wanted Necrons to have high damage output.
MaxT wrote: Well, apart from the completely broken Tesla/snapshot interaction.
What's broken about Tesla and snapshots?
Nothing? That it is only slightly better than some weapons when snap firing and yet at the same time people can't do basic Mathhammer 40k and realize they don't generate more shots than normal shooting?
It's broken because of the 7th Ed jink/snapshot interaction. Jinking is supposed to be a meaningful tradeoff, increased survival at a cost of decreased offensive output. Any Necron models armed with Tesla weaponry that Jink currently lose barely any offensive output, thus it's broken.
It's not broken is Matt Ward wanted it to be that way. Maybe Matt Ward wanted Necrons to not suffer as much while snap shooting as other armies. Maybe he wanted Necrons to have high damage output.
Ork shooting doesn't suffer much from snapshooting either. Low BS but tons of dakka. Orks don't aim so much as just shoot a lot, so snapshooting and shooting while jinking doesn't suffer much performance loss for Orks.
It is simply by design of the Tesla gun that it can arc and hit while not even being fully aimed at something (see Tesla arcs) and so superior for snapshooting and shooting while jinking.
undertow wrote: I want to see Mindshackle Scarabs go away or get nerfed.
I want people to actually understand the game they pretend to play and realise that MSS, while funny, is actually a terrible piece of equipment and can be too easily countered if your opponent took the time to open his rulebook and read out of it.
No it's a perfect piece of equipment and helps counter how terrible our characters are in CC. It's also not nearly as powerful in 7th edition now that challenges don't make you immune to damage from the rest of the unit. I've used it maybe once since 7th dropped as opposed to being auto included in 6th edition.
undertow wrote: I want to see Mindshackle Scarabs go away or get nerfed.
I want people to actually understand the game they pretend to play and realise that MSS, while funny, is actually a terrible piece of equipment and can be too easily countered if your opponent took the time to open his rulebook and read out of it.
No it's a perfect piece of equipment and helps counter how terrible our characters are in CC. It's also not nearly as powerful in 7th edition now that challenges don't make you immune to damage from the rest of the unit. I've used it maybe once since 7th dropped as opposed to being auto included in 6th edition.
It's also nice in that it rewards opponents who are tactically smart and figure out how to defeat it's potency. By rewarding smart players, it helps to make 40k more of a thinking man's game.
undertow wrote: I want to see Mindshackle Scarabs go away or get nerfed.
I want people to actually understand the game they pretend to play and realise that MSS, while funny, is actually a terrible piece of equipment and can be too easily countered if your opponent took the time to open his rulebook and read out of it.
No it's a perfect piece of equipment and helps counter how terrible our characters are in CC. It's also not nearly as powerful in 7th edition now that challenges don't make you immune to damage from the rest of the unit. I've used it maybe once since 7th dropped as opposed to being auto included in 6th edition.
It's also nice in that it rewards opponents who are tactically smart and figure out how to defeat it's potency. By rewarding smart players, it helps to make 40k more of a thinking man's game.
Careful, your testing your opponents intelligence unfairly while leaning on an auto take piece of war-gear that literally requires zero thought
MSS is the necrosn answer to assault. However, I avoid the MSS but if I can not. I just throw a unit in with decent save with no AP vaule HtH. That way if they hit each other, I can still take a save. Plus most of the time, I win combat and sweep them. GK players hate MSS because they can kill themselves rather quite easily with all that power weapons they have. Seriously, there are ways to deal with MSS, just got to think about it.
undertow wrote: I want to see Mindshackle Scarabs go away or get nerfed.
I want people to actually understand the game they pretend to play and realise that MSS, while funny, is actually a terrible piece of equipment and can be too easily countered if your opponent took the time to open his rulebook and read out of it.
No it's a perfect piece of equipment and helps counter how terrible our characters are in CC. It's also not nearly as powerful in 7th edition now that challenges don't make you immune to damage from the rest of the unit. I've used it maybe once since 7th dropped as opposed to being auto included in 6th edition.
It's also nice in that it rewards opponents who are tactically smart and figure out how to defeat it's potency. By rewarding smart players, it helps to make 40k more of a thinking man's game.
Careful, your testing your opponents intelligence unfairly while leaning on an auto take piece of war-gear that literally requires zero thought
Why does it matter if its a one way test of smart play? I have to learn how to effectively fight my opponents various stratagems as well. For instance, the more I study Tau and how it relies on support systems, the better I am able to fight them.
Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
jasper76 wrote: Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
Next time the opponent won't underestimate the MSS and will make sure to tarpit the Overlord or meat wrap his HQ and then handily win. And he will feel better for having figured out how to defeat it.
jasper76 wrote: Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
Next time the opponent won't underestimate the MSS and will make sure to tarpit the Overlord or meat wrap his HQ and then handily win. And he will feel better for having figured out how to defeat it.
jasper76 wrote: Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
Next time the opponent won't underestimate the MSS and will make sure to tarpit the Overlord or meat wrap his HQ and then handily win. And he will feel better for having figured out how to defeat it.
Seriously, if that opponent underestimated the MSS, he get what he deserved. For a 350 pts HQ, they better come with an invul, because it too pricey to put an invul on an necron lord/overlord after the MSS, S weave, and warscythe. I faced the destroyer lord with MSS, and a wraithwing before. A 3++ stock save is just like a 3+ armour save for the wraiths. then my AP2 and AP1 shot when the wraiths got shot up. All weapons were pointed at him until he got into assault, which I counter assaulted with troops as a tarpit.
jasper76 wrote: Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
Next time the opponent won't underestimate the MSS and will make sure to tarpit the Overlord or meat wrap his HQ and then handily win. And he will feel better for having figured out how to defeat it.
I'd just issue a Challenge
You do realize the challenge rules have changed, right? All you do is bring the models in the units attached to the HQ into base contact with the Overlord or the bargeLord and MSS is defeated by flooding it with targets.
Also, the smart opponent will assault you first and have MSS resolve first and then declare his challenge so that your initial MSS whiffs.
I haven't played MSS in 7th so was unaware of how rules changes effect MSS.
Also, not even too sure I remember how MSS works. If multiple enemies are in base contact, it randomizes, right?
Like I said, for the past umpteen games I have been running NZ as my only HQ, so I wouldn't miss MSS if it went away. However, whenever its actually worked for me in the past, it has worked at the cost of good will in the game...i.e. when it works well, its a very very rude thing to do (same category as Mind in the Machine taking over a LoW).
If they're gonna super-nerf something, it might as well be MSS says I, for selfish reasons because I never use it!
jasper76 wrote: Honestly, MSS is one of the "most likely to get nerfed" that bothers me the least. Maybe its because I've been playing Nemesor Zandrekh solo for so long, I wouldn't really notice a change.
However, whenever I've taken a DLord with MSS, and the MSS actually comes in to play, it makes me feel very, very rude, almost to a point of it sort of ruining the good will of the game.
"See this shiny-gold 350 point fancy HQ you brought?...He's about to kill himself with his own Power Fist because I paid 15 points for this cool rule. Sorry."
I never feel rude, that's because most of the time we have the following situations:
1. My Necron Overlord and his unit charged into your assault unit or MC. I charge, I challenge, I stay out of B2B with anything else => Your model hits himself and you feel bad.
But you should feel bad, because you allowed Necrons to charge your assault unit, you accepted a challenge which you shouldn't and you put your challenger in such a way that my MSS had only one target.
2. You take the charge, challenge me and then allow me to activate MSS while nothing else is in B2B-contact. The model will hit itself and the opponent feels bad.
But, again, he should feel bad. He allowed me to activate MSSafter the challenge and he didn't put anything else in B2B.
The opponent made two mistakes and he loses his challenging model because of it. So yeah, he should feel bad.
3. You take the charge, my Lord is in the front and you somehow manage to get your big model as the only one in B2B, so the order of Challenge and MSS doesn't matter. Well, where to begin with the number of mistakes the opponent made?
The only time an opponent has the right to feel 'bad' about it is when my Destroyer Lord is hunting his lonely model and he has nothing to stop it.
But in these circumstances your model would die anyway since the D-Lord is accompanied by a full unit of Wraiths and you should have seen this coming.
In short:
-If you charge you always let them activate MSS before the Challenge; MSS is now nullified.
-Always make sure that multiple units are in basecontact (B2B) with the MSS-bearer, since MSS picks a random target; MSS is now nullified.
If you have a hard time dealing with MSS, you really need to study up. Anytime a necron is assaulting you, you did somethign wrong. I have yet seen MSS break the game where it won all these tournaments.
legions_no_more wrote: If you have a hard time dealing with MSS, you really need to study up. Anytime a necron is assaulting you, you did somethign wrong. I have yet seen MSS break the game where it won all these tournaments.
I don't think its broken per se, just kind of a crappy thing to do when it works as intended. I'd sort of rather beat someone with my own models, then dip into possessing my friends models to punch themselves in the face.
In any case, if MSS stays, it'll be nice to still have the option, and if it goes, I won't miss it horribly...not like if RP were to go from 5+ to 6+ or something like that.
skoffs wrote: If they just changed it to "affected model does not attack this turn" instead of attacking itself/it's unit, that wouldn't be a horrible trade off.
That wouldn't stop the complaining.
People don't like it when their model can't do stuff, even if it is entirely their own fault because they don't know how to easily stop it.
The online complaining usually makes no sense.
People focus on Tesla, RP and MSS while the reason Necrons are so strong are three undercosted units.
Did you hear anyone on Canoptek Wraiths? I didn't.
It is a chance to get off, ~40/60 at LD9 and ~50/50 at LD10, and that's only if the target is the only model in base contact. Then you have to roll to wound yourself, and you get saves if possible. If it doesn't go off, the Overlord isn't particularly by himself. That's far less broken than other things in the game.
But, it does suck when it happens. It sucks when you fail three 2+ saves in a single go as well. The game is all about dice, I don't see this as any better/worse than rolling 6 on D and instantly removing something, other than perhaps the price. But, to me, the price seems fine considering how crap horrible most Necrons are in CC.
They only have to address MSS if they add the option of Necron Lords buying jump packs or something like that. A Fast royal court with MSS spam would be pretty broken.
If they do remove MSS then the Overlord stats would need a serious overhaul. He has subpar stats and damage output because MSS is factored in.
The original and first full codex versions of the Necron lord had an identical statline, with the exception of Initiative 4 and Staff Of Light being a power weapon.
Frankly I'd be happier if they reverted that, factored it into the base cost and made the improved Staff mean he could switch to a Warscythe for free.
