To Yakface:

Thank you very much for the updates on the rumors.

I will be placing my 3000 point Necron Raider Army (yes the all pewter ones that had the Terminator/Egyptian look to them) that I still win in competitive play back in my display case. It is not worth the chance of damaging them in game play to a codex like this (if the rumors are mostly correct).

Seems like the new revision of the Nercons will be an Almost... Almost as good as the newer MEQ Armies, and it will cost you money to get to that "Almost as good" status.

Worglock wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:And it appears Immortals will be getting the 'Plastic Stealth Suit' treatment - ie. they're already popular, but to further increase sales they'll make a completely new kit for them that doesn't match the old one, probably with new options that, again, won't be at all compatable with the old model. And they'll put 'em in a box of 5 and charge as much as a Tac Squad for 'em.

And it's a perfect sell. Make 'em Troops, make Warriors weaker, everyone goes to buy the stronger troops.

Selling Models > Better Game @ GW!

If by "popular" you mean "no one really plays the army at all" then yes, they're popular. Hugely popular.

I look forward to the teeming masses of army hoppers spending their money on Knee-Korns and then selling them off within weeks because the army is either sub-par or MNightWarded to the point that no one will play them.

There are quite a few Necron players down at my FLGS (3, possibly 4 and all regular customers). Immortals always make an appearance (of course along with the Nightbringer). I would hardly call them unpopular with Necron players given their current stats and firepower. Having to use a Railgun or a vindicator to make sure they don't get back up and blast you next turn is a pain for opponents.

As for immortals, I think a box of 3 or perhaps a box of 5 depending on how many options they have. Ideally I would be looking for a box of 10 but that seems like wishlisting.

Sasori wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:

Sasori wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:

ashikenshin wrote:I think scarabs got the biggest boost of all. A squad of 5 scarabs could potentially destroy a vehicle that didn't move the previous turn... in one assault.

Actually, just reread the scarabs rumor and apparently I missed the vehicle thing...nevermind what I said about disruption fields I still dislike the movement change. Until you get in charge range, you are still plodding along at 6" + d6" a turn. Though it will be nice though to see a swarm model in the game that people actually might fear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What are people's thoughts on using old and new Immortals? I have a unit of ten now and would probably add another unit of 10 new ones. how much of a fit would people throw over having both on the board when they will (probably) have two different base sizes?

I would say it would depend on the individual person. That's understandable right after release, but I think after a prolonged amount of time, it's either time to rebase them, or get some new models.

I wouldn't have a problem rebasing them, I'm just concerned about some beardy player trying to call them out as illegal since they wouldn't be on the bases they came with. Have to see what the new ones look like, but I really like my current ones.

Well, I wouldn't call the player beardy since technically it is against the rules, and will really depend on the player. I'd say it'd be a no no for any tournaments as well. You know your local gaming scene better than anyone, and should know the people you could test with.

Well, there is nothing actually illegal about using the old (current) models. Putting them on a 40mm base would be less advantageous to me than leaving them on a 25mm as they are not really built for assault (as far as we can tell..that could change in the new dex), so the only reason to actually call me out for switching them to a larger base(which has been done primarily for the other player's benefit) is to screw me out of using the unit at all...which is a beardy move imo.

Kevin949 wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:

ashikenshin wrote:I think scarabs got the biggest boost of all. A squad of 5 scarabs could potentially destroy a vehicle that didn't move the previous turn... in one assault.

Actually, just reread the scarabs rumor and apparently I missed the vehicle thing...nevermind what I said about disruption fields I still dislike the movement change. Until you get in charge range, you are still plodding along at 6" + d6" a turn. Though it will be nice though to see a swarm model in the game that people actually might fear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What are people's thoughts on using old and new Immortals? I have a unit of ten now and would probably add another unit of 10 new ones. how much of a fit would people throw over having both on the board when they will (probably) have two different base sizes?

Not to mention that they get WBB as well now. Also remembering that you can't think they're exactly the same as they are now with just some additions. I'm sure they're getting a stats change and other stuff too.

Actually I had already edited the original comment on scarabs to take WBB into consideration. On the stat changes, there is nothing in the rumors about them. Doesn't mean there will or will not be changes, but we have no info on it either way, so I can only comment on what's been rumored. All my feelings on these rumors are subject to change upon release of an actual dex

dancingcricket wrote:

However -
With cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are currently
Without cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are now
In hand to hand - necrons will be less durable than they are now, not taking power weapons and such into account.

Their price dropped 33%.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

dancingcricket wrote:

However -
With cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are currently
Without cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are now
In hand to hand - necrons will be less durable than they are now, not taking power weapons and such into account.

Their price dropped 33%.

What good is more of them if they still get wiped out if they are charged once? I guess it depends if you get to take the new WBB save before you factor in the combat resolution modifier, which could make a big difference.

RobPro wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

dancingcricket wrote:

However -
With cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are currently
Without cover saves, necrons will be less durable than they are now
In hand to hand - necrons will be less durable than they are now, not taking power weapons and such into account.

Their price dropped 33%.

What good is more of them if they still get wiped out if they are charged once?

Why would you assume to make Warrior units deeper with the savings? I find the idea of 40 Necron Warriors for 480 points quite daunting.

I'm really liking this new set of rumours! Call me bonkers, but I think their fluff needs a shake up. This is sounding like they are empowering the Necrons to be an independant race that can function by itself without the C'tan.

From what I'm hearing, some people wanted Codex: C'tan? With soo few C'tan currently around after them feeding on each other, doesn't it make sense the Necrontyr themselves now have more freedom? I'd like to see more focus on the Necrontyr themselves and how they function after being 'cursed' to functional immortality. The idea of the C'tan was interesting and cool, but should have stayed in the backround fluff, I feel it dominated the codex, Necrons as a race or entity of their own were stripped of any intelligence or decision making, made out to be brain dead zombies that the C'tan used like puppets to go on soul harvesting sprees.

As for the stats leaked here, until the everliving rule is expanded, the effect of monoliths or other vehicles resurrection expanded, and the res orb itself (and who can have it) is expanded, and the points costs of these vehicles and upgrades can be looked at, decrying your standard Necron warrior as obsolete or nerfed, is premature at best.

The negativity and unwillingness to even consider change to a fairly unestablished race is truely surprising for me. I liked that the fall of damnos gave the necrons themselves personality and I really hope this is expanded in the codex, even if it's at the expense of the cannibal star eaters getting pushed WAAAY into the backround, where I think they should have always been.

If they can take tesla weapons then gunline Warriors can probably put out enough shots to dampen any charge efforts against them, assuming Tesla weapons work the way Yakface detailed it. A squad of 30 warriors rapidfiring can potentially put out 89 S4 AP5 shots (unless the Tesla ability only works the first time around, and subsequent bonus hits do not generate more To Hit rolls, in which case it's gonna be only 80 shots). It also comes to a comfortable 360 points for 30 near-MEQ bodies. However this means that Warriors are exceptionally susceptable to Heavy Flamers and the kind. Hopefully Crypteks can

Sectiplave wrote:I'm really liking this new set of rumours! Call me bonkers, but I think their fluff needs a shake up. This is sounding like they are empowering the Necrons to be an independant race that can function by itself without the C'tan.
(...)
The negativity and unwillingness to even consider change to a fairly unestablished race is truely surprising for me. I liked that the fall of damnos gave the necrons themselves personality and I really hope this is expanded in the codex, even if it's at the expense of the cannibal star eaters getting pushed WAAAY into the backround, where I think they should have always been.

Well, what bothers me is not that they go to the background. It's the complete retcon of a piece of fluff that I like that bothers me. The theory that the shards are the eaten-ones and not the 'big four' is cool, however, and I hope it will turn like that. But I also remember when the first rumors about GK appeared and nobody wanted to believe the sillyness of those... So, I don't know.

IMHO, the Necron Lords always had personnality, it was just that we had not enough sources to see it.

im standing by my fear. if matt ward is writing this dex, the fluff will stink (and no doubt be riddled with contradictions, holes and `just cause` explanations. the rules will be worse, and come relase we will see YMDC full of questions on how his random rules actually work. things like teleportation, and other things will create gross crazy combos leading to massive debate. plus, im still expecting them to get some sort of storm raven equivilant unit.

models will probally look decent, as latley the sculpting team at GW has done really impressive work (DE, TK, GK, and so on.)

but otherwise expect nothing short of bad from ward, creating an extremly OP dex, with tons of FAQ required to clean up his mess, and fluff that dosent make sense

If the Scarabs really work like Yak posted then that will be very unfortunate. Tracking which physical model in a given unit has lost it's armor is going to be obnoxious, will cause even more wound allocation issues, and is a step backwards for the game as a whole (like most of 5th ed)

Would be better off giving them a power that just lets them mark the unit and other 'crons can ignore their armor saves, since that's all the rule is really trying to do anyway.

I disagree with the Scarabs and tracking armor saves being aggravating. How many models are you going to have that have more than one wound in your army? It's not going to be a big issue for a most people. I'm assuming by "wound" they failed the armor save. If they just have to successfully roll to wound against you...then yeah, that could possibly be aggravating.
So far, these rumors are sounding really awesome if they turn out to be true. I know a few friends that would love these changes.

yakface wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Problem 1: Necron players already own a lot of Warriors.
Problem 2: The Necron Warrior box will not be recut as the return on investment would not be very high, so making the mould isn't worth it, so GW can't entice existing players with a new Warrior model.

Solution 1: Make Necron Warriors cheaper and weaker so you need more of them. Existing Necron players will need to buy more.
Solution 2: Make Scarabs even better than they are now. You can only get them in Warrior boxes, so existing Necron players will want to buy more.

Good to see GW once again starting (and ending) with how they can sell more models rather than making a better game...

Or perhaps they finally decided to make good on the basic concept of zombie undead robots in the way they always should have been?

Perhaps sometimes needing more models can actually result in a better game?

Or maybe even Necron players can use the existing they models they have and since they cost less points now, they'll have room in the army to field some of the (desperately needed) new variety of units?

But that requires players to buy more models and anything that does that is bad for the game by definition of course (and yes, that was sarcasm).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Uriels_Flame wrote:
I also don't understand sweeping robots. I've played Necrons for a long time, and was miffed about having to actually take leadership tests last go round.

The unit phases out when they realize they're getting their butt handed to them in CC? Robots of all creatures should be able to process when its time to get the heck out of dodge, and the fluff behind them being to teleport out of battle when needed gives them the excuse to disappear off a battlefield when they get swept.

Good one!

Looks quite interesting, now for the tough decision.... Buy more now or wait for new models?

dzoid5000 wrote:Looks quite interesting, now for the tough decision.... Buy more now or wait for new models?

I bought a starter box to get my paint scheme going and get some basic warriors done.. i'll most likely pick up a monolith after that, too. Hopefully those won't change too much, but I'm really excited for all the other stuff, I told myself I'd play them if they ever got some more interesting stuff and now they should!

One thing I'm interested in is will the new WBB bring the model back to full wounds for scarabs, lords, spyders and possibly the crypteks or will it be up with one wound waiting for the lucky bolter to drop them again?

That also raises the notion: how have the lords been changed? Are they monsters in CC now or still slap fighters compared to other army HQ's?

I just sold my Necron army not long ago. And here goes GW. . .making me buy it again.

Here's hoping that immortals have had a serious price decrease. $30US for 5 (metal) or $25US for 10 (plastic); which seems to be GW's current standard.

Although I have about 1700 pts of necrons, I never could bring myself to pay $15/each for an immortal.

Swara wrote:I bought a starter box to get my paint scheme going and get some basic warriors done.. i'll most likely pick up a monolith after that, too. Hopefully those won't change too much, but I'm really excited for all the other stuff, I told myself I'd play them if they ever got some more interesting stuff and now they should!

Yea at the moment I have a starter box, a lord, 3 pariahs i got as a b'day present and another box of warriors, so with 40 warriors i think i am good to go with that for now and with them being cheaper points wise hopefully i will be fielding all of them instead of just half most the time.

clively wrote:Here's hoping that immortals have had a serious price decrease. $30US for 5 (metal) or $25US for 10 (plastic); which seems to be GW's current standard.

Although I have about 1700 pts of necrons, I never could bring myself to pay $15/each for an immortal.

The new ones are looking to be plastic. I'd expect close to plastic terminator pricing.

Maelstrom808 wrote:

clively wrote:Here's hoping that immortals have had a serious price decrease. $30US for 5 (metal) or $25US for 10 (plastic); which seems to be GW's current standard.

Although I have about 1700 pts of necrons, I never could bring myself to pay $15/each for an immortal.

The new ones are looking to be plastic. I'd expect close to plastic terminator pricing.

So five for fifty... still not great, but definitely better than current, which works out to five for sixty five. I think it should be be closer to forty for Terminators and Immortals, since there just isn't enough in the box to justify the price...

yakface wrote:17) In the new fluff it sounds like the C'Tan were mainly killed off by the Necrons (or something like that), so the C'Tan that you field in the game are just remaining shards of their power. They're naturally still a really mean Monstrous Creature who rocks in combat, but you can also purchase a bunch of different abilities. These abilities are in line with a lot of the things we've seen in the last few codexes, things like: messing around with Deep Striking enemy units, making enemies moving through terrain differently, and allowing the Necron player to change some of his deployment, etc. So it sounds like you have a lot of different options with the C'Tan that really mess with the enemy army and/or supplement your own. And they are not one per army (so you can have 3 if you want to use up all your Elites on them, although it sounds like the other Elites choices are pretty awesome as well).

*sigh*
The C'Tan were the entire reason I took up Necrons.

While I am sad to see the appearant move from Cthulu-mtyh to Egyptian-myth, the gameplay changes and new models sounds really exciting.

Any news regarding Tomb Stalkers and Pylons, will they be in the 'dex?

JoeyHeadwounds wrote:
So five for fifty... still not great, but definitely better than current, which works out to five for sixty five. I think it should be be closer to forty for Terminators and Immortals, since there just isn't enough in the box to justify the price...

Have to remember the pricing includes the store based empire GW are trying to maintain. I'd be interested in how many hundreds of stores they have world wide, the monthly bill must be staggering! I'd be the first to put my vote in for a reduction of physical stores in conjunction with a drop in product price, but that's not what gets the next generations hooked on plastic

But yes, for those who are still going to stick with the Necrons, I see many boxes of immortals in our future. I see no one has mentioned much about Wraiths yet, I see they are now Fearless, previous rumours stated their 3+/3++ was staying, I'm hoping for more rumours in regards to my favorite Necron unit, fingers crossed for unit size increasing and/or power weapons being an option.

Darkvoidof40k wrote:Combined with the HH stuff on the Dragon

Could you elaborate on this?

Sectiplave wrote:

JoeyHeadwounds wrote:
So five for fifty... still not great, but definitely better than current, which works out to five for sixty five. I think it should be be closer to forty for Terminators and Immortals, since there just isn't enough in the box to justify the price...

Have to remember the pricing includes the store based empire GW are trying to maintain. I'd be interested in how many hundreds of stores they have world wide, the monthly bill must be staggering! I'd be the first to put my vote in for a reduction of physical stores in conjunction with a drop in product price, but that's not what gets the next generations hooked on plastic

But yes, for those who are still going to stick with the Necrons, I see many boxes of immortals in our future. I see no one has mentioned much about Wraiths yet, I see they are now Fearless, previous rumours stated their 3+/3++ was staying, I'm hoping for more rumours in regards to my favorite Necron unit, fingers crossed for unit size increasing and/or power weapons being an option.

...and not screwing with their movement like what is rumored for the other fast units.

Kurgash wrote:One thing I'm interested in is will the new WBB bring the model back to full wounds for scarabs, lords, spyders and possibly the crypteks or will it be up with one wound waiting for the lucky bolter to drop them again?

I'd like to see wounded multi-wound models regenerate as well. Like, if they're hurt but not down, start healing wounds. If they're down, get back up with 1 wound, and then they start to regenerate as well, gradually healing if you don't put them back down.

Hmmm Interesting necrons are finally going to be cool again (:

Maelstrom808 wrote:...and not screwing with their movement like what is rumored for the other fast units.

