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.

Ktulhut wrote:My opinion?
Ws 2 Bs 4 St 4 To 5 In 1 At 1 Ld 10 Sv 3+

Slow and Purposeful

Feel no Pain

Relentless

Gauss Rifle:
Range: 18, St 3, AP 5, Heavy 1, Rending.

20~25pts a model.

I agree with this.

However.... why both Slow and Purposeful AND Relentless? Those two rules do the same thing, with the exception of Slow and Purposeful forcing them to take a difficult terrain test every time they move.

Nix Relentless, it doesn't add anything, just give them Slow and Purposeful.

Make it Heavy 2 or S4 and as Saint says Relentless is included with S&P, and I'd say 18/20 pts going by current Marine standards, otherwise you're getiing towards GK style rapid fire rapings even with T5

E: IMHO of course

Ktulhut wrote:My opinion?
Ws 2 Bs 4 St 4 To 5 In 1 At 1 Ld 10 Sv 3+

Slow and Purposeful

Feel no Pain

Relentless

Gauss Rifle:
Range: 18, St 3, AP 5, Heavy 1, Rending.

20~25pts a model.

Well, the pt cost would be too high for a basic model in the troop section.
WBB should be replaced by FNP.
The rest is debatable.

No T5 as it renders a large amount of small arms useless and means only S10 weapons instant kill, i think their stats are good enough they just need more variety

BenManicom wrote:No T5 as it renders a large amount of small arms useless and means only S10 weapons instant kill, i think their stats are good enough they just need more variety

It does make sense that only exceptionally powerful weapons can instakill them, what with being made of living metal and all. The only thing I can think of not making much sense would be power fists, which for SM hit at S8. I can see a power fist instakilling just about any infantry.

And I wouldn't say it renders small arms useless. Think about it this way. If they had T5, bolters would wound on a 5+ (33%), pulse rifles would wound on a 4+ (50%), and lasguns would wound on a 6+. Given the general uselessness of lasguns (sorry, but it's true), that makes sense to me.

Given that a single Guard platoon might have fifty lasguns pointed at you, though, I don't think it'll hurt Guard players too much.

If they made them T5 it wouldn't make small arms useless, bc there will be less of them so it'd still even out, and I think it would reinforce the whole unkillable robot theme, I mean tau would still have to 4+ with the basic weapons to wound. Ok Flashlights would need 6's but at 20+ points per model you could put a lot of shots onto each model.

Well a battle cannon is Sr8 and I can see them vapourising any Necrons instantly as well

BenManicom wrote:Well a battle cannon is Sr8 and I can see them vapourising any Necrons instantly as well

And Lascannons are S9, and could conceivably vaporize a Cron. Yes. There are certain weapons that won't make as much sense against T5 Crons.

I'd say it's debatable, but T5 still fits the fluff better, and that's what makes 40k armies make sense to me.

I don't see BC vapourising anything personally, shattering PA maybe but vapourising a living metal? You have to heat steel to about 1400 deg C if I remember rightly and I don't see a standard tank explosive shell being that hot over such a large blast. But maybe thats just me, and anyway I know I'm getting into real world science and I hate it when my brain makes me do that

SaintHazard wrote:

I agree with this.

However.... why both Slow and Purposeful AND Relentless? Those two rules do the same thing, with the exception of Slow and Purposeful forcing them to take a difficult terrain test every time they move.

Nix Relentless, it doesn't add anything, just give them Slow and Purposeful.

Does Slow and Purposeful automatically grant Relentless? My bad. I thought they were two seperate rules now.

Ktulhut wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:

I agree with this.

However.... why both Slow and Purposeful AND Relentless? Those two rules do the same thing, with the exception of Slow and Purposeful forcing them to take a difficult terrain test every time they move.

Nix Relentless, it doesn't add anything, just give them Slow and Purposeful.

Does Slow and Purposeful automatically grant Relentless? My bad. I thought they were two seperate rules now.

They are two separate rules.

Relentless lets you fire heavy and rapid fire weapons as if stationary, even after having moved.

S&P lets you fire heavy and rapid fire weapons as if stationary, even after having moved, and you have to take a difficult terrain test every time you move.

So the difference is just whether or not you roll for difficult terrain before moving. The shooting effect is identical.

Personaly.. necrons are just about right stat wise... The only thing that seriously ruins them is the phase out rule.