They seem pretty committed to I2 being universal rather than a Warrior and Immortal gimmick now though, sadly. Shame, it also made the Flayed Ones a bit less ridiculous.
Anyhow: Jump pack lords? Would be cool, but would also require reverting the Destroyers to Jetbikes to make much sense. As it is, the Destroyer Lord is the Jump Lord.
Regardless of whether or not they remove MSS, they need to introduce an option for our HQ slot that boosts shooting prowess.
Nearly every army in the game has some way to boost their ranged output. This comes in the form of buffs (for things like Tau or IG), Psychic Powers (take your pick), or powerful shooting attacks of their own (Tyranids, for instance). However, Necrons, who are a very shooting oriented army, have little to nothing to boost their firepower output. DLords give Preferred Enemy, and Szeras can RNG a buff onto one squad, but we don't have anything on the level of Prescience, Orders, or Ethereals in our HQ options.
In fact, the only thing in our army that does reliably increase shooting output is the Stalker, which is oftentimes a waste of points since our Destructors are Twin Linked anyway and the Stalker has a tendency to be targeted and die immediately in a lot of games. We don't have anything even close to Markerlights, Ultramarines Doctrines, etc, which just has never made much sense to me.
legions_no_more wrote: If you have a hard time dealing with MSS, you really need to study up. Anytime a necron is assaulting you, you did somethign wrong. I have yet seen MSS break the game where it won all these tournaments.
So apparently anytime a dedicated unit of wraiths charges something the opponent is doing it wrong? Again, what does that say about you for fielding said unit. So many egos in here.
MSS is a stupid piece of gear from a game design standard because not only is it ridiculously clunky do to initiative steps and randomization but it also is a 15pt piece of gear that can invalidate 300+ point dedicated assault units. That is poor design period. Sorry but a bloodthirster shouldn't avoid a necron lord in assault for any reason. If you think it's going to remain around I'd prepare for disappointment. Not trying to be a jerk, just being honest. I don't understand how people can think its an OK piece of gear, I know how to get around it and it's implications, that hardly justifies it as a well written rule. Things that frustrate the opponent and are auto includes are generally a red flag for poor design.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
col_impact wrote: They only have to address MSS if they add the option of Necron Lords buying jump packs or something like that. A Fast royal court with MSS spam would be pretty broken.
If they do remove MSS then the Overlord stats would need a serious overhaul. He has subpar stats and damage output because MSS is factored in.
What? He has amazing stats for a tanking character actually, not to mention he has access to crazy court minions with a toolbox for anything that he can dole out across the table. Overlords are perfectly fine as is. S5 T5 2+ 3++ with a S7 ap1 amorbane weapon and the ability to get back up on a 4+ and you think they need a boost?
Again expect much disappointment, the current trend is blanding down armies. Part of it sucks, as flavor is good but over all I think it's creating healthier armies if we disregard the FOC.
legions_no_more wrote: If you have a hard time dealing with MSS, you really need to study up. Anytime a necron is assaulting you, you did somethign wrong. I have yet seen MSS break the game where it won all these tournaments.
So apparently anytime a dedicated unit of wraiths charges something the opponent is doing it wrong? Again, what does that say about you for fielding said unit. So many egos in here.
MSS is a stupid piece of gear from a game design standard because not only is it ridiculously clunky do to initiative steps and randomization but it also is a 15pt piece of gear that can invalidate 300+ point dedicated assault units. That is poor design period. Sorry but a bloodthirster shouldn't avoid a necron lord in assault for any reason. If you think it's going to remain around I'd prepare for disappointment. Not trying to be a jerk, just being honest. I don't understand how people can think its an OK piece of gear, I know how to get around it and it's implications, that hardly justifies it as a well written rule. Things that frustrate the opponent and are auto includes are generally a red flag for poor design.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
col_impact wrote: They only have to address MSS if they add the option of Necron Lords buying jump packs or something like that. A Fast royal court with MSS spam would be pretty broken.
If they do remove MSS then the Overlord stats would need a serious overhaul. He has subpar stats and damage output because MSS is factored in.
What? He has amazing stats for a tanking character actually, not to mention he has access to crazy court minions with a toolbox for anything that he can dole out across the table. Overlords are perfectly fine as is. S5 T5 2+ 3++ with a S7 ap1 amorbane weapon and the ability to get back up on a 4+ and you think they need a boost?
Again expect much disappointment, the current trend is blanding down armies. Part of it sucks, as flavor is good but over all I think it's creating healthier armies if we disregard the FOC.
Lots of things can invalidate assault units. Overwatch is the worst offender, and Tau's supporting fire (or whatever the rule is called) is potentially worse than MSS is in most situations. That same Bloodthirster could take an Overwatch hit from a 10 point Meltagun and lose its last wound. It's probably undercosted, but it's not gamebreaking in any way.
The only thing the Overlord has going for it is the tankiness. 3W T5 2+/3++/4++++ is great, yes, but the Overlord literally does nothing else. If you don't charge him or shoot him, he does nothing except maybe make his squad more tanky if he takes 30 points for the Orb. In assault, 3 attacks at I2 WS4 is pretty poor compared to any "good" statlines.
The existance of other things that poop all over assault doesn't change the fact that MSS are a problematic piece of gear, just as Wave Serpents existing don't make Riptides OK.
Red Corsair wrote: So apparently anytime a dedicated unit of wraiths charges something the opponent is doing it wrong? Again, what does that say about you for fielding said unit. So many egos in here.
So we get this QQ a dozen times a day because all the time Destroyer Lords are charging MC's?
MSS is a stupid piece of gear from a game design standard because not only is it ridiculously clunky do to initiative steps and randomization but it also is a 15pt piece of gear that can invalidate 300+ point dedicated assault units. That is poor design period. Sorry but a bloodthirster shouldn't avoid a necron lord in assault for any reason. If you think it's going to remain around I'd prepare for disappointment. Not trying to be a jerk, just being honest. I don't understand how people can think its an OK piece of gear, I know how to get around it and it's implications, that hardly justifies it as a well written rule. Things that frustrate the opponent and are auto includes are generally a red flag for poor design.
How is it clunky? You do it at the start of combat and target a random model.
This game is filled with random stuff, but all of the sudden this one is clunky? Give me a break.
And please refrain from calling it a 15-point piece of wargear. Because that'd be totally ignoring the Destroyer Lord-tax you have to pay.
Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
PS. That last line is hilarious. This game has enough stuff that are actually auto-includes and frustrate the opponent, go complain about that.
What? He has amazing stats for a tanking character actually, not to mention he has access to crazy court minions with a toolbox for anything that he can dole out across the table. Overlords are perfectly fine as is. S5 T5 2+ 3++ with a S7 ap1 amorbane weapon and the ability to get back up on a 4+ and you think they need a boost?
Don't forget that:
a) They have no decent support in the Codex.
b) You are paying 205 points for that!
My BA can make a Captain with 2+/3++ and an AP2, I5-weapon for only 145 points.
I can then give him anything I want to add him to different kind of relevant units.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: The existance of other things that poop all over assault doesn't change the fact that MSS are a problematic piece of gear, just as Wave Serpents existing don't make Riptides OK.
It's not problematic, it's just unfun. It has counters - have multiple things in base contact, or avoid it altogether, or have multiple characters to eat the challenge, or bring a reroll in case you fail the test, etc. Does it suck losing control of your character for one phase? Yeah, totally. But that doesn't make it broken.
This is what non - necron players don't realize, so they tend to put their foot into their mouth.
95% of Necron units have an abysmal 2 initiative
No access to the psychic phase. No blessing stacking. No extra shooting phase.
Horribly inefficient MCs
Lack of force multipliers
No battle brother options, until just recently
Necrons are chock full o open top skimmers making them vulnerable to skyfire weapons in addition to the vehicle dmg chart
Lack of AP 1/2 equipment
I can go on with the flock of albatross til I turn blue in da face. This is why we have MSS, this is why we have tesla/gauss, this is why we have quantum shielding. This is why we have cheap NS and ABs. They are trade offs. Do the math.
MSS isn't automagic either. They have to be in base to base at the top of initiative, randomly be targeted, fail a LD check on 3d6, then make damage and armor saves.
A lone Bloodthirster charging a lone Necron Lord with MSS is begging to be hit with it and still has a roughly 50% chance to ignore it.
A lone Bloodthirster charing a unit with a Necron Lord gets into base with anything else and ignores it turn 1, then has 50% to ignore it later turns.
A lone anything against MSS is probably bad idea.
Incidently, Necrons have the Initiative check or die mechanic going on, and no one seems to complain about that as much as MSS.
Watched a Bloodthirster roll a 6 on init test and die a couple of weeks ago and we all ahd a good laugh about it. Same game saw Necron Overlord torn to shreds after Demon Prince made successful checks against MSS 2 turns in a row.
AlexRae wrote: MSS will either go or only work in challenges like everything else that is good in combat these days.
I would hope so!
Having it only work on the challenger instead of a random model would be a gigantic buff to MSS in my armies.
But it would also stop working on Monstrous Creatures. Making it worthless against Wraith Knights and their ilk. I agree that it's a likely change. I also suspect an alternate change would be: User gains the Fear USR. Suck.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit. That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
BlaxicanX wrote: Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
No, he is not.
So you don't do such a thing because it's a bad choice and that would cost you the game.
In the exact same spirit you don't allow a Necron Lord to charge your CC-MC.
And if you charge the Lord, you let him activate MSS or avoid getting into B2B with the Lord.
If everything stayed the same and Wraiths were nerfed, then GW would lose a lot of players. Because the Codex, as it is now, is crap!
Despite popular belief they are not a book filled with nothing but overpoweredness where every single model can battle an entire squad of Marines.
It's a book where you pay Terminator-prices for a 3+ unit without Inv or Deep Strike.
A book where a Cryptek with +1W, +1SV and a useless random ability suddenly becomes 55 points more expensive.
docdoom77 wrote: But it would also stop working on Monstrous Creatures. Making it worthless against Wraith Knights and their ilk. I agree that it's a likely change. I also suspect an alternate change would be: User gains the Fear USR. Suck.
The GK-thing has been changed to Character, so I'm not sure what GW's plans are with MC's.
Fear, aah, yes.. That could be their plan, but it would suck. There is a reason I'm not taking it on my SG's for 1 point a model.
Well, this is the first time I have posted on dakkadakka, but I have held such conversations on other forums. I had always liked the original 3rd edition codex that we (Necrons) had. I was sad that the current codex had come out and had changed our base warriors SV to a 4+, We'll Be Back from a 4+ to Reanimation with a 5+, made the lord slower to I2, had removed the nearly immune to anti-tank weapons on the monolith, and to my biggest disappointment removed the NIghtbringer and Deceiver from the codex.
