kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

I insist you go into the Necron Tactica and tell those players that RP is fine. I insist. Seriously.

ERJAK wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I agree there is room for improvement. I just disagree on how much would be wise.

You want love taps. What is needed is just as Newman stated 15-30% point reductions across the board.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemondish wrote:

The Newman wrote:

There are admittedly some things where it feels like the price isn't the issue though. The Redemptor is one of them, both for T7 and for having a much worse set of weapon options than an Armiger. The Vindicator also comes to mind, it feels like it needs Grinding Advance more than any points adjustment.

Terminators, too. For 13 points more than a Custodian Guard, you get an assault cannon/power fist Terminator that is slower, has fewer wounds, worse BS/WS, lower toughness, strength, and attacks, and does marginally more damage to GEQ past 12" if stationary. Oh, but it can deep strike.

It should be 50% it's current price, but it can't be, because its wargear is half the damn point cost.

Whats more a custodian guard isn't even very good for it's points. No wonder they see 0 competitive play.

Except you can't do a 20-30% point reduction across the board because then gorram Girlyman becomes a major problem again. 15% is probably doable, but after that Girlybro starts compounding additional firepower on itself and the whole army spirals out of control, just like in the Indexes.(Index Space marines with quad Stormravens are STILL the most powerful army, relative to available field, we've seen in 8th).

The stuff that's really bad: Most of the vehicles, terminators, assault marines, etc. could drop that much and probably still be fine. But you start messing around too much with Centurions or Stormravens or even just devastators and you're setting up for another Girlydude leafblower gunline.

Just to be clear, when I said 15%-30% I meant everything needs to be 15% cheaper at a minimum and some things need more than that. I didn't mean a blanket "x percent for all the things" because some stuff needs a bigger price drop than other stuff.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

I don’t mind like “2 damage on 6’s to wound vs vehicles” or something, but we do NOT need even more mortal wounds. It’s already a bad mechanic, let’s keep the infection as contained as possible.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

I insist you go into the Necron Tactica and tell those players that RP is fine. I insist. Seriously.

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

I don’t mind like “2 damage on 6’s to wound vs vehicles” or something, but we do NOT need even more mortal wounds. It’s already a bad mechanic, let’s keep the infection as contained as possible.

Contained = screw the two or three armies that can't do it, but we'll let everyone else carry on. Most other armies can reliably crank out mortal wounds way easier than what I'm proposing, without the limitation of vehicles only. If you don't like the MW mechanic as a whole then fine, but you can't say this is OP compared to other MW stuff out there.

D2 on 6's is really weak sauce, especially as they're only ap-1. You're blocking half of the D2 shots at a minimum, so in reality that's an extra wound or two at most.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

I insist you go into the Necron Tactica and tell those players that RP is fine. I insist. Seriously.

I'll bring the pop corn

IanVanCheese wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

I don’t mind like “2 damage on 6’s to wound vs vehicles” or something, but we do NOT need even more mortal wounds. It’s already a bad mechanic, let’s keep the infection as contained as possible.

Contained = screw the two or three armies that can't do it, but we'll let everyone else carry on. Most other armies can reliably crank out mortal wounds way easier than what I'm proposing, without the limitation of vehicles only. If you don't like the MW mechanic as a whole then fine, but you can't say this is OP compared to other MW stuff out there.

D2 on 6's is really weak sauce, especially as they're only ap-1. You're blocking half of the D2 shots at a minimum, so in reality that's an extra wound or two at most.

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.,
Also, RPs can never be negated by the enemy, it can be limited which is a different thing. Focus firing a unit does indeed prevent you from getting your guys back, but every time you focus fire something to the bitter end of it, then you had to reduce the efficency of your offensive, so RP did have an effect on the game.
We can argue that the effect becomes smaller the larger the game is, and at the standard point level 1750-2000 then it is overcosted for the effect it brings to the table. That is indeed true.
Saying though that RP can be negated is wrong, RP is never truly negated, which means that it's already in a better state than other faction rules.

Necron's biggest problem is that they are a faction designed to cover all AT needs by means of massed Gauss fire, and all of a sudden the Gauss changed role without redesigning the rest of the faction, so that now Necrons have big issues taking down big targets (and also have some overcosted stuff here and there, probably more than the average faction).
Necron's issues are also meta related. The meta right now is cheap infantry and huge models or very powerful and mobile alpha strikes. Necrons are at theyr best against 3+ / 4+ average T targets which right now are completely missing from the picture.

w1zard wrote:
I also personally didn't think ork boyz needed to go to 7 points, but w/e. Guardsmen now feel even more out of place than they already did at 4ppm. I think they should go to 5ppm in this CA and get it over with so people will stop complaining about how good guard chaff is in relation to everything else.

If IS go to 5ppm, the more deranged elements of DakkaDakka will continue to attack the IG - they'll just start to claim IS should go to 6ppm instead...

 Xenomancers wrote:
They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Assuming your use of AM there should've been IG, then there are bad units in their 'dex too - without grabbing the book, the Deathstrike and Chimera spring to mind without even thinking about it, and I'm sure there are plenty of others.

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

To a lesser extent all aura effects work like that. Also all psykers do.

Spoletta wrote:

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.

You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers. Now tell me, how can necrons do 30 MW per turn ??

 p5freak wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.

You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers. Now tell me, how can necrons do 30 MW per turn ??

Easily for example?

No seriously, have you ever faced 3 vaults?

Spoletta wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

To a lesser extent all aura effects work like that. Also all psykers do.

At least all auras and psykers do SOMETHING in bigger games. RP doesn't.

I faced codex Necrons twice with my AdMech and got traumatised twice. Between the Tesseract Vaults that vaporized my characters one by one with the C'tan powers + the Tesla, and the unkillable Wraiths I'm pretty scarred.

I don't believe the whole codex is really good because of that though, maybe just those few units (and AdMech is not the most serious opponent when not optimised) but there's strong stuff in there. And it didn't strike me as lacking MW sources. Meanwhile AdMech's only reliable sources are Wrath of Mars (so, Forge-World related) and flimsy Fulgurites.

Spoletta wrote:

Easily for example?

10 psykers and decimators with soulburner petards. Magnus has a 2D6 smite. Every tson HQ unit can spam smite, at 24". Ahriman gets +1 to psychic tests, they have a stratagem which gives them +2 to psychic tests, getting a 11 is very possible. Decimators do MW by simply hitting.

Spoletta wrote:

No seriously, have you ever faced 3 vaults?

No, i havent. They cant do 30 MW per turn.

Decimators do MW by simply hitting.

and are also easily blowing themselves up, meanwhile have better weapon options then petards but he, let's ignore that.
Not to mention that Decimators are rather fragile units and the petard has a low range for it's priecetag.

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.,
Also, RPs can never be negated by the enemy, it can be limited which is a different thing. Focus firing a unit does indeed prevent you from getting your guys back, but every time you focus fire something to the bitter end of it, then you had to reduce the efficency of your offensive, so RP did have an effect on the game.
We can argue that the effect becomes smaller the larger the game is, and at the standard point level 1750-2000 then it is overcosted for the effect it brings to the table. That is indeed true.
Saying though that RP can be negated is wrong, RP is never truly negated, which means that it's already in a better state than other faction rules.

Necron's biggest problem is that they are a faction designed to cover all AT needs by means of massed Gauss fire, and all of a sudden the Gauss changed role without redesigning the rest of the faction, so that now Necrons have big issues taking down big targets (and also have some overcosted stuff here and there, probably more than the average faction).
Necron's issues are also meta related. The meta right now is cheap infantry and huge models or very powerful and mobile alpha strikes. Necrons are at theyr best against 3+ / 4+ average T targets which right now are completely missing from the picture.

What you're saying is that because we can spam 3 superheavies, our codex is fine? Sure, also why fix Space Marines, they can just spam Knights so it's fine right? The reason triple vault is the only list that shows up at tournaments (and still doesn't do well) is that the rest of our book is so underpowered and overcosted. You're even admitting that you know what our issue is: necrons were designed with the idea that mass gauss fire made up for our lack of AT weaponry. Now that it doesn't, we're boned.

Also just because other factions also need fixing, doesn't mean Necrons don't. Yes ATSNNF sucks. That's an issue for to fix in their codex, not a reason to not fix ours.

RP can absolutely be negated. Not getting to use it is negating it. As for the meta, well yeah. Massive vehicles is the meta and we suck against armour. Necrons need points cost and viable anti-armour to drag them off the bottom of the army rankings (alongside Grey Knights)

RP can absolutely be negated. Not getting to use it is negating it. As for the meta, well yeah. Massive vehicles is the meta and we suck against armour. Necrons need points cost and viable anti-armour to drag them off the bottom of the army rankings (alongside Grey Knights)

When you can force someone to focus fire a unit through a rule, then yes actually he could not negate the rule but he could limit it's impact. Forcing someone to play in a certain way, (in this case forcing someone to wipe out a necron unit completely) is an advantage. (not to say that the current RP rules are not bad, but the rule is not as abbmissal as certain people make it out to be.)

In my last (Fun-)Game against Necrons I was not able to kill a single Necronwarrior with my SoB. I realy tried to, but failed everytime the last modell had to go. The next turn it came back with 7 Modells. In a casual Game I would be pissed, if RP would work better. 0:-)

MW on a 6 for Gauss-weapons ist truely insane. I like the suggestion of double-damage against vehicles. I think it would be fluffy without killing the Game.

Not Online!!! wrote:

RP can absolutely be negated. Not getting to use it is negating it. As for the meta, well yeah. Massive vehicles is the meta and we suck against armour. Necrons need points cost and viable anti-armour to drag them off the bottom of the army rankings (alongside Grey Knights)

When you can force someone to focus fire a unit through a rule, then yes actually he could not negate the rule but he could limit it's impact. Forcing someone to play in a certain way, (in this case forcing someone to wipe out a necron unit completely) is an advantage. (not to say that the current RP rules are not bad, but the rule is not as abbmissal as certain people make it out to be.)

Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Covenant wrote:
In my last (Fun-)Game against Necrons I was not able to kill a single Necronwarrior with my SoB. I realy tried to, but failed everytime the last modell had to go. The next turn it came back with 7 Modells. In a casual Game I would be pissed, if RP would work better. 0:-)

MW on a 6 for Gauss-weapons ist truely insane. I like the suggestion of double-damage against vehicles. I think it would be fluffy without killing the Game.

Ah yes let's go with anedoctal luck of dice arquments. "His conscripts killed my grand master grey knight on dreadknight on overwatch! THEY ARE CHEESY BROKEN IN OVERWATCH!" (yes that's actually true story. Deep strike, charge, got blown to bits. Albeit I was the conscript fielder)

Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

My point was that his argumentation made no sense. My point was not that the rule is great, frankly i would prefer the oldcron rules as in get back up regardless of CP at 4+ at the end of each turn but before morale. Not that it matters, just like it made absolute no sense that ork boyz are now 7ppm.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

My point was that his argumentation made no sense. My point was not that the rule is great, frankly i would prefer the oldcron rules as in get back up regardless of CP at 4+ at the end of each turn but before morale. Not that it matters, just like it made absolute no sense that ork boyz are now 7ppm.

But it can be negated by smart opponent. Playing counting on opponent playing badly is not that smart idea. Sure if your opponent plays badly it's great. What happens when you run into sensible opponent?

tneva82 wrote:
Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

That's because the codex is generally overpriced and bad. You can focus down any vaguely threatening units (destroyers, bikers etc) and then mop up the rest later.