Yes, I would like to see Wraithflight or a suitable equivalent in place still, I'm quite interested to see what happens to them, hopefully Yakface will leak more soon

Savis wrote:
Any news regarding Tomb Stalkers and Pylons, will they be in the 'dex?

Definitely no Pylon.

Unless the new walker is somehow secretly the Tomb Stalker (which it doesn't sound like it is), then I don't think the Tomb Stalker is in there either (although I'm not as certain on this one).

I think a Statline with T4 abd a 4+ save makes sense. They are not supposed to be impossible to put down in the first place, the whoel point of a 'cron army is that even thoughthey go down, they don't always STAY down.

Think about it. If this rumour is true we get a (possibly) T4 model with a 4+ save and essentially a 5++ that you get to use even AFTER your armour save fails. All this for 12 points apparently? Yes please!

Also, whiel everyoen is debatign what the new units will or wont be, lets not forget the Tomb Stalker. I for one am hoping it is in the new codex so i can buy the model and actually use it in 40k games. I've held of on buying one so far as i hardly ever play games of Apoc.

I will definitly be buying a second monolith though. I've not read anything about the model being re-done but i woudl think taht if it is the price will most likely go up. I just wish they sold packs of scarabs separately. I'd buy a few straight away.

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

Kurgash wrote:One thing I'm interested in is will the new WBB bring the model back to full wounds for scarabs, lords, spyders and possibly the crypteks or will it be up with one wound waiting for the lucky bolter to drop them again?

I'd like to see wounded multi-wound models regenerate as well. Like, if they're hurt but not down, start healing wounds. If they're down, get back up with 1 wound, and then they start to regenerate as well, gradually healing if you don't put them back down.

Multi wound healing would be great but may get frustrating to keep track of. although it would put more emphasis on that unit, if you want it down wipe out the squad none of this ill take out half and hope for the best.

yakface wrote:

Savis wrote:
Any news regarding Tomb Stalkers and Pylons, will they be in the 'dex?

Definitely no Pylon.

Unless the new walker is somehow secretly the Tomb Stalker (which it doesn't sound like it is), then I don't think the Tomb Stalker is in there either (although I'm not as certain on this one).

That's really dissapointing. The Tomb Stalker is such a cool model, and it would have fit right in as Heavy Support choice. I never play Apoc, so I guess I won't be picking one up.

The multi wound thing could work.

You could apapt WBB as a case of roll <whenever you roll under the new rules> to replace missing wounds on models. For downed one-wound models this would get them back up, for multi wound models with 1 wound left, this would regenerate 1 wound.

All that on a 5+





Is it bad that we're re-writing a codex that hasn't even been released yet?

Thanks for all the rumors Yak, Any news on Wraiths please? They are my favorite units, plus i think we all want to know about them

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

Darkvoidof40k wrote:Combined with the HH stuff on the Dragon

Could you elaborate on this?

Sasori wrote:

yakface wrote:

Savis wrote:
Any news regarding Tomb Stalkers and Pylons, will they be in the 'dex?

Definitely no Pylon.

Unless the new walker is somehow secretly the Tomb Stalker (which it doesn't sound like it is), then I don't think the Tomb Stalker is in there either (although I'm not as certain on this one).

That's really dissapointing. The Tomb Stalker is such a cool model, and it would have fit right in as Heavy Support choice. I never play Apoc, so I guess I won't be picking one up.

I'm not too surprised personally; the Pylon could be a bit big for normal 40K whilst I can't recall GW transferring a FW model to normal gameplay; other than the Trygon. I would too have liked to have see the Tomb Stalker however.

My birthday is in a few days and this new batch of rumors were just what i needed to make me happy.

Thanks Yakface!!!

Now i'm waiting for GW to send me a present as well... in the form of an 'Incoming' e-mail maybe?

And I agree, I want to hear more about the Wraiths too. Also not much speculation or rumors about the Monolith so I assume it remains largely unchanged.

The real problem is, what the hell CAN I buy right now that would be a good safe bet? Im getting my late bday present from the wife, and was wanting to buy some Necron stuff....but uh....now I dont know what the hell I should get

Battleforce should be a safe bet. As are monoliths.

I've not heard any mention of Monoliths being redone and they're great units now and are rumoured to be even better in the new Codex, so that's definitely an option...

KingCracker wrote:The real problem is, what the hell CAN I buy right now that would be a good safe bet? Im getting my late bday present from the wife, and was wanting to buy some Necron stuff....but uh....now I dont know what the hell I should get

Warriors. Boxes upon boxes of Warriors. You can bet GW will recut the sprues and give us 10 cron boxes for the current price of 12 cron boxes come release date. And no scarabs.

Currently every model is still useful even Pariahs for crypteks perhaps. If you like the model you could well get them now. If any of the older rumours concerning the 'waves' are true holding off on immortals might be a safe bet? of all the rumoured stuff in wave one they seem to be the ones changing the most dramatically with even a base size up. I honestly can not remember all the rumours I think destroyers were also catting a plastic's box that let you make heavy's or normals or new options but with Yak's rumoured changes to destroyers it doesn't sit right in my head.

I agree with earlier posters that warriors will probably be resprued to 10 in a box but perhaps upgrades and cool stuff might be included there. The one thing my gut has no doubt is that the monolith will still be like it is now but that's my gut speaking!

KingCracker wrote:The real problem is, what the hell CAN I buy right now that would be a good safe bet? Im getting my late bday present from the wife, and was wanting to buy some Necron stuff....but uh....now I dont know what the hell I should get

As states above, based on the rumours i woudl buy battleforces, boxes of warriors and/or monolilths. But i woudl keep them unbuilt so that, whenthe new stuff is released, you have loads of conversion fodder if you need it.

i think there was a link earlier to turn normal warriors into Flayed ones or Immortals using some plasticard and a positive attitude.

Yak, where would you place this rumour? It was posted a few months ago.
Is it more accurate to the Elite jump infantry or the fast attack jetbikes?

New fast attack unit
Look kinda like flayed ones
They have an 18” charge with their special ability
Think jump infantry with special rules
5 per box

Weren't there rumors that the models for the necrons themselves were going to be redesigned to look less 'terminator' like? If so, i guess that is fine, but i just hope that the new models blend in well with the old ones that most of us already own.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Problem 1: Necron players already own a lot of Warriors.
Problem 2: The Necron Warrior box will not be recut as the return on investment would not be very high, so making the mould isn't worth it, so GW can't entice existing players with a new Warrior model.

Solution 1: Make Necron Warriors cheaper and weaker so you need more of them. Existing Necron players will need to buy more.
Solution 2: Make Scarabs even better than they are now. You can only get them in Warrior boxes, so existing Necron players will want to buy more.

Good to see GW once again starting (and ending) with how they can sell more models rather than making a better game...

Not like you H.B.M.C. but you missed out a solution.

Solution 3: Put different coloured plastic rods in the warriors box so those that want a new colour scheme out of the old 'cron players will have to buy loads more.

(That is unless GW provide the plastic rods as a seperate 'bitz pack')

For those that are thinking of buying now so to miss out on any price increase/start early, bear this in mind, you might like the new plastic rods better than green.

Thats if there are any new plastic rods?

For those that are thinking of buying now so to miss out on any price increase/start early, bear this in mind, you might like the new plastic rods better than green.

Yeah, but do you like them 10 - 60% more than the green ones? Remember the price increase on the Orc Warriors. In the US they went from 19 for $35 to 10 for $29 when the new Orc kits were released. Who knows how much the Necron Warriors will cost per model if and when they add other color rod options. Personally, if I really was that determined to have rods that aren't green, I'd buy up what Necron kits I can now as cheap as I could and then buy a pack or two of rods from Plastruct. The amount of color rods you can get for the money that way will likely not even come close to equalling the likely price increase on the Necrons that will come when they are revised.

That's really dissapointing. The Tomb Stalker is such a cool model, and it would have fit right in as Heavy Support choice. I never play Apoc, so I guess I won't be picking one up.

I'm not too surprised personally; the Pylon could be a bit big for normal 40K whilst I can't recall GW transferring a FW model to normal gameplay; other than the Trygon. I would too have liked to have see the Tomb Stalker however.

Didn't a lot of the new IG stuff come from FW? I could be totally wrong, but I thought they did.

ceorron wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Problem 1: Necron players already own a lot of Warriors.
Problem 2: The Necron Warrior box will not be recut as the return on investment would not be very high, so making the mould isn't worth it, so GW can't entice existing players with a new Warrior model.

Solution 1: Make Necron Warriors cheaper and weaker so you need more of them. Existing Necron players will need to buy more.
Solution 2: Make Scarabs even better than they are now. You can only get them in Warrior boxes, so existing Necron players will want to buy more.

Good to see GW once again starting (and ending) with how they can sell more models rather than making a better game...

Not like you H.B.M.C. but you missed out a solution.

Solution 3: Put different coloured plastic rods in the warriors box so those that want a new colour scheme out of the old 'cron players will have to buy loads more.

(That is unless GW provide the plastic rods as a seperate 'bitz pack')

For those that are thinking of buying now so to miss out on any price increase/start early, bear this in mind, you might like the new plastic rods better than green.

Thats if there are any new plastic rods?

The problem I see with the "new plastic rods" rumor is the Monolith as it makes use of a big power crystal, portal door, and gun rods all in the standard green acrylic.

I wonder if they would make those as bitz, or would people have to recast their own...

Didn't a lot of the new IG stuff come from FW? I could be totally wrong, but I thought they did.

A lot of the Leman Russ variant ideas and the Valkyrie were indeed originally Forge World.

BrassScorpion wrote:

Didn't a lot of the new IG stuff come from FW? I could be totally wrong, but I thought they did.

A lot of the Leman Russ variant ideas and the Valkyrie were indeed originally Forge World.

Then I guess it woulden't be too far of a stretch, with at least two codexs as precedent, to have the possibility of the Tomb Stalker in.

Sasori wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:

Didn't a lot of the new IG stuff come from FW? I could be totally wrong, but I thought they did.

A lot of the Leman Russ variant ideas and the Valkyrie were indeed originally Forge World.

Then I guess it woulden't be too far of a stretch, with at least two codexs as precedent, to have the possibility of the Tomb Stalker in.

Oh, I stand corrected then. Apologies.
Although, with the others they did release new kits for them...

I wonder if a plastic tomb Stalker kit would be cheaper that the FW one? I think the FW model is actually a pretty good price already.

It would, but there won't be one.
And you can the Stalker just fine in regular 40k.

You'd think that with the popularity of the Tomb Stalker, it'd be a shoe in for the new dex. They wouldn't even have to produce a Citadel kit for it for awhile...then again, what do I know.

Maelstrom808 wrote:You'd think that with the popularity of the Tomb Stalker, it'd be a shoe in for the new dex. They wouldn't even have to produce a Citadel kit for it for awhile...then again, what do I know.

Which is why it's not in.

Forge World and Games Workshop have, for awhile now, been delineating themselves in that Forge World doesn't really make models to 'gapfill' for the main codices. They can make units that fit into the codices. Don't ask why, I can't explain it. I think they're just trying to get rid of this idea that you have to buy Forge World stuff for your main book(Vendettas aside. That was more done because of the Elysian list in IA8).

So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

No, because the Tomb Stalker's rules clearly state that it can be used as a Heavy Support in a Codex: Necron army.

It's like the 'Hazard' Suits. The rules are in Imperial Armour Apocalypse, but only because there's a formation to go alongside of it in there. The basic unit entry, however, explicitly states that it's a valid choice for a Codex: Tau Empire army.

Oh, ok then. I mgiht save up and grab one then.

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

Where can i find the stats? :O

The stats are posted on the Forge World site entry for the Tomb Stalker found here:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Necrons/NECRON-TOMB-STALKER.html

A direct link to the PDF is here:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/t/tstalker.pdf

Why does it sound like the necron fluff is advancing?

Surely they would retcon rather than advance right.

Necrons regaining more tech = More necrons waking up?
Named lords and ctan being weakened = Necron revolution?

Sounds really interesting fluff wise. Well potentially.

yakface wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Problem 1: Necron players already own a lot of Warriors.
Problem 2: The Necron Warrior box will not be recut as the return on investment would not be very high, so making the mould isn't worth it, so GW can't entice existing players with a new Warrior model.

Solution 1: Make Necron Warriors cheaper and weaker so you need more of them. Existing Necron players will need to buy more.
Solution 2: Make Scarabs even better than they are now. You can only get them in Warrior boxes, so existing Necron players will want to buy more.

Good to see GW once again starting (and ending) with how they can sell more models rather than making a better game...

Or perhaps they finally decided to make good on the basic concept of zombie undead robots in the way they always should have been?

Or perhaps their making them zombie undead robots instead of making them into full conversion military cyborgs, which is more how I envisioned them. Concepts vary, and the changes tend to go away from the ultra-high tech that I had in mind.

Perhaps sometimes needing more models can actually result in a better game?

Sometimes they do. In this case, I would have been just fine with no new models, but upgraded rules to really make the necron shine again. And maybe, just maybe, more models really are about selling more product? GW is a miniature company after all...


Or maybe even Necron players can use the existing they models they have and since they cost less points now, they'll have room in the army to field some of the (desperately needed) new variety of units?

Again, I'm not sure we need a new variety of units, so much as a plugging of holes in our rules and gear. Flayed ones with rending, Wraiths with power-weapons, stubborn, adjust some of the weapon stats, and a +1 on the vehicle damage chart would have gone a long way to fixing things so that we don't need a new variety of units. Some of us would have been happy with that, particularly if it meant that the army still had the same flavor to it that we enjoyed. Sorry if it doesn't match the way you envisioned them, or wanted to play them, but then, tastes differ.


But that requires players to buy more models and anything that does that is bad for the game by definition of course (and yes, that was sarcasm).

Sarcasm noted, but in this case the answer is quite possibly, yes. If it becomes required to buy more models to play the game, particularly different ones that are outside the theme or concept you like, at least if you'd like to play competitively, then yes, it is a bad thing. If I'm going from running Skynet to running the skeletons from Army of Darkness, there's a big change, it might not be something I like, and that's bad for the game if it drives players away. It would have been better to take the concept of an army of undead, and start a new codex.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Uriels_Flame wrote:
I also don't understand sweeping robots. I've played Necrons for a long time, and was miffed about having to actually take leadership tests last go round.

The unit phases out when they realize they're getting their butt handed to them in CC? Robots of all creatures should be able to process when its time to get the heck out of dodge, and the fluff behind them being to teleport out of battle when needed gives them the excuse to disappear off a battlefield when they get swept.

Or maybe the robots, understanding that getting destroyed would just let them come back later anyhow as though brand new, would fight to the last on the possibility that they'd more severely weaken the foe for the next encounter, since the foe doesn't get to come back. If every foe you drop is one less of them, but each of you that drops gets back up no matter what, even if it takes a bit of time, it makes a bit more sense to stick around doing as much damage as possible to the bitter end.

Did somebody say cheaper warriors?


Overall, I'm pretty pumped for the changes. Nerfbat? well compared to current yes, but with a 33% cost reduction and a hooptie to ride acrosss the table I'm all for it.

I have the feeling scarabs may be more gimmicky than super effective.

As for new kits inorder to make me buy more. +1 I'm all for it. Why wouldn't I want to invest in purchases that help my army grow. At least warriors are a troop and useable in the core army.

Regards,

scratch misread.

I fail to see how any changes to the necrons can be considered a nerfbat.. They're such a low power army right now virtually anything is an improvement (Beyond the horribly boring 15 destroyer list)

Kanluwen wrote:

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

No, because the Tomb Stalker's rules clearly state that it can be used as a Heavy Support in a Codex: Necron army.

It's like the 'Hazard' Suits. The rules are in Imperial Armour Apocalypse, but only because there's a formation to go alongside of it in there. The basic unit entry, however, explicitly states that it's a valid choice for a Codex: Tau Empire army.

Of course, you then need someone to agree to let you use the entry from IA:A in the first place. Very few tournaments allow units from outside the base codex (regardless of usage instructions printed alongside those units). At which point, it's the next best thing to a house rule anyway.