But I had realized that with the change that we had received, the army became more powerful and was able to compete if not beat another codex. We got a ton of new toys to try out, the cheapest and most efficient flyers in the game, and a ton of equipment to make up for the complete lack of psychic powers.
But now with the current 7th edition of the game, pyskers have become one of the most powerful units in the game and Necrons do not even have access to such things. Yes, you can take allies or go unbound, but I would prefer to stay with a single codex that I can have an enjoyable time playing. Everything in the Necron codex is designed to work with Necrons, not designed to work with other armies. A Bloodthirster is not designed to work with a unit of Eldar Guardians, or Blood Angle Assault Marines, or even a Nurgling Swarm.
Everyone should be fine with the codices that exist and will exist. I know that people will always complain about certain units, powers, rules, or equipment from another codex, but they should realize that other people will always complain about their codex.
I a pair of friends, one plays elder and the other plays daemons. They both complain about each others codex. Such as the Wraith Knight is overpowered and should be costing a minimum of 300 points or so and that all wraithguns should go back to the last Codex: Eldar version. The other says that the amount of psychic control that daemons have is too much and that all their pyskers and MC's should cost about 100 to 150 points more than they do already.
What I am trying to get to is that there will always be certain rules, abilities, units, powers, or equipment that is in a codex that seems overpowered, but that exists in every codex there is. It is GW's way of balancing the game and testing your own ability to make the correct tactical choice at the right moment. If it does not work out in your favor, too bad but that is the way the game is played. If it does work in your favor congrats on using your strategy to the fullest.
Longshadow7 wrote: What I am trying to get to is that there will always be certain rules, abilities, units, powers, or equipment that is in a codex that seems overpowered, but that exists in every codex there is. It is GW's way of balancing the game and testing your own ability to make the correct tactical choice at the right moment.
You're right about the first part - there are always going to be certain combinations or units and so on that seem overpowered (or are overpowered) - but I can't agree with that second part. GW makes no appreciable effort to balance the game. If they did, the game wouldn't be in the state that it is now.
Beyond that, I agree with the idea about testing your own ability to make a good list. Welcome to Dakka.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
Longshadow7 wrote: What I am trying to get to is that there will always be certain rules, abilities, units, powers, or equipment that is in a codex that seems overpowered, but that exists in every codex there is. It is GW's way of balancing the game and testing your own ability to make the correct tactical choice at the right moment.
.....but I can't agree with that second part. GW makes no appreciable effort to balance the game. If they did, the game wouldn't be in the state that it is now...
Don't say that when the new 7th ed codexes are deliberate attempts to balance the game. And exactly what state isn't it in? Alaska?
;D
Speaking to a larger point here... GW has a history of buffing under-used (under-sold) units and nerfing units that sold very well. You could almost accuse GW of using that as a strategy to sell models.
To that point... there will always be klunkers in every codex. There should always be good units as well; internal codex balance never will be perfect. Hopefully, this edition of 40k will be with us for a while and the few codicies that are out of balance will be brought into balance (In my mind, that means Tau, Eldar, Demons, Dark Angels and CSM). Oh, and Necron rules that work with the current edition would be nice.
Anpu-adom wrote: Speaking to a larger point here... GW has a history of buffing under-used (under-sold) units and nerfing units that sold very well. You could almost accuse GW of using that as a strategy to sell models.
To that point... there will always be klunkers in every codex. There should always be good units as well; internal codex balance never will be perfect. Hopefully, this edition of 40k will be with us for a while and the few codicies that are out of balance will be brought into balance (In my mind, that means Tau, Eldar, Demons, Dark Angels and CSM). Oh, and Necron rules that work with the current edition would be nice.
That used to be the trend, but it seems like 6th and 7th edition books have really bucked that.
I mean, we've seen plenty of new shiny kits that have been totally useless.
Soo... 15pages into Cron rumours and we've only seen what may or may not be a new Necron Lord model and some formations for Shield of Baal campaign... how boring.
I have Exterminatus and just added everything to BattleScribe.
Some things I find very interesting:
1. C'tan shard picture uses the T-C'tan. New clamp-pack probably?
2. Edge of Eternity has AP2, probably an indication of what will happen to War Scythes.
Yes, this Relic is worth 20 points.. Because people forgot to mention the Precision Strike is on a 2+.
That will probably mean that War Scythes remain at 10 points!
3. Solar Thermasite let's you reroll saving throws of 1. What will this mean for the Sv2+ from Overlords?
I don't believe they will allow us to get an Overlord with a 2+/3++/4++++ that can reroll 1's on his Arm/Inv.
4. Warlord Traits: Haywire on Melee, Hatred.
Is this an indication of more melee-orientated stuff for Necrons?
5. You may choose to re-roll failed Morale, Pinning and Fear.
Why would I want this Trait if they are all Ld10; does this mean the Necron-Ld will be changed or is this just for losing CC?
6. Detachment with re-rolls on RP for Troops; that will make a 4+ RP with a re-roll on the 1's at the moment.
Perhaps they will change either RP or ResOrbs?
7. Ghost Arks are independent entries in the Formations.
I expected them to get their own slot, but what does this mean for their capacity?
8. Lack of regular Lords: Are we keeping them, what happens to them?
9. Immortals are heavily featured in the Formations. They are also renamed from 'Necron Immortals' to 'Immortals'.
I expect them to get quite some attention, perhaps even go to Elite and get Scarabs/Flayed Ones in Troops.
skoffs wrote: Highly doubtful.
This is the same guy whose "reliable" source said the codex was coming out the week of Halloween.
I mean, FFS, he didn't even mention anything about the formation that was talked about in the latest Sheild of Baal stuff!
I'm done listening to anyone who has a bad track record... so in other words, I'm hanging out for more word from Lords Of Wargaming.
Mh. Fun to look at, though, and the Alliance on Asphodex was right.
skoffs wrote: Highly doubtful.
This is the same guy whose "reliable" source said the codex was coming out the week of Halloween.
I mean, FFS, he didn't even mention anything about the formation that was talked about in the latest Sheild of Baal stuff!
I'm done listening to anyone who has a bad track record... so in other words, I'm hanging out for more word from Lords Of Wargaming.
Mh. Fun to look at, though, and the Alliance on Asphodex was right.
Don't know them. Were they right (as in, information they gave first, before anyone else), or were they just repeating information they heard from somewhere else that turned out to be correct?
Kangodo wrote: I
5. You may choose to re-roll failed Morale, Pinning and Fear.
Why would I want this Trait if they are all Ld10; does this mean the Necron-Ld will be changed or is this just for losing CC?
Because when you do fail a LD 10 pinning test, it really sucks. And when you're facing Eldar and taking 3 or 4 pinning tests a turn, even LD 10 starts to fail you. I like it.
That happened because I needed to put all entries to the background so I could make links.
Otherwise I couldn't make formations, unless I made the file so big that it would crash mobile devices.
It was smarter if we did this two years ago from the start, but we couldn't predict Formations like we have now.
I gave a warning in the BS thread, but again: Sorry, I had no choice
If there was any other way I would've done it cause this took a couple of hours of work :(
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit. That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Necrons get some good cost deals since they don't have psychic powers. Instead of comparing wraiths to terminators compare wraiths + d lords to centurions + draigo + chapter masters + invisibiliy + gate + etc.
Also, keep in mind that wraiths are no where near the top of melee anymore. Bullyboyz, TWC, and Dreadknights are dominating that spot.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Terminators are already overcosted as is, along with things like Bully Boyz and TWC being the go-to melee units, not to mention Wraiths are VERY vulnerable to Instant Death. Wraiths are fine.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Necrons get some good cost deals since they don't have psychic powers. Instead of comparing wraiths to terminators compare wraiths + d lords to centurions + draigo + chapter masters + invisibiliy + gate + etc.
Also, keep in mind that wraiths are no where near the top of melee anymore. Bullyboyz, TWC, and Dreadknights are dominating that spot.
Yea, compare a 400 point unit to a 1000+ point one.
Obviously they arent on the same power level.
Not saying that wraiths are better, or the cent star isnt op.
Just pointing out its a bad comparison.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Necrons get some good cost deals since they don't have psychic powers. Instead of comparing wraiths to terminators compare wraiths + d lords to centurions + draigo + chapter masters + invisibiliy + gate + etc.
Also, keep in mind that wraiths are no where near the top of melee anymore. Bullyboyz, TWC, and Dreadknights are dominating that spot.
Yea, compare a 400 point unit to a 1000+ point one.
Obviously they arent on the same power level.
Not saying that wraiths are better, or the cent star isnt op.
Just pointing out its a bad comparison.
It is a good comparison. Psychic powers like death stars so that they net a bigger return on their buff. Feel free to even out the points with 2 wraith wings with attached D Lords to compare.
When discussing Necron Wraiths vs other armies you have to discuss the availability of buffs. Necrons do not have psychic buffs so we get some things cheaper up front. Wraith are a non-player in today's meta, so obviously they aren't cheap enough!
psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
compared to cheap, 100% reliable units, that dont even need powers, its not even a close trade off to make.
for what they are, wraiths are very undercosted. same with MSS, very undercosted for what it does. necrons have 0 holes in what they can do, for a supposedly bad CC army, MSS makes you equal to or better then anything you might face in CC.
easysauce wrote: psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
Well, that's not exactly true, is it?
Oh certainly, taking a single solitary Psyker took a big hit, but dedicated Psyker armies with a lot of dice to toss around are horrendous for a Necron player to deal with. Buffs you can do nothing about pop up all over the place.
Some of them are really nasty to be able to plonk onto any unit you like too. Other buffs usually are mitigated by predictably being on specific models.
easysauce wrote: psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
compared to cheap, 100% reliable units, that dont even need powers, its not even a close trade off to make.
for what they are, wraiths are very undercosted. same with MSS, very undercosted for what it does. necrons have 0 holes in what they can do, for a supposedly bad CC army, MSS makes you equal to or better then anything you might face in CC.
There is lots of undercosted stuff in 40k. Every army has undercosted stuff. Are wraiths even worth getting in a huff over? Nope.
easysauce wrote: for what they are, wraiths are very undercosted. same with MSS, very undercosted for what it does. necrons have 0 holes in what they can do, for a supposedly bad CC army, MSS makes you equal to or better then anything you might face in CC.
But MSS doesn't cover the melee-weakness of Necrons.
It allows them to bite back a bit harder, you are still going to wipe out that unit and in most cases MSS doesn't even work when you are being charged.