Necrons suffer from the curse of MEQ and RP is valued as if it was a 5+++. Its not however as good. This is especially true on the smaller elite squads that pay through the nose for no obvious reason.

tneva82 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

My point was that his argumentation made no sense. My point was not that the rule is great, frankly i would prefer the oldcron rules as in get back up regardless of CP at 4+ at the end of each turn but before morale. Not that it matters, just like it made absolute no sense that ork boyz are now 7ppm.

But it can be negated by smart opponent. Playing counting on opponent playing badly is not that smart idea. Sure if your opponent plays badly it's great. What happens when you run into sensible opponent?

You're fethed, but he still had to make sure to wipe, which might leads to overcommitment, ergo he potentially wasted firepower, ergo he has LIMITED not NEGATED. I agree wholeheartedly that the rule is terrible, but the simple fact remains that in lower pts cases the rule is comparatively speaking overperforming and in higher pts limit matches basically useless.

As for reliance of playing against bad people: Errare humanum est, if anything you can always count on human beeings to do dumb stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

That's because the codex is generally overpriced and bad. You can focus down any vaguely threatening units (destroyers, bikers etc) and then mop up the rest later.

Necrons suffer from the curse of MEQ and RP is valued as if it was a 5+++. Its not however as good. This is especially true on the smaller elite squads that pay through the nose for no obvious reason.

Would a pricecut (say around10-15% ) be enough to get more threats on the table, to the point where oppurtunity cost actually kicks in?
IDK personally.

 p5freak wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Easily for example?

10 psykers and decimators with soulburner petards. Magnus has a 2D6 smite. Every tson HQ unit can spam smite, at 24". Ahriman gets +1 to psychic tests, they have a stratagem which gives them +2 to psychic tests, getting a 11 is very possible. Decimators do MW by simply hitting.

Spoletta wrote:

No seriously, have you ever faced 3 vaults?

No, i havent. They cant do 30 MW per turn.

Getting to 30 MW in a single turn with Tsons is possible, but is defintely not the average value. On the other hand 3 vaults can easily push that numbers of MW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IanVanCheese wrote:

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.,
Also, RPs can never be negated by the enemy, it can be limited which is a different thing. Focus firing a unit does indeed prevent you from getting your guys back, but every time you focus fire something to the bitter end of it, then you had to reduce the efficency of your offensive, so RP did have an effect on the game.
We can argue that the effect becomes smaller the larger the game is, and at the standard point level 1750-2000 then it is overcosted for the effect it brings to the table. That is indeed true.
Saying though that RP can be negated is wrong, RP is never truly negated, which means that it's already in a better state than other faction rules.

Necron's biggest problem is that they are a faction designed to cover all AT needs by means of massed Gauss fire, and all of a sudden the Gauss changed role without redesigning the rest of the faction, so that now Necrons have big issues taking down big targets (and also have some overcosted stuff here and there, probably more than the average faction).
Necron's issues are also meta related. The meta right now is cheap infantry and huge models or very powerful and mobile alpha strikes. Necrons are at theyr best against 3+ / 4+ average T targets which right now are completely missing from the picture.

What you're saying is that because we can spam 3 superheavies, our codex is fine? Sure, also why fix Space Marines, they can just spam Knights so it's fine right? The reason triple vault is the only list that shows up at tournaments (and still doesn't do well) is that the rest of our book is so underpowered and overcosted. You're even admitting that you know what our issue is: necrons were designed with the idea that mass gauss fire made up for our lack of AT weaponry. Now that it doesn't, we're boned.

Also just because other factions also need fixing, doesn't mean Necrons don't. Yes ATSNNF sucks. That's an issue for to fix in their codex, not a reason to not fix ours.

RP can absolutely be negated. Not getting to use it is negating it. As for the meta, well yeah. Massive vehicles is the meta and we suck against armour. Necrons need points cost and viable anti-armour to drag them off the bottom of the army rankings (alongside Grey Knights)

No, i never said that the codex is fine. I just said that "Necrons are the faction which is boned MW wise" is completely false and "RP can be completely negated" is partially false.
No one here disagrees on the fact that necrons need an hand.

Tyel wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Rarely focusing is bad thing though. Even without RP good player would generally be focus firing. And that's even assuming he needs to do anything more than what he would have done anyway...I have yet to play vs necrons and go "oh crap I had to finish off that unit instead of firing somewhere else".

That's because the codex is generally overpriced and bad. You can focus down any vaguely threatening units (destroyers, bikers etc) and then mop up the rest later.

Necrons suffer from the curse of MEQ and RP is valued as if it was a 5+++. Its not however as good. This is especially true on the smaller elite squads that pay through the nose for no obvious reason.

Doesn't change that if having to focus would be so bad I should have met it.

Also index orks were even worse off so...At least necrons could kill stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Would a pricecut (say around10-15% ) be enough to get more threats on the table, to the point where oppurtunity cost actually kicks in?
IDK personally.

RP opportunity? Not really. You would have more intact units running around but RP itself would be limited by unit sizes having maximum.

Issue here is price reduction would then turn necrons absolute terror in small games. Non scalable rule like RP is pretty much impossible to point correctly.

Necrons aren't actually that bad in the MW department. C'tan powers in general are better than their psychic equivalents, as they are easier to cast, cannot be denied and don't have a chance of hurting the caster.
C'tan are actually pretty dangerous themselves, though they are fragile.

What necrons do need is better psychic defense; for a race that's supposed to be experienced in fighting psychics, they aren't great at it. They beat the old ones, and only lost to the Eldar because they weakened themselves fighting C'tan.

RP in theory is fine, in practice though its not that great as there's not much synergy compared to the other versions of it; the buffs you can give RP are pathetic.
2CP to reroll 1s is laughable
35 points for a single use item that rerolls RP is a joke.
+1 to RP if you are within 3", and as its at the start of the turn you might have trouble getting in position
The only good buff is from the Ghost Ark, and that's warrior specific.

Not to mention that there's no squad resurrection, even though several armies can do that now.
I think that RP needs to happen at the end of a phase or turn, not at the beginning. Then you can get buffers in position. That's one of the reason why Ghost Arks are so good; you get its rerolls at the end of the movement phase, which gives you a lot of flexibility.

RP opportunity? Not really. You would have more intact units running around but RP itself would be limited by unit sizes having maximum.

Issue here is price reduction would then turn necrons absolute terror in small games. Non scalable rule like RP is pretty much impossible to point correctly.

Well then, it seems that going back to a FNP wannabee save would probably make it better? I mean if anyone is equally disgustingly resilient to DG then mostliekly Necrons no?

tneva82 wrote:
Doesn't change that if having to focus would be so bad I should have met it.

Also index orks were even worse off so...At least necrons could kill stuff.

I encounter it a fair bit. You regularly see people commit to "inefficient" shooting to secure first blood - and with Necrons its like that all the time.
The problem is that RP really only works on big squads of warriors who don't matter. Its a bit annoying on say 6 destroyers - but that's a significant investment that everyone should dedicate to shooting down.
Units of 10 immortals - never mind any other infantry - are too expensive and inflexible to really take while MSU 5 man squads do not really benefit from RP.

Since Index Orks consistently placed higher in tournaments than Necrons I don't really understand the claim they were worse off.

I don't know if a 10-15% drop would cut it - but some units clearly need a reduction. The thing is I think some are screwed. Lychguard are in a similar boat to Terminators. A unit which may get to assault in turn 3 is just bad full stop. Praetorians are a bit of an everything unit - but they do everything badly. The complaints then move to the flyers and some of the vehicles.

I don't know if a 10-15% drop would cut it - but some units clearly need a reduction. The thing is I think some are screwed. Lychguard are in a similar boat to Terminators. A unit which may get to assault in turn 3 is just bad full stop. Praetorians are a bit of an everything unit - but they do everything badly. The complaints then move to the flyers and some of the vehicles.

"Heavy" infantry atm suffers from an overestimation of value of durability. Infact i think that the durability needs to go through the roof for Heavy infantry as terminators and similar units (like the DG termis) in order to be used again, or which probably would be better more output of damage.

As for what will probably happen, more FW nerfs. Jokes aside, i sincerly hope they will take a look at certain FW index lists, and units (cough malcador cough)

I honestly hope, just for the sake of my sanity, that the R&H list in the FW department get's an general improvemnt, i am sick of beeing overpriced by 25% just on the troop side of things . I want to be able to field my Renegade grenadiers again, i want to have impactfull covenants again. Probably not going to happen, but they should atleast consider to split up DKoK list again into siege and assult lists.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Necrons aren't actually that bad in the MW department. C'tan powers in general are better than their psychic equivalents, as they are easier to cast, cannot be denied and don't have a chance of hurting the caster.
C'tan are actually pretty dangerous themselves, though they are fragile.

What necrons do need is better psychic defense; for a race that's supposed to be experienced in fighting psychics, they aren't great at it. They beat the old ones, and only lost to the Eldar because they weakened themselves fighting C'tan.

RP in theory is fine, in practice though its not that great as there's not much synergy compared to the other versions of it; the buffs you can give RP are pathetic.
2CP to reroll 1s is laughable
35 points for a single use item that rerolls RP is a joke.
+1 to RP if you are within 3", and as its at the start of the turn you might have trouble getting in position
The only good buff is from the Ghost Ark, and that's warrior specific.

Not to mention that there's no squad resurrection, even though several armies can do that now.
I think that RP needs to happen at the end of a phase or turn, not at the beginning. Then you can get buffers in position. That's one of the reason why Ghost Arks are so good; you get its rerolls at the end of the movement phase, which gives you a lot of flexibility.

Agree on psychic defense, having it tied to Spyders (which suck) and a warlord trait is weak sauce.

I think RP at the end of every phase would be insanely overpowered. End of the movement phase would be reasonable compromise, to allow buffing units to move into position. I agree that there should be a way (a costly way mind you) to bring back a dead unit. personally I think Res Orbs should allow for you to roll RP for a dead unit at the end of the phase they died in.

Still not seen any explanation as to what would be overpowered about MW vehicles on 6+ for Gauss, other than people don't like MW. If you absolutely must not have MW, then D2 AND ap-4 on 6's would also work and wouldn't cause MW. That way Inv saves still work.

Well, I did say at the end of a phase, not every. Every phase would be nuts with the persistent nature of 8th ed RP. In 5th ed it was fine because failed RP models stayed dead. Maybe at the end of the psychic phase, just so that we have something to do .
Something like "reanimation phase - replaces psychic phase for necrons during their player turn".

Mortal wounds on gauss is a bad idea because its on a ubiquitous weapon type, and it overlaps with Synaptic Disintegrators.
+1D is probably enough, -4AP would be goofy because Heavy Gauss Cannons already have -4AP.

Spoletta wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Easily for example?

10 psykers and decimators with soulburner petards. Magnus has a 2D6 smite. Every tson HQ unit can spam smite, at 24". Ahriman gets +1 to psychic tests, they have a stratagem which gives them +2 to psychic tests, getting a 11 is very possible. Decimators do MW by simply hitting.

Spoletta wrote:

No seriously, have you ever faced 3 vaults?

No, i havent. They cant do 30 MW per turn.

Getting to 30 MW in a single turn with Tsons is possible, but is defintely not the average value. On the other hand 3 vaults can easily push that numbers of MW.

I’ve not played 3 Vaults, with or against, so, can you break the 30+ MW a turn idea down for me please?