Depends on what is in the new codex and what models are released you could perhaps use the tomb stalker as a counts as? It is a nice model =)

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

It's immune to poison then

Last i heard it was a MC, and MC's bite the big one to poisoned weapon spam.

Not being snarky, just curious. I like the look of the model, but i don't want it going down in one turn to a single unit of Dark Eldar with splinter rifles.


*can't open the link at work- will check it out later *

Ascalam wrote:

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

It's immune to poison then

Last i heard it was a MC, and MC's bite the big one to poisoned weapon spam.

Not being snarky, just curious. I like the look of the model, but i don't want it going down in one turn to a single unit of Dark Eldar with splinter rifles.


*can't open the link at work- will check it out later *

It's rules state that any weapon that wounds on a set number (I.E. Poisoned Weapons and the like) instead of wounding on a 2+ or 4+ they only wound on a 6+.

Ascalam wrote:

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:So, technically, using a Tomb Stalker would have to be a house rule?

Arse.

I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

It's immune to poison then

Last i heard it was a MC, and MC's bite the big one to poisoned weapon spam.

Not being snarky, just curious. I like the look of the model, but i don't want it going down in one turn to a single unit of Dark Eldar with splinter rifles.


*can't open the link at work- will check it out later *

Poison and sniping weapons only wound a 6, regardless of what the weapon profile says.

Awesome

Sign me up for three

Exactly S6 means it's instant killing Archons, T7 means in close combat they need S4 or better to even wound, so throwing it at kabalites etc destroys them with extreme ease. 2 Gauss Flayers, hit and run, deep strike, fleet, all in all it's awesome. And having 5 wounds never hurts for 195 points

Scarey Nerd wrote:Exactly S6 means it's instant killing Archons, T7 means in close combat they need S4 or better to even wound, so throwing it at kabalites etc destroys them with extreme ease. 2 Gauss Flayers, hit and run, deep strike, fleet, all in all it's awesome. And having 5 wounds never hurts for 195 points

Not to mention the +2 attacks on the turn it charges!

Eldar have never felt so fragile ;p

FW beta rules wrote:
War Construct: The Tomb Stalker is a huge mass of shifting
pseudo-metal, with little vulnerability except to the
massive use of force. Sniper weapons, attacks with the
Poisoned ability and the like, only wound the Tomb Stalker
on a 6 (as opposed to a 4+, 2+ etc, as would normally be
the case).

Too lazy to look through all the replies :( has there been any reliable talk of the tomb stalker being in the codex? Or is it just gonna be a FW only thing for Apocalypse? I know the rules say it counts as a heavy choice, but it would just be cooler to have it in the book

Scarey Nerd wrote:I think so, but who's going to argue with the Tomb Stalker? It's not broken in strength by any stretch, unless you're playing against Dark Eldar, whom it absolutely destroys with ease.

While poison weapons and the like are next to useless against it, dark light weapons are not, and DE have those in spades as well.

Kanluwen wrote:No, because the Tomb Stalker's rules clearly state that it can be used as a Heavy Support in a Codex: Necron army.

It's like the 'Hazard' Suits. The rules are in Imperial Armour Apocalypse, but only because there's a formation to go alongside of it in there. The basic unit entry, however, explicitly states that it's a valid choice for a Codex: Tau Empire army.

For your average game, there really shouldn't be an issue using it..but if you are planning on playing tournaments, chances are you are going to be SOL.

EDIT:

Necros wrote:Too lazy to look through all the replies :( has there been any reliable talk of the tomb stalker being in the codex? Or is it just gonna be a FW only thing for Apocalypse? I know the rules say it counts as a heavy choice, but it would just be cooler to have it in the book

As of right now, this set of rumors makes no mention of it.

Praxiss wrote:

KingCracker wrote:The real problem is, what the hell CAN I buy right now that would be a good safe bet? Im getting my late bday present from the wife, and was wanting to buy some Necron stuff....but uh....now I dont know what the hell I should get

As states above, based on the rumours i woudl buy battleforces, boxes of warriors and/or monolilths. But i woudl keep them unbuilt so that, whenthe new stuff is released, you have loads of conversion fodder if you need it.

i think there was a link earlier to turn normal warriors into Flayed ones or Immortals using some plasticard and a positive attitude.

Yea Ive already done that with the army I currently have. Made 5 Immortals and 5 or 6 flayed ones. I really hope the flayed ones get a decent boost of somekind. I play against SM and nids mostly, and Ive got to say, they just suck against either
Its either oh, LD10, ok so Im just hoping you someone fail that LD test. OR, Oh 20 genestealers.....well this isnt ending well at all

Wow! Grate stuff yak! Hope that you really now these rumours to be true cos these are awesome! Ive been saving money and I yet have only 60€ Gladly my parents have promised to support me in this so I maby can keep my armys size in points. I have 70 warriors so I really dont need any more of em.

yakface wrote:




13) Necron Warriors have the same basic statline they had before except they now have a 4+ save. Now before you go crazy, also note that their points cost is 12 points, which is a 1/3 price drop (down from 18 points). That means you get 1/3 more Warrior models in the army for the same amount of points...it also makes losing an entire unit due to sweeping advance, not nearly as painful.

I know a lot of cynical people will hate this and accuse GW from simply making the change to sell more Warrior models, and you could be right. But personally I was always hoping they were going to make Necron Warriors not quite as tough and dump the points cost on them, so you could really take a ton of them...given in my mind they are supposed to be more like a shambling horde of undead robots than some sort of small elite force of super-warriors (but that could just be me).

So this change alone totally changes the army from out of the 'MEQ' umbrella and makes their base statline unique in the game (which is good, IMHO).


20) Scarabs sound great. They are cheap, have the new WBB rule, move like beasts and have an ability that erodes enemy armor when they get into combat with it. Any non-vehicle model they wound, but don't kill, has its armor save turned to a dash (i.e. nothing) for the rest of the game. If they hit a vehicle, on a 4+ the vehicle loses a point of armor value on ALL facings, and if any facing is reduced to zero, then the vehicle is destroyed (I'm not sure if this ability kicks in for each hit they get on the vehicle, or just once no matter how many hits they cause). There are some items in the army that also have a similar ability to erode armor, including one of the C'Tan powers.

So it sounds like Scarabs may play a major role in most Necron armies!

13)=Great news First and foremost Necrons will no longer be a MEQ army, and the game is sorely lacking in armies with a 4+ armor save. With 12 necrons going for the price of 8 it's a huge firepower increase, and they are actually a lot more durable because they have more wounds.

20)=CC problem solved when dealing with MEQ. If the unit doesn't have a pfist what was a tarpit would now turn into a death trap. If the unit does have a pfist then the marines still get their armor vandalized, and then run the risk of getting mowed down by masses of necron warriors and immortals. All my speculation however depends on how cheap "cheap" is.

Don't forget that, according to Yak's info, nothing negates the new WBB either so PFist or not, they still get WBB.

By the way, forgot to mention it before now, but thanks, Yakface, for all of this.
It's rough going so long with absolutely 0 news.

Indeed Yak has done a truly awesome job at not only giving us these rumours but by sharing his opinion on them I can only hope he has more to share in the future!

Kevin949 wrote:Don't forget that, according to Yak's info, nothing negates the new WBB either so PFist or not, they still get WBB.

Yea, but they won't have a res orb in their unit, WBB is going to be 5+, and it still instant death's the swarm causing 3 wounds per hit which will cause the fearless swarm to loose 3 more wounds through combat resolution. Power fists will still be bad for swarms, but like I said even if the swarm looses the combat they will still end up vandalizing a lot of power armor which is very bad news considering the increase in firepower warriors and immortals are receiving.

Kevin949 wrote:Don't forget that, according to Yak's info, nothing negates the new WBB either so PFist or not, they still get WBB.

seems a bit weird yet not impossible, maybe necrons indeed don't get pulverized by a powerfist like other races.
(seeing any race made out of flesh splat apart on the impact of a powerfist)

schadenfreude wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:Don't forget that, according to Yak's info, nothing negates the new WBB either so PFist or not, they still get WBB.

Yea, but they won't have a res orb in their unit, WBB is going to be 5+, and it still instant death's the swarm causing 3 wounds per hit which will cause the fearless swarm to loose 3 more wounds through combat resolution. Power fists will still be bad for swarms, but like I said even if the swarm looses the combat they will still end up vandalizing a lot of power armor which is very bad news considering the increase in firepower warriors and immortals are receiving.

You're assuming they're still 3 wound models or T3. *Edit* I don't think their stats will change much either but I'm not assuming they'll stay the same. Just FYI.

Also not to forget they'd go before the Pfists as well, and that could ruin the opponents day now.

I think I'll find it hysterical when my scarabs charge a trygon and one lucky wound gets through and all of a sudden you have a naked trygon with the shaven look with pink skin ala looney toons.

Kurgash wrote:I think I'll find it hysterical when my scarabs charge a trygon and one lucky wound gets through and all of a sudden you have a naked trygon with the shaven look with pink skin ala looney toons.

Haha!!! The worst part of that is a flashlight could killhim!

The idea of scarab screens sounds funny.

Give your warriors a 4+ save---anything charges them in HTH---wipes them, loses their armor---then gets rapid fired next turn with no saves.

Necrons are no stronger against melee with these changes than before. They're still I-low and they're still going to lose on the charge and then get run down if they break. It doesn't much matter if the unit that gets run down is 180 points or 120. Unless the Necrons can open transports and then have units that can charge and win, not that much has changed yet.

Also, Necron units are now far more vulnerable to massed fire. No more hopping between units. If you put every model of that Destroyer or Wraith unit down, they stay down.

I don't see why the Wraiths are fearless.

hah! I love to see the new necrons will be complete crap before we even get to look at the codex. Yeah they will suck in CC and everyone will CC us to death!

/sarcasm

The Grog wrote:Necrons are no stronger against melee with these changes than before. They're still I-low and they're still going to lose on the charge and then get run down if they break. It doesn't much matter if the unit that gets run down is 180 points or 120. Unless the Necrons can open transports and then have units that can charge and win, not that much has changed yet.

Except that now, where you'd lose 2 such units for 360 pts, instead you'll lose 2 units (240 pts), and still have a 3rd unit available.

40k being a turn-limited game, the ability to bring more units than you could before is advantageous.

Not to mention, from the sound of things those squads will be hiding some potentialy nasty models Wolf Guard style.

I really am excited being able to bring more warriors to the fight. Did love them but such a liability and the point cost choked my list on points that could have been put elsewhere. Now cheaper, I can combo them with the already 20 or so Immortals I have and then I free up the valuable elite slots AND have somewhere around 5 troops! Along with whatever else I nab on.

Also a fool would expect ANY race to be Gods everywhere... everything needs a weakness or the game is silly.

Mar wrote:everything needs a weakness or the game is silly.

Sillier

Flashman wrote:

Mar wrote:everything needs a weakness or the game is silly.

Sillier

Ok fair enough! lol but my point remains!

Question about the Scarabs: the armor destruction thing is per unit or model? Meaning, if a single model in a unit suffers a wound, does the entire unit lose their save? That seems unlikely, although keeping track of wounds on every multi-wound model on the battlefield would be a pain. Still it seems to me too broken to be so.

writing it down wouldn't be difficult I would imagine.

It sounds like per model, since you allocate which model wounds go to and not the entire unit takes a wound from scarabs. I'm impressed on this ability seeing as that's a lot of attacks on the charge.

Fankly we need SOMETHING to deal with all that 3+ and 2+ armour our there

Especially since we don't get it any more

Standard Necrons are meant to be poor in combat. Always have been, always will be because they're ranged units; and they're still not fragile in combat. Just as tough as a Marine, and they get to self repair. You're still going to be beat in combat, but its your duty to the overlord to prevent them from getting that far.

Indeed, Scarabs got me really impressed too, that is if they do come out in the Codex as rumored. I suppose it would not be too far fetched to assume they might get their very own box of models (at the necessary price of course). Anyway i think i'll have to add a few more Warrior boxes to my order while i still got the time...

"edit" Agreed, i would never have them changed from a ranged army to something else. Sure, they need some CC support but they have that in Wraiths and Flayed ones (all with the appropriate tweaks) and now the Scarabs seem like they are a great addition...I wonder whether we will see any Scarab-heavy army lists in the future...

How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

yeah the no armor thing only happens if you take a wound. Keeping track of this won't be hard. As the ic/mc that received the "no armor" status will probably die the next turn.

Guess you're right, seems I outsmarted myself there mea culpa guys

Just got an newsletter from GW, "This weekend the undead march to war..." I crapped bricks hoping it would be a surprise Necron release, turned out to still be Tomb Kings haha...>_>

Wouldn't that be great?!?!?! Well I just hope we still get the Incoming e-mail soon (by the way, the new Tomb Kings are really great looking - we have to hand it to the sculptors, they know how to put ideas in peoples minds, if you know what I mean...)

The Grog wrote:Necrons are no stronger against melee with these changes than before. They're still I-low and they're still going to lose on the charge and then get run down if they break. It doesn't much matter if the unit that gets run down is 180 points or 120. Unless the Necrons can open transports and then have units that can charge and win, not that much has changed yet.

Also, Necron units are now far more vulnerable to massed fire. No more hopping between units. If you put every model of that Destroyer or Wraith unit down, they stay down.

I don't see why the Wraiths are fearless.

I don't see why every necron isn't fearless or stubborn, but it's a game balancing thing. Wraiths, being only CC oriented, were still susceptible to being run down because even though they had high str they still had to bypass armor and losing 1 wraith in shooting would cause a morale check. Pretty lame.

Yes, necrons are still as susceptible to SA as they were before but here is the thing...you're not taking the whole picture for granted here. Sure, warriors still aren't that great in melee. So what? We now, supposedly, have MUCH better CC oriented units that are designed to handle that. So if you're warriors are getting caught in CC then you're doing it wrong or the game is going badly for you.

As for them being vulnerable to massed fire, we don't know all the rules for the new WBB, but you seem to forget the mention of the "ever-living" rule which lets those models get their WBB regardless of restrictions. We don't know if this is an upgrade to all units, an upgrade for crypteks to take as wargear for the unit they're attached to or if it's only given to certain models. We don't know yet.

And yes, from what we've heard there is a great possibility that necrons can "open transports and then have units that can charge and win".

Warriors were never meant to be the main force in the necron army, they are supplemental firepower at best.

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Tomb Spider, Tomb Stalker.

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Scarabs will be a good screen against;

ThunderWolf Cav
Bloodcrushers
Nobz (Bikers and foot)

Kevin949 wrote:

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Tomb Spider, Tomb Stalker.

I think Kenzo was mostly talking about other armies, not Necrons

SA still won't be has big has a deal before anyway because of a lack of phase out and your army will probably have more warriors if warriors cost less points. Losing a chunk of warriors with phase out was the worst thing ever in regard to SA imo

angelshade00 wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Tomb Spider, Tomb Stalker.

I think Kenzo was mostly talking about other armies, not Necrons

Ah. Ya, can't answer that myself.

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Paladins?

Monstrous creatures, Dreadknights *oh how I will laugh at that happening! just picture the harness getting stripped away and the dude falling out with a thud* and all sorts of other multi wound units, Tyranids especiallly!

Oh wow...yet another codex where something really mulches over the nids.

Scarabs: Because Tyranid Monstrous Creatures need to die faster.

That's the one rule here that seems blatantly "playtesty" to me. I wouldn't expect it to show up the exact same way in the actual codex.

Brother SRM wrote:Scarabs: Because Tyranid Monstrous Creatures need to die faster.

That's the one rule here that seems blatantly "playtesty" to me. I wouldn't expect it to show up the exact same way in the actual codex.

I would have to agree.. though I would love to see it make it.. Hopefully something similar that is a bit more balanced. We'll know in a few months

A weaker version of it probably would not be too bad.. but again we do not know the statline for this guys.

well this will make them not as super dupa and a lot better to field

Kanluwen wrote:Which is why it's not in.

I don't see why it couldn't be. I mean, if the Valk and Trygon can make the transition (not to mention a stack'a Guard tanks), then if the Tomb Stalker is popular enough (and I think it is, given something else I know yet cannot talk about) I can see it being brought across to regular 40K via a plastic kit.