They hit back harder than Tau but that's why Tau compensate that with even more firepower.
Personally I wouldn't mind a nerf in CC if that means we'll get closer to Tau-shooting levels.
Unless you are talking about Destroyer Lords with Canoptek Wraiths and his MSS.
But in those combats you are going to win anyway, MSS just reduces your own losses.
Conclusion: MSS let's an already winning squad suffer less casualties and let's a losing squad deal a bit more damage before dying.
BlaxicanX wrote: No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Why isn't it "fine"?
Comparing it to Terminators is a bad idea, you should probably compare C:SM to Necrons as a whole.
And guess what? C:SM is performing better than Necrons in tournaments.
By your logic Terminators should be nerfed because they are better than Lychguard with their Inv, Deep Strike, Transports and everything.
easysauce wrote: psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
compared to cheap, 100% reliable units, that dont even need powers, its not even a close trade off to make.
for what they are, wraiths are very undercosted. same with MSS, very undercosted for what it does. necrons have 0 holes in what they can do, for a supposedly bad CC army, MSS makes you equal to or better then anything you might face in CC.
There is lots of undercosted stuff in 40k. Every army has undercosted stuff. Are wraiths even worth getting in a huff over? Nope.
Honestly I can understand why some people are clinging to old auto take units. they are familiar. Wraiths need some sort of adjustment, profile alteration or slight increase in PPM. Not much though.
MSS should go away, it's a clumsy mechanic that isn't fun anyway.
A few hard offenders like fliers and barges also need tweaking.
In recompense, many things need fixing for the better. Immortals should go back to T5 IMO. C'tan shards need a massive price drop. Lich guard and Praetorian need a price drop as well. Flayed ones need rending and probably fear and a 2 point drop (fear mainly as it makes sense thematically), never understood why they don't rend. Doomsday arch needs a crazy overhaul. Pretty much need to overhaul destroyers as well.
It's really sad that 5-6 units are auto includes while the rest of the book is laughably 3rd choice. So many cool units need fixing.
Saying wraiths are fine because other units blow is not a rational response. They shouldn't be ruined, but they do need a tweak or two along with the other common offenders.
easysauce wrote: psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
compared to cheap, 100% reliable units, that dont even need powers, its not even a close trade off to make.
for what they are, wraiths are very undercosted. same with MSS, very undercosted for what it does. necrons have 0 holes in what they can do, for a supposedly bad CC army, MSS makes you equal to or better then anything you might face in CC.
There is lots of undercosted stuff in 40k. Every army has undercosted stuff. Are wraiths even worth getting in a huff over? Nope.
Honestly I can understand why some people are clinging to old auto take units. they are familiar. Wraiths need some sort of adjustment, profile alteration or slight increase in PPM. Not much though.
MSS should go away, it's a clumsy mechanic that isn't fun anyway.
A few hard offenders like fliers and barges also need tweaking.
In recompense, many things need fixing for the better. Immortals should go back to T5 IMO. C'tan shards need a massive price drop. Lich guard and Praetorian need a price drop as well. Flayed ones need rending and probably fear and a 2 point drop (fear mainly as it makes sense thematically), never understood why they don't rend. Doomsday arch needs a crazy overhaul. Pretty much need to overhaul destroyers as well.
It's really sad that 5-6 units are auto includes while the rest of the book is laughably 3rd choice. So many cool units need fixing.
Saying wraiths are fine because other units blow is not a rational response. They shouldn't be ruined, but they do need a tweak or two along with the other common offenders.
I'd be nice to see a C'tan or monolith again
There is no doubt in my mind that there will be some shuffling around of which units to buy and which units to shelf come the new codex. That's the main reason behind releasing a new codex - get people to buy more models.
There will be some shuffling around for sure, but nothing in the Necron codex is itself a problem like the Wave Serpent is a problem.
However, nerfing paired with buffing is only one way to get people to buy more models. The other way is to package buffs with formations that get players to eventually have diversified highlander collections.
Since Dynasties and Formations (designed to require players to build collections) have already been spoiled and there is evidence that some serious planning has gone into the codex and the supplements to follow I think its safe to say that the Necrons will not be a minimal codex like GK or a nerfing codex like Tyrannid but something more along the lines of Orks or Dark Eldar.
Red Corsair wrote: Honestly I can understand why some people are clinging to old auto take units. they are familiar. Wraiths need some sort of adjustment, profile alteration or slight increase in PPM. Not much though.
I think nearly everyone agrees with you.
I just want to speak out against some of the reasons people bring up: Comparing them to Terminators is not a good idea.
For some reason everything Necrons have is treated online as the worst thing to happen to the world since WW2.
It's this entire behaviour that every unit in their Codex is overpowered and that they are the strongest Codex ever.
I've even heard someone once complain that Flayed Ones are too cheap for their 4 attacks on the charge and their RP.
Tesla: Broken. RP: Broken. Wraiths: Broken Flyers: Broken. AB: Broken. MSS: Broken.
Could anyone explain to me while all this broken stuff still has a 55% win according to the last time ToF put some statistics online?
It's even worse in our playing group, one mention of my army and the 'OP-complaining' begins. Even from the guy with Tau and Eldar.
easysauce wrote: psychic powers are unreliable, can hurt your own guys, and got a huge *HUGE* nerf in 7th.
Well, that's not exactly true, is it?
Oh certainly, taking a single solitary Psyker took a big hit, but dedicated Psyker armies with a lot of dice to toss around are horrendous for a Necron player to deal with. Buffs you can do nothing about pop up all over the place.
Some of them are really nasty to be able to plonk onto any unit you like too. Other buffs usually are mitigated by predictably being on specific models.
it is 100% true...
only someone who doesnt understand how powers work now would claim they didnt get the huge nerf bat...
casting reliability went down from 90%+ spending warp charges at a 1-1 ratio, to 50% or less when spending WC's at a 1-1 ratio,
spending 3 charges to get a 1 charge power off reliably is a huge nerf, you dont magically get 3x the wc's, and you perils more often.
DTW is "doing something" about them as well, so thats a fals statement that there is nothing you can do about them.
necrons are not the uber codex they once were, but MSS makes cheap characters the equal or better of literally any unit in the game in CC that isnt a walker. thats not a good mechanic, thats not fun, and its not fair, or costed properly.
wraiths are undercosted, claiming there are other undercosted units does not make that better.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Riiiiight......because a white scar command squad w/ apothecary on bikes armed with grav/plasma/melta guns, storm shields, and fists/hammers plus [insert fotmopIC w/ bike here] is tame? Right?
A command vet w/melta, and SS is 47 pts. What is that? T5, 3+, 3++? But you also get +1s HoW, reroll terrain, hnr, a S8 ap1 ranged att, +1 jink(not that it's needed). Or wait! A WS assault bike w/ 2W, t5, 3+/3+ jink, and a relentless hvy weapon at 45 pts isn't a bargain? A wraith w/ Whips cost 45.
Don't make me laugh, I'm not ready for a diaper change.
Some folks are oblivious.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Yeah MSS is fine. It's our psychic shriek. Get over it. Learn how the war gear works and counter it.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
Riiiiight......because a white scar command squad w/ apothecary on bikes armed with grav/plasma/melta guns, storm shields, and fists/hammers plus [insert fotmopIC w/ bike here] is tame? Right?
A command vet w/melta, and SS is 47 pts. What is that? T5, 3+, 3++? But you also get +1s HoW, reroll terrain, hnr, a S8 ap1 ranged att, +1 jink(not that it's needed). Or wait! A WS assault bike w/ 2W, t5, 3+/3+ jink, and a relentless hvy weapon at 45 pts isn't a bargain? A wraith w/ Whips cost 45.
Don't make me laugh, I'm not ready for a diaper change.
Some folks are oblivious.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Yeah MSS is fine. It's our psychic shriek. Get over it. Learn how the war gear works and counter it.
Necrons aren't that powerful overall, above average maybe. I like all of the wargear and Cryptek powers, etc. It's part of what gives the army its flavour. There are a few units which I think are way undercosted however:
Night Scythes - Pretty durable, good firepower, large transport capacity, doesn't even use up a force org slot. Orks pay more for a Dakkajet which is comparable is firepower, flimsier, doesn't transport anything and takes up a force org slot.
Annihilation Barges - ****load of s6/7 shots for dirt cheap.
Haywire Crypeks - four Haywire shots for 25 points is simply too good.
CCB - Again just too cheap for what it does all round.
I don't include Wraiths on that list, I think they're comparable in value to certain other assault units which can move 12".
At the same time, there are several units in the book which just don't work e.g.
C'Tan - Once you pay for the the upgrades you are looking at Wraithknight points for something which doesn't do anything as well as a Wraithknight. Needs to be able to move 12".
Really? I always thought my Canoptek Wraiths should be at least 40 points, perhaps 45.
But that is only if they keep their double wound, Rending and 3++ (especially that last part should make them a bit more expensive for a Jump unit).
On the other hand I think the CCB-issue has more to do with the Overlord's wargear than the CCB itself.
It would be nice to see something equal to a Tau Riptide or Eldar Wraithknight. I know we have the Tomb Stalker and Sentinal, but we are lacking in the monstrous creature department.
Vash108 wrote:I would like to see a new MC of some sort. Big ol Necron stomping around
Avidem wrote:It would be nice to see something equal to a Tau Riptide or Eldar Wraithknight. I know we have the Tomb Stalker and Sentinal, but we are lacking in the monstrous creature department.
I remember the first appearance of the Monolith, it was a scary thing on the table. Something like what you guys mentioned would only seem right since everyone else has big scaries.
I did state a few pages back that a new lord was coming with book but nothing else. In fairness bar flayed ones and destroyer options the army is spot on.
Those asking for something big, necrons are gifted the transcendent c'tan and tesseract vault. If monoliths gain ceramite armour equivalent theyd be on the way to sorted. Army doesn't news new but some small tweaks would make it feel new (eg praetorians)
I don't particularly want new models, I want what we have to become useful. I feel that there are a lot of models in our book that are just on the cusp of being very good, and only need small changes (points, rules updates, slight wargear boosts) to be truly usable. Monoliths, Tomb Blades, Lychguard, Praetorians, Triarch Stalkers, and C'Tan Shards don't need really big, sweeping changes - their roles are clear and defined and they nearly do them perfectly. But they're just not quite there yet, so it'll be interesting to see if they change enough.
Requizen wrote: I don't particularly want new models, I want what we have to become useful.
Well...hate to disappoint you but that's not how GW works. Regardless of how little tweaking the army actually needs, GW is going to make sure that there are enough sweeping changes in a codex update to force existing players to spend several hundreds of dollars buying new models to keep using what they already have.
