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.

Kanluwen wrote:

Warboss Gutrip wrote:Has anyone else noticed that Trazyn the Infinite appears to be caressing a Tau symbol, and has an Eldar symbol tied to his waste?

I wonder what Ward has done to him in the fluff...

"Waist" not "waste".

And likely nothing bad. The Eldar are creations of the Old Ones, and the Tau are theorized to be one of the last of the Old Ones' creations as well.

The fact that it looks like he's wearing them as what looks to be trophies kind of implies that he took them off the dead.

Bad typo is bad. Edited.

And you are most likely correct on the fluff, but it's more fun to speculate as to how this can be carried out in the most OTT ways

JOHIRA wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I have to disagree with you on the headdresses, Johira.

People seem to forget that at one point...Necrons did have headdresses.

You miss my point. I'm not against headdresses in general. I'm against headdresses that look stupid.

We're going to have to agree to disagree then, because I think these look fine.

They're far less obtrusive than the Thousand Sons or Night Lords ones.

Heck, they're far less obtrusive than the ones the Vostroyans wear.

Personally, if it were me--I'd be painting the "headdresses" the same color as the head. As it stands, they just look odd with the color tones.

Sasori wrote:Someone with good Photoshop skills, should turn the top right Necron Flayed one, into a "Haters gonna hate" De-Motivational.

I asked in the other thread, and someone delivered...but attached it to Dakka's gallery. I popped it right into my "rehosting" folder for usage.
It's in the spoilers.

Sasori wrote:Someone with good Photoshop skills, should turn the top right Necron Flayed one, into a "Haters gonna hate" De-Motivational.

Anyone posting any more of those bloody things should get fed to weresharks!

I think the decorative head gear and collars look a tad pseudo-Egyptian RiTides, so maybe that is where the TK vibe is being picked up?
It makes them look a bit top heavy but apart from the creepy mummy wrap dudes (very silly poses like they are very bad actors trying to portray someone skulking about with ill intent) the foot troops don't look too bad at all imho .

Tailgunner wrote:Necrons driving machines. How silly - whereever did they get that from? They really don't understand Necrons, do they.

Yeah, the flying lawnchair really was stupid looking, wasn't it. Personally, I like when GW improves their designs rather than reverts to older, much less appealing designs.

Eldar used to have giant mohawks like glam rockers. If the next codex comes with guardians with 3ft. high dos and bright leather jackets, I'll complain about that too.

Has anyone else noticed that Trazyn the Infinite appears to be caressing a Tau symbol, and has an Eldar symbol tied to his waste?

Waste knot wotnot?

Kanluwen wrote:The blood and overall painting of the Flayed Ones is something I was complaining about whilst talking with Medium of Death about the Flayed Ones.

If I cut my finger, I get blood all over the dang place. These guys have ripped a living being apart, and are wearing the skin as a cape and somehow have no blood at all on them.

There's also the fact that it's a "light" metallic with a "light" flesh tone--not very good contrast. Compare it to Mengil's Manhide Manflayers--dark armor/metallic bits and cloth--light flesh tone of the flayed skins.

You are right that the painting on those guys is terribad, but there's more to it than that. On models this scale flayed skin should resemble the thickness of paper. The flayed ones look like they're wearing inch-thick scarves made of silly putty.

Mewiththeface wrote:Once the spiders come out , I'm sure they will look less Egyptian. Besides, I also quite like the tails, people got too used to Necrons being human. They aren't, they are necrontyr so I am happy they are starting too add some distinctions.

What makes you think that? The old model already looks like a scarab beetle... there's no reason not to assume the new model will take that vibe even further.

Kanluwen wrote:They're far less obtrusive than the Thousand Sons or Night Lords ones.

While that's true, when I evaluate models I'm not really into anything that's "less silly than Thousand Sons or Night Lords". I'd prefer they be "not silly at all."

If you think it over, the robot-on-robot design isn't a problem from a background PoV.

If it was easier to "copy" their original minds over than to build up an AI from scratch, it makes perfect sense that their vehicles would be operated by traditional means. It saves design work, and comes with a unique set of advantages and disadvantages:

1. If a pilotbot gets killed another one can replace him vs. if a destroyer "pilot" gets killed the entire platform becomes useless

2. Pilotbots can get out of their seat, to perform whatever extra-vehicular task might crop up

3. But pilotbots could also be thrown from their seats unwillingly

4. Depending on manual controls for pilotbots to operate means that enemies could possibly make use of Necron tech

5. But by the same token, a Necron could just as easily commandeer the tech of another humanoid race


I don't like the robot-on-robot concept aesthetically (not in the least) but let's stop pretending it's stupid or nonsensical.