Think about it.... wouldn't they just phase out at the end of the game? Makes more sense.

And the whole possibility of them running away, tad silly if you ask me.

And so we're clear P76 of the mini BRB says under S&P:

"models with this rule are relentless" so yeah it automatically grants relentless.

DEATH89 wrote:And the whole possibility of them running away, tad silly if you ask me.

And so we're clear P76 of the mini BRB says under S&P:

"models with this rule are relentless" so yeah it automatically grants relentless.

I originally thought that giving them LD10 across the board did this nicely, but now that I think about it, Fearless makes more sense...

And taking that extra wound instead of running away might balance out T5 nicely.

Edit: Maybe give them Fearless if they're within 12" of a Lord, or something similar, and otherwise let LD10 take care of it?

Crons should be fearless. They are in effect, walking robots bent on killing - what do they have to fear?

S&P certainly makes sense. Just look at the Dawn of War intro video that has the crons - they look S&P to me.

Rending also makes sense for gauss weapons in this edition. It makes them strong and scary without over-powering the crons too much.

FNP is a good alternative to WBB. It elimates a special rule and streamliens the rules into this edition - just like making gauss weapons rending.

Increasing the toughness of the standard warriors seems a little much. T4 with a 3+ save and FNP is plenty.

Vrakk wrote:Crons should be fearless. They are in effect, walking robots bent on killing - what do they have to fear?

S&P certainly makes sense. Just look at the Dawn of War intro video that has the crons - they look S&P to me.

Rending also makes sense for gauss weapons in this edition. It makes them strong and scary without over-powering the crons too much.

FNP is a good alternative to WBB. It elimates a special rule and streamliens the rules into this edition - just like making gauss weapons rending.

Increasing the toughness of the standard warriors seems a little much. T4 with a 3+ save and FNP is plenty.

They're not exactly numerous, so I guess my point was increase to T5 and increase model cost to 25 points or so. Fewer tougher models also makes sense for Crons, since they're not exactly numerous, and they're not exactly made of plywood, or even ceramite. Something much harder, in fact. Living metal.

By making them higher poitns costs and T5 aren't you making metal plague marines?

By keeping their toughness down you can keep their poitns down. This means you would have to buy more minatures to fill an army. What route do you think GW will go?

Vrakk wrote:By making them higher poitns costs and T5 aren't you making metal plague marines?

By keeping their toughness down you can keep their poitns down. This means you would have to buy more minatures to fill an army. What route do you think GW will go?

Saying Crons at T5 will be metal plague marines is like saying Crons right now are just metal nilla marines. They're marine equivalents, not marines.

Anyway, yes, more models directly translates into more money for GW, so that's probably the route they'll take, but we're talking fluff and army balance here, not "what will GW logically do?"

In the end, the answer to that one will always be "whatever makes them the most money."

I've never heard those arguments, but I have the same opinion as you about Necrons, lowmanjason. Necrons were one of the armies I thought on while choosing my first (and probably last) w40k army, with Chaos Space Marines and Tyranids, but I finally took CSM (as you can see on my avatar ). Necrons are one of my favourite w40k races, and they should be as strong as possible. Again, I'm with you in this.

Well, after reading through the topic a bit thought I would comment. I tried to base my arguments in relevance to how awesome crap is in the 40k universe, rationalizing things from a perspective of a human on a xeno is completely insane... but hey we all try.

In regards to Necron statline, I think the warriors are as they should be. Living metal justifies their armor value, WBB and toughness. MEQs are mushy in the middle, they only get their save from some armor plating, but inside nice and chewy, whereas the 'crons are all metal all the time. Equal balance there. Same argument for T4 on the warriors. One would think in a 40k environment that the Necrons after sleeping for 60mil years they might be a little less awesome than they were. Whose to say they weren't all ballistic skill 5 or 6 before they began to hibernate?. I mean if I were a star god deciding to transform an entire race into a shooty death army, I would make sure they can shoot crap allllll day. So in the 40k universe with all the tech that is available it is completely believeable that a marine might shoot just as well as a cron, but a cron would shoot better than a standard guardsmen. BS4 justified.