I think it'd be great, as the Tomb Stalker is a really nice model that is let down the eight bazillion resin legs you have to stick to it.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Scarabs will be a good screen against;

ThunderWolf Cav
Bloodcrushers
Nobz (Bikers and foot)

Dunno what a bloodcrusher is, but how does a nob have a 3+? 'Eavy armor maybe, but that's gettin expensive for orks.

kenzosan wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Scarabs will be a good screen against;

ThunderWolf Cav
Bloodcrushers
Nobz (Bikers and foot)

Dunno what a bloodcrusher is, but how does a nob have a 3+? 'Eavy armor maybe, but that's gettin expensive for orks.

It was just a list of popular multi-wound creatures that Scarabs will be good against.

I see. I dunno bout scarabs vs nobz. Nobz would run through them imo, I'd rather ahoot an ork. Something tells me that ic mc and tanks will be the biggest target for scarabs.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Which is why it's not in.

I don't see why it couldn't be. I mean, if the Valk and Trygon can make the transition (not to mention a stack'a Guard tanks), then if the Tomb Stalker is popular enough (and I think it is, given something else I know yet cannot talk about) I can see it being brought across to regular 40K via a plastic kit.

I think it'd be great, as the Tomb Stalker is a really nice model that is let down the eight bazillion resin legs you have to stick to it.

Aren't the parts for the Hydra still resin, and only made by Forgeworld Right now?

And HMBC, does this popularity have something to do with the upcoming Necron release? Don't keep us in the dark like GW

Scarabs are built for shooting, not hand to hand (against anything). You place them in front of your Warriors, so they'll be forced to assault them before your Warriors. Your scarabs wound them, drop their armor---die. They can't consolidate, you rapid fire them on your phase and they have no armor save.

kenzosan wrote:I see. I dunno bout scarabs vs nobz. Nobz would run through them imo, I'd rather ahoot an ork. Something tells me that ic mc and tanks will be the biggest target for scarabs.

But that's what I mean, the orks nobz run through em. you don't counter and take out armor. Scarabs just die.

I find it extremely unlikely that the scarab rule will stay. It, like much else here, goes back to 2nd and earlier for rules. And tracking scarabs was a pain in the ass then too.

Hmmm... not sure if I'm so hot on the whole "Ctan aspect" thing, it sounds way too similar to Eldar.
As for the Paraiahs, I suppose it's a good thing they're gone, despite having some pretty good fluff written about them.
Transports: really? Must our beloved metal soldiers go through this vehicle craze as well?
Well, overall, I'm still a tad bit skeptical to this new update, but until they are released, I probably will withhold my judgment.

Vehicle crazy? Everyone but nids has a vehicle

kenzosan wrote:Dunno what a bloodcrusher is, but how does a nob have a 3+? 'Eavy armor maybe, but that's gettin expensive for orks.

This is a Bloodcrusher....



It's a Khorne Juggernaut with a Bloodletter rider.

Kurgash wrote:Monstrous creatures, Dreadknights *oh how I will laugh at that happening! just picture the harness getting stripped away and the dude falling out with a thud* and all sorts of other multi wound units, Tyranids especiallly!

Oh wow...yet another codex where something really mulches over the nids.

I can just see the shock on the terminators faces that crush my necrons as their armour is no more

The Metal Tide wrote:

Kurgash wrote:Monstrous creatures, Dreadknights *oh how I will laugh at that happening! just picture the harness getting stripped away and the dude falling out with a thud* and all sorts of other multi wound units, Tyranids especiallly!

Oh wow...yet another codex where something really mulches over the nids.

I can just see the shock on the terminators faces that crush my necrons as their armour is no more

that wont happen though. unless they are palladins, termi's have 1 wound. thats the issue alot of use are having with scarabs.

I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

The Metal Tide wrote:

Kurgash wrote:Monstrous creatures, Dreadknights *oh how I will laugh at that happening! just picture the harness getting stripped away and the dude falling out with a thud* and all sorts of other multi wound units, Tyranids especiallly!

Oh wow...yet another codex where something really mulches over the nids.

I can just see the shock on the terminators faces that crush my necrons as their armour is no more

This will bring in a whole new load of kinky when Necrons are against SoBs.

dancingcricket wrote:
If it becomes required to buy more models to play the game, particularly different ones that are outside the theme or concept you like, at least if you'd like to play competitively, then yes, it is a bad thing. If I'm going from running Skynet to running the skeletons from Army of Darkness, there's a big change, it might not be something I like, and that's bad for the game if it drives players away. It would have been better to take the concept of an army of undead, and start a new codex.

I think that's the thing that bothers me most about these rumors. I've played necrons since second edition and I like the feel of a small implacable force. While people called them a MEQ army WBB made them far harder than that and if these rumors are true the math indicates that they will essentially be a MEQ equivalent army (it will just require two rolls to have a 3+ save instead of one). Necron Warriors used to be the most durable basic troop, now they'll be easier to kill than Plague Marines and Thousand Sons and as easy to kill as any basic marine.

Personally I don't care if they a dozen units that I think are completely out of character. I can choose not to use a new unit and if they wanted to add a new less resistant basic troop I would have been fine with that. To completely change the character of the army is another thing. It would be the equivalent of marines only having a 4+ save in the next codex. It wouldn't matter if they only cost 10 pts. people would be pissed. It seems to me that the way the opinions are breaking down are largely upon these lines; if you're a current Necron player you're less than enthused about the rumored changes, if you don't play Necrons you're intrigued by the new flavor of the day.

I predict that the new tournament move, which will require a name similar to "leafblower", will be to either protect a small bubble of scarabs, and charge terminators and other such high armor saving units with them, then when they fall back the target can be destroyed, or just sending suicide swarms that the enemy cannot completely take down.

Perhaps the Scarab Swamp?

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Unix wrote:

dancingcricket wrote:
If it becomes required to buy more models to play the game, particularly different ones that are outside the theme or concept you like, at least if you'd like to play competitively, then yes, it is a bad thing. If I'm going from running Skynet to running the skeletons from Army of Darkness, there's a big change, it might not be something I like, and that's bad for the game if it drives players away. It would have been better to take the concept of an army of undead, and start a new codex.

I think that's the thing that bothers me most about these rumors. I've played necrons since second edition and I like the feel of a small implacable force. While people called them a MEQ army WBB made them far harder than that and if these rumors are true the math indicates that they will essentially be a MEQ equivalent army (it will just require two rolls to have a 3+ save instead of one). Necron Warriors used to be the most durable basic troop, now they'll be easier to kill than Plague Marines and Thousand Sons and as easy to kill as any basic marine.

Personally I don't care if they a dozen units that I think are completely out of character. I can choose not to use a new unit and if they wanted to add a new less resistant basic troop I would have been fine with that. To completely change the character of the army is another thing. It would be the equivalent of marines only having a 4+ save in the next codex. It wouldn't matter if they only cost 10 pts. people would be pissed. It seems to me that the way the opinions are breaking down are largely upon these lines; if you're a current Necron player you're less than enthused about the rumored changes, if you don't play Necrons you're intrigued by the new flavor of the day.

You'd be mistaken then: I'm a current necron player, and I love the way the rumors are sounding. They're a terrible MEQ-ish army at the moment with very little flavor of their own and even less variety. When I looked at Necrons, the fluff always screamed to me not "can't be killed" but "unending". Sure, you can shoot down a necron, but he might just get right back up, and if not, it's a huge shambling horde, it's still going to get there. This fits that.

Remember: No one's seen the book yet. Heck, it isn't even finished being written and changed. There will likely be some way to still take a super expensive 30 model resilient army of doom.

Warriors are still a resilient basic troop btw, at 12 points with a 5+ save after they die, they're pretty darn tough. They die 1/6th of the time more than present, and get back up 1/3rd of the time they die, regardless of the source of the casualty. And if these don't tickle your fancy, immortals will still net you a small, terminator esque army.

micahaphone wrote:I predict that the new tournament move, which will require a name similar to "leafblower", will be to either protect a small bubble of scarabs, and charge terminators and other such high armor saving units with them, then when they fall back the target can be destroyed, or just sending suicide swarms that the enemy cannot completely take down.

Perhaps the Scarab Swamp?

I prefer to call it the Scuttle Bug Stunt.

A much better name.

I have 39 Scarab bases and 9 Tomb Spyders. I predict their stock going up up up!

This i can agree on if rumors are true

I have 6 and 30. I may have to get a few more

Come on. Scarabs are Beetles, right? So when you charge them, you have to scream, "Teal* Buggy Punch!" and lean over the table, punching your opponent in the arm like a man.**

*Insert the predominant color of your scarab swarm.

**If being manly actually applies to you. Giggling and doing a little dance after love tapping your opponent does not apply.

-Greed

targetawg wrote:

Unix wrote:

dancingcricket wrote:
If it becomes required to buy more models to play the game, particularly different ones that are outside the theme or concept you like, at least if you'd like to play competitively, then yes, it is a bad thing. If I'm going from running Skynet to running the skeletons from Army of Darkness, there's a big change, it might not be something I like, and that's bad for the game if it drives players away. It would have been better to take the concept of an army of undead, and start a new codex.

I think that's the thing that bothers me most about these rumors. I've played necrons since second edition and I like the feel of a small implacable force. While people called them a MEQ army WBB made them far harder than that and if these rumors are true the math indicates that they will essentially be a MEQ equivalent army (it will just require two rolls to have a 3+ save instead of one). Necron Warriors used to be the most durable basic troop, now they'll be easier to kill than Plague Marines and Thousand Sons and as easy to kill as any basic marine.

Personally I don't care if they a dozen units that I think are completely out of character. I can choose not to use a new unit and if they wanted to add a new less resistant basic troop I would have been fine with that. To completely change the character of the army is another thing. It would be the equivalent of marines only having a 4+ save in the next codex. It wouldn't matter if they only cost 10 pts. people would be pissed. It seems to me that the way the opinions are breaking down are largely upon these lines; if you're a current Necron player you're less than enthused about the rumored changes, if you don't play Necrons you're intrigued by the new flavor of the day.

You'd be mistaken then: I'm a current necron player, and I love the way the rumors are sounding. They're a terrible MEQ-ish army at the moment with very little flavor of their own and even less variety. When I looked at Necrons, the fluff always screamed to me not "can't be killed" but "unending". Sure, you can shoot down a necron, but he might just get right back up, and if not, it's a huge shambling horde, it's still going to get there. This fits that.

Just because you're a Necron player that doesn't fit my model doesn't make me wrong (or right for that matter). That's why I framed it with "opinions are breaking down LARGELY upon these lines." Considering that this thread has 10 pages of Matt Ward sucks posts from current Necron players I would argue that a good percentage of people are not happy about the rumors. As for the fluff they were always presented as a small raiding or now just waking army. Only in the recent Black Library books when the Necrons were facing off against space marines have they appeared vulnerable, but frankly in the black library books space marines have defeated titans one on one so I've never really tried to equate the books to game terms.

targetawg wrote:
Remember: No one's seen the book yet. Heck, it isn't even finished being written and changed. There will likely be some way to still take a super expensive 30 model resilient army of doom.

Warriors are still a resilient basic troop btw, at 12 points with a 5+ save after they die, they're pretty darn tough. They die 1/6th of the time more than present, and get back up 1/3rd of the time they die, regardless of the source of the casualty. And if these don't tickle your fancy, immortals will still net you a small, terminator esque army.

You're right that few people have seen the book so far. I'm not really one to get all up in arms about these types of things, hence my post count of 12. However, since this is a rumor thread and I have nothing else going on right now, based upon these rumors and the math that has been posted before Necrons have the same rate of survival as marines against the majority of ranged and close combat wounds. They are resilient, as resilient as basic marines. Now they are a true MEQ army, which for me sucks. I guess you're right that I could pony up a few hundred dollars for boxes of immortals just to maintain my present style of play, but I'll probably just wait a few years hoping that GWs pendulum swings back as it often does (especially if they have new boxes to sell). I imagine 2015 or 2016 will see the return of the "hard" Necron Warrior, with a new box set and new weapons options that only come one per box.

guys, you have to remember that unless its multi wound the scarabs are pretty useless against termis. all we know is they have the remove armor save/lower armor rating. even rending is w/e. just dont get your hopes up on seeing scarbs destory termis or even weaken em more so then a squad of warriors.

kenzosan wrote:How many units with 2+ or 3+ have multiple wounds that aren't ic? Personally can't think of any at the moment.

Dont the GK Paladins have 2 wounds each?

Also Obliterators.

IG Heavy Weapon teams

Attack bikes

MC's (or are they essentially the same as ICs?)

Might be something in the 'nid army i suppose but i have no idea.

There are a few 2+ wound SM i'd love to try it out on

Meganobs
Talos/Cronos
Tervigons
Trygons
Mawlocs
Hive Guard?
Other Necrons...

None of these are ICs

sorry kinda meant mc/ic,

i just think using it for anti infanty is pointless. mc/ic is the best use of the scarabs imho

The Scarabs ability is really for AV methinks. The Anti-Armour ability will rarely be relevant.

Its kinda like the old Gauss ability. Its auto-wound on a 6 was largely irrelevant.

Unless you were going Ctan hunting.

I used to rather like going on safari against a fellow Necron player, looking to mount a Star-God's bonce on the wall

I like to think of dead men walking. That's how I see necrons and I lime where it took them. The warrior squads went massive but quite small and hard to kill. That was cool. It would suck if with the rumored transports that they become half guard have old flavor necrons.

People seem to complain necrons only have 1 (well 2) vehicles but that's what made the army unique. Don't take that away, and don't let us spam vehicles. That's not a necron trait!

I really don't get the no vehicle movement amongst necron players. I agree that they should not be analagous with other races craft, but I kinda like the idea of a smaller 'lith portal screaming around spitting out squads of necron warriors in areas bad for your opponant. I also like the idea of a lord having his own 'Skeletor' chariot to bimble about in, though the mini will have to be better than the chibli-hawk to convince me.

I wish I did not buy a tau force now!!

Reflex wrote:I like to think of dead men walking. That's how I see necrons and I lime where it took them. The warrior squads went massive but quite small and hard to kill. That was cool. It would suck if with the rumored transports that they become half guard have old flavor necrons.

People seem to complain necrons only have 1 (well 2) vehicles but that's what made the army unique. Don't take that away, and don't let us spam vehicles. That's not a necron trait!

If there are Vehicles in the codex, you don't have to take them. There are a lot of Necron Players (Myself Included) That WANT the option to take vehicles and transports. There is 0 reason why we should be relegated to a single style of play, which is pretty much what it is right now.

Sasori wrote:

Reflex wrote:I like to think of dead men walking. That's how I see necrons and I lime where it took them. The warrior squads went massive but quite small and hard to kill. That was cool. It would suck if with the rumored transports that they become half guard have old flavor necrons.

People seem to complain necrons only have 1 (well 2) vehicles but that's what made the army unique. Don't take that away, and don't let us spam vehicles. That's not a necron trait!

If there are Vehicles in the codex, you don't have to take them. There are a lot of Necron Players (Myself Included) That WANT the option to take vehicles and transports. There is 0 reason why we should be relegated to a single style of play, which is pretty much what it is right now.

Yeah, GW's Codex design these days seems to be intended to cater for a wide variety of builds and playstyles. Unfortunately this does mean that some people may 'abuse' the options by 'spamming' units, but variety is the spice of life and all that.

A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

Unix wrote:

targetawg wrote:

Unix wrote:

dancingcricket wrote:
If it becomes required to buy more models to play the game, particularly different ones that are outside the theme or concept you like, at least if you'd like to play competitively, then yes, it is a bad thing. If I'm going from running Skynet to running the skeletons from Army of Darkness, there's a big change, it might not be something I like, and that's bad for the game if it drives players away. It would have been better to take the concept of an army of undead, and start a new codex.

I think that's the thing that bothers me most about these rumors. I've played necrons since second edition and I like the feel of a small implacable force. While people called them a MEQ army WBB made them far harder than that and if these rumors are true the math indicates that they will essentially be a MEQ equivalent army (it will just require two rolls to have a 3+ save instead of one). Necron Warriors used to be the most durable basic troop, now they'll be easier to kill than Plague Marines and Thousand Sons and as easy to kill as any basic marine.

