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.

Ascalam wrote: I used the excuse to amp up my Orks

This right here. I regret nothing except not playing the crazy green bastards sooner!

Edit: In a more on topic discussion, I do hate seeing a C'Tan hit the field, mostly for bad memories of it ripping through terminators. I don't think it's broken or anything, though I will say for some armies that Etheric Tempest was a stupid rule.

As for the monolith, I think most people still have a bad taste in their mouth from when it came out originally. It basically took every rule that was good, and then ignore every rule that wasn't. It can never be destroyed by immobilizing/weapon destroying it to death, as the Gauss Flux Arc Projectors are never actually destroyed, no matter how many weapon destroyed results you get.

Really, most of my issues with the Necron codex was the fluff. They went from "strange alien raiders" to suddenly being involved with and responsible for numerous things throughout the 40k universe that made no sense. Machine God on Mars? Totally a C'Tan... really! We swear! Buy our stuff!

okay, enough ranting for one morning.

Again... I love the feel of the Necrons. I hope that it doesn't change.

I even love the fluff of the limited types of units and weapons. I mean... if I un-lived for a couple of milennia, I'm pretty sure I'd figure out what works best and stick to that. The only problem is that what they currently have isn't the best.

Good point there.
And yes, as far as we all know, Matt Ward IS writing the codex... C'tan help us all...

Why?

You'll get a codex witha lot of good options, nothing spectacularly under or over powered / costed, with some interesting rules that *mostly* work, and overall it will be a strong codex with lots of potential for varied armies.

Yes, you'll get some terribad fluff, some passable fluff and some really good stuff. However this is MUCH easier to work around that bad rules.

Oops, sorry, interjecting sense into the start of a ward rant.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Why?

You'll get a codex witha lot of good options, nothing spectacularly under or over powered / costed, with some interesting rules that *mostly* work, and overall it will be a strong codex with lots of potential for varied armies.

Yes, you'll get some terribad fluff, some passable fluff and some really good stuff. However this is MUCH easier to work around that bad rules.

Oops, sorry, interjecting sense into the start of a ward rant.

Unless Ward writes it. Then we're looking at a storm of fandom coming down on the army hard followed by balance issues we realize that we've truly hit the rock paper scissors stage in this game where you have armies who just plain out and out no way can top another with single unit after single unit that's overpowered, very little synergy between units and characters who make chuck norris seem tame. ANYWAYS

Anyone else hoping crons get one or two really nice big monsterous creature things like the FW tomb stalker, that thing is sexy and I can only pray my new opponents look that good. Also any reliable news on what the new monolith is gonna be like? Wonder if the new one can be destroyed like any other vehical. At least unmodable armour 14 is less scary against my blood angels (move and fire preds and glorious)

Carabine - erm, no. MW writes, on the whole, balanced codexes. That was my point.

All the rage should be Cruddace and Kelly, for IG and SW, but all the band waggoning onto MW seems to forget that salient fact.

I would suggest you reread the GK book, and note how clever the synergy is in the army. The HQ slot in particular.

Frankly I am happy that MW is writing the codex, his codexs all have sound rules and only a few fluff "oddities". Also when I was talking to the writers at GD a couple of years ago I spoke to him and he was very passionate about the Necrons and has been apparently pushing for the Necrons to be redone since before 2008. Because of this I have great confidence that the new book will be satisfy all our Necrony needs.

Still, some players (myself included), like their armies to come with a bit of nice and sensible fluff on the side.
If Ward (or anyone else for that matter) suddenly decided that Necrons are actually the long-forgotten descendants of C3PO and started walking around funny saying "oh dear", well, I think I would be a little disappointed.
Oh, and as far as Ward's rules go, I've heard a lot about broken rules from people so I'll reserve judgment until I actually see the codex.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Carabine - erm, no. MW writes, on the whole, balanced codexes. That was my point.

All the rage should be Cruddace and Kelly, for IG and SW, but all the band waggoning onto MW seems to forget that salient fact.

I would suggest you reread the GK book, and note how clever the synergy is in the army. The HQ slot in particular.

And Kelly doesn't get any credit for the DE codex - arguably the best codex that's out there? The BA codex (which I quite like) is unquestionably over-the-top, especially compared to earlier codexes. Ward also writes terrible fluff - the GK codex is so overwritten and cliche-laden as to be virtually unreadable. There is a lot of potential for making the Necrons truly interesting in terms of background and motivation, but I don't think Ward has the skill to do it.

Yes, of course he gets credit for DE. But he shouldnt escape criticism of the SW codex, which is far more broken than ANYTHING MW has produced for 40k.

The BA Codex? Power wise its further down the list than SW and IG, on par with plain marines / GK and slightly worse off than DE, who hover in between SW/IG and the rest, depending on points level.

Also - reread my earlier post, where I talked about the fluff side. However from a CODEX persepective, it is far better to have a good rule set, as fluff is entirely mutable - rules generally arent.