With 3 Vaults, I can see you can get each power twice (unless you roll for them), and then, can likely cast 9 powers turn 1. Which powers are being cast in order to reliably get the 30+ MW turns 1 (and likely 2)?

Probably something like this -

TV1 - Sky of Falling Stars, Time's Arrow, Seismic

TV2 - Thunderbolt, Cosmic Fire, Meteor

TV3 - Thunderbolt, Sky, Meteor

A lot of it depends on positioning and enemy unit composition, but Sky of Falling stars can inflict up to 9MW, Thunderbolt depends on if the initial target is surrounded by enemies, Cosmic Fire depends on how many units are in range, and seismic isn't too bad on a vault as it procs on a 5+, but it's not great.
Those have the potential to inflict the most MW in a single cast, and a few of those powers can target multiple units allowing.

Time's arrow is a tax - you have to take it before taking something you do want, unless you go full random.

Ditto for Meteor, though if you don't have anything else that's worth casting the AoE ones on that one could be useful.

You can then use Wrath of the C'tan to cast a randomly chosen power, and if you get lucky you can cast the above AoE ones again.

If we were to assume there are 3 units that are 3" away from each other and 9" away from the Fire vault though, and assuming you successful cast all powers and their effects as well as rolling max damage -
Sky of Falling Stars (on 2 vaults) - Max 18MW
Thunderbolt (on 2 vaults, across 3 units) - Max 18MW
Cosmic Fire (on 1 Vault, across 3 untis) = Max 9MW
Total - 45 MW

This is without Wrath of the C'tan.
Wrath of the C'tan would add a few more.

Note that unlike psychic powers, there does not appear to be any restriction for casting C'tan powers other than the defined limit. So you can cast the same power from a different vault.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Necrons aren't actually that bad in the MW department. C'tan powers in general are better than their psychic equivalents, as they are easier to cast, cannot be denied and don't have a chance of hurting the caster.
C'tan are actually pretty dangerous themselves, though they are fragile.

What necrons do need is better psychic defense; for a race that's supposed to be experienced in fighting psychics, they aren't great at it. They beat the old ones, and only lost to the Eldar because they weakened themselves fighting C'tan.

RP in theory is fine, in practice though its not that great as there's not much synergy compared to the other versions of it; the buffs you can give RP are pathetic.
2CP to reroll 1s is laughable
35 points for a single use item that rerolls RP is a joke.
+1 to RP if you are within 3", and as its at the start of the turn you might have trouble getting in position
The only good buff is from the Ghost Ark, and that's warrior specific.

Not to mention that there's no squad resurrection, even though several armies can do that now.
I think that RP needs to happen at the end of a phase or turn, not at the beginning. Then you can get buffers in position. That's one of the reason why Ghost Arks are so good; you get its rerolls at the end of the movement phase, which gives you a lot of flexibility.

Agree on psychic defense, having it tied to Spyders (which suck) and a warlord trait is weak sauce.

I think RP at the end of every phase would be insanely overpowered. End of the movement phase would be reasonable compromise, to allow buffing units to move into position. I agree that there should be a way (a costly way mind you) to bring back a dead unit. personally I think Res Orbs should allow for you to roll RP for a dead unit at the end of the phase they died in.

Still not seen any explanation as to what would be overpowered about MW vehicles on 6+ for Gauss, other than people don't like MW. If you absolutely must not have MW, then D2 AND ap-4 on 6's would also work and wouldn't cause MW. That way Inv saves still work.

The biggest issue with MW is that it favours the all ready OP/best armies who have FNP on their vehicals.
MW is supposed to be an answer to GW giving out invulnerable saves like candy.
It makes actually having High toughness and decent armour even more irrelevant.
If Guass sucks against vehicals maybe it should be -3AP on a wound roll of 6+. If you go much further you punish only the armies who already feel that their vehicals suck, while Aeldari negative to hit and Deathguard, deamon unit are all still just as indestructible.

But what about Heavy Gauss Cannons? Those are already -4AP. -3AP on a 6 would be wasted. Its why I think +1D on a 6 to wound would be better overall, as then all weapons could benefit from it.

Ok, cool, thanks!

So, on turn 1, we’re realistically looking at an average of around 22 MW, should there be 2 units within 3” of the Thunderbolt target etc.

I’m guessing Vaults can advance and use the powers without issue as well?

Kdash wrote:
Ok, cool, thanks!

So, on turn 1, we’re realistically looking at an average of around 22 MW, should there be 2 units within 3” of the Thunderbolt target etc.

I’m guessing Vaults can advance and use the powers without issue as well?

Yeah, its not a shooting attack, so they should be able to. I didn't see anything that says that advancing restricts power usage.
Keep in mind that you still have seismic and meteor. I didn't bother doing the former because its dependent on how many models are in the enemy unit, and meteor should get a mention because it can deal D6 mortal wounds on a 5+, D3 otherwise. So if you don't have any good targets for the other powers (Nothing clumped together for thunder, no large units for sky and seismic, no low wound stat characters for arrow, at most 1 unit in 9" range for fire), you can just throw a meteor at them.

All the powers have their use, though I prefer Sky of Falling Stars and Thunderbolt because of the range and AoE.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Kdash wrote:
Ok, cool, thanks!

So, on turn 1, we’re realistically looking at an average of around 22 MW, should there be 2 units within 3” of the Thunderbolt target etc.

I’m guessing Vaults can advance and use the powers without issue as well?

Yeah, its not a shooting attack, so they should be able to. I didn't see anything that says that advancing restricts power usage.

Thanks!

Trying to work out in my head who would win... 3 Vaults or my MW spamming TSons lol. All seems to depend on whether they get lucky with Times Arrow snipes and whether or not the TSons are forced to go first.

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't 12 point troops.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.

You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers. Now tell me, how can necrons do 30 MW per turn ??

Considering they could have multiple mortal wounds spouting auras - their mortal wound protection is top teir.

Not to mention the fact that Ctan explode on 4's doing more AOE mortal damage. I'm not saying it OP. Just saying Crons can do epic tons of mortals with a ctan focus build.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

I insist you go into the Necron Tactica and tell those players that RP is fine. I insist. Seriously.

Yeah I think I've read the ability is useless. Cause enemies are just going to wipe out your units - because they have complete control of what happens in a dice game - plus no necron army has more than one threatening unit AND all armies have just enough firepower to finish off everything they shoot. LOL. Ofc none of that is true. Units coming back to life is totally on the same level as a reroll leadership...Seriously?

Mortal Wounds on 6s isn't OP. It already exists in the codex and no-one plays them.

 p5freak wrote:


You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers.

Sure, if you want a non-function army. How are you getting 15+ smites off?

2DPs, Ahriman = 6 MW
3 MSU Rubrics = 3 MW
3 Shamans = 6 MW

That's the best you could get on one detachment. Scarabs would be entirely inefficient for MW spam.

If you're spamming 9 DPs and Ahriman - that's not Thousand Sons and is still only 20 MW.

Spoletta wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

I don’t mind like “2 damage on 6’s to wound vs vehicles” or something, but we do NOT need even more mortal wounds. It’s already a bad mechanic, let’s keep the infection as contained as possible.

Contained = screw the two or three armies that can't do it, but we'll let everyone else carry on. Most other armies can reliably crank out mortal wounds way easier than what I'm proposing, without the limitation of vehicles only. If you don't like the MW mechanic as a whole then fine, but you can't say this is OP compared to other MW stuff out there.

D2 on 6's is really weak sauce, especially as they're only ap-1. You're blocking half of the D2 shots at a minimum, so in reality that's an extra wound or two at most.

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.,
Also, RPs can never be negated by the enemy, it can be limited which is a different thing. Focus firing a unit does indeed prevent you from getting your guys back, but every time you focus fire something to the bitter end of it, then you had to reduce the efficency of your offensive, so RP did have an effect on the game.
We can argue that the effect becomes smaller the larger the game is, and at the standard point level 1750-2000 then it is overcosted for the effect it brings to the table. That is indeed true.
Saying though that RP can be negated is wrong, RP is never truly negated, which means that it's already in a better state than other faction rules.

Necron's biggest problem is that they are a faction designed to cover all AT needs by means of massed Gauss fire, and all of a sudden the Gauss changed role without redesigning the rest of the faction, so that now Necrons have big issues taking down big targets (and also have some overcosted stuff here and there, probably more than the average faction).
Necron's issues are also meta related. The meta right now is cheap infantry and huge models or very powerful and mobile alpha strikes. Necrons are at theyr best against 3+ / 4+ average T targets which right now are completely missing from the picture.

Correct me if I am wrong but destroyers and doomsday arks are in the necron codex. I think we could even venture to say these are good units right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darsath wrote:
Mortal Wounds on 6s isn't OP. It already exists in the codex and no-one plays them.

It exists on a 19 point deathmark(not a troop - makes it worthless) not a 12 point warrior (which is a troop so can be easily spammed) Plus if you have literally every gauss weapon doing mortals on a 6 - come on man. You that would be OP as feth.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

A full unit of 20 in rapid fire range averages 6 mortal wounds on a vehicle. It's hardly disgusting, especially not when you consider that necron warriors used to be able to easily destroy vehicles in the other editions. Warriors currently have no way to embed special weapons. No meltaguns for us, no lascannons for us, no plasma for us. All our anti-tank is tied up in expensive units that are easy to focus down. This rule would give out rank and file a way to fight armour without being overpowered.

I don’t mind like “2 damage on 6’s to wound vs vehicles” or something, but we do NOT need even more mortal wounds. It’s already a bad mechanic, let’s keep the infection as contained as possible.

Contained = screw the two or three armies that can't do it, but we'll let everyone else carry on. Most other armies can reliably crank out mortal wounds way easier than what I'm proposing, without the limitation of vehicles only. If you don't like the MW mechanic as a whole then fine, but you can't say this is OP compared to other MW stuff out there.

D2 on 6's is really weak sauce, especially as they're only ap-1. You're blocking half of the D2 shots at a minimum, so in reality that's an extra wound or two at most.

Necrons are among the best factions when it comes to spam mortal wounds, probably the best one, so i don't follow your argument. You actually have the only mortal spam viable build in the game.,
Also, RPs can never be negated by the enemy, it can be limited which is a different thing. Focus firing a unit does indeed prevent you from getting your guys back, but every time you focus fire something to the bitter end of it, then you had to reduce the efficency of your offensive, so RP did have an effect on the game.
We can argue that the effect becomes smaller the larger the game is, and at the standard point level 1750-2000 then it is overcosted for the effect it brings to the table. That is indeed true.
Saying though that RP can be negated is wrong, RP is never truly negated, which means that it's already in a better state than other faction rules.

Necron's biggest problem is that they are a faction designed to cover all AT needs by means of massed Gauss fire, and all of a sudden the Gauss changed role without redesigning the rest of the faction, so that now Necrons have big issues taking down big targets (and also have some overcosted stuff here and there, probably more than the average faction).
Necron's issues are also meta related. The meta right now is cheap infantry and huge models or very powerful and mobile alpha strikes. Necrons are at theyr best against 3+ / 4+ average T targets which right now are completely missing from the picture.

Correct me if I am wrong but destroyers and doomsday arks are in the necron codex. I think we could even venture to say these are good units right?

Yeah they're good units, no doubt. Destroyers are a good unit with an amazing stratagem, but they're very easy to focus down once they've made a play at something. DDA are good AT firepower, but random shots and random damage makes them very difficult to rely on.

