Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

@-Loki- -- That's good to hear. Something as simple as "here's 4 necron lords; they want to kill the organics, but this one also want a delicious waffle cone, this one wants ..., etc." would be enough.

@Void__Dragon: Oh, I know there's differences. It's just that the two armies filled the same niche in the fluff -- as a totally alien force that posed an existential threat to all of the 40k universe. The other "evil" races, including Chaos, aren't totally alien. Similarly, only the tyranids and necrons are painted as this sort of inexorable enemy that can't be truly defeated or contained or avoided. Both are death-dealers that completely raze anything they touch.

What was clever about the implementation of the tyranids is that the designers co-opted already-established 40K threats, making the tyranids feel like an organic part of the universe (pun unintended); in contrast, the necrons just showed up one day. Similarly, by putting them in the same niche and giving them a similar command structure -- mindless drones controlled by intelligent commanders that are subservient to some ancient power -- it's hard not to draw comparisons. I get the feeling that the creators' discussions about necrons centered on differentiating them from tyranids, and they chose to make them the exact opposite in a lot of ways, while leaving their basic role in the universe identical. In the end, they ended up just looking like tyranids in different clothes. I thought it was clumsy implementation, and that's what irks me about them.

If what -Loki- said turns out to be true, highlighting the necron lords' ambitions while putting their overarching goal of "kill all organics" on the backburner could really distinguish the two armies thematically.

Quick edit: Which is basically what you said, Void, just in 3123x the words. I just wanted to explain why they bugged me a little more in-depth.

Mewens wrote:@-Loki- -- That's good to hear. Something as simple as "here's 4 necron lords; they want to kill the organics, but this one also want a delicious waffle cone, this one wants ..., etc." would be enough.

They aren't "fixing" the Necrons by any stretch of the word; they're retconning them, apparently.

@Void__Dragon: Oh, I know there's differences. It's just that the two armies filled the same niche in the fluff -- as a totally alien force that posed an existential threat to all of the 40k universe. The other "evil" races, including Chaos, aren't totally alien. Similarly, only the tyranids and necrons are painted as this sort of inexorable enemy that can't be truly defeated or contained or avoided. Both are death-dealers that completely raze anything they touch.

You are very, very mistaken if you are under the impression Chaos isn't presented as totally alien, or an enemy that can't be defeated, contained, or avoided in the long run.

What was clever about the implementation of the tyranids is that the designers co-opted already-established 40K threats, making the tyranids feel like an organic part of the universe (pun unintended); in contrast, the necrons just showed up one day. Similarly, by putting them in the same niche and giving them a similar command structure -- mindless drones controlled by intelligent commanders that are subservient to some ancient power -- it's hard not to draw comparisons. I get the feeling that the creators' discussions about necrons centered on differentiating them from tyranids, and they chose to make them the exact opposite in a lot of ways, while leaving their basic role in the universe identical. In the end, they ended up just looking like tyranids in different clothes. I thought it was clumsy implementation, and that's what irks me about them.

The underlying difference is motivation. Tyranids are motivated by simple hunger. Necrons are not, there is malice behind their actions, an ancient malice that led to them sacrificing their souls for the power to act upon that malice. This is very different from the Tyranids. Another theme of the Necrons is their cold, silent nature, some have said that 40k is Law vs. Chaos. Tyranids are on the side of Chaos. Necrons are squarely on the side of law, Tyranids are perhaps the ultimate expression of change, whereas if the Necrons win, nothing ever changes, ever.

Beyond that, their gods are different. Both wish to feed yes, but like with their "servants" (Technically the Tyranids are not subservient to the Hive Mind, they are part of it, I know), they differ, in that the Hive Mind just wants its noms. The C'tan desire to make the galaxy an eternal fast-food restaurant, where they can feed off of the suffering of mortal races for all time. Not even the Chaos Gods are this horrible.

The Tyranids and the Necrons share some similarities, yes, but they are opposites in many other respects, as you acknowledged. Are they the forboding, inevitable doom of the galaxy? Yes, both are. As is Chaos. The three share that theme, in the end, one of these factions will win.

