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.

Why would paying for an upgrade ha e any bearing on whether or nor the Lord is a T6 creature?

I'm talking about 5th edition codices. Look at all the 'nid MC's who are T 6 who used to be able to buff to 7. That was my point in regards to this seeming like a backward step in stats.

Monster Rain wrote:Why would paying for an upgrade ha e any bearing on whether or nor the Lord is a T6 creature?

Because he's not a T6 creature by profile.

Is there an outline of where GW monster toughness is heading so I can read up on this? Why would Tyranids have any bearing on the Necrons?

Monster Rain wrote:Is there an outline of where GW monster toughness is heading so I can read up on this? Why would Tyranids have any bearing on the Necrons?

Any 5th edition codex have anything t 7? And I thought my point (and attached assumptions) was somewhat clear.

Yeah, tyranids are different, I guess. Most of the army is monstrous creatures, and if they aren't good, why bother using them. In the fluff, carnifexii are almost impossible to kill in CC, so T7 would be a little better.

I think T7 is enough for this thing.

I would like to point out that with the exception of the wraithlord, all monstrous creatures in the game are currently flesh and blood (more or less). This thing is not... its a robot made of living metal. There is no reason why it couldn't be T7, 8, 9 or even 10. Using one codex to guage the "rules of the game" so to speak, is an exercise in futility. What seems to be the standard for one codex, need not be the standard for another.

Zeshin: Considering Necrons would be the Second non-Space Marine/Imperium codex to come out in 5th Edition I'd say your generalizations are premature.

chaos0xomega wrote:I would like to point out that with the exception of the wraithlord, all monstrous creatures in the game are currently flesh and blood (more or less). This thing is not... its a robot made of living metal. There is no reason why it couldn't be T7, 8, 9 or even 10. Using one codex to guage the "rules of the game" so to speak, is an exercise in futility. What seems to be the standard for one codex, need not be the standard for another.

And, by precedent, the WL being T8 means the Necron model can be T9 or T10.
____

Samus_aran115 wrote:I think T7 is enough for this thing.

I like T10 better - 1/6 chance to wound, even for a SM with a PF.

With a 4++, so that it saves 1/2 of those wounds (along with the Lascannon and Vindicator shots that people throw at it).

Give it at least 4 attacks so it can just chew through SMs

JohnHwangDD wrote:

I like T10 better - 1/6 chance to wound, even for a SM with a PF.

With a 4++, so that it saves 1/2 of those wounds (along with the Lascannon and Vindicator shots that people throw at it).

Give it at least 4 attacks so it can just chew through SMs

Yeah. That would be great. Especially for all of the people that run out to buy one and then get "No Thanks" when they ask someone "Wanna play 40K?"

It would be awesome!

JohnHwangDD wrote:I like T10 better - 1/6 chance to wound, even for a SM with a PF.

With a 4++, so that it saves 1/2 of those wounds (along with the Lascannon and Vindicator shots that people throw at it).

Give it at least 4 attacks so it can just chew through SMs

As a Necron player, that seems a little... un-fun. Especially for 195 points. I'd save T10 for C'Tan.

Tough 10? That would be stupid. Strength 6 wouldn't even be able to hurt it.

8 is the most any model should be, IMO, unless it only has 3 or less wounds.

The Tyranid titan that is tough 9 is so ludicrously hard to kill. It isn't fun.

Tough 7 is not that big of a deal, strength 4 can still hurt it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tough 8 isn't even that rough. It is the equivalent of an AV12 vehicle, which small arms can't hurt.

Reecius wrote:Tough 10? That would be stupid. Strength 6 wouldn't even be able to hurt it.

8 is the most any model should be, IMO, unless it only has 3 or less wounds.

Or, the corollary should be, costs nearly 400 points? The C'Tan occupy a slot that nearly nothing else in all of 40k occupy, and should have stats (and cost) to match. I'd have no problem with T9 or T10 for the avatars of gods (or space vampire god-wannabes, more accurately). I'd also see the Eldar's Avatar get a buff commensurate with that.

Edit for clarity: Tomb Stalkers aren't in that pantheon. T7 is fine.

So in question to the Necron players currently drooling over their keyboards, does this model with it's rules finally start to erase the close combat handicap of the necron army. As i don't play crons I cannot look at the thing and tell if it will work or not.

It fills the gap of new content sorely needed for over 8 years.

doubled wrote:So in question to the Necron players currently drooling over their keyboards, does this model with it's rules finally start to erase the close combat handicap of the necron army. As i don't play crons I cannot look at the thing and tell if it will work or not.

It's a fast CC unit. It's not as tough as the C'Tan, but with fleet it will definitely be able to get a hold of the enemy a little easier.

Being able to Deep Strike also negates some of the mobility problems that the other Necron CC units(and I do use the term loosely) like C'Tan and Tomb Spyders and Pariahs have, and the fact that it ignores armor saves makes it preferable to Flayed Ones and Wraiths when it comes to trying to fight Marines.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

I like T10 better - 1/6 chance to wound, even for a SM with a PF.

With a 4++, so that it saves 1/2 of those wounds (along with the Lascannon and Vindicator shots that people throw at it).

Give it at least 4 attacks so it can just chew through SMs

Athera wrote:Yeah. That would be great. Especially for all of the people that run out to buy one and then get "No Thanks" when they ask someone "Wanna play 40K?"

It would be awesome!

Waaahhh...
____

Ouze wrote: As a Necron player, that seems a little... un-fun. Especially for 195 points. I'd save T10 for C'Tan.