Not saying we don't have some decent units, just that we have a lot of chaff that needs fixing. As an aside, this quote chain is getting ridiculous lol.

Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:


You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers.

Sure, if you want a non-function army. How are you getting 15+ smites off?

2DPs, Ahriman = 6 MW
3 MSU Rubrics = 3 MW
3 Shamans = 6 MW

That's the best you could get on one detachment. Scarabs would be entirely inefficient for MW spam.

If you're spamming 9 DPs and Ahriman - that's not Thousand Sons and is still only 20 MW.

I never said 15 smites. Next time continue to read, before asking questions which already have been answered.

 p5freak wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:


You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers.

Sure, if you want a non-function army. How are you getting 15+ smites off?

2DPs, Ahriman = 6 MW
3 MSU Rubrics = 3 MW
3 Shamans = 6 MW

That's the best you could get on one detachment. Scarabs would be entirely inefficient for MW spam.

If you're spamming 9 DPs and Ahriman - that's not Thousand Sons and is still only 20 MW.

I never said 15 smites. Next time continue to read, before asking questions which already have been answered.

Cool. Hey did you know that the average smite is 2 mortal wounds? And that there is a 16% chance you fail to cast without a bonus? That means each smite is 1.7 MW on average, which takes 17 or more full smites to accomplish 30 mortal wounds per turn.

Next time learn some math and know what you're talking about instead of just throwing out some numbers.

 kastelen wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.

Just make the warriors do special stuff to vehicles only

As for flayed ones, how about letting them advance and charge? And keep the price tag and at 3A only

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

I guess CA could really upset people by making Guardsmen 6 points, Kabs 8 points, moving Fire Warriors up to 9 etc.

Models don't have to be troops to be worth playing. What is that based on?

Tyel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

I guess CA could really upset people by making Guardsmen 6 points, Kabs 8 points, moving Fire Warriors up to 9 etc.

I think 5 point guardsmen/8 point fire warriors would be more reasonable tbh. At 9 points they get to feeling like a Tax. Could need some testing tho.

Darsath wrote:
Models don't have to be troops to be worth playing. What is that based on?

CP


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:


You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers.

Sure, if you want a non-function army. How are you getting 15+ smites off?

2DPs, Ahriman = 6 MW
3 MSU Rubrics = 3 MW
3 Shamans = 6 MW

That's the best you could get on one detachment. Scarabs would be entirely inefficient for MW spam.

If you're spamming 9 DPs and Ahriman - that's not Thousand Sons and is still only 20 MW.

I never said 15 smites. Next time continue to read, before asking questions which already have been answered.

Cool. Hey did you know that the average smite is 2 mortal wounds? And that there is a 16% chance you fail to cast without a bonus? That means each smite is 1.7 MW on average, which takes 17 or more full smites to accomplish 30 mortal wounds per turn.

Next time learn some math and know what you're talking about instead of just throwing out some numbers.

Lets be nice. TS can do a lot of MW - which is what he ment. Necrons can do more...That much is clear.

Dire Avengers are t3, no WBB, and base AP0. Assault 2 18" vs RF1 24" is basically a wash. 12ppm. On 6s, their shots are AP-3.

Necron Warrors are much more durable (T4, WBB), and have AP-1.

If you gave Necron Warrors Mortal Wounds on 6s, how is that fair? That's strictly better than AP-3 on 6s, by a lot. In addition to the native AP-1.

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

 Xenomancers wrote:

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.

You either get to roll for RP or you don't. With more dakka in higher point games, your chances of rolling go down as it's easier to wipe a unit.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your comment, but it is definitely not getting better in higher point games.

Necronplayer wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.

You either get to roll for RP or you don't. With more dakka in higher point games, your chances of rolling go down as it's easier to wipe a unit.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your comment, but it is definitely not getting better in higher point games.

We are talking about in theory here. Typically units do more damage the closer they get in this game - but the space to get closer to a unit does not increase as points go up - so this space to deal increased damage to units goes down. Fire lanes don't get bigger as points go up - so LOS has a bigger effect in a large game than a smaller one.

There also always an inherent risk of bad rolls when shooting at a unit with RP. Opponents know that it's possible to fail to kill a unit and have it respawn so they are more likely to engage units that can't come back first. (Think about constructs and vehicles) So just by not being shot at RP is doing something effective. This is something that most Necron players seem to ignore.

When I am playing Tau sept and no one charges me because the damage threat is too high. I don't consider the improved overwatch useless ability - it's keeping my units alive - it is doing something very important at that point. Without ever actually using it. It doesn't show up on the stat sheet though. It what we call "intangibles".

Tyel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

I guess CA could really upset people by making Guardsmen 6 points, Kabs 8 points, moving Fire Warriors up to 9 etc.

This is the point I was trying to make in other threads... There are the "good" factions (Eldar, DE, Guard) and there are the "bad" factions (GK, SM, Necrons). Do we nerf the "good" factions down to the bad? Or do we buff the "bad" factions up to the good?

Daedalus81 wrote:
Cool. Hey did you know that the average smite is 2 mortal wounds? And that there is a 16% chance you fail to cast without a bonus? That means each smite is 1.7 MW on average, which takes 17 or more full smites to accomplish 30 mortal wounds per turn.

Next time learn some math and know what you're talking about instead of just throwing out some numbers.

You obviously have no clue how to build a tsons army that is capable of 30 MW per turn.

w1zard wrote:

Tyel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

I guess CA could really upset people by making Guardsmen 6 points, Kabs 8 points, moving Fire Warriors up to 9 etc.

This is the point I was trying to make in other threads... There are the "good" factions (Eldar, DE, Guard) and there are the "bad" factions (GK, SM, Necrons). Do we nerf the "good" factions down to the bad? Or do we buff the "bad" factions up to the good?

The game needs both though. As those top tier codex's have brutally devastating turn 1's while the bottom tier can't actually do enough damage to survive any return.
The game would need rebalanced if everyone was nerfed down to GK level of useless, as tabling would be impossible, but it doesn't need to go to the other extreme of DE/Guard deleting 1/3 of the opponent turn 1.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

Wait are you seriously saying you think RP gets better in high point games?

Also that other comment above from Ice Can, you're basically saying that some armies should just suck, so that your top tier armies feel special. Good lord.

Anyway, don't want to hijack this thread anymore than I already have. Necrons need love, some disagreement as to how much is the tl:dr

Allow Spyders to effect RP again.

Then have them function like the repair from the Ghost ark, but they only allow d6 models per Spyder in range to roll RP at the end of the movement phase.

Spyders cannot use this ability if they have used a Fabricator Claw this turn.

I expect another 30 page thread once CA comes out arguing if CA did enough.

meleti wrote:
I expect another 30 page thread once CA comes out arguing if CA did enough.

Duh. It's a law.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

Wait are you seriously saying you think RP gets better in high point games?

He really has no idea the state of Necrons at the moment. I'm assuming he was tabled in 5th ed by a flying crossiant list and has never gotten over it.

meleti wrote:
I expect another 30 page thread once CA comes out arguing if CA did enough.

Given the wish list I have seen on this thread, it will be a 30 page thread about how CA didn't do enough.

In all seriousness, though. What do people genuinely think Chapter Approved will include? At least as far as changes go, will it stick to points values, or will they introduce some sort of mono army bonus for certain factions. Will there be some sort of overhaul in the Command Point system.

Bharring wrote:
Dire Avengers are t3, no WBB, and base AP0. Assault 2 18" vs RF1 24" is basically a wash. 12ppm. On 6s, their shots are AP-3.

Necron Warrors are much more durable (T4, WBB), and have AP-1.

If you gave Necron Warrors Mortal Wounds on 6s, how is that fair? That's strictly better than AP-3 on 6s, by a lot. In addition to the native AP-1.

The fact you imply RP is worth anything defensively is laughable.

Darsath wrote:
In all seriousness, though. What do people genuinely think Chapter Approved will include? At least as far as changes go, will it stick to points values, or will they introduce some sort of mono army bonus for certain factions. Will there be some sort of overhaul in the Command Point system.

Mostly realistic wishlist:

A CP overhaul. Either only get CP from warlord's army or can only use CP on the faction that generated it (I prefer the latter option). This basically fixes 90% of soup issues (Eldar soup still kinda gross, but that's a whole other thing).
Nemesis Strike Force rule for Grey Knights (Turn 1 Deepstrike)
Buffs to Space Marines Chapter Tactics (apply to all units, specific buffs to each chapter to bring them in line with newer codexes).
Ravagers and Disintegrator Cannons going up in price. Probably Talos too.
All the necron buffs mentioned earlier.
Plasma fix (only explode on natural 1s).
Natural 6 is always a hit for all armies.
Crisis suits get cheaper.
Castellan is going up in cost.
Undo some of the silly rules that killed certain units utility (poxwalkers not being able to go above starting numbers etc)

I think most of these are reasonable on their own, but I don't see us getting more than half of it at best.

IanVanCheese wrote:

Darsath wrote:
In all seriousness, though. What do people genuinely think Chapter Approved will include? At least as far as changes go, will it stick to points values, or will they introduce some sort of mono army bonus for certain factions. Will there be some sort of overhaul in the Command Point system.

Mostly realistic wishlist:

A CP overhaul. Either only get CP from warlord's army or can only use CP on the faction that generated it (I prefer the latter option). This basically fixes 90% of soup issues (Eldar soup still kinda gross, but that's a whole other thing).
Nemesis Strike Force rule for Grey Knights (Turn 1 Deepstrike)
Buffs to Space Marines Chapter Tactics (apply to all units, specific buffs to each chapter to bring them in line with newer codexes).
Ravagers and Disintegrator Cannons going up in price. Probably Talos too.
All the necron buffs mentioned earlier.
Plasma fix (only explode on natural 1s).
Natural 6 is always a hit for all armies.
Crisis suits get cheaper.
Castellan is going up in cost.
Undo some of the silly rules that killed certain units utility (poxwalkers not being able to go above starting numbers etc)

I think most of these are reasonable on their own, but I don't see us getting more than half of it at best.

I could get on board with quite a few of these actually.

Realistically though, I'm not expecting much. A point tweak for several units is probably all we will get by way of balance changes. I think a lot of the focus will be shifted on the beta sisters codex.

Darsath wrote:
In all seriousness, though. What do people genuinely think Chapter Approved will include? At least as far as changes go, will it stick to points values, or will they introduce some sort of mono army bonus for certain factions. Will there be some sort of overhaul in the Command Point system.

It's been already said, however, I expect:
Points adjustment: I expect to see common units increased in price, but nothing to be done for underperforming units.
Sisters beta codex: The same thing as the index, with a set of marginally mediocre Order Convictions and relics, with one or two decent strategems.
Looted Wagon: Rules that aren't actually ever applicable, but give you more precise customization over your looted wagons than slotting them into the current pool of Ork vehicles, but open play only.
New missions: I don't know what they'll be, since Planetstrike and Cities of Death and Apocalyse have already been covered.

What we genuinely think it will include?

IG guardsmen point increase
Castellan Knight point increase
Probably some psychic power changes for Eldar and SM
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units
Plasma cost increase
Melta and equiv cost decrease
GSC ambush changes
Lots of CP nerfs across the board
I actually expect Custodes point decreases except for the biker.

 Quickjager wrote:
What we genuinely think it will include?