If what -Loki- said turns out to be true, highlighting the necron lords' ambitions while putting their overarching goal of "kill all organics" on the backburner could really distinguish the two armies thematically.

Quick edit: Which is basically what you said, Void, just in 3123x the words. I just wanted to explain why they bugged me a little more in-depth.

Well, there goal was never simply "kill all organics," but I disagree personally. The Necron Lords shouldn't be humanised. Intelligent, and possibly varying in their methods? Sure. But still singular in purpose, it is that singularness of purpose that made the Necrons what they were.

But to each his own.

This.

Necrons are supposed to be the ultimate in cold, calculating sociopathy.(cold, methodical serial killer)

Chaos is more psychopathy (screaming nutcase with a chainsaw)

Void__Dragon wrote:Tyranids are on the side of Chaos. Necrons are squarely on the side of law, Tyranids are perhaps the ultimate expression of change, whereas if the Necrons win, nothing ever changes, ever.

Remember, there's a huge difference when you capitalize Chaos in 40k. Tyranids may be chaos, they're definitely not Chaos.

That's an interesting take. I've always imagined on the spectrum of evil Chaos being on one end and tyranids on the other. Here's my reasoning:

Chaos is a twisted reflection of sentience. Each of the four powers takes some aspect of the human/eldar/what-have-you condition and magnifies it to a grotesque extreme. There is a glimmer of recognition of the self in Chaos, which is part of its allure (for in-game characters, that is). I'm not a lore guru, but I was under the impression that demons had a parasitic relationship with sentient creatures, and in fact required them to continue to survive. (Plaguebearers growing from the souls of those killed in Nurgle's plagues, for example.) In that sense, no matter how ascendant Chaos is, humanity always has hope against it -- Chaos can't wipe humanity out without crippling itself. Whether that hope is reasonable or not doesn't really matter; it exists, and can animate conflict against Chaos.

The tyranids, on the other hand, visit a planet and scour it clean. If they beat you on a given world, that world's gone. They're the ultimate salt-sowing conquerers; they literally leave no trace of life behind. There's no hope if the tyranids win -- they will literally devour every speck of culture, civilization and life, leaving nothing to recoup. There's nothing in the tyranid hive mind that beckons to humanity -- even genestealer cults use mind control and charisma, not primal desire, to ensnare victims. Chaos is alien in the sense that it defies logic on an inexpressible scale; the tyranids are alien in that they have nothing in common with the human psyche.

On a micro level, the result is the same; a world fallen to Chaos is just as gone as a world fallen to tyranids. But across the whole of the galaxy, a conquering tyranid force is the end of all things; a conquering Chaos force isn't.

On that scale, the necrons fill the exact same niche as the tyranids, but without any of the clever retcons that made their introduction feel so organic. A necron victory would be without even hollow hope. Necrons are alien and inimical to humanity in the way tyranids are. It's by that metric that I found them to be unsatisfying, forced and unnecessary.

I would have to say in first place would be Tau (basically just a stupid concept), Smurfs (due to the "we're the only speess mahrines" attitude!), Necrons (terminator wannabes) and dark eldar (with their fantastic array of power weapons, invul saves and pmt suffering leaders!).

Sometimes in all fairness you can get a little sodded off from the amount of space puppies bashing that goes on here!

Said before that I don't like marines and by extension... Dark Angles, Blood Angles, Ultramarines, Space Wolves, etc etc etc. This included the Grey Knights because they are, essentially, marines. After reading the GK codex a little more, I hate them just a little more. One bit did it, the piece on the aftermath of Armaggedon. I can see it going down. The GK Phil is at Bar Armageddon with Guardsman Bob..