Would you prefer awful rules that are either hideously OP (IG, SW) or pretty meh (Nids) or on one occasion prety good (DE) or would you prefer good, solid codex with lots of options to make interesting, varied armies, without the army being over the top in *power* level?

I know what I would prefer. Fluff I can work around, I cannot work around the rules for units - not if i want to use the army anywhere reasonable.

Uh, let's just rein in this "OMG the Guard is OP!" thing, for a minute. Crudance wrote a good codex that unfortunately offers up a few over the top builds which should have been caught in playtesting. It's no where near Matt Ward's 7th edition WHFB Daemon army book, which was outright broken in any configuration.

Also, if you really rate Vanilla Marines on the same tier as Blood Angels and Grey Knights (and below Dark Eldar)...yeah, wow. Have fun with that.

Um, guard IS overpowered - not the whole codex, as in every unit. But thats the problem - there are some seriously godawful units in there (mostly in elites) that never see regular, serious play, and there are some utter no brainers. A fast gun platform that carries troops? Oh, and it scouts. And is a skimmer. And is a bargain. Etc.

Also - note how i mentioned 40k in that? I was *very* careful to caveat the statement.

A well run DE army tears BA razorspam and GK PA spam lists a new one. Every time. Why, do you think differently?

Vanilla marines - usually meaning Vulkan led - can work toe to toe with BA and GK. Same tier doesnt mean absolutely equal - it certainly isnt as easy a list to play.

Anyway - it doesnt alter the fact that, 40k wise, SM/BA/GK are all of a level - and can create varied, fun and interesting lists. SW? Not so much

The 5th ed vanilla marine codex was the worst because it set so many new bars in what was broken at the time, characters, equipment, choices etc.

Phil Kelly is a saint compared to Ward. Basic marines can still beat wolves, but honestly I'd love someone to show me a situation where you see wolves taking on Grey knights. Heck I play all 4 and I see BA and GK having a major leg up on SW.

Ward writes specific entries that are broken worse than my 1987 Nissan Stanza. Kelly doesn't write broken entries he makes synergistic codices. The issue with IG and DE is that most of the units work in support of each other remarkably well, not that the units in question are broken. Again this coming from a 4 way marine player.

All in all I just hope Necrons avoid this problem. I really wanna see a codex without the screaming and pain and suffering that we've seen lately.

Now remember folks we keep this up and we'll end up getting this locked so lets just agree to disagree and start a new thread for the whole matt ward/phil kelly thing elsewhere.

Also so we can be back on track, anyone got anything new on the supposed character necron lords I keep hearing about locally? Is the guy I heard it from full of or are we gonna see some actual cool non c'tan HQs for these guys?

Wolves taking on GK? Well, they can outshoot standard PA / T GK armies, so thats a start.

I also play all 4, and having seen SW beat BA and GK on a *regular* basis (seriously - look at actual tourney results to get a good idea of the disparity) I know for a fact which codex is overpowered.

So Kelly doesnt write broken units? You're talking crap. LF. TWC. Just those two is bad enough, but then you get to the stupidity of GH - CA, 2CCW AND the banner of cheese, oh wait - the banners not one per army anymor, and is only 10 points, and can be used against pretty much anything you roll dice for? Awesome! And then theres WG....and Jaws.....

And thats before you get to the godawful units, like the ones that cant shoot *even if they cannot assault* just because theyre within 6".

Compare this to GK, where HQ selection is key, you have no no-brainers (want scoring dreads? GKGM, but unless you *also* take a termi libby (expensive) or Inq (squishy) youre missing out on MoT) in that list - none. I have seen more varied lists comgin from the GK book than I have seen from any codex except DE.

Overall - I'd rather have DE-Kelly write the book, as you'd get good balance (mostly, still some very poor choices there) as well as good fluff. But if we cant - then Ward is a very good second. You can work around bad fluff, you cant work around bad rules - not if you want to use your army outside of strictly friendly games, anyway.

I also hope they do not change the feeling of Necrons. I'd be very happy if they just made the army more competitive in 5th edition, brought important models (e.g.Immortals, Wraiths) as resin/plastic bulk kits and made implayable models (Pariahs or Flayed Ones) playable.

Some nice monstrous creatures would be the icing on the cake, though

nosferatu1001 wrote:Wolves taking on GK? Well, they can outshoot standard PA / T GK armies, so thats a start.

how so, if you don't mind my asking? I'm guessing you're talking about Razor and Long Fang spam, but I'm not 100% sure.

I'm with nosferatu on this one. It's easy to hate on Ward because his fluff is so godawful, but the actual codex rules and synergy are great (at least for his 5th ed codexes).

Stream - apart from psyriflemen, PA / T GK dont get guns over 24", and dont get to take dedicated transports to get their termis across safely if they still want to take psyriflemen.

I guess I'm not fully understanding, especially as I'm not very familiar with the new GK book.