Vash108 wrote:I would like to see a new MC of some sort. Big ol Necron stomping around
Avidem wrote:It would be nice to see something equal to a Tau Riptide or Eldar Wraithknight. I know we have the Tomb Stalker and Sentinal, but we are lacking in the monstrous creature department.
I remember the first appearance of the Monolith, it was a scary thing on the table. Something like what you guys mentioned would only seem right since everyone else has big scaries.
... or the Monolith could rebecome our big scary?
(highly unlikely)
In fact, the only thing in our army that does reliably increase shooting output is the Stalker, which is oftentimes a waste of points since our Destructors are Twin Linked anyway and the Stalker has a tendency to be targeted and die immediately in a lot of games.
Requizen wrote: I don't particularly want new models, I want what we have to become useful.
Well...hate to disappoint you but that's not how GW works. Regardless of how little tweaking the army actually needs, GW is going to make sure that there are enough sweeping changes in a codex update to force existing players to spend several hundreds of dollars buying new models to keep using what they already have.
GW hasn't really been doing that with the latest releaes though. The balance has been so haphazard, that half the time the new models aren't even any good. For Every Wraithknight, we got a Hemlock Wraithfighter.
Vash108 wrote:I would like to see a new MC of some sort. Big ol Necron stomping around
Avidem wrote:It would be nice to see something equal to a Tau Riptide or Eldar Wraithknight. I know we have the Tomb Stalker and Sentinal, but we are lacking in the monstrous creature department.
I remember the first appearance of the Monolith, it was a scary thing on the table. Something like what you guys mentioned would only seem right since everyone else has big scaries.
... or the Monolith could rebecome our big scary?
(highly unlikely)
Why not?
The Monolith and Destroyers could become the new black.
Vash108 wrote:I would like to see a new MC of some sort. Big ol Necron stomping around
Avidem wrote:It would be nice to see something equal to a Tau Riptide or Eldar Wraithknight. I know we have the Tomb Stalker and Sentinal, but we are lacking in the monstrous creature department.
I remember the first appearance of the Monolith, it was a scary thing on the table. Something like what you guys mentioned would only seem right since everyone else has big scaries.
... or the Monolith could rebecome our big scary?
(highly unlikely)
Why not?
The Monolith and Destroyers could become the new black.
I honestly hope so. I have a lot of Destroyers, and all they have to do (in my book) is just decrease their cost to like, 25-30. 20 would make more sense, but for some reason they seem to overcost Reanimation Protocols super high.
I think it is more the Jump that they costed too high.
The Codex is from around the same time where Death Company paid 15 and Vanguard Veterans paid 10 points per jump pack.
Reduce Destroyers with 10 or 12 points and they'd be priced more fairly.
Kangodo wrote: I think it is more the Jump that they costed too high.
The Codex is from around the same time where Death Company paid 15 and Vanguard Veterans paid 10 points per jump pack.
Reduce Destroyers with 10 or 12 points and they'd be priced more fairly.
Destroyers are largely overcosted.
I'd price them at 20 to 25 pts.
For T5 Jump Infantry with S5, AP3, Assault 2-shooting and Preferred Enemy?
28 a 30 points is where I'd rate them, they don't need to be an auto-include in every list.
I'd be satisfied with 30 ppm for Destroyers, with an additional 10 points for Heavy Gauss Cannon upgrade.
(though HGC might be given the "Heavy" weapon type in the new codex (come on, it makes sense), so there would need to be some way for Destroyers to gain relentless... an additional 10 point upgrade that gives them Slow And Purposeful and a 2+ save would be pretty useful AND fluffy. Throw in additional weapon options (Tesla Cannon for 0 points, Particle Beamer for 0 points, Heat Beamer (melta/flamer) for 5 points, Transdimensional Beamer for 10 points) and you'd have a really good unit, though not quite broken, that fits the fluff really well (Destroyers are upgrade junkies, so it would make more sense if they had a TON of upgrade options instead of... 2).)
I feel with how hard armies like nids and orks were hit, with mid level power, that the upper level boos, which make no mistake necrons can compete at top levels, are going to be hit even harder. Honestly I feel its going to be heartbreak for a lot of people in this thread.
Kangodo wrote: Yes, sometimes your 300 point model should refrain from going into CC with a specific unit.
That is what we call 'tactics', or do you charge your Riptides into a unit of Death Company?
Is a Riptide designed exclusively for melee combat and completely useless and not making its points back every round that it isn't in melee combat?
And for the record, I lick my lips hourly waiting for the day that Wraiths get crapped on in the new codex. Everything else in the codex could stay the same and I'd still be happy if Wraiths were nerfed.
Because Wraiths need a nerf? Wraiths are fine as is.
No.
Toughness 4, 2 wounds with a 3+/3++ save and 3 WS4 strength 6 rending attacks base, on top of a fearless 12'' moving chassis that also ignores terrain/intervening models... and all costing 5ppm points less then naked terminators, is not "fine".
You also have to take into account what an army has to back units up. Marines have tons to cheaply back up terminators.
"Oh well, I guess GW feels they've made enough money selling Necron models and have decided they don't want any more now, if the stuff in this book is any indication." - Me, when I retire my army if the codex turns out the way we're fearing it will
Eldarain wrote: Marines have more point efficient support options than the codex with Night Scythes and Annihilation Barges?
I guess so, seeing as Marines are higher ranked than Necrons
skoffs wrote: I'd be satisfied with 30 ppm for Destroyers, with an additional 10 points for Heavy Gauss Cannon upgrade.
(though HGC might be given the "Heavy" weapon type in the new codex (come on, it makes sense), so there would need to be some way for Destroyers to gain relentless... an additional 10 point upgrade that gives them Slow And Purposeful and a 2+ save would be pretty useful AND fluffy. Throw in additional weapon options (Tesla Cannon for 0 points, Particle Beamer for 0 points, Heat Beamer (melta/flamer) for 5 points, Transdimensional Beamer for 10 points) and you'd have a really good unit, though not quite broken, that fits the fluff really well (Destroyers are upgrade junkies, so it would make more sense if they had a TON of upgrade options instead of... 2).)
That would require a new box, which could be cool too. Destroyers are one of the few units I could like with more options.
Relentless could be given by Phaeron in some way or the other, though I am still secretly hoping that they change this ability or make it worthwhile in another way.
Do note that the Transcendent C'Tan is provided with (and usually utilized with) a flyer/hover base, so is normally a few inches taller.
skoffs wrote: "Oh well, I guess GW feels they've made enough money selling Necron models and have decided they don't want any more now, if the stuff in this book is any indication." - Me, when I retire my army if the codex turns out the way we're fearing it will
I dunno, there's a few models that only need slight tweaks and then they'll be viable enough to be bought/used. Halve the prices on Lychguard/Praetorians and I'll make full squads of them. Ditto for Stalkers, I love the model and it'll only take a decent buff to make me buy another.
Do note that the Transcendent C'Tan is provided with (and usually utilized with) a flyer/hover base, so is normally a few inches taller.
skoffs wrote: "Oh well, I guess GW feels they've made enough money selling Necron models and have decided they don't want any more now, if the stuff in this book is any indication." - Me, when I retire my army if the codex turns out the way we're fearing it will
I dunno, there's a few models that only need slight tweaks and then they'll be viable enough to be bought/used. Halve the prices on Lychguard/Praetorians and I'll make full squads of them. Ditto for Stalkers, I love the model and it'll only take a decent buff to make me buy another.
adamsouza wrote: When you say flying base, do you mean big oval one like the Scythes come one, 32mm like jump pack troops, or 50/60mm like Canopteck Spyders ?
Oh, I guess Skimmer bases is better. Barge/Ark/Destroyer base.
adamsouza wrote: When you say flying base, do you mean big oval one like the Scythes come one, 32mm like jump pack troops, or 50/60mm like Canopteck Spyders ?
Oh, I guess Skimmer bases is better. Barge/Ark/Destroyer base.
adamsouza wrote: When you say flying base, do you mean big oval one like the Scythes come one, 32mm like jump pack troops, or 50/60mm like Canopteck Spyders ?
Oh, I guess Skimmer bases is better. Barge/Ark/Destroyer base.
Thats a Tomb Blade/Jet Bike base right?
It might be. The one in the box I got was the same my Destroyers came on. They might have used the Jetbike one for the website.
skoffs wrote: "Oh well, I guess GW feels they've made enough money selling Necron models and have decided they don't want any more now, if the stuff in this book is any indication." - Me, when I retire my army if the codex turns out the way we're fearing it will
Yeah. I have a number of boxes that I have yet to open that I plan of selling should the codex get gutted. Will I be a bit sad? Yeah, but I really don't want to suddenly be put back into the situation of the 3rd edition codex in power levels.
Now's probably as good a time as ever to ask a question I've had about the Newcrons for some time.
What exactly IS the scope of their new character? I still don't know. I know that some of them behave like the oldcrons and want to exterminate all life so I guess the meat of the question is what are the nicer Necrons like, and what happens to the places they conquer? Be specific, I understand they're all different.
Quarterdime wrote: Now's probably as good a time as ever to ask a question I've had about the Newcrons for some time.
What exactly IS the scope of their new character? I still don't know. I know that some of them behave like the oldcrons and want to exterminate all life so I guess the meat of the question is what are the nicer Necrons like, and what happens to the places they conquer? Be specific, I understand they're all different.
Some Necrons just want their Tomb Worlds back. They'll give the inhabitants time to evacuate the planet, and then they'll wake up the Tomb that's slumbering underneath it. Of course, saying "get off the planet or we'll kill all of you" isn't exactly nice, just more so than "you're on our planet so we're going to kill you". They don't care about other races so much as they tolerate them as part of the Galaxy that they think they own. It's not so much a "good" or "evil" thing.
Quarterdime wrote: Now's probably as good a time as ever to ask a question I've had about the Newcrons for some time.
What exactly IS the scope of their new character? I still don't know. I know that some of them behave like the oldcrons and want to exterminate all life so I guess the meat of the question is what are the nicer Necrons like, and what happens to the places they conquer? Be specific, I understand they're all different.
Some Necrons just want their Tomb Worlds back. They'll give the inhabitants time to evacuate the planet, and then they'll wake up the Tomb that's slumbering underneath it. Of course, saying "get off the planet or we'll kill all of you" isn't exactly nice, just more so than "you're on our planet so we're going to kill you". They don't care about other races so much as they tolerate them as part of the Galaxy that they think they own. It's not so much a "good" or "evil" thing.