The Egyptian theme has been there fore a long time. That means the 'Tomb Kings in space' angle has been there since at least the last codex (the Monolith is basically a pyramid with guns). So what? It's no different to Orks being 'Orcs in space'. Given that Necrons are very obviously based on the Terminator robots, GW had to add an overlay of something else, and the Egyptian theme (with its strong associations with death) makes sense. There are a lot of classical elements throughout the WH40k line (the Ultramarines have a lot of Roman-style features), so it's entirely consistent. The Ghost Ark obviously also borrows from the Trade Federation in Star Wars (which were in turn had an African/Egyptian look), but not as much as some are suggesting. The design has a skeletal look that's unique, and is much more barge-like. This kind of mixing of source material is what GW has always done. The only question is whether they've pulled it off.

I like the Ghost Ark. I think that flipping a big chunk of the model upside down to make a 'new' vehicle is less successful - the photoshopped version with the struts repositioned looks better. The Command Barge is growing on me; I don't have any issue with Necrons as seated pilots, but the two models in front are a bit awkwardly positioned. It would be tempting to try and omit them.

The generic Necron Overlords look better than the named characters, which are rather heavy-handed and lack dynamism - a new sculptor perhaps? The Lych Guard are okay, but look a bit unfinished (not sure why). I agree with the comment about the crests looking a bit off. The Immortals look really good, and I agree with everyone else that the Flayed Ones are poor. The sniper models look good, but somehow more 'modern' than the others.

I won't really miss the green glowy rods, which were annoying to insert in painted models. I remember when they introduced them, there was a lot of sneering about them looking like Lego. Now there's much wailing about losing them...I assume the Warriors are essentially unchanged, but their weapons will have to be re-done without the rods. Perhaps with perforations in the barrels, as the Immortals' weapons seem to have.

I wonder if the Monolith is getting re-done? Or at least tarted up a bit, as it's now badly sub-standard compared to...well, just about everything.

Kanluwen wrote:

Warboss Gutrip wrote:Has anyone else noticed that Trazyn the Infinite appears to be caressing a Tau symbol, and has an Eldar symbol tied to his waste?

I wonder what Ward has done to him in the fluff...

"Waist" not "waste".

And likely nothing bad. The Eldar are creations of the Old Ones, and the Tau are theorized to be one of the last of the Old Ones' creations as well.

The fact that it looks like he's wearing them as what looks to be trophies kind of implies that he took them off the dead.

Yeah I recall necrons having some epic battles against the Eldar, I think there is info about it in the codex.

GW could just put a non-green rod in the box that's the same size. Without redesigning the weapons.

As a Necron player, first off, I need to say that I'm beside myself with joy that there is new Necron stuff coming out.
So, my reaction to the leaks are as follows:
1. Necrons have always been a mismash of themes and tropes. It seems GW has picked a direction. The TK models almost made me go square base, so the Spacke TK theme works for me.
2. The vehicles all look great to me. They are quite unique looking, and are going to look really cool on the table.
3. Love the new Immortals.
4. Snipers are cool as hell.
5. The IC's are kind of chunky, but cool if you dig the TK in space theme.
6. I'm really excited about the Lychguard, especially the shileld build.
7. Not sure about the jump troops. I like the models, and I love jump troops, but I need to see a comparison betweenthat and the SME to make a final decision.
8. The Flayed Ones are not as cool as they could have been, but I think the lack of gore on the paint job is a huge part of the problem. My Flayed Ones are pretty bloody, and these look PG. I think once we see some alernate paint jobs on those I think they will be better.
9. I'm happy that, overall, the models fit with what I already have. I think the Spyder is going to be totally different in look and function, but I don't have any issue mixing my current Immortals and Flayed Ones with the new models (in contrast to say, the new Pink Horrors and the older ones). I hope the Destroyers are not too different, since I have all I could possibly take and don't plan to buy more.
10. #1 most awaited units: Wraiths, Wraith IC, Flayed One IC.

Overall, I'm excited. I will buy at least one of everything on the list at launch. Can't wait to get my hands on this stuff.

Altruizine wrote:If you think it over, the robot-on-robot design isn't a problem from a background PoV.

If it was easier to "copy" their original minds over than to build up an AI from scratch, it makes perfect sense that their vehicles would be operated by traditional means. It saves design work, and comes with a unique set of advantages and disadvantages:

1. If a pilotbot gets killed another one can replace him vs. if a destroyer "pilot" gets killed the entire platform becomes useless

How about the vehicle just pilots itself? Then if the vehicle gets destroyed who cares if it can't pilot anymore? It's already dead.