Phil: Man Bob, this was one crazy war, huh?
Bob: You said it Phil, but we won. You and your knights, man it was amazing watching you in battle. You guys really did save our butts though, I don't know how to ever thank you for saving my world.
Phil: It was nothing Bob, nothing, don't think about it. I was actually impressed with you and the rest of the guard. You guys are braver then we ever gave you credit. There's only one lose end though..
Bob: What's that Phil? You're going to buy the next round!?
Phil: No. See, the problem is that I have to kill you now..
Bob: What!? Why!?
Phil: Well, it's like this. The GK, we're supposed to be mythical and all this stuff. People are supposed to think we're just phantoms, something like that, I didn't pay attention to the Librarian. Honestly, I prefer my librarians young, hot and blond.. and ofcourse female. This one though, he was old, crusty, evil, and definitally not female.
Bob: I hear that!
Phil: Anyway... *Phil kills Bob, looks around, see a bunch of people seen him and kills them too and then notices one guy slipped into the street and so he follows, seeing hundreds of people Phil sighs and kills them too*

Wulfen Andy wrote:I would have to say in first place would be Tau (basically just a stupid concept), Smurfs (due to the "we're the only speess mahrines" attitude!), Necrons (terminator wannabes) and dark eldar (with their fantastic array of power weapons, invul saves and pmt suffering leaders!).

Sometimes in all fairness you can get a little sodded off from the amount of space puppies bashing that goes on here!

Don't you mean Twilight Fangirl wish fulfillment army part 2? Go I hate them, don't you?

Mewens wrote:That's an interesting take. I've always imagined on the spectrum of evil Chaos being on one end and tyranids on the other. Here's my reasoning:

I wouldn't really consider the Tyranids evil at all. Nor the Chaos Gods (Though their daemons and cultists usually are). But that's just me.

Chaos is a twisted reflection of sentience. Each of the four powers takes some aspect of the human/eldar/what-have-you condition and magnifies it to a grotesque extreme. There is a glimmer of recognition of the self in Chaos, which is part of its allure (for in-game characters, that is). I'm not a lore guru, but I was under the impression that demons had a parasitic relationship with sentient creatures, and in fact required them to continue to survive. (Plaguebearers growing from the souls of those killed in Nurgle's plagues, for example.) In that sense, no matter how ascendant Chaos is, humanity always has hope against it -- Chaos can't wipe humanity out without crippling itself. Whether that hope is reasonable or not doesn't really matter; it exists, and can animate conflict against Chaos.

It is the fact that the Chaos Gods are ultimately a reflection of the sentient races of the galaxy (Barring Necrons and Tyranids, in that regard they are similar) that makes them so alien, that they reflect us, yet are so twisted. Nurgle for instance, god of Despair, is a jovial, affable, loving god who loves all life, from the smallest bacterium to the greatest of the sentient organisms. And he loves nothing more than showering them with his gifts, debilitating, horrible poxes and plagues, your suffering perceived by him as you thanking him. His mortal followers are similar, they love him for the plagues he inflicts upon their bodies, that is the horror of Chaos, in joining them, you lose yourself, until you become as alien as they are. Tzeentch is also very alien, a powerful deity with perception of the timeline, using it to scheme and plot and scheme and plot and scheme and plot. Surely this being must have some grand, end goal in mind if he takes time orchestrating these grand, often contradicting, schemes? He doesn't, the scheming is its own purpose, Tzeentch is the Changer of Ways, and as long as the ball continues rolling, as long as something happens, he is winning.

Beyond that, Chaos can't be defeated (Short of either the Tyranids eating all life, the Necrons severing the Materium from the Immaterium, Ynnead manifesting, or the Emperor becoming a Warp God), it can't. Fighting Chaos does nothing but fuel it. When you enter battle and spill blood, Khorne grows stronger, as an easy example. As long as sentient life exists and none can challenge the Gods, Chaos will exist. Beyond that, the goal of Chaos is to merge the Warp with the Materium, doing this would crush all hope, and the Chaos Gods would have "won." Though they've been winning for ten thousand years.

The tyranids, on the other hand, visit a planet and scour it clean. If they beat you on a given world, that world's gone. They're the ultimate salt-sowing conquerers; they literally leave no trace of life behind. There's no hope if the tyranids win -- they will literally devour every speck of culture, civilization and life, leaving nothing to recoup. There's nothing in the tyranid hive mind that beckons to humanity -- even genestealer cults use mind control and charisma, not primal desire, to ensnare victims. Chaos is alien in the sense that it defies logic on an inexpressible scale; the tyranids are alien in that they have nothing in common with the human psyche.