So basically just like Humans in real life. Go anywhere and think we own everything on the planet and don't give a damn about the life that already lived there.
Quarterdime wrote: Now's probably as good a time as ever to ask a question I've had about the Newcrons for some time.
What exactly IS the scope of their new character? I still don't know. I know that some of them behave like the oldcrons and want to exterminate all life so I guess the meat of the question is what are the nicer Necrons like, and what happens to the places they conquer? Be specific, I understand they're all different.
Some Necrons just want their Tomb Worlds back. They'll give the inhabitants time to evacuate the planet, and then they'll wake up the Tomb that's slumbering underneath it. Of course, saying "get off the planet or we'll kill all of you" isn't exactly nice, just more so than "you're on our planet so we're going to kill you". They don't care about other races so much as they tolerate them as part of the Galaxy that they think they own. It's not so much a "good" or "evil" thing.
So basically just like Humans in real life. Go anywhere and think we own everything on the planet and don't give a damn about the life that already lived there.
Man the human race is evil.
Yeah, they're basically metal humans (or Eldar) now. The fluff claims they have no emotions, but they have expressed rage, jealousy, amusement, etc. Basic GW having contradicting fluff all over the place. But there are Necron Worlds that have regressed to basic machines, more or less Oldcron fluff.
The big thing during Shield of Baal is that the Silent King genuinely wants the human race to survive, even if he doesn't care about the individuals. He wants to preserve the universe - it's more or less the M.O. of the Necrons now, to maintain the universe as it once they retake their remaining Tomb Worlds. Or to return to flesh and blood bodies, we're not quite sure.
Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
I am not familiar with all the abilities of a Trans C'tan, but if he stacks up power wise to the big boys in other armies, the bigger base is entirely reasonable.
The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
If it gets to big I'll would be more difficult for it to be in the tesseract vault imo.
I fluff justify it as the T c'tan is a lot more dense because it is so many shards put back together.
I know this needs to be taken with more salt then the dead sea but i saw someone claim on 4chan that jan/feb is going to be necron/sister of battle santuary 101 type set up. But..... I've looked everywhere and haven't found bunk. Big time wishlister i'm gonna write it off as.
Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns? If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
They can live everywhere. The C'tan feed on suns as they are, as themselves, pure energy. Keep in mind that C'tan aren't corporeal beings, they are pure energy. They were given their Necrodermis by the Necrontyr because they needed their Gods to be corporeal leaders in the war. So technically, their Necrodermis would be destroyed when going into a sun, yet the C'tan itself cannot be destroyed or killed by doing so.
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
They can live everywhere. The C'tan feed on suns as they are, as themselves, pure energy. Keep in mind that C'tan aren't corporeal beings, they are pure energy. They were given their Necrodermis by the Necrontyr because they needed their Gods to be corporeal leaders in the war. So technically, their Necrodermis would be destroyed when going into a sun, yet the C'tan itself cannot be destroyed or killed by doing so.
Given how tough their Necrodermis is supposed to be I'm not at all sure merely dipping into the sun would destroy it, not to mention the fact that they're powerful reality warpers, meaning a C'tan could simply will the area around itself to be all nice and cozy (or made of cheese for that matter).
Given how tough their Necrodermis is supposed to be I'm not at all sure merely dipping into the sun would destroy it, not to mention the fact that they're powerful reality warpers, meaning a C'tan could simply will the area around itself to be all nice and cozy (or made of cheese for that matter).
The Necrodermis is a weird piece of fluff. On the one hand, it's destructible by regular weapons such as lascannons, but on the other hand, it contains pure energy and, in case of the C'tan, the most powerful beings in the corporeal universe. So I'd say that a sun would definitely melt the Necrodermis.
BUUUUUT you do have an excellent point - given their power, a C'Tan could warp the environment just around the Necrodermis to avoid it being destroyed, yet still be able to harness the sun's energy. Very good point, exalted.
It was smarter if we did this two years ago from the start, but we couldn't predict Formations like we have now.
I gave a warning in the BS thread, but again: Sorry, I had no choice.
perrsyu wrote: It was smarter if we did this two years ago from the start, but we couldn't predict Formations like we have now.
I gave a warning in the BS thread, but again: Sorry, I had no choice.
perrsyu wrote: It was smarter if we did this two years ago from the start, but we couldn't predict Formations like we have now.
I gave a warning in the BS thread, but again: Sorry, I had no choice.
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
You purchased the Tesseract vault or Bitz?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
So you are saying an aircraft carrier is more powerful than a nuclear bomb, since it's bigger?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The C'tan is nearly identical in size to the Forge world Gargantuan GUO. Just because inferior races create mechanical, bio mechanical or organic monstrosities that pale in comparison to a god like entity that can will reality around it, does not justify the size comparison one way or the other. Or think of it as the Dr. Manhattan of the 40k universe, if it so chooses it can be large, small, or operate as many small autonomous entires.
A giant Transcendent C'tan wouldn't make much sense, however. They can freely change their form at will, so being this small is a good compromise between a skyscraper-ish model and a tiny, untargettable dot.
I'm using a Doctor Manhattan Model that stands as tall as a Knight Titan. Not only does it look cool, it neatly avoids any arguments about me modelling for advantage with it. I'm also going to rebase it to the oval flyer base.
That being said, I've also made sure my terrain collection includes lots of terrain tall enough to give a monolith/Knight Titan sized model cover
Anpu-adom wrote: The Silent King's Faction (In Word of the Silent King) put it this way:
Humans Create
Necrons Preserve
Tyranids Consume
He seems to want to preserve the sentient races.
In the short story "the word of the silent king" it seems like he wants to preserve humanity to have something to rule over once the necrons come to power. Seems legit
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
You purchased the Tesseract vault or Bitz?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
So you are saying an aircraft carrier is more powerful than a nuclear bomb, since it's bigger?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The C'tan is nearly identical in size to the Forge world Gargantuan GUO. Just because inferior races create mechanical, bio mechanical or organic monstrosities that pale in comparison to a god like entity that can will reality around it, does not justify the size comparison one way or the other. Or think of it as the Dr. Manhattan of the 40k universe, if it so chooses it can be large, small, or operate as many small autonomous entires.
Sorry but I just have to say those two are not even CLOSE to identical in size. I can only hope you were being sarcastic.
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
You purchased the Tesseract vault or Bitz?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
So you are saying an aircraft carrier is more powerful than a nuclear bomb, since it's bigger?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The C'tan is nearly identical in size to the Forge world Gargantuan GUO. Just because inferior races create mechanical, bio mechanical or organic monstrosities that pale in comparison to a god like entity that can will reality around it, does not justify the size comparison one way or the other. Or think of it as the Dr. Manhattan of the 40k universe, if it so chooses it can be large, small, or operate as many small autonomous entires.
Sorry but I just have to say those two are not even CLOSE to identical in size. I can only hope you were being sarcastic.
I concur. The C'tan is smaller and trimmer. And, the base size means something. Less things can get in base to base contact with the C'tan.
The size doesn't matter from a fluff perspective, and is very cool in fact. But in game, it really matters. First, for your opponents, they expect a massive thing to stomp all over their armies, but it's kind of annoying to them when this model that's the size of a Dreadnaught does the same. Second, as mentioned, the T-C'tan can hide behind a tree. A Revnant Titan, Imperial Knight, Harridan, or Baneblade generally cannot. Being unable to target the most powerful model in a book because they put a Monolith in front of it is somewhat problematic.
I don't see why. The Vindicare Assasin, for example, the old one, was about the best anti-vehicle unit out there and just killed everything with a single shot. Yet it was a single infantry model. Should it have been a giant MC?
I don't see how model size is supposed to reflect a model's actual strength on the battlefield. By the same logic, a C'Tan shard should be the size of a regular infantry unit, Necron Destroyers should be the size of Tau Drones, Sentry Pylons should be the size of regular Pylons etc. etc.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't see why. The Vindicare Assasin, for example, the old one, was about the best anti-vehicle unit out there and just killed everything with a single shot. Yet it was a single infantry model. Should it have been a giant MC?
I don't see how model size is supposed to reflect a model's actual strength on the battlefield. By the same logic, a C'Tan shard should be the size of a regular infantry unit, Necron Destroyers should be the size of Tau Drones, Sentry Pylons should be the size of regular Pylons etc. etc.
"Size equals strength" is a dead end.
Holy False comparison batman.
A vindicare is easily killed and requires LOS with a heavy weapon to pop a tank. A TC can just bounce over an obstacle and one shot something before an opponent can react whatsoever AND is tougher then 2 dollar steak.
At any rate, I wasn't saying the TC was too small to be a GMC but was calling into question how someone can keep a straight face while they tell me the model is nearly identical in size to a forge world GUO. Hilarious. Again, maybe he was being sarcastic.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't see why. The Vindicare Assasin, for example, the old one, was about the best anti-vehicle unit out there and just killed everything with a single shot. Yet it was a single infantry model. Should it have been a giant MC?
I don't see how model size is supposed to reflect a model's actual strength on the battlefield. By the same logic, a C'Tan shard should be the size of a regular infantry unit, Necron Destroyers should be the size of Tau Drones, Sentry Pylons should be the size of regular Pylons etc. etc.
"Size equals strength" is a dead end.
Holy False comparison batman.
A vindicare is easily killed and requires LOS with a heavy weapon to pop a tank. A TC can just bounce over an obstacle and one shot something before an opponent can react whatsoever AND is tougher then 2 dollar steak.
At any rate, I wasn't saying the TC was too small to be a GMC but was calling into question how someone can keep a straight face while they tell me the model is nearly identical in size to a forge world GUO. Hilarious. Again, maybe he was being sarcastic.
Either way Gargantuan Monstrous Creature makes certain promises that the model doesn't keep...
Sigvatr wrote: I don't see why. The Vindicare Assasin, for example, the old one, was about the best anti-vehicle unit out there and just killed everything with a single shot. Yet it was a single infantry model. Should it have been a giant MC?
I don't see how model size is supposed to reflect a model's actual strength on the battlefield. By the same logic, a C'Tan shard should be the size of a regular infantry unit, Necron Destroyers should be the size of Tau Drones, Sentry Pylons should be the size of regular Pylons etc. etc.
"Size equals strength" is a dead end.
Horrible comparison. The Vindicare Assassin gets one shot per turn, costs about a quarter as much, and dies to pretty much any amount of focus fire. The T-C'tan deals out Apocalyptic Blasts and Mega-blasts, Hellstorm Templates, and 6d6 shots, is immune to small-arms fire, and can't be ID'd. A T-C'tan is comparable in stats to a Revenant Titan or a Lord of Skulls, able to murder half an army in a single go, not a single Infantry model with a gun.