Personally I don't care if they a dozen units that I think are completely out of character. I can choose not to use a new unit and if they wanted to add a new less resistant basic troop I would have been fine with that. To completely change the character of the army is another thing. It would be the equivalent of marines only having a 4+ save in the next codex. It wouldn't matter if they only cost 10 pts. people would be pissed. It seems to me that the way the opinions are breaking down are largely upon these lines; if you're a current Necron player you're less than enthused about the rumored changes, if you don't play Necrons you're intrigued by the new flavor of the day.

You'd be mistaken then: I'm a current necron player, and I love the way the rumors are sounding. They're a terrible MEQ-ish army at the moment with very little flavor of their own and even less variety. When I looked at Necrons, the fluff always screamed to me not "can't be killed" but "unending". Sure, you can shoot down a necron, but he might just get right back up, and if not, it's a huge shambling horde, it's still going to get there. This fits that.

Just because you're a Necron player that doesn't fit my model doesn't make me wrong (or right for that matter). That's why I framed it with "opinions are breaking down LARGELY upon these lines." Considering that this thread has 10 pages of Matt Ward sucks posts from current Necron players I would argue that a good percentage of people are not happy about the rumors. As for the fluff they were always presented as a small raiding or now just waking army. Only in the recent Black Library books when the Necrons were facing off against space marines have they appeared vulnerable, but frankly in the black library books space marines have defeated titans one on one so I've never really tried to equate the books to game terms.

But the opinions don't largely break down as you said. I've read the entire thread as well, from the start, and most people seem happy. The only point I've seen people whine about consistently is the "ctan getting killed by necrons". Which we don't know if it's even true. Most people are saying they're LESS MEQ then the were before, which is true. Before they were: marine statline, marine save, one basic bolter esque gun, price of a veteran marine. Now they're a marine statline, 4+ save, cheap, with a better "you can't ever negate this WBB suckah" roll.

All the rest of the hate has just been the standard "Matt Ward?1! (insert insult utilizing a piece of the word ward)" hate-fest that always comes up if his name is mentioned. It's like throwing raw meat to a pack of dogs..

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

Following the FOC requirements:

How many different lists can you build with necrons at 500 points?

Now, how many different lists can you build with EVERY OTHER ARMY at 500 points?

Replace points value with any amount.

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

I'm not seeing your "effective and non effective". There are ZERO effective necron lists at present. The only one thats even playable is the monolith spam list that forces draws (yay...forcing draws...). Those may be different playstyles, but they're all ineffective. You can always make a 100 different playstyles if you play every different combo of junk options.

As far as real "builds" necrons have now? 1 to none.

And if warriors get to be 12 points and scarabs are the anti-armor nuts we're hearing about, the best build will likely be some sort of foot list!

I for one have played 'crons for a loonnnngg time, and would love the option run barges of the undead, slowly hovering closer to the enemy, or to run a foot list, or etc etc.

Whilst I'm not entirely sold on the idea of transports (I'd prefer it if they were portal-like, like the Monolith, it does also kind of suit the harvester theme and to a larger extent the suggested idea of the Cron's expanding outside of tomb-worlds and into occupied space, where they can't rely on the likes of teleporting and stationary pylons as much...

I hope thos rumors all will end up in the warp as some kind of embarrassing joke that isn't even funny.

The changes in rules and stats would be the worst thing that would happen to the necrons since the release of 5th ed of rules, the whole idea seem to be just "Oh, make the warriors more crap, take the immortals to troops, give them warrior statline and screw them all more with ridiculous WBB change" another idea with destroyers being jump infantry=WTF!?
If it turn to be true my whole necron army goes ebay and i will quit the hobby.

Kevin949 wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

Following the FOC requirements:

How many different lists can you build with necrons at 500 points?

Now, how many different lists can you build with EVERY OTHER ARMY at 500 points?

Replace points value with any amount.

Please don't use this argument. 40k is designed around 1500points not 500.

targetawg wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

I'm not seeing your "effective and non effective". There are ZERO effective necron lists at present. The only one thats even playable is the monolith spam list that forces draws (yay...forcing draws...). Those may be different playstyles, but they're all ineffective. You can always make a 100 different playstyles if you play every different combo of junk options.

As far as real "builds" necrons have now? 1 to none.

And if warriors get to be 12 points and scarabs are the anti-armor nuts we're hearing about, the best build will likely be some sort of foot list!

I for one have played 'crons for a loonnnngg time, and would love the option run barges of the undead, slowly hovering closer to the enemy, or to run a foot list, or etc etc.

I'd love to have an update to. But battle droids from starwars belong in starwars. And I'd hardly say destroyerwing is ineffective. While not top tier it can smash out some serious pain.

I always did wonder how the Necrons transported the captured human blanks.

Is it directly known that these transports will carry their cargo like rhinios? Or could it possibly mean they can portal units up to 15 models? =/ that's my only thought on keeping the army from going rhino happy.

Kurgash wrote:Is it directly known that these transports will carry their cargo like rhinios? Or could it possibly mean they can portal units up to 15 models? =/ that's my only thought on keeping the army from going rhino happy.

AFAIK the rumours pointed at the former, rather than the latter, which suggests it working like ordinary transports. Will have to wait and see though, like all things...

I think it might fit their "theme". Though they can teleport, why not bring another scary war-machine to the fray? Seeing as they are supposed to be engaged in bigger battles, rather than just raids, it makes sense. Also I doubt that they can teleport everywhere they want. What's stopping them from teleporting directly to Terra, Eldar Craftworlds, etc?

Destrado wrote:I think it might fit their "theme". Though they can teleport, why not bring another scary war-machine to the fray? Seeing as they are supposed to be engaged in bigger battles, rather than just raids, it makes sense. Also I doubt that they can teleport everywhere they want. What's stopping them from teleporting directly to Terra, Eldar Craftworlds, etc?

1. Necrons can teleport from planet to planet with ease, it's how they repair when they fail a WBB. They teleport to the nearest convenient tombworld, which if they're on a ship in space isn't exactly accessible.
2. They don't teleport onto Terra because of common sense. No matter how strong their forces, they'd get wiped. It'd be far easier to assail the Solar System with spacecraft, systematically taking down the defences with their superior technology.
3. New vehicles are a good thing, apart from the monetary price. Transports don't fit their fluff, and that's the problem people are having. It might make them stronger in game terms, but if you debase it to just rules and points, what's the point in having the different races and backgrounds?

targetawg wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

I'm not seeing your "effective and non effective". There are ZERO effective necron lists at present. The only one thats even playable is the monolith spam list that forces draws (yay...forcing draws...). Those may be different playstyles, but they're all ineffective. You can always make a 100 different playstyles if you play every different combo of junk options.

As far as real "builds" necrons have now? 1 to none.

And if warriors get to be 12 points and scarabs are the anti-armor nuts we're hearing about, the best build will likely be some sort of foot list!

I for one have played 'crons for a loonnnngg time, and would love the option run barges of the undead, slowly hovering closer to the enemy, or to run a foot list, or etc etc.

I disagree with the bolded statement 110%.

Captain Jack wrote:I really don't get the no vehicle movement amongst necron players. I agree that they should not be analagous with other races craft, but I kinda like the idea of a smaller 'lith portal screaming around spitting out squads of necron warriors in areas bad for your opponant. I also like the idea of a lord having his own 'Skeletor' chariot to bimble about in, though the mini will have to be better than the chibli-hawk to convince me.

Won't be too difficult for them to make that better than the Chibi Hawk, may need to re think that phrasing.

Reflex wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

Following the FOC requirements:

How many different lists can you build with necrons at 500 points?

Now, how many different lists can you build with EVERY OTHER ARMY at 500 points?

Replace points value with any amount.

Please don't use this argument. 40k is designed around 1500points not 500.

I take it you missed my last sentence? Also, 40k is a game made to played, it's designed to let the players do what they want, and setting a soft cap on points value games is ludicrous. Not to mention all the events that have taken place at my FLGS that have been geared at 200-500 points.

So, just because you couldn't come up with a good counter-point doesn't mean you can just throw out a generic bland response and expect to get a "ya, you're right." response.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Destrado wrote:I think it might fit their "theme". Though they can teleport, why not bring another scary war-machine to the fray? Seeing as they are supposed to be engaged in bigger battles, rather than just raids, it makes sense. Also I doubt that they can teleport everywhere they want. What's stopping them from teleporting directly to Terra, Eldar Craftworlds, etc?

I'm pretty sure that they need the power a tomb world provides to be able to teleport from planet to planet. So, to teleport to those locations you mentioned would require them to BE a tomb world already.
Speculation, of course.

Gethvar wrote:I hope thos rumors all will end up in the warp as some kind of embarrassing joke that isn't even funny.

The changes in rules and stats would be the worst thing that would happen to the necrons since the release of 5th ed of rules, the whole idea seem to be just "Oh, make the warriors more crap, take the immortals to troops, give them warrior statline and screw them all more with ridiculous WBB change" another idea with destroyers being jump infantry=WTF!?
If it turn to be true my whole necron army goes ebay and i will quit the hobby.

Well the Immortals are going to keep the 3+ save, so they wont be too much different. Missiles/rokkits wont matter too much, since you can always take aWBB according to current rules. And how are warriors more suck? You take away the phase out rules, and honestly the only thing bad about them is how poor they do in CC. So if you were to ask me, just taking away phase out makes them better.

Changes to the WBB sound great to me, so you take a res orb and get it back to 4+ (again current rumors) And destroyers being jump troops rumor....well that does seem a bit off, BUT in all honesty, most the time I use destroyers they only move 12 inches anyways, so I can keep on blasting away at the enemy.

I'm not too thrilled with changes to WBB as far as the number goes but not needing to baby sit my forces with an orb makes me happy as I can spread out and not rely on my majority T5 list. Still, transports....ugh.

Surely Destroyers becoming Jump Infantry just makes them lose the ability to Turbo Boost. Would they lose anything else?






Ah - unable to fire Heavy gund on the move as well. Which wont be a probelm IF their gun become "Assault"

Praxiss wrote:Surely Destroyers becoming Jump Infantry just makes them lose the ability to Turbo Boost. Would they lose anything else?






Ah - unable to fire Heavy gund on the move as well. Which wont be a probelm IF their gun become "Assault"

Ya, having to take dangerous terrain tests when you want to hide them in area terrain or in a ruin for better LOS.

Scarey Nerd wrote:
1. Necrons can teleport from planet to planet with ease, it's how they repair when they fail a WBB. They teleport to the nearest convenient tombworld, which if they're on a ship in space isn't exactly accessible.
2. They don't teleport onto Terra because of common sense. No matter how strong their forces, they'd get wiped. It'd be far easier to assail the Solar System with spacecraft, systematically taking down the defences with their superior technology.
3. New vehicles are a good thing, apart from the monetary price. Transports don't fit their fluff, and that's the problem people are having. It might make them stronger in game terms, but if you debase it to just rules and points, what's the point in having the different races and backgrounds?

1 & 2 - Terra was an example - they should be able to go there. But yet they don't (for other reasons, besides your own; downfall of mankind = chaos closing in). Yet on Mars they landed a craft.

So it would seem that they can't teleport everywhere. I didn't play BFGothic, but perhaps certain kinds of fields & technology break the teleportation (Geller fields, etc - I doubt Eldar wouldn't know how to counter it). So teleportation (and translated to gaming terms), Deep-striking isn't always an option. I doubt they'd been able to wage war for untold years if they didn't have their bases covered.

3. People will react negatively to anything that is against their perceived idea of how the army is. People have only heard rumours and already are calling it broken & bad. While I think that rumours are to be discussed... there's a limit. Like the costumary "I'm selling my army". Codexes change, rules and fluff change - I don't like Assault Marines as Troops in Blood Angels or Deep-Striking Land Raiders but that doesn't mean a codex is bad. Assuming it is bad based on some "facts" is like rating a movie or a book based on a synopsis.

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

Effective lists are completely relevant to the argument, because that's the point of the game. Sure, you can play friendly lists for fun, but at the end of the day it's a wargame, and it's about winning (and having fun in the process) for the vast majority of players. In this respect it's the same form of lists and play style over and over. It's Mandatory 2x Warrior Squads, then you add whatever ineffective and overcosted unit of choice to try to do damage and stay alive +Monoliths. Monoliths are a must, because of phase out.

Transports will not turn Necrons into space marines, or Guard. For one, there are more defining aspects to those armies than just transports, including the stat line and USR's for the army, which has already been rumored to change. The fundamental changes in the codex, that have been shown through the rumors, are indicative of a different approach than either of those armies. Just because we will be getting Transports Like, Say every other army other than Tyranids, Does not mean our Army becomes a shade of MEQ or GEQ.

The current rumors seem to indicate a brand new direction in vehicle and in playstyle with OPTIONS. I don't see how having say, an AV11 open topped transport Skimmer with Quantum Shielding that would add +2 to it's armor values on side and front (and perhaps add in the benefits of the current living metal, but that's speculation on my part) Just because it shares the base option of "Transport" Does not make it a Rhino, or a Chimera.

So, to sum it up: Just because an Army gets new options, that does not make it like other armies, because they share the base similarity such as having transports or vehicles. Just because your vision and feel of the army is different from someone else, does not mean we should have less options. You will still have the choice to run the army as you see fit, and I should have the option to run how I see fit as well, regardless if that means I run it with transports, and you run it footslogging.

Kevin949 wrote:

targetawg wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

I'm not seeing your "effective and non effective". There are ZERO effective necron lists at present. The only one thats even playable is the monolith spam list that forces draws (yay...forcing draws...). Those may be different playstyles, but they're all ineffective. You can always make a 100 different playstyles if you play every different combo of junk options.

As far as real "builds" necrons have now? 1 to none.

And if warriors get to be 12 points and scarabs are the anti-armor nuts we're hearing about, the best build will likely be some sort of foot list!

I for one have played 'crons for a loonnnngg time, and would love the option run barges of the undead, slowly hovering closer to the enemy, or to run a foot list, or etc etc.

I disagree with the bolded statement 110%.

Disagree however much you want, even a non-real amount, doesn't change the truth.

Necrons may be fun in a "play with your friends", but in any sort of even moderately competitive environment, they're absolute junk.

How about some reasoning with why you "disagree". Find me a single top 10 finish of necrons from 2010 or 2011 at the GT level, barring events where the success was purely based on a comp score (and I can't think of any of these, but I know that some events it can make an army that lost most games it played still win).

And mind you, most gt's are 50~ players, so thats only top 20%.

Heck, I'm pretty positive you couldn't find me a single top 20 finish either.

I just hope these transports are portal-based, to put emphasis on the Necron's superior technology. I don't want Rhinos/Razorbacks, sick of the sight of those metal boxes.

I wouldn't mind a drop-pod equivelent that raises out the ground. An obelist with a Flux Arc and a portal, that you can use as an immobile monolith portal. Have multiple of these shoot out around the board first turn and zip your guys all over the place as you please.

One unit per portal, letting you reroll WBB. I'm just not a fan of the idea of Necron APCs, I just hope they make these transports unique and obviously Necron.

I'm guessing they will be some sort of funky shape that doesn't fit in a frikkin army case like the 'lith. :(

Kevin949 wrote:

targetawg wrote:

Reflex wrote:A single style? That would be what? While there is a mega difference between effective lists and non effective lists, for the purpose of this argument that will be irrelevant. There is: warrior horde, wraithwing, destroyer wing, phalanx and mc list.

I'd say that's more then one playstyle.

What I was trying to say in my post, and what I was unclear about, was that a 35-75 point transport would turn necrons into a mash up of guard and spesh mureheeens. That's super flavorsome and totally what crons are about. A vehicle that is a portal is a different kettle of fish. But either way, necrons have never tasted like then need tons of veichles. They have 2, the monolith and pylon. If you got into crons for and are a tread head, seriously gtfo because necrons don't need transports! A few tanks I get, but full mech crons tastes as awesome as lame cake. Not even fat kids would eat that.

Why take the bus when you can be zaped there in an instant.
To sum up: an obelisk type gun tank, Ye cool. A portal tank, yea ok, makes sense. The parking lot at your local super market? Gtfo...

