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.

Here's an idea:  For the same price a C'tan also counts as having a Res Orb.  Anyone agree/disagree?  The idea being to introduce additional variety into Necron lists and get those big guys onto the battlefield.

While we're at it they could probably use some kind of 2+/4+ to wound weapons wound on a 4+/6+ (simliar to Apoc Gargantuan creatures) but the res orb idea was what I wanted opinions on.

no

yes?

Strongly disagree.

Most importantly, C'Tan give a Necron army a very distinct ability they don't normally have: a close combat monster. But what you lose is the ability to support Necron units that Lords tend to do with their equipment. To give C'Tans that same ability would make it so almost every army would naturally include a C'Tan (which is a boring idea).

Also, it doesn't fit from a fluff perspective as C'Tan generally don't care about their Necron warriors, they tend to just use them as tools to achieve their ends.

I too am in the "bad idea" camp. As things stand, the C-tan are quite powerful. By adding in res orb power to them (regardless of the price, or lack there of, you pay for the ability). You would be obsoleting the necron lords for all purposes other than a cheep res orb option. The current dynamic seems to work out just fine.

I'll agree then, I'm sold on the arguments regarding making Necron Lords obsolete.

OTOH, C'tan need help IMO. Particularly Nightbringer, but Deceiver is still kind of meh for being a fifth of your average army in one model. Sure, they're ZOMG choppy, but 300+ points is a little ridiculous for something that can do squat at range and moves 6" a turn. Kinda like uber CC fexen, only moreso and with a couple weird little blah abilities. Plus the morale breaker stuff is, like all morale effects in 40k, lame.

Basically, C'tan need a boost, but not this boost! Maybe if they worked like a Tomb Spider, counting as a similar model within range?

C'tan don't need a boost. They're special characters; players shouldn't be regularly humming and hawing over whether to take them in a standard army. The last thing we need is a Necron Eldrad.

So Necrons should be denied something almost every other race has?

Yes. If every other army had a "jump off the bridge" ability, would you put one in yours?

Underpriced, no-brainer characters are a bad thing for the game. They reduce tactical variety and therefore the variety of play experiences. Eldar are my first army and I HATE that Eldrad is as good as he is.

Posted By Mannahnin on 11/08/2007 8:06 AM
Underpriced, no-brainer characters are a bad thing for the game. They reduce tactical variety and therefore the variety of play experiences. Eldar are my first army and I HATE that Eldrad is as good as he is.

Thank YOU! I'm not the only one. Special characters should stay exactly that. special. If there is nothing special about them. They get boring and take away the possibility to create your own character. Sure you can but it will always be some sort of, let's say, Eldrad look-alike.

And for the resurrection-orb: Nah...

Greets
Schepp himself

Posted By tegeus-Cromis on 11/07/2007 6:52 PM
So Necrons should be denied something almost every other race has?

The new Chaos codex doesn't have any compulsory characters in it- one of the things the new codex got right. Space Marines may qualify as having a compulsory character, depending on how ubiquitous you feel Tiggy is. Eldar definitely have one, and it looks like the Orks are gearing up to have one or even two. Dark Eldar don't. Tyranids don't even have the option. Alien Hunters, Witch Hunters, and Tau have nothing notable.

If by "almost every other race" you mean "Eldar, Maybe Space Marines, and As Of Yet Unreleased Orks from the Future" then yes, I'm totally busting out a fat sloppy bucket of denial on the those Necrons. I'm just mean that way.

Necrons already have a compulsory character. His name is ROVOD. Buffing C'tan mildly would be a movement away from a "choice? what choice?" HQ section, not towards.

Or alternately, the studio could look at rewriting the Necron wargear section to make variety both interesting and viable.

Personally, I think the best thing they could do for Necrons is get rid of the WBB rule and make them more surivable somehow else (T5? Feel No Pain?). WBB is incredibly clunky and makes the rez orb a virtual necessity.

Posted By Triggerbaby on 11/09/2007 11:28 AM
Or alternately, the studio could look at rewriting the Necron wargear section to make variety both interesting and viable.

Personally, I think the best thing they could do for Necrons is get rid of the WBB rule and make them more surivable somehow else (T5? Feel No Pain?). WBB is incredibly clunky and makes the rez orb a virtual necessity.

Preach on brother.  I really hate for there to be anything in a codex that everyone always takes (this includes options for varisou unit choices).  I hated that all rhinos came with extra armor and smoke...or really all imperial vehicles ever made...ever.  I hate that all falcons come with spirit stones and holo fields.  I hate that eldar armies come with Eldrad.  I hate that all dreadnaughts are venerable.  I hate that all necron lords come with rez orbs.  If something is so good that it is always taken, then its either too powerful or too cheep.  If rez orbs were 100 points, you might not see every lord with one (but maybe you would because they probably are that good). 

The thing is that the C'tan fill a vital role in the necron army.  They are really the only good close combat unit that necrons have and that is very useful to keeping the enemy away from the necron lines where power weapons will carve huge holes though the army (or at least they would if there wasn't always a res orb around).  They may be expensive and huge fire magnets, but they are survivable and even if they don't get to kill anything, its likely that they kept a lot of units at bay and not killing your necrons.  If, in the end, you don't like them, don't take them, but I don't see a need to give them the only reason to take a necron lord (and the most broken piece of wargear in the codex...possibly the game).

On the other side of the coin, necrons really do need some more stuff.  Right now the phase out rule combined with the limited number of good units in the codex means that basically all necron armies are warriors, immortals, and destroyers backed up with a monolith or two.  There isn't much in the way of variety (particularly since the squads don't have any wargear options).  A rework of their units to provide more viable options would be nice as would a rework of the "we'll be back" rules.

Posted By Triggerbaby on 11/09/2007 11:28 AM
Or alternately, the studio could look at rewriting the Necron wargear section to make variety both interesting and viable.

Personally, I think the best thing they could do for Necrons is get rid of the WBB rule and make them more surivable somehow else (T5? Feel No Pain?). WBB is incredibly clunky and makes the rez orb a virtual necessity.

QFT.

I suspect that one of the reasons for the FNP USR was to replace WBB in the next Necron Codex. That would eliminate the clunkiness and make Necrons slightly less boring to play against by doing the rolling on an ongoing basis rather than at the start of the turn.