IG guardsmen point increase
Castellan Knight point increase
Probably some psychic power changes for Eldar and SM
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units
Plasma cost increase
Melta and equiv cost decrease
GSC ambush changes
Lots of CP nerfs across the board
I actually expect Custodes point decreases except for the biker.

This is what would happen in a sane and rational world, not what will actually happen.

He really has no idea the state of Necrons at the moment. I'm assuming he was tabled in 5th ed by a flying crossiant list and has never gotten over it.

I'm guessing that he doesn't actually play Necrons, and does not posses any real insight into how they actually play. No real Necron player will spout the non-sense about RP and Necrons being fine at the moment. I could understand the original theory of RP being powerful on paper, but it has clearly be shown that it is very weak in practice, and thus why I am certain that we are due for a substantial points decrease in our units since RP is not near as valuable as it looks on paper. I'm hoping to see both the points decreases, and some support to make RP better in game.

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

 Quickjager wrote:

Castellan Knight point increase

I was thinking that too, until I saw the Ork codex. If Knights were going to take a point increase, I would've expected that Gorkanaut and Morkanaut to be around 400pts, and they're 311 and 310 respectively.

 Quickjager wrote:

Plasma cost increase
Melta and equiv cost decrease

I can't see Plasma going up in cost further, as it's already 13pts for BS3, and sees very limited competitive play because of that.
Judging by the Ork codex's equivalents, BS4 meltas should drop to 9 points, ergo BS3 meltas will likely be coming down to 13 points.
I suspect that multi-meltas will drop to 20 for BS3 and 15 for BS4.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

Wait are you seriously saying you think RP gets better in high point games?

Also that other comment above from Ice Can, you're basically saying that some armies should just suck, so that your top tier armies feel special. Good lord.

Anyway, don't want to hijack this thread anymore than I already have. Necrons need love, some disagreement as to how much is the tl:dr

No I'm saying that the top armies need to be dailed down form the 11 they are at not every other codex dialed upto 11.
But they also Don't need to go as far as the 2 of GK they need to hit a 6 or 7 point of allowing most games to make it to turn 5-6 but not have half of people armies left turn 6 like it would if everyone went down to GK power level.

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Ummm so you saying that using yet another non scalable rules(strategem) suddenly makes non scalable rule scalable? That's like total opposition of basic logic...

Strategem is another 100% non scalable rule. You can use strategem once. Obviously say ork showing off strategem(shoot twice) is going to have bigger impact in 1k points when you have 1 unit that can benefit from it compared to 3k game where you could have 3-4 units that would love to use it but can't.

Non scalable rule does not change non scalable rule into scalable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Tyel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Necrons, like marines, are in the "have-not" bucket for base units. Compare a necron warrior or marine to a kabalite. And despair.

I guess CA could really upset people by making Guardsmen 6 points, Kabs 8 points, moving Fire Warriors up to 9 etc.

This is the point I was trying to make in other threads... There are the "good" factions (Eldar, DE, Guard) and there are the "bad" factions (GK, SM, Necrons). Do we nerf the "good" factions down to the bad? Or do we buff the "bad" factions up to the good?

The game needs both though. As those top tier codex's have brutally devastating turn 1's while the bottom tier can't actually do enough damage to survive any return.
The game would need rebalanced if everyone was nerfed down to GK level of useless, as tabling would be impossible, but it doesn't need to go to the other extreme of DE/Guard deleting 1/3 of the opponent turn 1.

WTF? For your sake I'm hoping you are joking here...

 Sasori wrote:

I'm guessing that he doesn't actually play Necrons, and does not posses any real insight into how they actually play. No real Necron player will spout the non-sense about RP and Necrons being fine at the moment. I could understand the original theory of RP being powerful on paper, but it has clearly be shown that it is very weak in practice, and thus why I am certain that we are due for a substantial points decrease in our units since RP is not near as valuable as it looks on paper. I'm hoping to see both the points decreases, and some support to make RP better in game.

Thats the eays way to go, but it will make necrons even stronger in low point games. Another easy way to go is to change RP into a FNP rule. I think one of these will happen.

 Blndmage wrote:
Allow Spyders to effect RP again.

Then have them function like the repair from the Ghost ark, but they only allow d6 models per Spyder in range to roll RP at the end of the movement phase.

Spyders cannot use this ability if they have used a Fabricator Claw this turn.

I guess the easiest way is to change RP to the FNP rule they had before...plus some minor point changes is what I expect...

Probably almost nothing will happen to how our teleportation works or to our flyers (except point drops)

Also definitely no change to Gauss...I just dont see it coming (even though id love to)...just point drops and maybe some rules clarifications (moving units that disembarked from our „transports“)...

If this is enough to make necrons viable depends wholly on the other factions nerfs/buffs...but to be REAL honest here...I dont expect much...This is how they think necrons should play...theres no 180 change in sight...

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

You're joking right?
IS are undercosted compared to EVERYTHING.
They are very much NOT "the foundation cost for every other infantry unit"
Heck, look at cultists or conscripts for comparison-same price, strictly worse.

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

Castellan Knight point increase

I was thinking that too, until I saw the Ork codex. If Knights were going to take a point increase, I would've expected that Gorkanaut and Morkanaut to be around 400pts, and they're 311 and 310 respectively.

Not seeing the codex yet, I find it hard to comment as I dont know how good gork/mork are. but I suspect they are not AS good as knights-given that they don't have an entire codex dedicated to supporting them.

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

Plasma cost increase
Melta and equiv cost decrease

I can't see Plasma going up in cost further, as it's already 13pts for BS3, and sees very limited competitive play because of that.
Judging by the Ork codex's equivalents, BS4 meltas should drop to 9 points, ergo BS3 meltas will likely be coming down to 13 points.
I suspect that multi-meltas will drop to 20 for BS3 and 15 for BS4.

 Quickjager wrote:
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units

Any chance you could elaborate on this one, dude?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:


You are ridiculously wrong. Tsons can easily spam 30 MW per turn, without the +1 smite penalty every other faction suffers.

Sure, if you want a non-function army. How are you getting 15+ smites off?

2DPs, Ahriman = 6 MW
3 MSU Rubrics = 3 MW
3 Shamans = 6 MW

That's the best you could get on one detachment. Scarabs would be entirely inefficient for MW spam.

If you're spamming 9 DPs and Ahriman - that's not Thousand Sons and is still only 20 MW.

So, while I agree smite spam doesn’t get you to the same potential level as Necrons, but, I also think he was indicating total MW output as opposed to just smite spam.

At 2000 points, with Magnus, I’d reasonable expect to break the 30MW barrier in the same situations we used to get the Necrons to 30+ MWs.

Doing so, potentially results in you not getting the more supportive powers off for a turn, and some of it relies on you getting powers like Bolt of Change and Doombolt off on Mangus (and then a +4 Infernal Gateway for D6 spread onto 2 additional units) but, Tsons can still reliably put out the same amount of MWs on a standard turn, as 3 Necron Vaults can do – which is ~20-30.

Kdash wrote:

So, while I agree smite spam doesn’t get you to the same potential level as Necrons, but, I also think he was indicating total MW output as opposed to just smite spam.

Exactly. I never said smite spam. There are many more ways to spam MW, its not only smites.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

Wait are you seriously saying you think RP gets better in high point games?

He really has no idea the state of Necrons at the moment. I'm assuming he was tabled in 5th ed by a flying crossiant list and has never gotten over it.

To be fair, I do see his point. If your opponent is forced to spend more firepower than he normally would to render a unit useless than strategically speaking you would have the advantage. The problem though is that such a thing only really works when everything in the necron army is a potential threat and they are cheap enough to make such focus firing down a unit an inefficient proposition.

This is a huge problem, because not only are necron damage dealers few in number and will be focused down, leaving the rest of the army without any real damage sources, they are also expensive, meaning that your opponent will ultimately win out the trade.
In the past necron units were always a threat - that gauss rule made even a squad of warriors a potential threat, as they could one shot vehicles. Now, not so much. -1Ap isn't that impressive against a unit with a 3+ save, high toughness and more than 5 wounds. You have to spend so many points on warriors to make any damage output worthwhile now.
If gauss were changed to +1D damage on a 6 whilst retaining their "bonus" AP, that would give a lot of necron units more a bite, and therefore would make the impact of losing a unit to getting focused down a little less severe, as then you'd still have some offensive options left against heavier targets.

Necrons need a price decrease overall, starting with their weapons. A Gauss blaster and tesla carbine is not worth 9 points. That's more than the immortal they go on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:
I guess the easiest way is to change RP to the FNP rule they had before...

Easiest? Probably. Best? Hell no.
In terms of army flavor its a cop out, as necrons were always about getting knocked down and standing back up again
In terms of game design its a cop out, as why bother creating a unique, flavorful rule when you can just copy and rename Disgustingly Resilient?
8th ed already has a problem with recycling the same damned rule over and over again.

I’ve said for a while the most awesome thing they could do with necrons is to give them a scaling amount of RP-resource in the list, and allow them to spend it in game to rez models. It would add a layer of tactics in that necrons could bring a balanced army and then burn their resources rezzing the units they need while letting the unneeded ones die off.

Allow them to bring back totally wiped units for an extra cost near a cryptek, and there ya go.

“B-But I can’t keep track of one easily tracked number through the game!”
Then you don’t pass the minimum mental ability level to play the game. Bye.

RP probably doesn't need to scale though. It just needs synergy and some actual support.
An ability like RP is only worth it if you have the damage output to go with it and can support it with buffs and other defensive abilities. Can't do that with necrons.

The orks do a better job at defending units with their KFF. The chronometer is just pathetic. It's 75% of the cost of a KFF but has 33% of the range. I don't know why GW gives things 3" auras because those are bloody useless.

RP is a strong ability in theory, but in practice its weak because the army isn't built around it.

I guess a good analogy would be a Role Playing party that is full of nothing but poorly built defensive tanks, and one of them has a knife. That's what necrons are like.

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

The math is clear - they should be 6 ppm. No point hiding from it.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units

Any chance you could elaborate on this one, dude?

Yea, I got it backwards, some keyword adjustment of IK because last I checked some knights weren't able to be part of the AdMech because of a missing keyword. Most of these were FW ones, haven't checked in a while.

DKoK and Elysians needed some keyword touch up and doctrine changes, but since the latter got discontinued...

Best would be: increase all points by a factor of 10.

Then you can better balance out points for the cheap infantry. Right now the problem is that a change from 5 to 6 points is a 20% increase and that is just too much for finetuning.

Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Weidekuh wrote:
Best would be: increase all points by a factor of 10.

Then you can better balance out points for the cheap infantry. Right now the problem is that a change from 5 to 6 points is a 20% increase and that is just too much for finetuning.

Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

I'll do you one better-increase by factor of 20.

That way you can have true 40k tournaments.

Honestly, how we didn't come up with that one before eludes me.

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Its still a powerful ability. Maybe a unit can only be resurrected once instead, like the restriction on Resurrection Protocols.

Kdash wrote:


So, while I agree smite spam doesn’t get you to the same potential level as Necrons, but, I also think he was indicating total MW output as opposed to just smite spam.

At 2000 points, with Magnus, I’d reasonable expect to break the 30MW barrier in the same situations we used to get the Necrons to 30+ MWs.

Doing so, potentially results in you not getting the more supportive powers off for a turn, and some of it relies on you getting powers like Bolt of Change and Doombolt off on Mangus (and then a +4 Infernal Gateway for D6 spread onto 2 additional units) but, Tsons can still reliably put out the same amount of MWs on a standard turn, as 3 Necron Vaults can do – which is ~20-30.