PT / T GKs still have better guns than bolters, and other than their transports Hunters aren't getting anything over 24" either. They can take Dreads and such to get long range support similar to Wolves, but I'm guessing they don't have the equivalent of Long Fangs then? Lack of dedicated transports for Termies is kinda craptastical, although at least theirs can teleport.

They cannot carry any guns with a greater than 24" range. While they can fire on the move at 24" that doesnt help when LF can outrange them by 24"

nosferatu1001 wrote:They cannot carry any guns with a greater than 24" range. While they can fire on the move at 24" that doesnt help when LF can outrange them by 24"

This is a negative? When the metagame for 40k is all about CC? Your logic seems a bit off.

On topic---If half the rumors are true then at least the Necrons will be as pretty as the Dark Eldar release. I don't expect them to release as many models but those that they do release should be amazing.

Too bad 40k is dead to me, dead I tell you.

I want pretty necrons! A race that wants all life extinct should be pretty


Keep telling yourself that

off topic: SW are overpowered IMHO(actually agreeing with nosferatu lol)

on topic: i agree, i want to see a Monstrous Creature Necron!

I'd like a monstrous creature necron that moves like a jetbike and could turbo boost. I always liked the fact that scarabs, wraiths, and destroyer/heavy destroyer could all turbo boost and move 12" normally, so why not allow the spyder that ability too?

Probably because that would be pretty OP 3+ cover save and then can assault 42" in 2 turns.

Not even I want that and I love my necrons, it would just screw some armies hard, especially if the MC was t5-6 with multiple wounds. You wouldnt be able to kill it before it started beating on you in assault.

dajobe wrote:off topic: SW are overpowered IMHO(actually agreeing with nosferatu lol)

on topic: i agree, i want to see a Monstrous Creature Necron!

Off Topic: While I think there are a few questionable things in Codex: SW, I'd say overall that the book isn't overpowered. Efficient? Most definitely. But even things like JotWW are of limited use depending on the army faced. I'd never take it against my friend's Eldar, for example. That said, it (along with all poison DE and all Force Weapons GKs) makes my Tyranids and Orks cry.

On Topic: A tomb spyder-esque transport for Necrons could be interesting. Could either go an armor route, or go similar to the Mycetic Spores and make it an MC that can carry or teleport a unit of warriors.

Edit: Tomb Spyder, not Scarab

tiekwando wrote:Probably because that would be pretty OP 3+ cover save and then can assault 42" in 2 turns.

Not even I want that and I love my necrons, it would just screw some armies hard, especially if the MC was t5-6 with multiple wounds. You wouldnt be able to kill it before it started beating on you in assault.

Well, if the rumor about the spyder getting an artillery option is true, I'd definitely agree with you that those rules are OP, but as of now, the current spyder is useless in my opinion. Maybe you've had more luck then me, but my spyders have never been useful once. they always fail me when I need them.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:Well, if the rumor about the spyder getting an artillery option is true, I'd definitely agree with you that those rules are OP, but as of now, the current spyder is useless in my opinion. Maybe you've had more luck then me, but my spyders have never been useful once. they always fail me when I need them.

This is how I feel about my whole Chaos Space Marine army

Tomb Spyders do need an upgrade or something to make them useful.

Pael wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:They cannot carry any guns with a greater than 24" range. While they can fire on the move at 24" that doesnt help when LF can outrange them by 24"

This is a negative? When the metagame for 40k is all about CC? Your logic seems a bit off.

On topic---If half the rumors are true then at least the Necrons will be as pretty as the Dark Eldar release. I don't expect them to release as many models but those that they do release should be amazing.

Too bad 40k is dead to me, dead I tell you.

Sorry, what?

The meta is mech. Lots and Lots of mech, to keep those precious troops alive.

So yes, it is a negative. Your AV11 vehicles die first turn, and you slowly walk across the board getting chopped to pieces.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

tiekwando wrote:Probably because that would be pretty OP 3+ cover save and then can assault 42" in 2 turns.

Not even I want that and I love my necrons, it would just screw some armies hard, especially if the MC was t5-6 with multiple wounds. You wouldnt be able to kill it before it started beating on you in assault.

Well, if the rumor about the spyder getting an artillery option is true, I'd definitely agree with you that those rules are OP, but as of now, the current spyder is useless in my opinion. Maybe you've had more luck then me, but my spyders have never been useful once. they always fail me when I need them.

Well the current spyder, with the ability to move like a jetbike, would be pretty ridiculous depending on the rules for generating scarabs. You would get a 3+ cover save from shooting and could have a bunch of extra wounds. T6 means your not going to be wounded by much other than heavy weapons, and against those you have the 3+ save. In combat your not great if they have powerfists, but otherwise are ok. The big thing is that 1 would not be over powered, but the ability to take 9 would be.

Really though it would depend on point costs, if they were 75 points and had that upgrade, then way OP as many armies wouldn't be able to deal with 9 of them charging turn 2. If they are 100 points, then probably not effective except for certain lists.

Anyways, I agree tomb spyders do need an upgrade just think that making them/any MC move like jetbikes is not a good idea.