You underestimate the taint of Chaos. If the taint grows bad enough, if a world becomes a Daemon World, that world is gone, beyond salvation, Exterminatus. The fact that Chaos beckons to humanity only makes them more implacable, not less, and those that lived there are killed or worse. Even if alive, they are changed irrevocably.

On a micro level, the result is the same; a world fallen to Chaos is just as gone as a world fallen to tyranids. But across the whole of the galaxy, a conquering tyranid force is the end of all things; a conquering Chaos force isn't.

The difference being that the Imperium doesn't allow a Chaos warband to parade across the galaxy like they do the Tyranids, forces originally meant to confront Leviathan have been redirected to help fight Abaddon's 13th Black Crusade. And you are confusing Chaos' warbands with Chaos itself, Chaos has not been hindered at all.

On that scale, the necrons fill the exact same niche as the tyranids, but without any of the clever retcons that made their introduction feel so organic. A necron victory would be without even hollow hope. Necrons are alien and inimical to humanity in the way tyranids are. It's by that metric that I found them to be unsatisfying, forced and unnecessary.

If the Necrons, Tyranids, Chaos, or the Orks were to win, there would be no hope for humanity at all. Orks are similarly unreasonable and offer nothing to humanity, short of slaughter and the occasional slavery, barring the occasional open-minded Freebooter. All four factions share a few similarities, but have enough differences to stand out amongst themselves. Necrons however differ from the other three by standing firmly on the side of Law, something that is unique only to them in terms of the "villainous" factions.

But, to each his own.

KilroyKiljoy wrote:Ever since I finished Space Marine (the game),

Spoiler:

I hate Inquisitors

The inquisitor was probably right though. A single space marine doesn't kill seventy-five chaos marines, thousands upon thousands of ork boyz, dozens of daemons and hundreds of traitor guard and then pop a Daemon Prince's head without either having help or being Kaldor Draigo or Lysander.

How childish the current IoM and space marines are.

Everything is black and white, and even being suspected of something is a death sentence. No room for reason, or humility, or what the astartes were created to do, and which is highlighted brilliantly in Tales of Heresy in the space wolf short.

If there is even the slightest chance that the planet can be saved, or that someone is innocent, or that by some slim chance you are wrong, they are sworn to try.

Also,

im2randomghgh wrote:

KilroyKiljoy wrote:Ever since I finished Space Marine (the game),

Spoiler:

I hate Inquisitors

The inquisitor was probably right though. A single space marine doesn't kill seventy-five chaos marines, thousands upon thousands of ork boyz, dozens of daemons and hundreds of traitor guard and then pop a Daemon Prince's head without either having help or being Kaldor Draigo or Lysander.

Sure he does, if he's a captain, and not on the tabletop. Ever read the fluff/lore/novels about space marine captains/chapter masters? Hell, regular marines wade through anything that isn't daemons/daemon princes like it's going out of style.

@Void__Dragon: Yes, I conceded most of those points: we know, from our god's-eye view, that Chaos is unbeatable; we also know that planets can be irredeemably damned by its taint (a fate that's possibly worse than simply being eaten).

I wasn't trying to say that Chaos conquering everything would be A-OK and not miserable hell; I'm saying that a Chaos victory, by nature, must include humanity. That means humans would have hope, even if it's a false hope. (A false hope, of course, could be a plan of Tzeentch's, for all we know. Again, it might be worse than just being eaten.)

My point was that a necron or a tyranid victory doesn't have that -- they win, nothing's left. The two fill the same role. (Orks don't, because they're not systematically trying to kill everything.)

Still, you're right -- there are plenty of differences at the on-the-ground level. Not only do the two armies play very differently, they look very different and have very different motivations.

I guess I could sum up our points of view this way: I see two groves of trees, and say "there's some trees." You go up to the trees, pick the fruit, and say, "One's apple and one's peach. They're similar, but fundamentally different." Would you say that's fair?