Which is why I said functional army. Nobody is building around MW spam, because then you don't have an army. Magnus often doesn't survive without protection buffs.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Its still a powerful ability. Maybe a unit can only be resurrected once instead, like the restriction on Resurrection Protocols.

It really isn't that powerful once you put it at 3CP. Then again we had whiners about the Cultists strategem which wasn't bad either so...

Lemondish wrote:

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

The math is clear - they should be 6 ppm. No point hiding from it.

Perhaps, but changing that one unit in isolation creates more weirdness in the AM codex. SWS teams are 4 points each guy, Veterans are 6 points, HWTs are 6 points per model, Ratlings are 5; you're going to have to realign all of those to fit if a Guardsman is now 6. A Scion is currently 10 points (with weapon), 2.5 times a guardsman, should they get bumped up to 14-15, or stay at 10?

5 fits better, and while its not as much as some IG detractors believe, it still fits in the points space much more neatly.

The comparative points values of nearly every Infantry unit in the game are out of whack with each other. That’s one nice thing about the Ork Codex. It seems to acknowledge and largely correct that issue, at least internally.

Now cross your fingers that it is a harbinger or CA 2018.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

The reality is it gets even better as points go up. Units take up space and available firepower to a particular spot goes down in scale as points go up. Stratagems with amplify damage can still only be played once. Not to mention threat saturation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

The mechanic itself is fine... It's the fact that people like him and the devs thought that RP was much more valuable than it actually is, and baked a lot of high points costs into our units. RP could be improved in a lot of ways, but the main offender is the absurd points costs that Necron units are paying due to it right now. I will also say that RP is one of the few (Only?) Mechanics that an opponent can completely deny the Necron player.

Problem with the rule is it's not scalable. It goes from awesome in 1k to meh in 1.5k to useless in 2k to not exist at all in 3k+.

Good luck balancing something whose effect varies that much based on point level...And guess what level is most common...

I will disagree a bit. I think it's scaleable, if it had the right support. For instance, if we had a 2CP ability to allow RP on a unit that had been completely wiped out, and they fixed a few of the other weak RP support abilities, then I think scaling would not be an issue.

Indeed all hopes are not lost for RP, which is a good thing, because the current incarnation is much more in line with narrative than a plain FNP roll.

I think that the cryptechs needs a redesign, increasing the chances of bringing back models is exactly the wrong way to buff RP, it makes it even more powerful in small games without helping in big games. Maybe that if a unit is wiped out while within 3" of a cryptech, the unit can use the cryptech as a base model for RP but only comes back on a 6+.

Humm - how about no. How about a 3 CP strat that can be used once per game that lets you use reanimation on a wiped out unit?

Wait are you seriously saying you think RP gets better in high point games?

He really has no idea the state of Necrons at the moment. I'm assuming he was tabled in 5th ed by a flying crossiant list and has never gotten over it.

Um - no. Yes - RP is better in high point games. Argue my points - this is how debate works.

Saying things like...oh you just have no idea. Is not constructive. Did I not just suggest a 1 use stratagem that cost CP that allows you to use RP on a completely wiped out unit? Sounds like a buff to me. It also sounds to me like cron players want this at all times. It's almost like they don't understand that units coming back to life for free is OP.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units

Any chance you could elaborate on this one, dude?

Yeah I´m also eager to find out what wierd combos/interactions you’re seeing here
EDIT: my bad I missed quickjaggers response

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Yeah - just 420 free points. Nothing to see here ladies and gents lol.

BTW - can we make the tyranids stratagem to resurrect a whole unit of tyranids warriors work like this too? I'd really like to auto win games with my nids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Dire Avengers are t3, no WBB, and base AP0. Assault 2 18" vs RF1 24" is basically a wash. 12ppm. On 6s, their shots are AP-3.

Necron Warrors are much more durable (T4, WBB), and have AP-1.

If you gave Necron Warrors Mortal Wounds on 6s, how is that fair? That's strictly better than AP-3 on 6s, by a lot. In addition to the native AP-1.

The fact you imply RP is worth anything defensively is laughable.

2 units - 1 has 1 model left in cover compared to a fresh unit.

In any other army that 1 model is just going to die from a LD test after losing 9 models or is easy to ignore 1 model till later. Against crons you have to kill it or the half the unit can come back on a good roll. He's got a 2+ save in cover though and you'd much rather shoot your auto cannons (the only weapons you have left) on that Ctan on your front lines

You keep putting scrap wounds on the 1 model but he keeps making 3+ saves. Now what do you do? The only weapon you have left is a las cannon. It would sure like to shoot at that Ctan on your front lines but that immortal is still alive. So Ill shot it with a lascannon. Success! the immortal is dead! But look - Ctan is at full life when it could have taking 2 heavy weapon shots.

If you fail to realize that situations like this happen ALL THE TIME. You clearly aren't trying to have real discussion. Target priority is literally the only skill in this entire game that matters and crons take that choice away from you for the most part. That is a powerful ability on it's own.

Maybe I am just not thinking sufficiently outside the box - but I don't like the idea of whole units re-appearing.

If Necron Warriors were 10 points, Immortals about 14-15 points and so on you don't need RP to be an especially powerful ability that goes off all the time.

Necrons might be able to leverage some los against some lists, but there is no hope vs ig

Tyel wrote:
Maybe I am just not thinking sufficiently outside the box - but I don't like the idea of whole units re-appearing.

If Necron Warriors were 10 points, Immortals about 14-15 points and so on you don't need RP to be an especially powerful ability that goes off all the time.

Yeah, after thinking about it I think the only unit that's particularly cost effective are destroyers. Everything else is overpriced for what they can offer.

Yeah, I find it quite strange that the faction that's known for standing back up doesn't have an equivalent stratagem (Green tide, Tide of traitors, etc.) to support that.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Yeah - just 420 free points. Nothing to see here ladies and gents lol.

BTW - can we make the tyranids stratagem to resurrect a whole unit of tyranids warriors work like this too? I'd really like to auto win games with my nids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Dire Avengers are t3, no WBB, and base AP0. Assault 2 18" vs RF1 24" is basically a wash. 12ppm. On 6s, their shots are AP-3.

Necron Warrors are much more durable (T4, WBB), and have AP-1.

If you gave Necron Warrors Mortal Wounds on 6s, how is that fair? That's strictly better than AP-3 on 6s, by a lot. In addition to the native AP-1.

The fact you imply RP is worth anything defensively is laughable.

2 units - 1 has 1 model left in cover compared to a fresh unit.

In any other army that 1 model is just going to die from a LD test after losing 9 models or is easy to ignore 1 model till later. Against crons you have to kill it or the half the unit can come back on a good roll. He's got a 2+ save in cover though and you'd much rather shoot your auto cannons (the only weapons you have left) on that Ctan on your front lines

You keep putting scrap wounds on the 1 model but he keeps making 3+ saves. Now what do you do? The only weapon you have left is a las cannon. It would sure like to shoot at that Ctan on your front lines but that immortal is still alive. So Ill shot it with a lascannon. Success! the immortal is dead! But look - Ctan is at full life when it could have taking 2 heavy weapon shots.

If you fail to realize that situations like this happen ALL THE TIME. You clearly aren't trying to have real discussion. Target priority is literally the only skill in this entire game that matters and crons take that choice away from you for the most part. That is a powerful ability on it's own.

No one wants to discuss this with you, because you act like you have an agenda, and just seem to ignore the fact that RP and Necrons are not in a good place.

1. You pull a random number of points, and don't bother to explain it. That's not an argument. Not to mention, you always seem to assume the best possible scenario for the Necrons, which is never the case.
2. You attempt to make a point about nids, that doesn't make sense. Do Nids have an army wide rule that allows them to get back up? No? Then making this comparison is silly. Necrons right now are paying the price for this rule in the absurd points cost across the army.
3. Look, you made up some fantasty land scenario again, about how it works out for the Necrons. This theory is fine and great, but it is not how it's working out in practice on the tabletop. Right now it is very easy to pick apart the Necron Army, and deny them their special rule. Are there any other armies that can be fully denied their special rule by the enemy player? How Many?
4. RP does not get better at higher point games. I don't know where you keep coming up with this. Players have the tools to much easier deny RP at higher point games. Nearly all of our units that have RP max out at a squad size of ten, which is by no means hard to kill.

I think that if the hypothetical strategem was worded:

Use when the last model of a unit with RESURRECTION PROTOCOLS would be removed as casualty. Immediately [Conduct Resurrection Protocols].

Would probably be more than fair. That way, if we really want that unit dead, it still dies, but it takes most of our army to do it, allowing RP to still soak up fire and protect other units like it should without making the unit functionally invincible.

The Imperial Knight strategem is extraordinarily frustrating to play against. Our Darkest Hour into Machine Spirit Resurgent is just awful, I don't think letting Necrons return a third of an infantry unit that would otherwise die is particularly egregious. Like, the best thing to return would be a squad of destroyers, I think.

the best solution for necrons, by far, is one that was proposed by another user in the necron forum, that Resurrection orb can be used at any time to roll for Resurrection protocol. Even in the opponents turn. It makes that wargear go from never used to auto include on any HQ able to take it, now HQ are way more worth it, and it makes the whole Resurrection way more efficient in bigger game.
Actually, where do we send suggestion to GW for chapter approve, cause I would dearly love to push this one forward lol.

I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

VoidSempai wrote:
the best solution for necrons, by far, is one that was proposed by another user in the necron forum, that Resurrection orb can be used at any time to roll for Resurrection protocol. Even in the opponents turn. It makes that wargear go from never used to auto include on any HQ able to take it, now HQ are way more worth it, and it makes the whole Resurrection way more efficient in bigger game.
Actually, where do we send suggestion to GW for chapter approve, cause I would dearly love to push this one forward lol.

Unfortunately, CA is more than likely already printed! But that is a good idea

 Quickjager wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Some Keyword adjustment on IG and AdMech units

Any chance you could elaborate on this one, dude?

Yea, I got it backwards, some keyword adjustment of IK because last I checked some knights weren't able to be part of the AdMech because of a missing keyword. Most of these were FW ones, haven't checked in a while.

DKoK and Elysians needed some keyword touch up and doctrine changes, but since the latter got discontinued...

Ah, OK, that makes sense. Given (from the stories I heard) the FW Index books were pulled together at quite short notice, a keyword sweep to remove such odd situations wouldn't be a bad shout.

I need to check my FW Space Marine Index and see what provisions it gives for GK and DW - might be worth giving them access to certain toys, if they haven't already got them.

And thanks to LemonDish for proving a point I made a page or two ago.

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

Which is almost an additional 200 points. And it isn't hard to kill the last 5 Warriors. Now nothing matters!

Also the fact you think RP gets stronger as the game size increases shows a huge disconnect from reality. You still also have yet to accept my invitation to post in the Necron Tactica. Wonder why that is?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

So you're thinking spending CP, investing in a Cryptek and Ghost Ark, and ensuring they are alive and within range to get models back is OP?

I can't imagine your thoughts on how OP the guaranteed throughput of Death Guard 5+++ is, with no outside support needed...

I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

I guess my ideas are just being ignored then?

 Sasori wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Weidekuh wrote:


Edit: also for Necrons a stratagem that lets you use RP on a completely wiped out unit at the end of the turn?

Yes, but it should be one use only. It is a powerful ability, and even Endless Green Tide has a caveat where they have to arrive from the table edge and be 9" from an enemy instead of just staying where they are.