2. Pilotbots can get out of their seat, to perform whatever extra-vehicular task might crop up

Such as? Collecting wood? It's not like they can repair the vehicles, if they're able to do it with their fingers why not just make the vehicle heal itself? I mean, it already can.

3. But pilotbots could also be thrown from their seats unwillingly

Yeah, you would think they would have enclosed compartments or something. The seat from the superman ride isn't a good seat for a combat vehicle.

4. Depending on manual controls for pilotbots to operate means that enemies could possibly make use of Necron tech

It's weird that they would even have a touchscreen at all when they're plugged into the vehicle as well.

5. But by the same token, a Necron could just as easily commandeer the tech of another humanoid race

Not when he's a pilotbot. They're kinda stuck. Why are they more capable of using the vehicles then the other necrons anyway?

I don't like the robot-on-robot concept aesthetically (not in the least) but let's stop pretending it's stupid or nonsensical.

But it is both stupid and nonsensical. Why doesn't it just pilot itself? Why aren't the pilots protected? Why do they need both a control console and to be plugged in? Why, when they clearly have machine intellegences that are very advanced, do they need to give a necron the keys to the boat?

I don't like the robot-on-robot concept aesthetically (not in the least) but let's stop pretending it's stupid or nonsensical.

Yeah, I prefer girl on girl action myself tbh but each to their own

On the issue of pilots, why is the pilot of the Ark pointing?
None of the other necrons is looking in its direction or looking at where it is pointing to
Why would it even need to point?

If the necrons are really getting 4+ saves does that mean all of the vehicles will be open topped?

I'm far more concerned about the fact that the Necrons now need to ferry their models to battle rather than rely on a sophisticated teleportation system.

That Ghost Barge makes me cringe.

Otherwise most of the other models are fine.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Altruizine wrote:Stuff

and Stuff

I like the drivers to be honest and if you want reasons. How about this:

Even in their down graded minds the Necrontyr are still better pilots then their AIs. The reason that the pilots do not get intergraded into the ship is because most Necrons fear the "Destroyer Curse".

So I can see a Necron who does not want to lose what is left of himself driving the vehicle. Just as I can see a Necron Lord wanting to be driven around by actual pilots rather then an inferior AI, who don't have the Destroyer Curse.

As far as the model goes. i think I will be cutting the back off so it looks more like a "Sky Chariot".

Kid_Kyoto wrote:If the necrons are really getting 4+ saves does that mean all of the vehicles will be open topped?

Why? Does that only mean the Space Marines with their 3+ saves are the only ones who can hide and cower in their vehicles?

I don't like the transport. I much prefer the idea of a vehicle with a portal at the end (like the Monolith's star gate). I know it has to hold a specific unit to fit with the transport rules, but really, I'd prefer they were mobile reserve gates, that any unit (within reason) could exit via the portal rather than a Trade Federation droid deployer.

And I'm still surprised that there's no new Tomb Spyder. I was expecting a big new Dread-sized Spyder, or, at the very least, a 3-per-box plastic re-do.

ShumaGorath wrote:The fluff writer had better be a fething wunderkind...

It's Matt Ward... so set sail for fail.


And you're 100% dead-on Shummy as far as their Egyptian theme and the fact that robots driving robots looks silly. I liked it when the Destroyer became an integrated torso as part of the 'flying' bit. That made sense. I could even live with the Lord on the platform being separate from the rest of the machine (he may want to get off and crack skulls) but the guys piloting it should be part of the machine itself. Think of the Terminator films. All their big tanks and HK flying things and whatnot were AI's in and of themselves. There weren't T-800's piloting these things because that wouldn't make sense.

They also are Egyptian themed - I don't know why people can't see that they aren't. This makes them Tomb Kings in space, and as someone who loves the Tomb Kings - who cares?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

It's Matt Ward... so set sail for fail.

I heard the Silent King carves his name into the Emperor's heart.

H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's Matt Ward... so set sail for fail.

Is that a subtle jab at Failfleet?

H.B.M.C. wrote:I don't like the transport. I much prefer the idea of a vehicle with a portal at the end (like the Monolith's star gate). I know it has to hold a specific unit to fit with the transport rules, but really, I'd prefer they were mobile reserve gates, that any unit (within reason) could exit via the portal rather than a Trade Federation droid deployer.

And I'm still surprised that there's no new Tomb Spyder. I was expecting a big new Dread-sized Spyder, or, at the very least, a 3-per-box plastic re-do.