I got a Hecatondies Zero Sigma from the Anima Tactics line that I have to assemble and and paint still to use as my C'tan. Debating on keeping the wings on or not.
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
You purchased the Tesseract vault or Bitz?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
So you are saying an aircraft carrier is more powerful than a nuclear bomb, since it's bigger?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The C'tan is nearly identical in size to the Forge world Gargantuan GUO. Just because inferior races create mechanical, bio mechanical or organic monstrosities that pale in comparison to a god like entity that can will reality around it, does not justify the size comparison one way or the other. Or think of it as the Dr. Manhattan of the 40k universe, if it so chooses it can be large, small, or operate as many small autonomous entires.
Sorry but I just have to say those two are not even CLOSE to identical in size. I can only hope you were being sarcastic.
I concur. The C'tan is smaller and trimmer. And, the base size means something. Less things can get in base to base contact with the C'tan.
The size doesn't matter from a fluff perspective, and is very cool in fact. But in game, it really matters. First, for your opponents, they expect a massive thing to stomp all over their armies, but it's kind of annoying to them when this model that's the size of a Dreadnaught does the same. Second, as mentioned, the T-C'tan can hide behind a tree. A Revnant Titan, Imperial Knight, Harridan, or Baneblade generally cannot. Being unable to target the most powerful model in a book because they put a Monolith in front of it is somewhat problematic.
RivenSkull wrote: I got a Hecatondies Zero Sigma from the Anima Tactics line that I have to assemble and and paint still to use as my C'tan. Debating on keeping the wings on or not.
Example, not mine:
Void Dragon? Perhaps. May need more tech Anima tentacles for the ladies....
And regardless anybody's argument about the C'tan being able to hide is bs. This game has numerous units that can Deepstrike without scattering. Drop pod armies have massive immunity from mishaping. If you build a list to counter the C'tan you can kill it. Thunderwolve cav also make quick work of the C'tan. There are plenty of counters to it. What there aren't counters to are the ridiculously over powered builds that are already legal in 40k. Wave serpent spam, ad lance, drop pod spam, biker armies of super friends, etc. many of which only have one solid counter and that's the T. C'tan.
Kangodo wrote: Don't these C'tans live on suns?
If I remember my physics right, they have to be 'small' to survive stuff like that.
NecronLord3 wrote: Small flight base isn't provided with the model. The flight stand is obviously for the Vault/Obleisk only. The only legal way per tourneys like Adepticon is to field it on the large flight base(stem of your choice).
It was provided with my model.
You purchased the Tesseract vault or Bitz?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: The larger skimmer base (Arks/Barges/Destroyers) is slightly larger than Terminator bases, slightly smaller than Monstrous Creature bases, iirc. Don't have them in front of me at the moment.
Either way, it should realistically be larger. Heck, the whole model should be larger, given the relative power level. It can stand toe to toe with things like Revenant Titans or Hierodules and kick their butts, but it's only slightly smaller than a Daemon Prince or so. I feel like it would be much more widely accepted if it wasn't small enough to hide behind a Bastion.
So you are saying an aircraft carrier is more powerful than a nuclear bomb, since it's bigger?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The C'tan is nearly identical in size to the Forge world Gargantuan GUO. Just because inferior races create mechanical, bio mechanical or organic monstrosities that pale in comparison to a god like entity that can will reality around it, does not justify the size comparison one way or the other. Or think of it as the Dr. Manhattan of the 40k universe, if it so chooses it can be large, small, or operate as many small autonomous entires.
Sorry but I just have to say those two are not even CLOSE to identical in size. I can only hope you were being sarcastic.
I concur. The C'tan is smaller and trimmer. And, the base size means something. Less things can get in base to base contact with the C'tan.
The size doesn't matter from a fluff perspective, and is very cool in fact. But in game, it really matters. First, for your opponents, they expect a massive thing to stomp all over their armies, but it's kind of annoying to them when this model that's the size of a Dreadnaught does the same. Second, as mentioned, the T-C'tan can hide behind a tree. A Revnant Titan, Imperial Knight, Harridan, or Baneblade generally cannot. Being unable to target the most powerful model in a book because they put a Monolith in front of it is somewhat problematic.
They have nearly the same LoS silhouette.
LOL, by using that technique I can make my dog the same size as an elephant!
Besides, much of the C'Tan model would be disregarded for LOS purposes.
Oberron wrote: If it gets to big I'll would be more difficult for it to be in the tesseract vault imo.
I fluff justify it as the T c'tan is a lot more dense because it is so many shards put back together.
I know this needs to be taken with more salt then the dead sea but i saw someone claim on 4chan that jan/feb is going to be necron/sister of battle santuary 101 type set up. But..... I've looked everywhere and haven't found bunk. Big time wishlister i'm gonna write it off as.
I love the fact that the TC is like a heavy element. I like to think that the TC is composed of "degenerative matter". A particle term in physics defining super dense matter compressed to the near breaking point of the orbits of subatomic particles. Matter found at the heart of singularies, white dwarves, etc. C'tans were sentient, primordial energy essences tied to the very fabric of the universe. GW gave them as sort of Galactus spin, except instead of eating high calorie planets, TCS ate STARS! Any fracture of a creature that ate stars for an appetizer gets a pass on size and power in my ledger.
They one thing I love to see changed in the TC is that instead of having various, but similar apocalypse blast options, that they are exchanged for thematic utility powers in the same spirit of stuff like Writhering Worldscape, Grand Illusion, Sentient Singularity, so on and so forth, but on an apocalypse scale. Either combining some of the aforementioned effects or adding an effect to some firepower. And honestly, how does phase shift technology have a better save than the entity they have sourced it from? I know our tech is supposed to be far superior to any of the existing races, but replicating an effect better than a cosmic god is blasphemous.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NecronLord3 wrote: And regardless anybody's argument about the C'tan being able to hide is bs. This game has numerous units that can Deepstrike without scattering. Drop pod armies have massive immunity from mishaping. If you build a list to counter the C'tan you can kill it. Thunderwolve cav also make quick work of the C'tan. There are plenty of counters to it. What there aren't counters to are the ridiculously over powered builds that are already legal in 40k. Wave serpent spam, ad lance, drop pod spam, biker armies of super friends, etc. many of which only have one solid counter and that's the T. C'tan.
Hahaha. Or how about an invisible Eldar Lynx w/ pulsar and multilaser sitting on a skyshield firing off 2 60' rng hvy blast D Str atts that are twin linked for under 450 pts (skyshield and spiritseer not included)?
NecronLord3 wrote: And regardless anybody's argument about the C'tan being able to hide is bs. This game has numerous units that can Deepstrike without scattering. Drop pod armies have massive immunity from mishaping. If you build a list to counter the C'tan you can kill it. Thunderwolve cav also make quick work of the C'tan. There are plenty of counters to it. What there aren't counters to are the ridiculously over powered builds that are already legal in 40k. Wave serpent spam, ad lance, drop pod spam, biker armies of super friends, etc. many of which only have one solid counter and that's the T. C'tan.
All of those things can be countered if you build a list to counter it. And much more easily than the T-C'tan in most cases.
I'm not saying the T-C'tan is the most broken model in the game, but the size is a problem, and it's one of the main reasons most tournaments don't allow it on the table. I love mine and I don't want it nerfed, I'm just pointing things out from a (hopefully) neutral angle. The weapons are appropriately costed, he has counters, but compared to other models of the same points cost and power level, the size discrepancy gives him a clear and relatively large edge.
No... it's size isn't the main reason that TO's don't allow it. 18 inch lines of D hits, followed by 6D6 missile shots at one unit and a hellstorm D template (at completely different units) in a S9 T9 body with feel no pain and almost a complete disregard of poison weapons as well. The size is almost a non-issue since almost the exactly same arguments are used against the Phantom Titan (which is much larger, size-wise).
Anpu-adom wrote: No... it's size isn't the main reason that TO's don't allow it. 18 inch lines of D hits, followed by 6D6 missile shots at one unit and a hellstorm D template (at completely different units) in a S9 T9 body with feel no pain and almost a complete disregard of poison weapons as well. The size is almost a non-issue since almost the exactly same arguments are used against the Phantom Titan (which is much larger, size-wise).
Right since Ad Lance is just so under powered by comparison.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote:
LOL, by using that technique I can make my dog the same size as an elephant!
Besides, much of the C'Tan model would be disregarded for LOS purposes.
Those models are base to base with one another. That is not a perspective trick, like you are suggesting.
How so? I can see plenty of the GUO behind the C'tan. If you can see the model behind it, then line of sight is not blocked.
On top of that, it could also be argued that the energy 'frills' fall under the category of "wings, tails and antennae" and would not block line of sight.
Ghaz wrote: How so? I can see plenty of the GUO behind the C'tan. If you can see the model behind it, then line of sight is not blocked.
On top of that, it could also be argued that the energy 'frills' fall under the category of "wings, tails and antennae" and would not block line of sight.
I never suggested that the C'tan blocks LoS to the GUO, but that both are equally visible on the tabletop with regards to LoS. Everyone argues that the T. C'an is to small to be a GC when a tent poll model for what is a GC is practically the same size as the C'tan.
Anpu-adom wrote: No... it's size isn't the main reason that TO's don't allow it. 18 inch lines of D hits, followed by 6D6 missile shots at one unit and a hellstorm D template (at completely different units) in a S9 T9 body with feel no pain and almost a complete disregard of poison weapons as well. The size is almost a non-issue since almost the exactly same arguments are used against the Phantom Titan (which is much larger, size-wise).
Right since Ad Lance is just so under powered by comparison.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote:
LOL, by using that technique I can make my dog the same size as an elephant!
Besides, much of the C'Tan model would be disregarded for LOS purposes.
Those models are base to base with one another. That is not a perspective trick, like you are suggesting.
Regardless, putting something in front of another artificially increases the size, it's called perspective. The only difference between my dog/elephant example and your picture is the distances involved, and as Gaz says, and as I already mentioned, large portions of the C'Tan don't count for LOS purposes and don't block LOS anyway.
Yours is a fallacious argument and it's best dropped as being OT and wrong.
No your size argument is total bull gak. There are plenty of examples of Monstrous creatures that are vastly larger than Gargantuan creatures. Size means nothing, there is plenty of potency and power in this regardless of their size. Any it's also a bull gak argument that it can hide considering how much precision deepstriking units that are legal in this game.