It isn't like the army is swimming in CP. Even with unlimited uses you'd get maybe 2 max.

Yeah - just 420 free points. Nothing to see here ladies and gents lol.

BTW - can we make the tyranids stratagem to resurrect a whole unit of tyranids warriors work like this too? I'd really like to auto win games with my nids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Dire Avengers are t3, no WBB, and base AP0. Assault 2 18" vs RF1 24" is basically a wash. 12ppm. On 6s, their shots are AP-3.

Necron Warrors are much more durable (T4, WBB), and have AP-1.

If you gave Necron Warrors Mortal Wounds on 6s, how is that fair? That's strictly better than AP-3 on 6s, by a lot. In addition to the native AP-1.

The fact you imply RP is worth anything defensively is laughable.

2 units - 1 has 1 model left in cover compared to a fresh unit.

In any other army that 1 model is just going to die from a LD test after losing 9 models or is easy to ignore 1 model till later. Against crons you have to kill it or the half the unit can come back on a good roll. He's got a 2+ save in cover though and you'd much rather shoot your auto cannons (the only weapons you have left) on that Ctan on your front lines

You keep putting scrap wounds on the 1 model but he keeps making 3+ saves. Now what do you do? The only weapon you have left is a las cannon. It would sure like to shoot at that Ctan on your front lines but that immortal is still alive. So Ill shot it with a lascannon. Success! the immortal is dead! But look - Ctan is at full life when it could have taking 2 heavy weapon shots.

If you fail to realize that situations like this happen ALL THE TIME. You clearly aren't trying to have real discussion. Target priority is literally the only skill in this entire game that matters and crons take that choice away from you for the most part. That is a powerful ability on it's own.

No one wants to discuss this with you, because you act like you have an agenda, and just seem to ignore the fact that RP and Necrons are not in a good place.

1. You pull a random number of points, and don't bother to explain it. That's not an argument. Not to mention, you always seem to assume the best possible scenario for the Necrons, which is never the case.
2. You attempt to make a point about nids, that doesn't make sense. Do Nids have an army wide rule that allows them to get back up? No? Then making this comparison is silly. Necrons right now are paying the price for this rule in the absurd points cost across the army.
3. Look, you made up some fantasty land scenario again, about how it works out for the Necrons. This theory is fine and great, but it is not how it's working out in practice on the tabletop. Right now it is very easy to pick apart the Necron Army, and deny them their special rule. Are there any other armies that can be fully denied their special rule by the enemy player? How Many?
4. RP does not get better at higher point games. I don't know where you keep coming up with this. Players have the tools to much easier deny RP at higher point games. Nearly all of our units that have RP max out at a squad size of ten, which is by no means hard to kill.

First of all - it's just theory on RP scaling for point level. It doesn't really matter. But I've made points that you aren't even trying to dispute. There are some factors that you can't dispute.
#1 Models take up space
#2 Closing distance increases damage to a target generally
#3 Units can not stand on top of each other.

In other words - because units can not occupy the same space - getting damage to a particular target becomes more difficult as space becomes cramped. So in larger games finishing off a target becomes more difficult. Not to mention - the average number of units being destroyed in large game goes up. More target variety. More total units in general with a chance to get RP. These are all factors that make getting RP rolls easier.

I am not always assuming the best case for the necrons. If you actually go back and read your statements -"Not to mention, you always seem to assume the best possible scenario for the Necrons, which is never the case" you are the one that is making the absolute statement. I'm simply stating that RP is very powerful SOMETIMES and stating that the best case CAN occur. It's doesn't never happen. It happens in a minority of situations but when it does happen it completely changes the game. Unlike battle focus which probably gives you a few more hits with shuriken catapults in a game. RP probably gives you a few to many resurrections in a game. Getting back units is much better than a few more shuriken hits. So when you compare RP to other army wide abilities. It is clearly at the top of them. A buff to Necrons should not be a buff to RP (except in the case of a stratagem perhaps - and it had best be expensive)

I get that people want the army to be thematic. You have to get real though - you can't actually beat an army that you can't kill.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I get that people want the army to be thematic. You have to get real though - you can't actually beat an army that you can't kill.

Sure you can. Play the mission. Go for objectives, don't waste time trying to grind them down. Most RP units are slow, use it against them. It's not always about tabling your opponent, you can win a game while still losing most of your army, if you do it right. That's the strategy.

 Blndmage wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I get that people want the army to be thematic. You have to get real though - you can't actually beat an army that you can't kill.

Sure you can. Play the mission. Go for objectives, don't waste time trying to grind them down. Most RP units are slow, use it against them. It's not always about tabling your opponent, you can win a game while still losing most of your army, if you do it right. That's the strategy.

Honestly that just makes me think of control decks from magic the gathering and how not fun it is to play against them.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

Which is almost an additional 200 points. And it isn't hard to kill the last 5 Warriors. Now nothing matters!

Also the fact you think RP gets stronger as the game size increases shows a huge disconnect from reality. You still also have yet to accept my invitation to post in the Necron Tactica. Wonder why that is?

First of all HQ's that are going to be in the army anyways aren't really a factor here. Necron armies have cryptecs...it's just the way it is.

Second - the ghost arch - like all transports costs too much. This is the kind of stuff I'd like to see change for crons. Cheaper ghost arcs - cheapers warriors. Not undeniable RP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Don't set me up for disappointment man!

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

Which is almost an additional 200 points. And it isn't hard to kill the last 5 Warriors. Now nothing matters!

Also the fact you think RP gets stronger as the game size increases shows a huge disconnect from reality. You still also have yet to accept my invitation to post in the Necron Tactica. Wonder why that is?

First of all HQ's that are going to be in the army anyways aren't really a factor here. Necron armies have cryptecs...it's just the way it is.

Second - the ghost arch - like all transports costs too much. This is the kind of stuff I'd like to see change for crons. Cheaper ghost arcs - cheapers warriors. Not undeniable RP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Don't set me up for disappointment man!

If it makes you guys feel better, neither necrons OR space marines are at all relevant.

Ultramarines.

If I don't get charged I can't fall back ergo special rule is denied


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Are you sworn to secrecy? Spill the beans!

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Wait, what?

I can't share details, sorry. But, there are a lot of changes. And not just for SM.

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Huh?

 Marmatag wrote:
I can't share details, sorry. But, there are a lot of changes. And not just for SM.

Did you mug Reece? You're giving us all ultramarine balls, here.

Marmatag just say this much, which are better Primaris Intercessors or OG Tacticals.

 Quickjager wrote:
Marmatag just say this much, which are better Primaris Intercessors or OG Tacticals.

I'm guessing trolling it's not like GW is tracking his Dakkadakka account

Well - give him credit for being able to keep a secret. That is an admirably quality. No worry though - not everyone is so admirable. Details will be sooner rather than later.

When does this thing drop, then? If people have already seen it?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well - give him credit for being able to keep a secret. That is an admirably quality. No worry though - not everyone is so admirable. Details will be sooner rather than later.

True - but I can't wait for the shitstorm. It's going to be so glorious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
When does this thing drop, then? If people have already seen it?

Last year it was out before December so very, very soon. This week is clean up for BSF and next is almost guaranteed to be lead up to CA if not the week after.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well - give him credit for being able to keep a secret. That is an admirably quality. No worry though - not everyone is so admirable. Details will be sooner rather than later.

True - but I can't wait for the shitstorm. It's going to be so glorious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
When does this thing drop, then? If people have already seen it?

Last year it was out before December so very, very soon. This week is clean up for BSF and next is almost guaranteed to be lead up to CA if not the week after.

Nah if I knew I'd be spreading the word like herpes

 Marmatag wrote:
I can't share details, sorry. But, there are a lot of changes. And not just for SM.

Pick the % chance tactical marine players will be pleased.

A) 8%
B) 15%
C) 32%
D) More than 32%

Will GK players be happy too?

I really wonder how bold GW dares to be with CA in general. Points changes sure, but would they ever change units, add units or change/add strategems in CA?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

Which is almost an additional 200 points. And it isn't hard to kill the last 5 Warriors. Now nothing matters!

Also the fact you think RP gets stronger as the game size increases shows a huge disconnect from reality. You still also have yet to accept my invitation to post in the Necron Tactica. Wonder why that is?

First of all HQ's that are going to be in the army anyways aren't really a factor here. Necron armies have cryptecs...it's just the way it is.

Second - the ghost arch - like all transports costs too much. This is the kind of stuff I'd like to see change for crons. Cheaper ghost arcs - cheapers warriors. Not undeniable RP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Don't set me up for disappointment man!

First of all, you still need to include the points for them. Crypteks aren't free, and neither are Overlords, Lords, and Destroyer Lords. Nothing is free. You can't assume buffs without having paid the points. That's why some of the Guard players here are understandably frustrated when you talk about everything Infantry squads can do. You just assume without having paid the points.

Secondly, Ghost Arks having a price cut won't fix them, because you still won't take them to transport Warriors. Were they open topped and you could fire with the Warriors embarked, sure. As is with just a price cut? Don't make me laugh.

Thirdly, you still haven't accepted my invitation to the Necron Tactica. Why are you avoiding it? If you could just admit you're posting a lot of BS, you don't need to go in there and embarrass yourself.

chnmmr wrote:
Will GK players be happy too?

Being "happy" is all relative. I have a feeling GK players will be in a better place. Kind of like how a passenger on the Titanic with a life vest was better off than a passenger without one. Still screwed, just not quite as bad.

Gryphonne wrote:
I really wonder how bold GW dares to be with CA in general. Points changes sure, but would they ever change units, add units or change/add strategems in CA?

They can add units when new models pop out with the free PDFs they've done in the past.

Anything else is entirely feasible.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I feel like a 20-man Warrior blob spending CP when the last model is removed to roll WBB for the unit - and probably get 6-7 guys back - would be rather fair. As long as it's at 'would be remove as a casualty' and not 'at the end of turn' or whatever.

With a ghoast arc and a cryptec they'd get 15 back.

Which is almost an additional 200 points. And it isn't hard to kill the last 5 Warriors. Now nothing matters!

Also the fact you think RP gets stronger as the game size increases shows a huge disconnect from reality. You still also have yet to accept my invitation to post in the Necron Tactica. Wonder why that is?

First of all HQ's that are going to be in the army anyways aren't really a factor here. Necron armies have cryptecs...it's just the way it is.

Second - the ghost arch - like all transports costs too much. This is the kind of stuff I'd like to see change for crons. Cheaper ghost arcs - cheapers warriors. Not undeniable RP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have seen many of the points changes and marines will be happy.

Don't set me up for disappointment man!

First of all, you still need to include the points for them. Crypteks aren't free, and neither are Overlords, Lords, and Destroyer Lords. Nothing is free. You can't assume buffs without having paid the points. That's why some of the Guard players here are understandably frustrated when you talk about everything Infantry squads can do. You just assume without having paid the points.

Secondly, Ghost Arks having a price cut won't fix them, because you still won't take them to transport Warriors. Were they open topped and you could fire with the Warriors embarked, sure. As is with just a price cut? Don't make me laugh.

Thirdly, you still haven't accepted my invitation to the Necron Tactica. Why are you avoiding it? If you could just admit you're posting a lot of BS, you don't need to go in there and embarrass yourself.

Have you ever seen a necron army without a cryptec? I havn't. We weren't doing a point comparison. The real question is - do they have a cryptec? and the answer will 90% of the time be yes. very much like - will space marines required HQ be a captain or a chapter master....the answer is yes.