FNP vs WBB.
One of my friends and I had this debate a while back. And I went for the FNP just for game mechanics as I, as a necron player, get all sorts of questions on WBB. But the WBB is really the flavor of the army. FNP makes sense sure, soul less robots wouldn't feel pain, both could be justified, but the fluff wise them reassembling just fits better. Game mechanics wise, removing models to keep out of assualt, and standing up on my turn rather than just liking getting hit, I personally like it better. Bane of my existence is Pariahs, I love them, expensive as hell but armor sucks for something so expensive and not necron. As that were, I would love to see them have FNP, fits fluff wise too. Newest Necron unit, not all living metal bodies yet, wouldnt feel pain as they would be at least a little wired in the head, and makes them a tad more survivable than they are at the current point cost making them rediculous expensive, and they'd still die to fast initiative power weapons in CC and ap2 weapons like they do now.

Slow and purpseful
In a word, no. Have you played a 'cron army? they are about as slow as it gets minus a few options. The range on the warriors guns makes them useless 1 to 2 game turns for anything that sits back and shoots. Lets make that 3 turns because of slow and purposeful? reduce the point value on them and we'll talk, but I think it would nerf them too much. Robots should be able to multitask, walk and shoot, I agree so relentless makes sense, but slow and purposeful would only nerf them. It always seems to me that SAP is a game mechanic that is used to slow down something that gets there too fast. Crons aren't that by any means. I could understand it added to Pariahs if they had an invuln save or cheaper or possibly even a 2+ armor. But in the rest of the army it only nerfs a non tier 1 army.

Fluff argues that Necrons are beatable. So they should not be uber awesome. They should be MEQs for the fact that you can beat them, and they can beat you. Leave it up to a general's tactics and choices in army roster to decide the fate of the universe, not nerfing an army or rediculous statlines. There is a trade off for Necrons and their WBB over MEQ's, theyre more expensive! 18pts a troop is not cheap. Only elite armies like death wing, black templar, GK are higher in pt cost. Which makes sense, as man to man 'crons will lose.

How good should 'crons be?
Better than they are. I'm a believer that all armies should be able to be fielded to an effective extent against all other armies, destroy that Tier 1 army list by making them all competive. But, for 'crons I dont think that needs to happen by altering what's out there. But by adding choices and fun tricks to play. I mean Demons have skulltaker 140pts, instant death on a 4+ , I can t even have a troop choice at 140 pts! That point is made to say I want more variety in the army. Allowing different builds, allows more combinations, more nastiness and overall more fun to the game. Take tyranids for example, how many different special characters do they have? more than I can list off by memory, I have two and everyone knows who they are, and both are at least 300pts. I think that adding variety to the 'crons can be made to fit in the fluff, after all it states that no one knows how many tomb worlds there are, so whose to say what hasn't awaked.

Oh we need wraith lords. oh that was taken? um super wraiths? ok fine i ll stop naming them, just grive my 41 pt 1 wound model a power weapon please?

How about no SnP and just not the ability to run? Static advance seems more machine like than random steps and long strides.

WBB as normal but at the end of every phase instead of start of the turn, adds a sense of rethought to moves when you spent a turn shooting down a large unit only for it to rise again that turn.

Gauss grants rending. Why would they be able to blow open a land raider on both end and yet a Marine still gets an armor save?

Keep the statline but a lower WS.

sebster wrote:I’m a little puzzled by the need in this thread to reduce the effectiveness of the Necrons.

I'm not suggesting this at all. What I'm wanting, rather, is that there is a much more noticeable difference between Warriors and the more elite choices such as Immortals. Immortals are allowed to keep a portion of their personality and intelligence, whereas Warriors aren't. Warriors are the cheap hordes of unrelenting undead machines. Immortals are the elites they bring in to crack hard targets and wipe out the enemy's elites.

Melissia wrote:

sebster wrote:I’m a little puzzled by the need in this thread to reduce the effectiveness of the Necrons.

I'm not suggesting this at all. What I'm wanting, rather, is that there is a much more noticeable difference between Warriors and the more elite choices such as Immortals. Immortals are allowed to keep a portion of their personality and intelligence, whereas Warriors aren't. Warriors are the cheap hordes of unrelenting undead machines. Immortals are the elites they bring in to crack hard targets and wipe out the enemy's elites.