NecronLord3 wrote: No your size argument is total bull gak.... Size means nothing, there is plenty of potency and power in this regardless of their size.
Out of context, this might be my favorite quote for 2014
On topic, or maybe still off , your comparison is garbage dude. Hilarious and hot trash in fact. It's such a bad comparison that I genuinely thought you were being cleverly sarcastic. The fact that you have no idea what perspective is should explain away most of your ranting.
NecronLord3 wrote: No your size argument is total bull gak.... Size means nothing, there is plenty of potency and power in this regardless of their size.
Out of context, this might be my favorite quote for 2014
On topic, or maybe still off , your comparison is garbage dude. Hilarious and hot trash in fact. It's such a bad comparison that I genuinely thought you were being cleverly sarcastic. The fact that you have no idea what perspective is should explain away most of your ranting.
No I own both models. And side by side they take up just as much table space. They can or can't behind all the same pieces of terrain and models.
Are Wraithknights now GC because they are twice the size of a Wraithlord? Is a Heirodule now a MC because it's smaller than a Mowloc?
NecronLord3 wrote: No I own both models. And side by side they take up just as much table space.
'Table space' is meaningless. We don't use the 'magic cylinder' to determine line of sight. The GUO occupies a greater volume of space, period. Reverse your picture and tell us how much of the C'tan you can see behind the GUO.
NecronLord3 wrote: No I own both models. And side by side they take up just as much table space.
'Table space' is meaningless. We don't use the 'magic cylinder' to determine line of sight. The GUO occupies a greater volume of space, period. Reverse your picture and tell us how much of the C'tan you can see behind the GUO.
NecronLord3 wrote: No I own both models. And side by side they take up just as much table space.
'Table space' is meaningless. We don't use the 'magic cylinder' to determine line of sight. The GUO occupies a greater volume of space, period. Reverse your picture and tell us how much of the C'tan you can see behind the GUO.
Like this?
Spoiler:
If you honestly can't tell the difference between those two pictures then you're either trolling or delusional.
What was the point of this argument again? I think it got lost somewhere because I have no idea what either side is arguing for at this point.
The TC isn't big enough? Bigger = stronger now? Couldn't a TC theoretically be any size it wanted to be as it's a being made of pure energy? Why does any of this matter or have anything at all to do with the rumored impending Necron update?
Sidstyler wrote: What was the point of this argument again? I think it got lost somewhere because I have no idea what either side is arguing for at this point.
The TC isn't big enough? Bigger = stronger now? Couldn't a TC theoretically be any size it wanted to be as it's a being made of pure energy? Why does any of this matter or have anything at all to do with the rumored impending Necron update?
Having my son dress up in his Optimus prime Halloween costume and stomp around on the table would be ideal then
via Nostromodamus on 12-27-2014
There will be a plastic Cryptek along with a new Destroyer Lord. That is all I am aware of for Necrons at this time. Don’t count on too many new units until the ranges are fully converted to plastic.
Also, on GW site, both the lord with res orb and cryptek are both listed as unavailable. This generally hints at what is being possibly removed and replaced. So, I can see plastic clampacks for either or both of an overlord and cryptek. Warriors will be reboxed with new bases, and maybe another unit will too.
I say 50/50 on supplement. Xenos have been getting the supplements, but after exterminatus I'm not sure they would release another one.
Hopefully they'll finally make separate kits for Warriors and Scarabs- it's not as if either of the two is so unpopular that it wouldn't get sold if it wasn't bundled with the other and, aside from being in the same army, they have absolutely nothing to do with one another.
Galorian wrote: Hopefully they'll finally make separate kits for Warriors and Scarabs- it's not as if either of the two is so unpopular that it wouldn't get sold if it wasn't bundled with the other and, aside from being in the same army, they have absolutely nothing to do with one another.
Yeah, scarabs aren't even troops anymore. They shouldn't be in the same box.
I kind of hope scarabs no longer take any slots. They are meant to be the most numerous part of a (traditional) necron army, after warriors.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, scarabs aren't even troops anymore. They shouldn't be in the same box.
I kind of hope scarabs no longer take any slots. They are meant to be the most numerous part of a (traditional) necron army, after warriors.
Scarabs have always been fast attack. They weren't swarms in their first incarnation, but they've always been fast attack.
Slotless wouldn't really make sense unless maybe you can take a free slot of Scarabs for every Spyder unit. I definately wouldn't count on that one though.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, scarabs aren't even troops anymore. They shouldn't be in the same box.
I kind of hope scarabs no longer take any slots. They are meant to be the most numerous part of a (traditional) necron army, after warriors.
Scarabs have always been fast attack. They weren't swarms in their first incarnation, but they've always been fast attack.
Slotless wouldn't really make sense unless maybe you can take a free slot of Scarabs for every Spyder unit. I definately wouldn't count on that one though.
Oh wow I think you are right. No idea why I thought they were troops.
Memory is a bitch.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, scarabs aren't even troops anymore. They shouldn't be in the same box.
I kind of hope scarabs no longer take any slots. They are meant to be the most numerous part of a (traditional) necron army, after warriors.
Scarabs have always been fast attack. They weren't swarms in their first incarnation, but they've always been fast attack.
Slotless wouldn't really make sense unless maybe you can take a free slot of Scarabs for every Spyder unit. I definately wouldn't count on that one though.
Oh wow I think you are right. No idea why I thought they were troops.
Memory is a bitch.
As someone who in the last few months bought fifty scarab bases on ebay with an obsessive desire to keep them four per base to maximise the horde look...
I'd have to say, it'd be just my luck if they brought out a ten scarab base box.
changemod wrote: As someone who in the last few months bought fifty scarab bases on ebay with an obsessive desire to keep them four per base to maximise the horde look...
I'd have to say, it'd be just my luck if they brought out a ten scarab base box.
changemod wrote: As someone who in the last few months bought fifty scarab bases on ebay with an obsessive desire to keep them four per base to maximise the horde look...
I'd have to say, it'd be just my luck if they brought out a ten scarab base box.
I put 3 Scarabs per base, but find that if you build up the base a little you still get the feel of Scarabs swarming over things. I'd love to post pics, but I'm at work and don't have the proper ability. In the meantime, here's a link to my blog showing the first batch of Scarabs I've painted in my current scheme...
I've looked at the pics of the warriors released with Exterminatus and I'm convinced that it's not a conversion. Things are just a bit too perfect. Being that the arms, guns (minus the front bit) and scarabs are on one sprue while the legs, chest front and back, and heads are on the other. They could release a box with half recut/new sprues (with a suitable price increase).
More likely, they'll recut the warrior sprues... take out some of the empty space on them. Then the'll be able to sell 5 warriors for the price of 12.
Anpu-adom wrote: I've looked at the pics of the warriors released with Exterminatus and I'm convinced that it's not a conversion. Things are just a bit too perfect. Being that the arms, guns (minus the front bit) and scarabs are on one sprue while the legs, chest front and back, and heads are on the other. They could release a box with half recut/new sprues (with a suitable price increase).
More likely, they'll recut the warrior sprues... take out some of the empty space on them. Then the'll be able to sell 5 warriors for the price of 12.
I know what you mean about them being pretty darn perfect... but keep in mind that these models are being converted and assembled by the in house GW studio. These are hobbyists who are GOOD at what they do. They get paid to do this 40+ hours a week. If they couldn't make the models look perfect, they shouldn't be working at GW.
I'm inclined to believe that these are conversions. The conversion method was actually in the White Dwarf, which lends a HUGE amount of believability. If it was an entirely new sprue, why not update the rest of the model and not just the little gun bit. It's important to remember that while the arms/guns appear to be on one sprue while the legs appear to be on another, the reality is that it's one big sprue that is "snapped" in half to fit in the box. If they update one bit, they'd be likely to update the rest. One possible option is that the models remain the way they are with the green rods being replaced with a "plastic rods sprue" and that's what we're seeing.
Want? No...
Expect us to be Dire Avenger-ed? Always.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I too do the 3 scarabs per base business. Then I also have some with 2 and 1... I use them as wound counters for the squad. When one base takes damage, I just swap it out for the one that has the appropriate number of scarabs on it.
adamsouza wrote: We are essentially getting scarabs for free with warrior boxes and battle forces. Why would you want them to end that and charge us for them ?
Nurglings are $5 a base, and scarabs go for less than that on the secondary market.
Do you have any idea how many warriors I'd have needed to buy if I hadn't stopped to repainting pre-assembled ones?
200.
With my preference for Immortals, I barely have any use for twenty of the things.
If I could have gotten first hand ones alone instead of compromising, I would have.
adamsouza wrote: We are essentially getting scarabs for free with warrior boxes and battle forces. Why would you want them to end that and charge us for them ?
Nurglings are $5 a base, and scarabs go for less than that on the secondary market.
Anpu-adom wrote: I've looked at the pics of the warriors released with Exterminatus and I'm convinced that it's not a conversion. Things are just a bit too perfect. Being that the arms, guns (minus the front bit) and scarabs are on one sprue while the legs, chest front and back, and heads are on the other. They could release a box with half recut/new sprues (with a suitable price increase).
More likely, they'll recut the warrior sprues... take out some of the empty space on them. Then the'll be able to sell 5 warriors for the price of 12.
I know what you mean about them being pretty darn perfect... but keep in mind that these models are being converted and assembled by the in house GW studio. These are hobbyists who are GOOD at what they do. They get paid to do this 40+ hours a week. If they couldn't make the models look perfect, they shouldn't be working at GW.
I'm inclined to believe that these are conversions. The conversion method was actually in the White Dwarf, which lends a HUGE amount of believability. If it was an entirely new sprue, why not update the rest of the model and not just the little gun bit. It's important to remember that while the arms/guns appear to be on one sprue while the legs appear to be on another, the reality is that it's one big sprue that is "snapped" in half to fit in the box. If they update one bit, they'd be likely to update the rest. One possible option is that the models remain the way they are with the green rods being replaced with a "plastic rods sprue" and that's what we're seeing.
All of the " new" necron models seen in Exterminus are in fact conversions. I am familiar with all the parts. The warrior rifles are from the ghost/doomsday ark gauss flyer arrays. The Edge of Eternity's (wielded by Zarathusa the Ineffable) blade is cut from a vehicle control counsel. The other gem-like part of the staff between the blade and shaft, along with the identical piece on the belt buckle is a bit used on a good number of Necron vehicles. The tabard is just cut from an Overlord's cape. The head piece addition is another vehicle bit.
Btw, the c'tan that's fighting the Hierophant in the book is referred to as a shard, even though it's a Transcendent model. The model is without flying stem, having its feet touch the base.
). The 