Yeah, what a horrible idea that the Necron Wraithlord-equivalent might actually be tougher than a Wraithlord, and require players to react in the same way that players have to deal with other all-new game-changers like Tervigons and Valkyries and Lash...
____

Reecius wrote:Tough 10? That would be stupid.

Strength 6 wouldn't even be able to hurt it.

8 is the most any model should be, IMO, unless it only has 3 or less wounds.

The Tyranid titan that is tough 9 is so ludicrously hard to kill. It isn't fun.

Tough 7 is not that big of a deal, strength 4 can still hurt it.

Tough 8 isn't even that rough. It is the equivalent of an AV12 vehicle, which small arms can't hurt.

Fine. Save T10 for the other Necron entry - C'Tan.

Necrons have a Living Metal AV14 Tank which ignores practically everything. S8 basically can't touch it, needing S9 or better to have any real chance of doing anything.

Given that Necron theme of being hard to kill, T9 seems very much more reasonable on a Necron MC than a Nid one.

T7 and T8 trade off against IG and SM having AV13 and AV14 Tanksl, which aren't as obnoxiously hard, but still a tough nut to crack. What sense does it make that Necrons aren't very hard to kill based on the army design to date?
____

Ouze wrote:Or, the corollary should be, costs nearly 400 points? The C'Tan occupy a slot that nearly nothing else in all of 40k occupy, and should have stats (and cost) to match. I'd have no problem with T9 or T10 for the avatars of gods (or space vampire god-wannabes, more accurately). I'd also see the Eldar's Avatar get a buff commensurate with that.

Edit for clarity: Tomb Stalkers aren't in that pantheon. T7 is fine.

And why shouldn't Tomb Stalkers be nearly just as hard to kill as a Monolith? Necron should be able to spam a pile of Heavies that are giant, indestructible rocks.

The idea that they'd be hard to kill really seems like a weak argument.

Really. What's this teleportable(is that a word) Close Combat beast that the Necrons already have? Please enlighten me.

Ok brain failure moment
Yes the crons don't have a fast combat beast, because they don't need one.

The Tomb Stalker's "specific function" is to be fast and run about and shred the living.

Running (or crawling) is pointless when you can teleport.Teleportation is faster, and you can't be attacked while your teleporting.

There a reason it's base is the size of Tasmania?

Does anyone know whether these bad boyz are actually for sale at Games Day? Or just preorder at Games Day?

4M2A wrote:

Really. What's this teleportable(is that a word) Close Combat beast that the Necrons already have? Please enlighten me.

Ok brain failure moment
Yes the crons don't have a fast combat beast, because they don't need one.

Really? You don't play Necrons do you? If you don't, allow me to tell you that they most definitely do need one. CC is the Necrons' major problem in 5th Edition. If you do play Necrons... I just don't know what to say to you.

Also, you don't need to be a tool. From where I'm sitting your post more accurately describes your post, not mine. So let's keep it friendly.

4M2A wrote:

The Tomb Stalker's "specific function" is to be fast and run about and shred the living.

Running (or crawling) is pointless when you can teleport.Teleportation is faster, and you can't be attacked while your teleporting.

Yeah. And? You also can't assault after you teleport unless very specific conditions are met. Tomb Spyders can't teleport and they see a lot of playtime, this thing trades the Spyder's WBB buff for a host of other CC related abilities. So what if it can't teleport? None of the other Necron Heavy Support can do so, except for Heavy Destroyers and honestly; A: Who uses them, and B: Why would you teleport them?

Monster Rain wrote:much truth

This thing is exactly what the 'Crons need. A perfect counter assault unit that can get to where you need it. Move through cover, fleet, DEEP STRIKE! I wouldn't be surprised that IF this got into the new codex you'd see it given the rule like the mawloc given the concept.

I'm not talking about the rules. This thing looks great if you want to play competitively and I think it's good that necrons get something new and shiny. I just don't like it because I feel the idea doesn't fit the fluff of necrons. This is purely based on the way I visualise necrons. The tomb spider may not be worth teleporting in the rules but in the background it makes sense.

Maybe someone posted and I missed it, but how much is this thing gonna cost? Money wise not points.

£36 ($56.96) according to the Forge World supplement. Theres one on eBay UK already for £130 Buy It Now

4M2A wrote:I'm not talking about the rules. This thing looks great if you want to play competitively and I think it's good that necrons get something new and shiny. I just don't like it because I feel the idea doesn't fit the fluff of necrons. This is purely based on the way I visualise necrons. The tomb spider may not be worth teleporting in the rules but in the background it makes sense.

Given that it's a cross between a Tomb Spyder and a Wraith I don't understand how you would come to that conclusion. Particularly since fluff is whatever GW says it is, and that it can change without a moment's notice. But hey, you're entitled to your opinion.

The painted version at Games Day UK looks much better than the unpainted pictures. Like I said, definitely a beautiful sculpt.

I'm still not liking the antennae/face. I guess I always liked the Necrons for their cold, robotic, skeletal feel (even the Tomb Spyder was very mechanical looking). The very organic face just seems to not fit with the existing style (and isn't a style I particularly like outside of the very obvious flesh/metal hybrid Pariahs).

Painted, the rest of it looks pretty good. Still not sure why it has the jet engine ass though.

Yes GW can change the background but I just prefer one aspect of the fluff. I'm not saying I don't like it because it's unfluffy (I agree that as soon as Gw say it is then it is), as much as that it doesn't fit in with the rest of the cron fluff (very small difference).

When I think of the necrons moving quickly I see them as silently gliding (or in the case of Flayed ones creeping), which fits the undead/ emotionless theme. I guess I find this models looks to alive and clunky for the necrons.

Just for completeness, here two pics of the painted model:

wow that looks pretty good to me!