I'm not seeing your "effective and non effective". There are ZERO effective necron lists at present. The only one thats even playable is the monolith spam list that forces draws (yay...forcing draws...). Those may be different playstyles, but they're all ineffective. You can always make a 100 different playstyles if you play every different combo of junk options.

As far as real "builds" necrons have now? 1 to none.

And if warriors get to be 12 points and scarabs are the anti-armor nuts we're hearing about, the best build will likely be some sort of foot list!

I for one have played 'crons for a loonnnngg time, and would love the option run barges of the undead, slowly hovering closer to the enemy, or to run a foot list, or etc etc.

I disagree with the bolded statement 110%.

Then can you tell us what the "effective" Necron list is these days because, if it's out there, I haven't seen it yet.

targetawg wrote:
Disagree however much you want, even a non-real amount, doesn't change the truth.

Necrons may be fun in a "play with your friends", but in any sort of even moderately competitive environment, they're absolute junk.

How about some reasoning with why you "disagree". Find me a single top 10 finish of necrons from 2010 or 2011 at the GT level, barring events where the success was purely based on a comp score (and I can't think of any of these, but I know that some events it can make an army that lost most games it played still win).

And mind you, most gt's are 50~ players, so thats only top 20%.

Heck, I'm pretty positive you couldn't find me a single top 20 finish either.

So your definition of "effective" is "useful at tournaments" then? Good to know, but still an incorrect definition.

And ya, you're right, I couldn't find an example for you. Mainly because no one actually plays necrons in tournaments anymore. Either way, I don't follow the tournament crap at all so I really couldn't care less about who wins what and where with what army.

Your statement of having "ZERO effective necron lists" is just invalid, and I disagree because there are a number of people on here that are playing necrons and winning games. Even myself, and I mainly play against MEQ's and still win/draw quite a number of times. I don't get phased out either. And I don't take the standard lists that have been mentioned either. Is there one list of necrons that will be good against everything? No. But I'm sure the same could be said about any army. As usual, you're just another person that thinks only the models and rules play a factor in whether or not an army is good, never do you consider the tactician.

And THAT is why I disagree with you 120% now.

In reference to effectiveness of Necrons, since I began playing in 2009 I've won 2 games. 2. And one of them wasn't a game, it was a turn 3 wipe bloodbath against DE being run by a player with absolutely no tactical knowledge. I'm not a bad player by any means, it's just that Necrons currently suck, and suck hard.

Zathras wrote:
Then can you tell us what the "effective" Necron list is these days because, if it's out there, I haven't seen it yet.

Yes, anything that wins games. /discussion


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scarey Nerd wrote:In reference to effectiveness of Necrons, since I began playing in 2009 I've won 2 games. 2. And one of them wasn't a game, it was a turn 3 wipe bloodbath against DE being run by a player with absolutely no tactical knowledge. I'm not a bad player by any means, it's just that Necrons currently suck, and suck hard.

Sorry to hear that. I'm about 50/50 with my friend who plays BT. Undefeated against his nids(Edit: come to think, I *may* have lost or drawn one game against his nids) and tau. My other buddy has vanilla marines and nids and I'm undefeated against them. And another guy has chaos (and eldar, but I haven't played his eldar) (though his armies are SORELY lacking, from what I understand) and I'm undefeated against him as well. Been playing about as long as you, maybe a little longer.

Praxiss wrote:I'm guessing they will be some sort of funky shape that doesn't fit in a frikkin army case like the 'lith. :(

That's what tool boxes, monster cases and good ol' plastic carrier bags ar for I used to just use carrier bags lined with bubble rap to carry two 'Liths. Worked well, until I wasted £50 on a monster case...

Kevin949 wrote:

Scarey Nerd wrote:In reference to effectiveness of Necrons, since I began playing in 2009 I've won 2 games. 2. And one of them wasn't a game, it was a turn 3 wipe bloodbath against DE being run by a player with absolutely no tactical knowledge. I'm not a bad player by any means, it's just that Necrons currently suck, and suck hard.

Sorry to hear that. I'm about 50/50 with my friend who plays BT. Undefeated against his nids(Edit: come to think, I *may* have lost or drawn one game against his nids) and tau. My other buddy has vanilla marines and nids and I'm undefeated against them. And another guy has chaos (and eldar, but I haven't played his eldar) (though his armies are SORELY lacking, from what I understand) and I'm undefeated against him as well. Been playing about as long as you, maybe a little longer.

The DE player is also a 'Nid player, but he won't let me play against him because he knows he'll lose. He's TFG big time. I've never won against Marines, I've won once against IG but it was incredibly close, and his dice rolls were poor in the extreme. I get steamrolled by Chaos Daemons every time. I'm not exactly the luckiest guy in the world, but come on Universe, cut me some slack, huh?

Sort of on topic: Whilst the fluff is being butchered in my opinion, and by no means anyone else's, I think Necrons could make an interesting secondary army. I'll sell up shop, collect Sisters when they come out, and then slowly reintegrate myself with Necrons and come at them with a completely new mindset, as if they're a brand new army.

Scarey Nerd wrote:In reference to effectiveness of Necrons, since I began playing in 2009 I've won 2 games. 2. And one of them wasn't a game, it was a turn 3 wipe bloodbath against DE being run by a player with absolutely no tactical knowledge. I'm not a bad player by any means, it's just that Necrons currently suck, and suck hard.

I've played at least once every two weeks with Necrons until recently (when I sold them) for six months, lost one game, drew one. It's the player not the army, I don't consider myself the best of players either, I just understand how my army works. The majority of these games were against Deathwing, IG and Tau. Of course though, you need the dice behind you.

Kevin949 wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Surely Destroyers becoming Jump Infantry just makes them lose the ability to Turbo Boost. Would they lose anything else?






Ah - unable to fire Heavy gund on the move as well. Which wont be a probelm IF their gun become "Assault"

Ya, having to take dangerous terrain tests when you want to hide them in area terrain or in a ruin for better LOS.

How is that any different from now? In fact it would be better than now as they would have the option to 'walk' in and out of terrain.

Kevin949 wrote:

Zathras wrote:
Then can you tell us what the "effective" Necron list is these days because, if it's out there, I haven't seen it yet.

Yes, anything that wins games. /discussion

Ok, nice non-answer there. Just what is in that "effective" Necron list?

Guys stop derailing the thread and take the "Most effective cron list" topic to army list or tactics, not here.

Neconilis wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Surely Destroyers becoming Jump Infantry just makes them lose the ability to Turbo Boost. Would they lose anything else?






Ah - unable to fire Heavy gund on the move as well. Which wont be a probelm IF their gun become "Assault"

Ya, having to take dangerous terrain tests when you want to hide them in area terrain or in a ruin for better LOS.

How is that any different from now? In fact it would be better than now as they would have the option to 'walk' in and out of terrain.

I was being somewhat sarcastic pretty much for the reasons you just mentioned. As it stands now they can't go in area terrain with out taking DT tests. At least as jump infantry though could just climb to the top of the ruin to avoid it all together. The bummer part is that if they are JI they can't be placed on impassable terrain like they can now (with DT test, of course).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zathras wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

Zathras wrote:
Then can you tell us what the "effective" Necron list is these days because, if it's out there, I haven't seen it yet.

Yes, anything that wins games. /discussion

Ok, nice non-answer there. Just what is in that "effective" Necron list?

You just don't understand it...and now see below.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:Guys stop derailing the thread and take the "Most effective cron list" topic to army list or tactics, not here.

Agreed, I'm done.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:Guys stop derailing the thread and take the "Most effective cron list" topic to army list or tactics, not here.

i gotta say this comment has always been odd to me. threads evolve in a certain direction. this one has gone in wave back and forth between how people run necrons currently, how they will run them, wild speculation, and hating something about the new codex. if it were to stay on topic, this would be a quiet place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
as to the rumors: my friend plays ig, and he cannot wait to finish building his second army when the necron dex comes out. necrons are his personal favorite army but he couldnt play with them. when i had barely started the game and 5th just came out my friend loaned me his tau, another friend had nids, and another had vanilla marines. 2v2, necrons/tau vs vanilla/nids, the game ran like this: turn 1 nids destroyed the warriors. turn 1!, some lucky roles, true, but he went straight for the warriors and thus had the necrons phase out.

the reason for my tale is simple, my friend has been waiting for the new update since 5th came out and likes whats up, but hes waiting for the actual release, much like i did with the grey knights, to get excited.

on a side note, my computer freaked out so idk if i posted my earlier comment. looks like it did.

targetawg wrote:
Most people are saying they're LESS MEQ then the were before, which is true. Before they were: marine statline, marine save, one basic bolter esque gun, price of a veteran marine. Now they're a marine statline, 4+ save, cheap, with a better "you can't ever negate this WBB suckah" roll.

They might be saying that it's less MEQ but they're wrong. Fine they don't have a 3+ armor save, but for every basic ranged and close combat weapon in the game they have the same survival rate as a marine. They used to be twice as likely to survive. To put it another way the kill rates for marines, old necrons and new necrons for different AP rates are:

AP 5,6,-
MEQ 33%
Old 17%
New 33%

AP 4
MEQ 33%
Old 17%
New 67%

AP 1,2,3
MEQ 100%
Old 50%
New 67%

So old necrons have different survival rates against every AP value, new necrons are the same for everything but AP4 or better. How is this less MEQ? Because they have to roll 2 dice for the same effect?

Kevin949 wrote:

targetawg wrote:How about some reasoning with why you "disagree". Find me a single top 10 finish of necrons from 2010 or 2011 at the GT level, barring events where the success was purely based on a comp score (and I can't think of any of these, but I know that some events it can make an army that lost most games it played still win).

And mind you, most gt's are 50~ players, so thats only top 20%.

Heck, I'm pretty positive you couldn't find me a single top 20 finish either.

And ya, you're right, I couldn't find an example for you. Mainly because no one actually plays necrons in tournaments anymore. Either way, I don't follow the tournament crap at all so I really couldn't care less about who wins what and where with what army.

It's not to hard here's one posted on Dakka UK GT Finals march 2010

I can probably find more if I really look.

Necrons where designed to be tough but have little offence. Since GW has made other armies tougher in the last decade. It's harder for Necrons to score Massacre results to actually place high in tournies. That does not prevent them from winning compeditive games but does greatly effect tournament results.

*Disclaimer* I did not read that thread just found it.

Kevin949 wrote:

targetawg wrote:
Disagree however much you want, even a non-real amount, doesn't change the truth.

Necrons may be fun in a "play with your friends", but in any sort of even moderately competitive environment, they're absolute junk.

How about some reasoning with why you "disagree". Find me a single top 10 finish of necrons from 2010 or 2011 at the GT level, barring events where the success was purely based on a comp score (and I can't think of any of these, but I know that some events it can make an army that lost most games it played still win).

And mind you, most gt's are 50~ players, so thats only top 20%.

Heck, I'm pretty positive you couldn't find me a single top 20 finish either.

So your definition of "effective" is "useful at tournaments" then? Good to know, but still an incorrect definition.

The fact that you don't play in tournaments means you shouldn't even be commenting on what an "effective" list is. Playing against friends in fun games doesn't mean a list is effective. Effective in the sense that was being referred to originally meant "competitive". They are not in any way, shape, or form a competitive book right now. They don't need to be best, but at present, they just can't compete at all.

Kevin949 wrote:
And ya, you're right, I couldn't find an example for you. Mainly because no one actually plays necrons in tournaments anymore. Either way, I don't follow the tournament crap at all so I really couldn't care less about who wins what and where with what army.

Meaning you shouldn't even be commenting on the effectiveness of a book. Because you have no clue what effectiveness means. The reason that no one plays necrons at tournaments anymore is BECAUSE they aren't effective.

Kevin949 wrote:
Your statement of having "ZERO effective necron lists" is just invalid, and I disagree because there are a number of people on here that are playing necrons and winning games. Even myself, and I mainly play against MEQ's and still win/draw quite a number of times. I don't get phased out either. And I don't take the standard lists that have been mentioned either. Is there one list of necrons that will be good against everything? No. But I'm sure the same could be said about any army. As usual, you're just another person that thinks only the models and rules play a factor in whether or not an army is good, never do you consider the tactician.

All you state is your biased opinion, with absolutely no backing. You refuse to even acknowledge the book needs a major overhaul to have it be competitive or effective in 5th edition. Playing an army and winning games is no proof for anything, since we have no idea WHO you're playing. If you're playing a bunch of inexperienced players or guys that don't like to build competitive/effective lists, it means nothing. Don't assume I'm "just another person" that fits your preconceived perception of anyone that disagrees with you. The tactician is the most important part of the game, however, most tacticians have agreed to move on to armies that have the tools to be competitive, which necrons don't. They lack the utility to play in an "all-comers" environment.

Kevin949 wrote:And THAT is why I disagree with you 120% now.

I accept that statement.

I for one am glad to see Necron's getting an overhaul, as they've needed one from quite some time. Whether you're in it for:

1) The models: the change is currently very limited and lacks variety compared to other ranges. There's 1 troop choice for the love of god.
2) The variety of lists that can be built: Since you have less than half the force org options, and basically no upgrades which would let you differentiate squads, you inherently end up with far fewer builds than other books.
3) The rules/effectiveness: This plays into the above primarily, since the army lacks variety, it lacks the ability to give the general the tools he needs to win a competitive game.

No one likes change, it happens whenever a new book comes out. There will always be those doom-sayers that see it as the end of their beloved army. But as the song goes, "look on the bright side of life". Your book is getting some attention, you're getting your fluff advanced (and before you cry out about it, realize...you haven't read it yet), and you're getting an update which will give you a larger variety of lists, and just new opportunities and options to play with.

All of your old models will still be there for the most part, and it appears the primary model necron players have (warriors) will be one of the absolute best choices. I've got roughly a hundred painted and based warriors, and I'd love for them to be an effective choice again.

Don't let the fact that Matt Ward is writing it make you see everything you read through colored lenses. For the most part, the hate surrounding Matt Ward is just a ridiculous hype that the internet started with a kernel and just ran with to epic proportions.

Unix wrote:They might be saying that it's less MEQ but they're wrong. Fine they don't have a 3+ armor save, but for every basic ranged and close combat weapon in the game they have the same survival rate as a marine. They used to be twice as likely to survive. To put it another way the kill rates for marines, old necrons and new necrons for different AP rates are:

AP 5,6,-
MEQ 33%
Old 17%
New 33%

AP 4
MEQ 33%
Old 17%
New 67%

AP 1,2,3
MEQ 100%
Old 50%
New 67%

So old necrons have different survival rates against every AP value, new necrons are the same for everything but AP4 or better. How is this less MEQ? Because they have to roll 2 dice for the same effect?

How does having a different survival rate to different AP values = "different" from MEQ? Also, those survival rates for old necrons are flawed, since you aren't factoring in what weapons would have negated/not negated WBB under the old rules due to strength values and the like.

Also..if those are kill rates...you said they're the same as marines now. If you compare the numbers under MEQ and NEW...it's different in every instance except for AP 5/6.

Mind you, I find those whole argument pretty flawed since you're basically saying that anything that has a similar armor save to a marine is an equivalent..

targetawg wrote:*Snipped*

Never said I didn't think the necrons needed a new book. I've been pining for a new book since I started getting really familiar with the rules of 5th ed.

Your OPINION that effectiveness is directly correlated to competition is just that, your opinion. Accept that as it is.

I can comment on the book of the army I play and have played for a few years now all I want.

I play against people that have years more experience than I do with WH40K. My main opponent has been playing (off and on, but more regularly the past few years now) for about 13 years or more. I really don't know when he started but we were in high school and that was about 13-15 years ago. So, now you know. And I guess playing against him is not the same as playing against some random guy in a tournament even though other than knowing him for so long there is no difference. We don't run house rules and we generally pick missions at random. Heck, most of the time we're playing pretty close to tournament style games anyway. But whatever.

I'm glad, ecstatic even, that they're getting an overhaul. I love everything I've heard so far about the changes (except maybe the WBB change but I'm glad it's not just blanket FNP). I'm practically giddy with excitement, especially at the prospect of destroying my opponents even more thoroughly than I sometimes do now.