I would say they all do. I love the game, but GW story writing is horrible. Their characters lack depth and are very one dimensional. I have found that most of the novels are very predictable and somewhat unimaginative compared to other science fiction. As for the codex fluff, the product over the past few years is appalling and now blatantly written by fan boys. In general I think GW suffers from 1 big problem in the writing department. 1) game designers who think they are also authors and 2) a story line that doesn’t advance, but somehow has to take into account new army books released. The Tau are a perfect example. The basic 40k story line has not changed at all and hay this new race is thrown into the mix, but will not affect anything. The whole 40k universe is just stale at this point. There is so much potential there, but things are just thrown together or under developed.

Mewens wrote:@Void__Dragon: Yes, I conceded most of those points: we know, from our god's-eye view, that Chaos is unbeatable; we also know that planets can be irredeemably damned by its taint (a fate that's possibly worse than simply being eaten).

I wasn't trying to say that Chaos conquering everything would be A-OK and not miserable hell; I'm saying that a Chaos victory, by nature, must include humanity. That means humans would have hope, even if it's a false hope. (A false hope, of course, could be a plan of Tzeentch's, for all we know. Again, it might be worse than just being eaten.)

My point was that a necron or a tyranid victory doesn't have that -- they win, nothing's left. The two fill the same role. (Orks don't, because they're not systematically trying to kill everything.)

Still, you're right -- there are plenty of differences at the on-the-ground level. Not only do the two armies play very differently, they look very different and have very different motivations.

I guess I could sum up our points of view this way: I see two groves of trees, and say "there's some trees." You go up to the trees, pick the fruit, and say, "One's apple and one's peach. They're similar, but fundamentally different." Would you say that's fair?

Well, I personally disagree that humanity would really have hope if Chaos won, or that they have hope now. The 5e rulebook outright states they are the greatest threat to humanity at the moment. And humans would still be alive if the Necrons win, they don't seek the total annihilation of life as the Tyranids do. Though, I'm not sure if you could consider their state of being "living" at that point.

But, fair enough I guess. To each his own.

Eldar are arrogant

edinburgh40kgamer wrote:Eldar are arrogant

We now have a firm grasp of the obvious.

edinburgh40kgamer wrote:Eldar are arrogant

Mewens wrote:That's an interesting take. I've always imagined on the spectrum of evil Chaos being on one end and tyranids on the other. Here's my reasoning:

Chaos is a twisted reflection of sentience. Each of the four powers takes some aspect of the human/eldar/what-have-you condition and magnifies it to a grotesque extreme. There is a glimmer of recognition of the self in Chaos, which is part of its allure (for in-game characters, that is). I'm not a lore guru, but I was under the impression that demons had a parasitic relationship with sentient creatures, and in fact required them to continue to survive. (Plaguebearers growing from the souls of those killed in Nurgle's plagues, for example.) In that sense, no matter how ascendant Chaos is, humanity always has hope against it -- Chaos can't wipe humanity out without crippling itself. Whether that hope is reasonable or not doesn't really matter; it exists, and can animate conflict against Chaos.

The tyranids, on the other hand, visit a planet and scour it clean. If they beat you on a given world, that world's gone. They're the ultimate salt-sowing conquerers; they literally leave no trace of life behind. There's no hope if the tyranids win -- they will literally devour every speck of culture, civilization and life, leaving nothing to recoup. There's nothing in the tyranid hive mind that beckons to humanity -- even genestealer cults use mind control and charisma, not primal desire, to ensnare victims. Chaos is alien in the sense that it defies logic on an inexpressible scale; the tyranids are alien in that they have nothing in common with the human psyche.

On a micro level, the result is the same; a world fallen to Chaos is just as gone as a world fallen to tyranids. But across the whole of the galaxy, a conquering tyranid force is the end of all things; a conquering Chaos force isn't.

On that scale, the necrons fill the exact same niche as the tyranids, but without any of the clever retcons that made their introduction feel so organic. A necron victory would be without even hollow hope. Necrons are alien and inimical to humanity in the way tyranids are. It's by that metric that I found them to be unsatisfying, forced and unnecessary.