Maybe immortals should be leaders for squads of warriors, like a seargent. Use that extra bit of self awareness to direct and command. Same for heavy destroyers, let them be an upgrade fro destroyers. Let them confer a USR like stubborn for the warriors. Give the Necrons a little bit extra variety to force org in the process. Same choices new builds. You're elites get to lead a squad, or stand alone. Fits the rest of the 40k universe and fluff I think.

themrsleepy wrote:

Melissia wrote:

sebster wrote:I’m a little puzzled by the need in this thread to reduce the effectiveness of the Necrons.

I'm not suggesting this at all. What I'm wanting, rather, is that there is a much more noticeable difference between Warriors and the more elite choices such as Immortals. Immortals are allowed to keep a portion of their personality and intelligence, whereas Warriors aren't. Warriors are the cheap hordes of unrelenting undead machines. Immortals are the elites they bring in to crack hard targets and wipe out the enemy's elites.

Maybe immortals should be leaders for squads of warriors, like a seargent. Use that extra bit of self awareness to direct and command. Same for heavy destroyers, let them be an upgrade fro destroyers. Let them confer a USR like stubborn for the warriors. Give the Necrons a little bit extra variety to force org in the process. Same choices new builds. You're elites get to lead a squad, or stand alone. Fits the rest of the 40k universe and fluff I think.

Ignore this post, apparently I didn't read that second to last sentence before I responded.

Sainthazard, congrats on ninjaing your own post before I could read it lol

So here is my final thought on this section.

Warriors should stay the same. I don’t like the idea of changing any stats. Slow and Purposeful… no, I don’t want my slow army to be any slower and the real punch of my warriors is within rapid fire range not 24 inches.

Feel no pain… I prefer We’ll be Back. FnP may be streamlined but WbB is just a Necron thing. Try taking ATSKNF from Marines and see how they like it. Tweak it but keep it We’ll be Back.

Phase Out… get rid of it. I already have one of the most expensive armies out there. Phase Out makes me spend more then takes away 25% of my army after I field it. Not fair.

Stay tuned for the next set of ideas later today!

If you remove phase out, you should also make monoliths vulnerable to melta.

The only thing I can say about ditching phase out, is its nigh impossible to be tabled if it s not there. It s how Necrons are allowed such an awesome monolith. I mean, take three in a three objective game and call it a draw, deep strike all three and tada draw! Phase out isn't the huge downfall imho, its just our lack of builds for the army. although i have been toying with rather odd builds (combat necs) as of late out of boredom. Just min warriors lots of wraiths dp lords and pariahs. just for giggles. Against most armies it s generally a tie. Phase out only happens against black templar land raider spams, cause my ctan misses every time.

lowmanjason wrote:I've read that too but it was fan fiction i dont know how official it was

its in official fluff.

from the 40k 4th ed rulebook:

"Should irreparable damage occur, the Necron 'phases out'. Body and consciousness are teleported to the nearest tomb complex, where they remain in storage until such time as repairs can be effected or a new form can be forged. such seeming inviolability is not without its limitations, and each act of transference exacerbates any weakness in the Necron's engrams. A necron that has 'died' several times will often be little more than a shambling automaton, with no memory of the creature it once was."

Ok this next set will cover some questions about some other units and concerns had with them.

1. Nercon lords, should they have tiers?

a. Hmm. I don’t know. I think I would rather just have some more wargear options or even specific lords with a purpose i.e. this lord is for combat, this lord is for shooting, this lord is for support, those type of things. I would like some named lords, it says in the codex that they are able retain their old personalities and what not. Plus it would probably give us some new models. People talk about this wraithlord all the time but you can make one now with the current wargear using the destroyer body and phase shifter and then using the “counts as” rule. And you can model it however you want.



2. Wraiths should have power weapons or rending.

a. I can go with or without either of these. S6 already hits pretty hard, it’s not a critical point for me. My concern is…


3. Wraith squad size should be upped.

a. Agreed 100%. Minimum of 3 and max of 6 sounds about right to me. It just makes an expensive unit a little more survivable without making them harder to kill. Leave the points the same with no other changes and its fine with me.



4. Flayed Ones as troops?

a. Why not? Really, why not. For a troops choice they make perfect sense (same cost, same stats besides attacks) and are pretty lame for an elite choice. Move through cover isn’t that great especially when they need help from a pariah or lord to support them for their other special rule terrifying visage.[/color]


So that’s the next set. Have at it!