ShumaGorath wrote:The fluff writer had better be a fething wunderkind...

It's Matt Ward... so set sail for fail.


And you're 100% dead-on shummy as far as their Egyptian theme and the fact that robots driving robots looks silly. I liked it when the Destroyer became an integrated torso as part of the 'flying' bit. That made sense. I could even live with the Lord on the platform being separate from the rest of the machine (he may want to get off and crack skulls) but the guys piloting it should be part of the machine itself. Think of the Terminator films. All their big tanks and HK flying things and whatnot were AI's in and of themselves. There weren't T-800's piloting these things because that wouldn't make sense.

They also are Egyptian themed - I don't know why people can't see that they aren't. This makes them Tomb Kings in space, and as someone who loves the Tomb Kings - who cares?

Yeah, I find the direct denial of the art direction and theme perplexing. I think people just really want them to be unique, which they should be. It's just not the case though.

As for the fluff.. The C'tan all killed themselves once they found out about Roboutte Guilliman. They knew, deep in their hearts, that they could never truly be an ultramarine.

Hey, i liked dreadfleet

I wasn't the one paying for it, which helps...

The game is actually pretty fun to play

Flayed ones can take a hike, the rest i'm still mulling on.



*edit*

If you don't like the pilots why not leave the chairs off, take two destroyer bodies (and a little creativity) and intergrate then directly to the hull ?

Ascalam wrote:
If you don't like the pilots why not leave the chairs off, take two destroyer bodies (and a little creativity) and intergrate then directly to the hull ?

I'm going to find a small box, primer it black, and place a portal on and call it a Ghost Barge (hell, so long as it is a GW box, it is tourney legal, right?).

That's called creativity.

ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah, I find the direct denial of the art direction and theme perplexing. I think people just really want them to be unique, which they should be. It's just not the case though.

Not an issue for me. I couldn't care less if they were Space Tomb Kings. But what I'm seeing is a science fantasy army with a vague Egyptian influence. Tomb Kings also have an Egyptian influence, but there were very different design directions taken.

And at the end of the day, the Egyption influences for Necrons were there from the start... and again, Necrons came before Tomb Kings. So if anything, we should be complaining about how Tomb Kings are just humanised Necrons, rather than the inverse.

insaniak wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah, I find the direct denial of the art direction and theme perplexing. I think people just really want them to be unique, which they should be. It's just not the case though.

Not an issue for me. I couldn't care less if they were Space Tomb Kings. But what I'm seeing is a science fantasy army with a vague Egyptian influence. Tomb Kings also have an Egyptian influence, but there were very different design directions taken.

And at the end of the day, the Egyption influences for Necrons were there from the start... and again, Necrons came before Tomb Kings. So if anything, we should be complaining about how Tomb Kings are just humanised Necrons, rather than the inverse.

How is a magical skeleton in a robe and headdress more humanized then a robot skeleton in a robe and headdress?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WarOne wrote:

Ascalam wrote:
If you don't like the pilots why not leave the chairs off, take two destroyer bodies (and a little creativity) and intergrate then directly to the hull ?

I'm going to find a small box, primer it black, and place a portal on and call it a Ghost Barge (hell, so long as it is a GW box, it is tourney legal, right?).

That's called creativity.

I would just leave off the pilot entirely. It wouldn't be a bad model without them. The crescent moon is detailed enough.

ShumaGorath wrote:
I would just leave off the pilot entirely. It wouldn't be a bad model without them. The crescent moon is detailed enough.

Actually, removing all the pilots makes the thing look like a very nice space fighter sort of ship, perhaps a giant base for that gothic battlefleet game?

ShumaGorath wrote:How is a magical skeleton in a robe and headdress more humanized then a robot skeleton in a robe and headdress?

It's a human skeleton, and not a robot body made for an alien?

ShumaGorath wrote:

insaniak wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah, I find the direct denial of the art direction and theme perplexing. I think people just really want them to be unique, which they should be. It's just not the case though.

Not an issue for me. I couldn't care less if they were Space Tomb Kings. But what I'm seeing is a science fantasy army with a vague Egyptian influence. Tomb Kings also have an Egyptian influence, but there were very different design directions taken.

And at the end of the day, the Egyption influences for Necrons were there from the start... and again, Necrons came before Tomb Kings. So if anything, we should be complaining about how Tomb Kings are just humanised Necrons, rather than the inverse.

How is a magical skeleton in a robe and headdress more humanized then a robot skeleton in a robe and headdress

Because the robot isn't a human robot? It is a necrontyr style robot which apparently seems human however, now they have tails.
The magical skeletons are indeed human.