I would actually go to say that its the Tyranids and Necrons that define the extremes.

the Tyranids represent ultimate chaos. they symbolize life in its most raw and monsterous form. Eternally feeding, reproducing, growing. Tearing down to feed itself. They shall consume untill there is nothing left to consume. at the last, The Devourer shall consume itself.

the Necrons represent ultimate order. They are Entropy. They are death itself. The stillness that shall overcome the universe at the end of all things. Only when the last bit of energy has been spent and the last star has disappated will they truly rest for all eternity. The universe will be nothing but hunks of lifeless rock and massive clouds of gas hanging in equilibrium. and there will be no light, no sound, no movement. Only stillness...



Chaos is neither of these. It is both Life and Death. It is order bestowed upon the riot that is life.

Said it better than I ever could, +1.

Mr. S Baldrick wrote:I would say they all do. I love the game, but GW story writing is horrible. Their characters lack depth and are very one dimensional. I have found that most of the novels are very predictable and somewhat unimaginative compared to other science fiction. As for the codex fluff, the product over the past few years is appalling and now blatantly written by fan boys. In general I think GW suffers from 1 big problem in the writing department. 1) game designers who think they are also authors and 2) a story line that doesn’t advance, but somehow has to take into account new army books released. The Tau are a perfect example. The basic 40k story line has not changed at all and hay this new race is thrown into the mix, but will not affect anything. The whole 40k universe is just stale at this point. There is so much potential there, but things are just thrown together or under developed.

I can agree with characters being weakly created. The problem is that many of people (based solely on what I read here) like it this way. There is even acceptance that Space Marines should be basically Orks. They are supposed to be big, strong and tough. The value of a Space Marine is measured only by how hard he can punch in the face. Also, somebody's rank is based by how strong he is in combat. If somebody is chapter master it is preposterous if he can't everything up. Chapter leaders are supposed to have a great kill streak, they don't have to be leaders at all.
The second part is true, but I think this is made on purpose. This world was made to be dynamic, action-packed but at the same time stagnant and "tired". It is very slowly going towards a bad ending for many races and despite all the glamorous victories, battles on a huge scale, incredible feats by heroes nothing can change that. It also shows that there won't be a hero that can change that because so many heroes already done something incredible. It think it's deliberately made this way to enforce the grimdark(TM).

BronzeJon wrote:How childish the current IoM and space marines are.

Everything is black and white, and even being suspected of something is a death sentence. No room for reason, or humility, or what the astartes were created to do, and which is highlighted brilliantly in Tales of Heresy in the space wolf short.

If there is even the slightest chance that the planet can be saved, or that someone is innocent, or that by some slim chance you are wrong, they are sworn to try.

Also,

im2randomghgh wrote:

KilroyKiljoy wrote:Ever since I finished Space Marine (the game),

Spoiler:

I hate Inquisitors

The inquisitor was probably right though. A single space marine doesn't kill seventy-five chaos marines, thousands upon thousands of ork boyz, dozens of daemons and hundreds of traitor guard and then pop a Daemon Prince's head without either having help or being Kaldor Draigo or Lysander.

Sure he does, if he's a captain, and not on the tabletop. Ever read the fluff/lore/novels about space marine captains/chapter masters? Hell, regular marines wade through anything that isn't daemons/daemon princes like it's going out of style.

Even in the fluff, 1 SM =/= a daemon prince. If daemon princes, who are the most powerful of chaos space marines (and chaos space marines are even more power individually than loyalists) were weaker than Space Marines, then how come the Primarchs became daemon princes? Just sayin'

I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

Grey Templar wrote:

Mewens wrote:That's an interesting take. I've always imagined on the spectrum of evil Chaos being on one end and tyranids on the other. Here's my reasoning:

Chaos is a twisted reflection of sentience. Each of the four powers takes some aspect of the human/eldar/what-have-you condition and magnifies it to a grotesque extreme. There is a glimmer of recognition of the self in Chaos, which is part of its allure (for in-game characters, that is). I'm not a lore guru, but I was under the impression that demons had a parasitic relationship with sentient creatures, and in fact required them to continue to survive. (Plaguebearers growing from the souls of those killed in Nurgle's plagues, for example.) In that sense, no matter how ascendant Chaos is, humanity always has hope against it -- Chaos can't wipe humanity out without crippling itself. Whether that hope is reasonable or not doesn't really matter; it exists, and can animate conflict against Chaos.