*edit*
as for the matt ward comment, I know absolutely nothing of this guy other than what everyone has complained about, so nothing I say is based off of whatever he is doing or not doing. *Shrug* Again, I just play the game with what I'm given, I don't care who wrote it.

I just wanted to say, that saying someone that does not play in tournaments has no idea what they are talking about is just stupid. Incredibly stupid. Now if you are asking someone that doesnt play in tournies, about their opinions on tourny play, then yea I see your point. But just because 1 person doesnt goto tournies, does not mean they dont know what they are talking about.

I would like to point out that I do agree that necrons are not COMPETITIVE right now for tournament play but I don't believe that means they're ineffective. Can people with them? Sure, I think they could. But a lot of it will rely on luck and very very skillful play. I certainly think it would be much harder for a necron army to win a tourny than most other armies currently. But as KingCracker said, I don't play tournaments so I don't really have a place to comment on tournament play.

Its probably been gone over before, but i dont like the loss of Pariahs, i know they werent the best unit, but i loved their fluff and models

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

I dont think they will cut out Pariahs all to getter, but make them a SGT upgrade for warriors or/and Immortals. But I don't really know so we will see.

Well maybe they are going to be the "Crypteks" or how ever its spelled. So maybe its just a bit of a change. Who knows, maybe they killed off the Ctan (mostly) and when that happened Necrons started getting themselves back, and the Pariahs changed into those thingys.

Yes, thingys is a technical term

I'd wager you could use pariahs as the cryptek models, considering I believe there was mention of the crypteks being able to take warscythes?

Let's hope they retain the Assault 2 status of the current immortals gun as well and not the poop version of the lords warscythe.

Well, there is always this too:

yakface wrote:One of the other new Elite units is also CC oriented, but is very pricey points wise (but is S5/T5/3+save). This unit can wield a Warscythe, but they are not called Pariahs (no idea if that's what Pariahs have 'turned into' or not).

KingCracker wrote:Well maybe they are going to be the "Crypteks" or how ever its spelled. So maybe its just a bit of a change. Who knows, maybe they killed off the Ctan (mostly) and when that happened Necrons started getting themselves back, and the Pariahs changed into those thingys.

Yes, thingys is a technical term

loving thingys!
hope they do keep them and its just a name change

Just Dave wrote:Well, there is always this too:

yakface wrote:One of the other new Elite units is also CC oriented, but is very pricey points wise (but is S5/T5/3+save). This unit can wield a Warscythe, but they are not called Pariahs (no idea if that's what Pariahs have 'turned into' or not).

They sound exactly like the Guard-things in FoD. Sounds like Pariah's transformation, if they haven't been cut alltogether. Plus, they're the unit in FoD that made me realise that Necrons are Daleks.

"WE OBEY."

Sorry pet peeve of mine, people keep saying the Necron save is 16% worse, that is not true, it has been lowered by 16% but it is actually (1/2-1/3)/(1/3) worse. Just like how a terminator is twice as likely to survive a bolter shot as a marine even though the save is only raised by 1/6.

sorry to be off topic...

Just Dave wrote:Well, there is always this too:

yakface wrote:One of the other new Elite units is also CC oriented, but is very pricey points wise (but is S5/T5/3+save). This unit can wield a Warscythe, but they are not called Pariahs (no idea if that's what Pariahs have 'turned into' or not).

I swear I've read the OP over 20 times, and I missed this. This sounds more like the Pariahs than Crypteks to me. I would love for a unit with a transport, that has the ability to shread any dedicated CC units. This is all supposing that Warscythes maintain their current stats.

I'm glad necrons aren't turning into blood angels...we'd see sliver painted marines using the necron codex.

Farmer wrote:I'm glad necrons aren't turning into blood angels...we'd see sliver painted marines using the necron codex.

Even more Grey Knights?

kenzosan wrote:guys, you have to remember that unless its multi wound the scarabs are pretty useless against termis. all we know is they have the remove armor save/lower armor rating. even rending is w/e. just dont get your hopes up on seeing scarbs destory termis or even weaken em more so then a squad of warriors.

Well, they'd be a small sacrificial unit. The scarabs charge, hopefully live until the opponents assault phase, die, and then next shooting phase, no armor saves for mr. termie.

Azure wrote:

Farmer wrote:I'm glad necrons aren't turning into blood angels...we'd see sliver painted marines using the necron codex.

Even more Grey Knights?

Naw... we'd see even the feared NECRORK!!!!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/271328.page

micahaphone wrote:

kenzosan wrote:guys, you have to remember that unless its multi wound the scarabs are pretty useless against termis. all we know is they have the remove armor save/lower armor rating. even rending is w/e. just dont get your hopes up on seeing scarbs destory termis or even weaken em more so then a squad of warriors.

Well, they'd be a small sacrificial unit. The scarabs charge, hopefully live until the opponents assault phase, die, and then next shooting phase, no armor saves for mr. termie.

Only if Mr. Termie has more than one wound. If they do a wound to a Terminator---he'll be dead before his lack of armor save will come into play.


TWC
BloodCrushers
Nobz
MC
AV 14

Put them in front of your warriors and make them charge the Scarabs first. It's a lose/lose for your opponent.

micahaphone wrote:

kenzosan wrote:guys, you have to remember that unless its multi wound the scarabs are pretty useless against termis. all we know is they have the remove armor save/lower armor rating. even rending is w/e. just dont get your hopes up on seeing scarbs destory termis or even weaken em more so then a squad of warriors.

Well, they'd be a small sacrificial unit. The scarabs charge, hopefully live until the opponents assault phase, die, and then next shooting phase, no armor saves for mr. termie.

the way its worded it only works on a multi wound model. just like the sniper ability in the gk codex for the assassin, except it takes 1 models armor save if it suffers an unsaved wound and not the invul save if it hits. which means in cc you will have to role each save at a time cuz as soon as you fail 1 save that multi wound model loses the armor save, and you have to either let him suffer the rest of his wounds (with his invul save if he has one) or roll for other models in the unit.
IF you have a 5 man paladin squad that suffers 6 unsaved wounds then the problem is when those saves were taken. this would be a very time consuming endeavor but I would force this as a necron player: if you force the enemy to roll each dice individually you have a higher chance of causing more unsaved wounds and deaths, basically my point is, if the first 5 2+ armor save roles fail then the remaining 5 wounds must be taken via 5+ invul saves for the rest of the wounds caused by scarabs (assuming the 5 man paladin squad i mentioned earlier)

man i hope that was clear :( if its not ill try again...

Revenent Reiko wrote:Its probably been gone over before, but i dont like the loss of Pariahs, i know they werent the best unit, but i loved their fluff and models

it was said earlier, and i agree with this, that crypteks are pariahs or atleast replacing them. no one knows, unless they are holding out on us, what they new models will look like and maybe pariahs will be usable as crypteks.

KingCracker wrote:I just wanted to say, that saying someone that does not play in tournaments has no idea what they are talking about is just stupid. Incredibly stupid. Now if you are asking someone that doesnt play in tournies, about their opinions on tourny play, then yea I see your point. But just because 1 person doesnt goto tournies, does not mean they dont know what they are talking about.

If you read my post carefully, you'd notice we were discussing whether they were effective/competitive, two words that I feel mean largely the same thing, which may have been a point of confusion. If you're talking about the effectiveness of a unit in a wargame, I'd assume you're also saying something about how "competitive" it is as well. I did not say he had no idea what he was talking about in general as you imply above. I said he had no idea what he was talking about as it pertains to the competitiveness/effectiveness of a book. People don't need to go to tournies, they're not for everyone, just as painting competitions aren't for everyone.

But if you don't paint, you shouldn't think of yourself as knowledgeable on painting competitions. The same can be said, in my opinion, for commenting on the effectiveness (which to me as I said, means competitiveness when we're talking about units in a wargame) when you don't play in the competitive part of the environment (tournaments).

Pariahs my guess is will be removed and renamed, either as that phantom cc unit thats been mentioned, or as crypteks. Rumors elsewhere (warseer I believe) have flat out said "Pariahs have not been squatted". So I'd expect to see them somewhere in the book, if under a different name, so your models shouldn't be wasted.

Oddly, scarabs are a main point of excitement for me, I've always enjoyed painting/playing with them, and would love to see them get a bit of a boost in utility.

kenzosan wrote:the way its worded it only works on a multi wound model. just like the sniper ability in the gk codex for the assassin, except it takes 1 models armor save if it suffers an unsaved wound and not the invul save if it hits. which means in cc you will have to role each save at a time cuz as soon as you fail 1 save that multi wound model loses the armor save, and you have to either let him suffer the rest of his wounds (with his invul save if he has one) or roll for other models in the unit.
IF you have a 5 man paladin squad that suffers 6 unsaved wounds then the problem is when those saves were taken. this would be a very time consuming endeavor but I would force this as a necron player: if you force the enemy to roll each dice individually you have a higher chance of causing more unsaved wounds and deaths, basically my point is, if the first 5 2+ armor save roles fail then the remaining 5 wounds must be taken via 5+ invul saves for the rest of the wounds caused by scarabs (assuming the 5 man paladin squad i mentioned earlier)

man i hope that was clear :( if its not ill try again...

I don't know if it would work that way though, since all wounds are done at the same time and not in sequential order. So if you had 3 unsaved wounds on a 4 wound model that's 3 chances that the armor disintegrates from those attacks which would result in further attacks bypassing armor all together. But I don't think it would work the way you worded it because that would slow down the game and GW doesn't want that.

*Edit*
As targetawg said, unless there is different initiative steps amongst the scarabs. Or they're in multi-assault with another necron unit against that force that goes AFTER the scarabs.

kenzosan wrote:

micahaphone wrote:

kenzosan wrote:guys, you have to remember that unless its multi wound the scarabs are pretty useless against termis. all we know is they have the remove armor save/lower armor rating. even rending is w/e. just dont get your hopes up on seeing scarbs destory termis or even weaken em more so then a squad of warriors.

Well, they'd be a small sacrificial unit. The scarabs charge, hopefully live until the opponents assault phase, die, and then next shooting phase, no armor saves for mr. termie.

the way its worded it only works on a multi wound model. just like the sniper ability in the gk codex for the assassin, except it takes 1 models armor save if it suffers an unsaved wound and not the invul save if it hits. which means in cc you will have to role each save at a time cuz as soon as you fail 1 save that multi wound model loses the armor save, and you have to either let him suffer the rest of his wounds (with his invul save if he has one) or roll for other models in the unit.
IF you have a 5 man paladin squad that suffers 6 unsaved wounds then the problem is when those saves were taken. this would be a very time consuming endeavor but I would force this as a necron player: if you force the enemy to roll each dice individually you have a higher chance of causing more unsaved wounds and deaths, basically my point is, if the first 5 2+ armor save roles fail then the remaining 5 wounds must be taken via 5+ invul saves for the rest of the wounds caused by scarabs (assuming the 5 man paladin squad i mentioned earlier)

man i hope that was clear :( if its not ill try again...

I don't think that will work, unless you have different initiative steps. All of the scarbs saves would be rolled simultaneously, and so they'd use their 2+ versus all of them.

However, any of those that dropped in and knocked out a 2+ save would then leave the paladin open to be rapid fired down easily be nearby warriors/other units.

If I can re-point out to everyone, as far as fluff goes Pariah=/=Cryptek. The Cryptek comes from Fall of Damnos and is very distinctly Necron, having said to have risen from the ranks via an unkown method. What will be replacing Pariah instead, according again to FoD, is a 'Lych like warrior' that acted as bodyguards to the prime lord during the campaign. Pariah will still exist and will not be renamed something else for the codex, and that is not to imply they are still in the codex, merely to point out that, in fluff, there are now potentially 3 things that act similar to Pariahs; the Pariah themselves, Crypteks, and the unnamed Lych warriors

good point, i do agree that the because i plain forgot about initiative

i gues my point is unless the gk player allocated 1 wound (which would be dumb) to each paladin then they would be four 1 wound 5+ inv (using my previous example)

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Perhaps I would accept that .. Oh, but wait! The fall of Damnos is only a year old and what's that retinue with the lord? Did someone say Warscythes?

I look forward to the new Pariah rules in the new codex when they get here.

Azure wrote:If I can re-point out to everyone, as far as fluff goes Pariah=/=Cryptek. The Cryptek comes from Fall of Damnos and is very distinctly Necron, having said to have risen from the ranks via an unkown method. What will be replacing Pariah instead, according again to FoD, is a 'Lych like warrior' that acted as bodyguards to the prime lord during the campaign. Pariah will still exist and will not be renamed something else for the codex, and that is not to imply they are still in the codex, merely to point out that, in fluff, there are now potentially 3 things that act similar to Pariahs; the Pariah themselves, Crypteks, and the unnamed Lych warriors

didnt know that. i should correct myself then: from the rules of the new units, pariahs are being replaced by crypteks

The Twisted wrote:

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Perhaps I would accept that .. Oh, but wait! The fall of Damnos is only a year old and what's that retinue with the lord? Did someone say Warscythes?

I look forward to the new Pariah rules in the new codex when they get here.

I thought it came out a month ago?...

whembly wrote:
Naw... we'd see even the feared NECRORK!!!!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/271328.page

Sorry, I know it's off topic but I must admit...I play Orcs & Goblins in Warhammer Fantasy and seeing the Black Orcs as a Necron conversion really made me smile... Also loved Da Nightbringer...but the warriors were the coolest...

Yea hate to get off topic, but that is, IMO, one of the best conversion projects Ive EVER seen. Ive showed friends and whatnot that page many times over the years

Well if the new Necron Codex has a weapon called "Warscythe of the Last WAAAGH!" We'll know why the C'Tan are out of the picture...
The Necrons simply changed their faith to worship Gork! (or possibly Mork)

angelshade00 wrote:Well if the new Necron Codex has a weapon called "Warscythe of the Last WAAAGH!" We'll know why the C'Tan are out of the picture...
The Necrons simply changed their faith to worship Gork! (or possibly Mork)

haha, having started this game as an ork player i find this completely amazing

Yeah just imagined a Monolith with a graffiti-like WAAAGH! written in red spray paint all over...

Azure wrote:

Farmer wrote:I'm glad necrons aren't turning into blood angels...we'd see sliver painted marines using the necron codex.

Even more Grey Knights?

No those are grey not sliver

atleast necrons will be unique this time instead of the old MEQ space marines who forgot to take their steroids

good thing I spread my scarabs from the necron warrior phalanx out to 3 a base instead of 4 like most people.
now I have enough to take to cover the additional points I get if these rumors are true.

I don't like the mention about the armor saves though. its rare enough as it is that I even get a save with all the high Str and low AP weapons abound.

Onnotangu wrote:
I don't like the mention about the armor saves though. its rare enough as it is that I even get a save with all the high Str and low AP weapons abound.

This is one of those times where I wonder if people just don't read the rumors they're responding to.

Yakface wrote:3) We'll be Back is no longer called that and it is NOT Feel No Pain. Basically it is a 5+ bonus save similar to Feel No Pain, but doesn't get cancelled out by double strength, AP1/2, etc. In addition, this save is made at the END of the phase after morale tests are taken. If the unit is wiped out or is falling back at the end of the phase, then the save cannot be used. So as an opponent, if you manage to wipe the unit out or make them fall back, then you prevent any Necrons from getting back up...unless the unit has something called the 'ever-living' rule, in which case it gets to attempt this save even if the unit is wiped out.

Notice:

Basically it is a 5+ bonus save similar to Feel No Pain, but doesn't get cancelled out by double strength, AP1/2, etc. In addition, this save is made at the END of the phase after morale tests are taken

And then there's also:

unless the unit has something called the 'ever-living' rule, in which case it gets to attempt this save even if the unit is wiped out.

And of course, there's also the Rez Orb changing it to a 4+ rather than a 5+ for any unit with a Rez Orb.

Overall, I'd say it's not something to worry too much about when you're losing the 3+ for a 4+.

The Twisted wrote:

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Perhaps I would accept that .. Oh, but wait! The fall of Damnos is only a year old and what's that retinue with the lord? Did someone say Warscythes?