I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

Note that there's reasonably suggestive evidence that GW has done nasty canary traps in the past. Revealing specific details may out your source.

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

Who needs friends when you can have...THIS?

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

So, would you just say that CA will fix a lot of problems?

Don't listen to anything Marmatag says. They are known Xeno scum and is here just to get our hopes up so that when the reduce the prices of Dissie cannons, make doom apply to the entire enemy army and price Guilliman like a titan they will collect our tears to power those dark eldar suffering mobiles...

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

Should be under a month then.

Very exciting.

Eldar buffs? Please tell me jetbike warlock conclave is a thing now!?!?

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

Alright I can respect that. But was it just points or did they make rule changes?

I'm guessing that Eldar Wraithknights will return to reasonable points values. That will help them sell the Battleforce as well.

bananathug wrote:
Don't listen to anything Marmatag says. They are known Xeno scum and is here just to get our hopes up so that when the reduce the prices of Dissie cannons, make doom apply to the entire enemy army and price Guilliman like a titan they will collect our tears to power those dark eldar suffering mobiles...

LOL!!

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

I am willing to bet its going to start getting teased after BSF is released. Regardless, even the little tease you gave us brings hope for my BT army.

I'll be picking up a PDF copy once I see it available for my tablet.

If they make tac marines good or even servicable, that will be a feat not done since 3rd.

Martel732 wrote:
If they make tac marines good or even servicable, that will be a feat not done since 3rd.

They should just release an “primaris tactical sprue” that consists of special and heavy weapons available to tac marines, for intercessors, and then squat tac marines. They’d be basically usable at that point as “counts as”.

Every once in a while I feel like I need to step back and remind myself how difficult a job GW actually has balancing things. Consider the Stalker and the Whirlwind for a moment; both are Rhino chassis with what are basically Autocannons, with the following differences:

The Stalker is T8 to the Whirlwind's T7.
The Stalker has the full AA wording.
The Whirlwind has Heavy 2d3 instead of Heavy 6, but with twice the range and Indirect Fire.

That's pretty damn similar when you think about it, and they're only 5 points apart. I sure as spit couldn't say if that's the right spread for the number of times I've fielded them, and it's tough because they're both kind of specialized and no matter which one you take in a tac list you're going to run into opponents that make you really wish you'd brought the other one.

Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

The Newman wrote:
Every once in a while I feel like I need to step back and remind myself how difficult a job GW actually has balancing things. Consider the Stalker and the Whirlwind for a moment; both are Rhino chassis with what are basically Autocannons, with the following differences:

The Stalker is T8 to the Whirlwind's T7.
The Stalker has the full AA wording.
The Whirlwind has Heavy 2d3 instead of Heavy 6, but with twice the range and Indirect Fire.

That's pretty damn similar when you think about it, and they're only 5 points apart. I sure as spit couldn't say if that's the right spread for the number of times I've fielded them.

Stalkers are WAY better. 48" range is plenty, and 6 consistent shots with +1 to hit lots of strong stuff in the meta is gold. Whirlwind needs 3D3 and 3D6 shots to be remotely usable.

Look at how WraithLords have compared to Dreadnaughts.

Or Striking Scorpions have compared to Assault Marines.

Across the last several editions, those things have been roughly comparable most of the time.

GW does a lot of good work on balance. They just also do some boneheaded stuff, too.

Gnollu wrote:
Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

Increasing basic Guardsmen to 5ppm would cause a domino effect on the rest of the game, as Guardsmen are used as the base for all other infantry price calculations.

Pretty easy when some units never change while others get fancy new updates.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PuppetSoul wrote:

Gnollu wrote:
Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

Increasing basic Guardsmen to 5ppm would cause a domino effect on the rest of the game, as Guardsmen are used as the base for all other infantry price calculations.

That's patently false.

PuppetSoul wrote:

Gnollu wrote:
Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

Increasing basic Guardsmen to 5ppm would cause a domino effect on the rest of the game, as Guardsmen are used as the base for all other infantry price calculations.

Any receipts for that?

PuppetSoul wrote:

Gnollu wrote:
Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

Increasing basic Guardsmen to 5ppm would cause a domino effect on the rest of the game, as Guardsmen are used as the base for all other infantry price calculations.

I've alsway been told that Marines are the baseline unit in the game.

I don't think there is a baseline. Hence, the chaos with infantry.

PuppetSoul wrote:

Gnollu wrote:
Any leaks on IG?
Being AM player I honestly don't mind guardsman being 5ppm but I am more curious about vehicles (e.g. leman russ having only two viable variants, unplayable deathstrike) and other not necessarily fun options like mortar squad for 33 pts

Increasing basic Guardsmen to 5ppm would cause a domino effect on the rest of the game, as Guardsmen are used as the base for all other infantry price calculations.

Lol no they aren’t, and no it wouldn’t.

I doubt Space Marine players will be happy. Not because I don't doubt GW will cave to the demands of it's largest cash cows, but because the expectatoins they've set up for themselves will make anything short of total power armor domination as "not going far enough".

I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Martel732 wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Every once in a while I feel like I need to step back and remind myself how difficult a job GW actually has balancing things. Consider the Stalker and the Whirlwind for a moment; both are Rhino chassis with what are basically Autocannons, with the following differences:

The Stalker is T8 to the Whirlwind's T7.
The Stalker has the full AA wording.
The Whirlwind has Heavy 2d3 instead of Heavy 6, but with twice the range and Indirect Fire.

That's pretty damn similar when you think about it, and they're only 5 points apart. I sure as spit couldn't say if that's the right spread for the number of times I've fielded them.

Stalkers are WAY better. 48" range is plenty, and 6 consistent shots with +1 to hit lots of strong stuff in the meta is gold. Whirlwind needs 3D3 and 3D6 shots to be remotely usable.

That being true depends a lot on how much and what type of terrain your local club is using. It also sort of underscores my point about them both being situational that you think one is clearly better than the other and I think it's a close call; I see a lot of IG, IK, DG, and AdMech lists where the Stalker's AA rules are a straight up penalty.

meleti wrote:
I'm guessing that Eldar Wraithknights will return to reasonable points values. That will help them sell the Battleforce as well.

Honestly? Good, it has sat on the naughty step long enough now.

Actually a pretty model but I have only seen one on the table in all of 8th and i almost had to apologise to the guy for what happened next...

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Terminators are a pretty big talking point so he could still be trolling. But still, I wanna believe. Terminators were one of the main reasons I started with marines

 fraser1191 wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Terminators are a pretty big talking point so he could still be trolling. But still, I wanna believe. Terminators were one of the main reasons I started with marines

Fingers crossed for Centurions. I want my Termies to be good, but not nearly as much as I want my Centurions to not be stupidly over-costed.

The Newman wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Terminators are a pretty big talking point so he could still be trolling. But still, I wanna believe. Terminators were one of the main reasons I started with marines

Fingers crossed for Centurions. I want my Termies to be good, but not nearly as much as I want my Centurions to not be stupidly over-costed.

I don't even know what centurians can take its been so long

The Newman wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Terminators are a pretty big talking point so he could still be trolling. But still, I wanna believe. Terminators were one of the main reasons I started with marines

Fingers crossed for Centurions. I want my Termies to be good, but not nearly as much as I want my Centurions to not be stupidly over-costed.

Seconded! 330 for the cheapest possible squad of Centurion Devastators is crazy. (6 Heavy Bolters and 3 Hurricane Bolters). A squad of Custodes Jetbikes is only 270. Centurions cost about as much as shooty Leviathan Dreadnoughts (Imperium or Chaos).

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Indeed. If this turns out to be true, I'll finally be able to dust off my Deathwing army

Audustum wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
I am choosing to believe in Marmatag because he said Terminators and it got me all excited.

Terminators are a pretty big talking point so he could still be trolling. But still, I wanna believe. Terminators were one of the main reasons I started with marines

Fingers crossed for Centurions. I want my Termies to be good, but not nearly as much as I want my Centurions to not be stupidly over-costed.

Seconded! 330 for the cheapest possible squad of Centurion Devastators is crazy. (6 Heavy Bolters and 3 Hurricane Bolters). A squad of Custodes Jetbikes is only 270. Centurions cost about as much as shooty Leviathan Dreadnoughts (Imperium or Chaos).

A single Centurion with Lascannons and the Centurion Missile Launcher costs ten points more than a regular Dreadnaught with the Twin Lascannon and Missile Launcher. That's insane.

 Marmatag wrote:
I think marines players will be happy. I assume tactical players also like terminators? If i share details i lose friends, and access to this kind of info.

Funny enough i think overall Eldar players will be happy too.

I don't know about release date but the book is printed and has a cover.

How about a non-specific share?

Given what you know about the other points adjustments, where do the adjustment in Codex Orks compared to the Index fall between 10 (The Oracle at Delphi) and 1 (Monkeys at a Typewriter)?

Do you think CA 2018 will be available for preorder on black friday?

Also let's face it marines are generalist, and that's why they are awful right now. When you can take specialist of every conceivable variety from almost a dozen codexes a generalist just doesn't have any place. Until you limit soup, you could drop marines to 10ppm and people would still choose guardsmen for screens and CP because they are cheaper.

The current meta is all about having your cake and eating it to. You don't make hard choices anymore, you just grab the shiny bits from whatever the most exploitable codexes are currently, and poof you have a ticket to the winners table. Yesterday it was supreme smash, a knight or few, and some guard, tomorrow who knows. Meanwhile GW is playing balance whack a mole, trying to fix individual units when the whole ally system makes their work as relevant as Sisyphus pushing a boulder up a hill.

we have had the current rules for over a year, and peoples arguments that allies are fluffy are starting to ring as hollow as people who said formations in 7th ed were fluffy. The silver lining is that since marines are taking the brunt of the pain GW might actually do something about it.

More than anything I want Baal Predators and vanilla Predators fixed. I love marine tanks but they are just flaming garbage dumps. Marines in general aren’t worth their points though and that extends to the dreaded death company.

I also dislike that some auras are units within 6” and others are models within 6”. Models within 6” for Heirs of Azkaellon basically makes that rule a nonfactor for Sanguinary Guard, which even at 35 points are underwhelming (which tells you everything you need to know about every version of terminators in the game).

Lemondish wrote:

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

The math is clear - they should be 6 ppm. No point hiding from it.

5ppm puts them mathematically in the same boat as fire warriors in terms of durability per point and damage output per point. 6ppm is overkill with kabalites, GSC neophytes, and skitarii rangers being priced as they are.

Putting IS at 6ppm also means you need to reprice veterans, which currently are currently gak and would make them even worse. No, 5ppm is a good spot, anything more and you would need to overhaul the entire faction.

w1zard wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

IG guardsmen point increase

Not going to happen, as their cost is the foundation cost for every other infantry unit, and there is nothing about the unit that warrants a cost increase besides people who don't bring anti-horde crying that "existing is worth more than 4 points".

The math is clear - they should be 6 ppm. No point hiding from it.

5ppm puts them mathematically in the same boat as fire warriors in terms of durability per point and damage output per point. 6ppm is overkill with kabalites, GSC neophytes, and skitarii rangers being priced as they are.

Putting IS at 6ppm also means you need to reprice veterans, which currently are currently gak and would make them even worse. No, 5ppm is a good spot, anything more and you would need to overhaul the entire faction.

Okay then. 5 ppm.

And Commanders jump to 50.