The tyranids, on the other hand, visit a planet and scour it clean. If they beat you on a given world, that world's gone. They're the ultimate salt-sowing conquerers; they literally leave no trace of life behind. There's no hope if the tyranids win -- they will literally devour every speck of culture, civilization and life, leaving nothing to recoup. There's nothing in the tyranid hive mind that beckons to humanity -- even genestealer cults use mind control and charisma, not primal desire, to ensnare victims. Chaos is alien in the sense that it defies logic on an inexpressible scale; the tyranids are alien in that they have nothing in common with the human psyche.

On a micro level, the result is the same; a world fallen to Chaos is just as gone as a world fallen to tyranids. But across the whole of the galaxy, a conquering tyranid force is the end of all things; a conquering Chaos force isn't.

On that scale, the necrons fill the exact same niche as the tyranids, but without any of the clever retcons that made their introduction feel so organic. A necron victory would be without even hollow hope. Necrons are alien and inimical to humanity in the way tyranids are. It's by that metric that I found them to be unsatisfying, forced and unnecessary.

I would actually go to say that its the Tyranids and Necrons that define the extremes.

the Tyranids represent ultimate chaos. they symbolize life in its most raw and monsterous form. Eternally feeding, reproducing, growing. Tearing down to feed itself. They shall consume untill there is nothing left to consume. at the last, The Devourer shall consume itself.

the Necrons represent ultimate order. They are Entropy. They are death itself. The stillness that shall overcome the universe at the end of all things. Only when the last bit of energy has been spent and the last star has disappated will they truly rest for all eternity. The universe will be nothing but hunks of lifeless rock and massive clouds of gas hanging in equilibrium. and there will be no light, no sound, no movement. Only stillness...



Chaos is neither of these. It is both Life and Death. It is order bestowed upon the riot that is life.

The way I see it the Necrons, Tyranids and Chaos are all extremely similar in one point: Their sole goal is to consume. Be it bio-matter, matter/energy or souls

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

Just because we totally killed Slaanesh...

Avatar 720 wrote:

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

Just because we totally killed Slaanesh...

That was fairly comical... and considering the mental state of most chaos worshippers you can't blame them for misundertsanding.

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

I don't see it as naivety so much as inexperience. Because the mistakes they're making are mistakes that are to be expected. If they were illogical courses of action, then I would consider it naive.

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

I don't see it as naivety so much as inexperience. Because the mistakes they're making are mistakes that are to be expected. If they were illogical courses of action, then I would consider it naive.

Naievity is lack of experience...

purplefood wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naievity. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

I don't see it as naivety so much as inexperience. Because the mistakes they're making are mistakes that are to be expected. If they were illogical courses of action, then I would consider it naive.

Naievity is lack of experience...

When I think of naive I think more of a lack of wisdom or judgement based on inexperience, rather than inexperience in and of itself

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naivety. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

I don't see it as naivety so much as inexperience. Because the mistakes they're making are mistakes that are to be expected. If they were illogical courses of action, then I would consider it naive.

Naivety is lack of experience...

When I think of naive I think more of a lack of wisdom or judgement based on inexperience, rather than inexperience in and of itself

It was their first encounter with chaos correct?
They had a lack of wisdom and judgement due to their inexperience with chaos.
It's an understandable mistake but it is them being naive.

purplefood wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

purplefood wrote:I kinda like all of them...
The only ones that annoy me a little bit are the Tau and that's only because of their naivety. Even then it's not that annoying because of how their fluff seems to be going.

I don't see it as naivety so much as inexperience. Because the mistakes they're making are mistakes that are to be expected. If they were illogical courses of action, then I would consider it naive.

Naivety is lack of experience...

When I think of naive I think more of a lack of wisdom or judgement based on inexperience, rather than inexperience in and of itself

It was their first encounter with chaos correct?
They had a lack of wisdom and judgement due to their inexperience with chaos.
It's an understandable mistake but it is them being naive.

What lack of wisdom did they have?