I look forward to the new Pariah rules in the new codex when they get here.

Because things like powers and equipment cannot be reshuffled throughout an army, and that is why GK Terminators still have Holocaust! Oh wait...
Plus did the book even give them a single Pariah-like quality beyond them carrying a warscythe? It didn't, how weird!

I'm not saying Pariahs are gone, but those are some pretty thin arguments to say that they absolutely are in the codex. PERSONAL ATTACKS ARE NEVER PERMISSABLE.

KingCracker wrote:

Gethvar wrote:I hope thos rumors all will end up in the warp as some kind of embarrassing joke that isn't even funny.

The changes in rules and stats would be the worst thing that would happen to the necrons since the release of 5th ed of rules, the whole idea seem to be just "Oh, make the warriors more crap, take the immortals to troops, give them warrior statline and screw them all more with ridiculous WBB change" another idea with destroyers being jump infantry=WTF!?
If it turn to be true my whole necron army goes ebay and i will quit the hobby.

Well the Immortals are going to keep the 3+ save, so they wont be too much different. Missiles/rokkits wont matter too much, since you can always take aWBB according to current rules. And how are warriors more suck? You take away the phase out rules, and honestly the only thing bad about them is how poor they do in CC. So if you were to ask me, just taking away phase out makes them better.

Changes to the WBB sound great to me, so you take a res orb and get it back to 4+ (again current rumors) And destroyers being jump troops rumor....well that does seem a bit off, BUT in all honesty, most the time I use destroyers they only move 12 inches anyways, so I can keep on blasting away at the enemy.

The way i see it an imortal became what a warrior is now but with a better gun no phase out and a slightly worse WBB that doesn't get negated by anything. id say that would be an effective warrior equivlent to the one now and at a 1 point drop.

Kanluwen wrote:

Onnotangu wrote:
I don't like the mention about the armor saves though. its rare enough as it is that I even get a save with all the high Str and low AP weapons abound.

This is one of those times where I wonder if people just don't read the rumors they're responding to.

Overall, I'd say it's not something to worry too much about when you're losing the 3+ for a 4+.

Oh I read it I still would rather have my 3+ save on my warriors and my Toughness 5 on my imortals rather than end up heavy bolter bait.

yakface wrote:13) Necron Warriors have the same basic statline they had before except they now have a 4+ save. Now before you go crazy, also note that their points cost is 12 points, which is a 1/3 price drop (down from 18 points). That means you get 1/3 more Warrior models in the army for the same amount of points...it also makes losing an entire unit due to sweeping advance, not nearly as painful.

14) Immortals have lost their T5 (down to T4)

15) Rez Orb is still in the game and boosts the new WBB rule to a 4+ instead of a 5+, but only affects the unit it is in.

These just made my day.

No longer will I have to deal with "Dead Robot Space Marines" with an impossible to Kill in combat HQ who likes pretending to be a Sanguinary Novitiate with "6-inch re-rolling FNP Dead Skeleton Robot Blood Cups" while sitting the the middle of a sea of Warriors whom are within Rez Orb range.

Enlightenment's a beautiful feeling it is

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Perhaps I would accept that .. Oh, but wait! The fall of Damnos is only a year old and what's that retinue with the lord? Did someone say Warscythes?

I look forward to the new Pariah rules in the new codex when they get here.

Because things like powers and equipment cannot be reshuffled throughout an army, and that is why GK Terminators still have Holocaust! Oh wait...
Plus did the book even give them a single Pariah-like quality beyond them carrying a warscythe? It didn't, how weird!

I'm not saying Pariahs are gone, but those are some pretty thin arguments to say that they absolutely are in the codex. You, on the other hand, seem a bit thick

Ah, so it comes down to a personal insult does it. Actually FYI, I have an IQ over 150 and am currently studying my Ba Sci (Hons) in Astrophysics with the Open University. That aside, what the hell is your problem? a public forum is a place to pass opinion. The fact is no one but GW knows what's in the codex. I'm going on the vague clues and some gut instinct to be sure but as a veteran who has been playing WH40K since 1st edition (and other wargames and RPG's for 17 years beforehand) I often guess close to the mark.

Can't you handle some open debate? Others opinions? Whatever your problem I don't need your attitude and a personal attack is plain out of order.

Rule 1 of the dakka posting rules is BE POLITE! Now let's try to be adults shall we.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scarey Nerd wrote:

The Twisted wrote:

Vhalyar wrote:

The Twisted wrote:I don't think we will see the end of Pariahs at all. The most silly thing I've heard for a long time. You just don't make a pariah the central part of the Necrons story in the Dawn of War video game story line and get rid of them in the next codex.

Dark Crusade is a five year old game, thinking it has any relevance is pretty silly.

Perhaps I would accept that .. Oh, but wait! The fall of Damnos is only a year old and what's that retinue with the lord? Did someone say Warscythes?

I look forward to the new Pariah rules in the new codex when they get here.

I thought it came out a month ago?...

You are of course correct, I meant a month old. It's been a loooong day. XD

THAT'S ENTIRELY ENOUGH PERSONAL BICKERING AND INSULTS. BE POLITE OR DON'T POST. THIS IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TOY SOLDIERS WE ALL ENJOY. IF YOU FIND YOURSELF GETTING UPSET ABOUT IT, STEP BACK FROM THE COMPUTER, TAKE A WALK AND/OR ENJOY A REFRESHING BEVERAGE, AND COME BACK WHEN YOU FEEL COPACETIC AND RELAXED.

Seriously. You'd probably get along and shake hands and have a beer if you met in person. Don't let internet anonymity tempt you into being incivil with one another.

Azure wrote:If I can re-point out to everyone, as far as fluff goes Pariah=/=Cryptek. The Cryptek comes from Fall of Damnos and is very distinctly Necron, having said to have risen from the ranks via an unkown method. What will be replacing Pariah instead, according again to FoD, is a 'Lych like warrior' that acted as bodyguards to the prime lord during the campaign. Pariah will still exist and will not be renamed something else for the codex, and that is not to imply they are still in the codex, merely to point out that, in fluff, there are now potentially 3 things that act similar to Pariahs; the Pariah themselves, Crypteks, and the unnamed Lych warriors

Hmmmm....LYCHE like warriors who GUARD the Lord, you say?

I wonder what that new Elites unit that can carry Warscythes in the new codex will be called?

Oh god... I sure hope it's not the Lichguard, as I think you're implying... That just doesn't flow right to me.

yakface wrote:

Azure wrote:If I can re-point out to everyone, as far as fluff goes Pariah=/=Cryptek. The Cryptek comes from Fall of Damnos and is very distinctly Necron, having said to have risen from the ranks via an unkown method. What will be replacing Pariah instead, according again to FoD, is a 'Lych like warrior' that acted as bodyguards to the prime lord during the campaign. Pariah will still exist and will not be renamed something else for the codex, and that is not to imply they are still in the codex, merely to point out that, in fluff, there are now potentially 3 things that act similar to Pariahs; the Pariah themselves, Crypteks, and the unnamed Lych warriors

Hmmmm....LYCHE like warriors who GUARD the Lord, you say?

I wonder what that new Elites unit that can carry Warscythes in the new codex will be called?

lol, another tasty tidbit. I can't wait until you give us another big update! please keep it up, I know it's keeping some of us Sane lol.

Lich Guard huh? Not the most Necorny name. But I guess Tomb Guard is already taken. I can live with it.

Shelegelah wrote:Oh god... I sure hope it's not the Lichguard, as I think you're implying... That just doesn't flow right to me.

Let's see if they can pass their Ward save...

Yakface... you damn well better not be leading me on. My happiness at the prospect of Lyche Guard is untranslatable into words. This is the best rumor ever

I wanted to play necrons, but if these rumors hold true, necrons will be my second army.

I just kind of skimmed through the statlines, and didn't read any of the fluff .

The transports sound kind of fitting, like a who bunch of necrons in stasis, and thier resective tombs
kind of splinter off into transports to get the necrons into the fray.

But I am incredably pumped!

100th Post !

yakface wrote:Hmmmm....LYCHE like warriors who GUARD the Lord, you say?

I wonder what that new Elites unit that can carry Warscythes in the new codex will be called?

Something not called Pariah carrying a warcythe, I am shocked! Shocked!
Thanks Yakface; I guess Nick Kyme pretty much once again delivered a surprisingly accurate preview of an upcoming codex. Now, if it's an August release, we should be seeing something fairly soon... I hope.

I just talked to my FLGS owner. He says the most likely thing is 5+ FNP, and says we can expect it around October.

kenzosan wrote:

The Metal Tide wrote:

Kurgash wrote:Monstrous creatures, Dreadknights *oh how I will laugh at that happening! just picture the harness getting stripped away and the dude falling out with a thud* and all sorts of other multi wound units, Tyranids especiallly!

Oh wow...yet another codex where something really mulches over the nids.

I can just see the shock on the terminators faces that crush my necrons as their armour is no more

that wont happen though. unless they are palladins, termi's have 1 wound. thats the issue alot of use are having with scarabs.

I think they just have to -hit- you (not wound) and then roll a 4+; so things with heavy armor or high toughness would lose out. They don't need to be multi-wound, since the scarabs don't need to wound to activate their ability.
From how I understand it, anyway.

Judging how much the rumors are following Fall of Damnos in a lot of areas, I think the lychguard or whatever they end up being will be replacing the pariahs in form, and crypteks will be something of a cross between techpriest and librarian.

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:I think they just have to -hit- you (not wound) and then roll a 4+; so things with heavy armor or high toughness would lose out. They don't need to be multi-wound, since the scarabs don't need to wound to activate their ability.
From how I understand it, anyway.

your thinking of a tank

Yakface wrote:Any non-vehicle model they wound, but don't kill, has its armor save turned to a dash (i.e. nothing) for the rest of the game.

kenzosan wrote:

Yakface wrote:Any non-vehicle model they wound, but don't kill, has its armor save turned to a dash (i.e. nothing) for the rest of the game.

Hmm. So if you wound a Terminator, it makes its save, then you roll a 4+ and it loses that save? I wonder if it just needs to 'wound', or if the model needs to actually suffer the wound...

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

kenzosan wrote:

Yakface wrote:Any non-vehicle model they wound, but don't kill, has its armor save turned to a dash (i.e. nothing) for the rest of the game.

Hmm. So if you wound a Terminator, it makes its save, then you roll a 4+ and it loses that save? I wonder if it just needs to 'wound', or if the model needs to actually suffer the wound...

you wound a termi and it dies. the scarab rumor is purely for multi wound models and vehicles.

whembly wrote:
Naw... we'd see even the feared NECRORK!!!!
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/271328.page

THAT is what would attract me to play necron... or ork

kenzosan wrote:

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

kenzosan wrote:

Yakface wrote:Any non-vehicle model they wound, but don't kill, has its armor save turned to a dash (i.e. nothing) for the rest of the game.

Hmm. So if you wound a Terminator, it makes its save, then you roll a 4+ and it loses that save? I wonder if it just needs to 'wound', or if the model needs to actually suffer the wound...

you wound a termi and it dies. the scarab rumor is purely for multi wound models and vehicles.

I'm not positive this is accurate. It will depend on the wording once it's actually in print.

haha, thats what i said awhile ago

got to wait to see actual print. im just making sure that we understand the rumors properly and not "on a 4+ the enemy unit loses their armor saves" when NOWHERE has it said that.

In my opinion, losing the save on a simple roll (4+ or more) would be too broken. Having to actually wound the model seems more likely (and perhaps still kind of broken ) Of course, it's still all speculation.

Now after having a couple of days to reflect and to come to terms with theese rumors i have come to the conclusion.

Maybe this is not what i saw my necrons go towards, and maybe its not really what i would have done and not the direction i would have liked it to go But..

In the end we will all just buy the new codex and we will go from there.
I am sad to see my deciever go but will try to get as many matches ageinst my friends as i can before the new codex hits (whenever that is).

I mean in the end its just a game and we are apparently alot of players with different opinions on what the necrons are and should be and this time, it seems as it will be not the necrons i had evisioned that will come into play (im theese rumors are correct come release day)
But i will still play them and probably love them aswell after a little time.

Maybe they will even be more than i think of what i want i just dont know it yet.

I will form my opinion efter the release until then i can only go with what i feel and know atm.

Well spoken Ogard.
And that concludes this thread (until Yakface has something new to add...) Just kidding...

yes, those are some good points there orgard, I quite like the rumors except for some parts that I hope are not true,
mainly the weaker Immortals having them as being as weak as current warriors doesn't really fit the fluff, especially after reading Fall of Damnos,
I feel they should either keep the toughness 5 or have a 2+ armor save, possibly both but that would make them a bit expensive points wise (not that they would die alot )

I'm still waiting on Yak leaking us the Wraith stat line and rules ....... please

I'm still waiting on Fall of Damnos to be delivered to me, but I've always figured that the black library books don't really fit in with the table top or codex fluff. It always needs to be toned down if you want to keep balance in check. If you read the fluff of Gauss weapons you'd argue that they should all be AP2 right?

Sectiplave wrote:I'm still waiting on Yak leaking us the Wraith stat line and rules ....... please

I'm hoping Wraiths don't change too much, except obviously they either need poisoned weapons or power weapons. And maybe less strength, 6 is a bit much, I'd rather have the few points I'd get in exchange.

OMFG I should have read this before I went and got a necron codex. WASTE!!!!!!

Ok anyway, does anyone know when this new codex is expected to arrive? next few weeks or months or years.

Marthike wrote:Ok anyway, does anyone know when this new codex is expected to arrive? next few weeks or months or years.

The earliest it can come is in three months - we've already been told what's being released in May (Tomb Kings), June (DE 2nd wave) and July (Storm of Magic).

Scarey Nerd wrote:I'm hoping Wraiths don't change too much, except obviously they either need poisoned weapons or power weapons. And maybe less strength, 6 is a bit much, I'd rather have the few points I'd get in exchange.

Yeah I generally want to refrain from wish listing, but I'm hoping to see an increase in wound dealing ability, I hope they retain S6 as this made them great at damaging transports with rear AV10, if this is also teamed up with larger squad sizes, and it would fit with GW wanting to sell more models too right?

I believe the fast attack slots will still be highly contested for Necrons, however it's sounding like Elites will finally offer some contest in where to spend up points.

Also for those mentioning the change to destroyers being jump infantry, don't forget this means they only take up 2 slots in a transport! If their weapon is changed to AP3 and assault2, I'd also picture it being reduced to 24", can't comment too much without knowing the strength, but it'll give those filthy marines something to want to hide from

I won't lie I have jumped here from page 9 ... so ... I just want the next Necron Codex, to be of the uh, grade, that will want to bring back 2-3 local necron players who have sort of faded from the game, cause all they want to do is play Necrons...

AlexHolker wrote:

Marthike wrote:Ok anyway, does anyone know when this new codex is expected to arrive? next few weeks or months or years.

The earliest it can come is in three months - we've already been told what's being released in May (Tomb Kings), June (DE 2nd wave) and July (Storm of Magic).

Yeah, I guess I will just wait before buying some necrons.

Talarn Blackshard wrote:I won't lie I have jumped here from page 9 ... so ... I just want the next Necron Codex, to be of the uh, grade, that will want to bring back 2-3 local necron players who have sort of faded from the game, cause all they want to do is play Necrons...

Well that sucks to hear about your Necron players failing their WBB.




Ok terribad joke there. I feel for them. I almost stopped playing when the current Chaos dex came out. I just couldnt believe they made a somewhat bad dex, into an even worse dex. But instead I switched armies, and have loved 40k even more since the change. Im looking forward to the Necron dex, Im having fun with the old one of course, but I cant wait to see some life put back into them. Ive always liked the idea of Necrons

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Sectiplave wrote:I'm still waiting on Yak leaking us the Wraith stat line and rules ....... please

I'm hoping Wraiths don't change too much, except obviously they either need poisoned weapons or power weapons. And maybe less strength, 6 is a bit much, I'd rather have the few points I'd get in exchange.

I don't think they'd really need Poisoned weapons, they tend to wound on a 2+ most of the time anyway. I think Rending would be right for them. Power Weapons seem a bit to much, with everything else they get.