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.

Dunwich wrote:But Matt Ward says they are pretty cool in the Necron Tactica of the latest White Dwarf. Matt Ward would never lie to me.

/thread.

Ugh, I've taken a brief look through all of these "worst units in the Necron codex-discuss" things...and I see they're all posted by you. Fact is, they aren't so bad. Ghost arcs are good, and C'tan built correctly can really force your opponent to change how he plays his game. I have no experience with the doomsday arc, but the GA and C'tan are pretty good. I do have to wonder if you're trolling-because you have 3 of these threads up and admitted to a future "destroyers are the worst unit-discuss" thread. Please...skip that thread completely-don't hold it for a later date...skip it. Or, write it in word and delete it. These are getting old. I don't usually respond with negatives (usually I'm rather encouraging), until threads are constantly repeated with no original thought added-then I start getting cranky and telling the kids to stay off my lawn (and I'm only 26!!).

I know lore is just trying to generate discussion so I don't mind it so much, but I do agree he may need to throttle his topic creation a bit.

I'm off until at-least tomorrow. The poll thread I've got going has more "write something" than "write nothing" which leads me to believe that people don't mind the discussion, but definitely want a break.

Dunwich wrote:Whoa didn't realize Matt Ward was Voldemort.

Seriously though, I don't play necrons, but I was reading their tactica to get a feel for how to play against them. Until I read this thread, C'tans seemed pretty scary. I'll paraphrase some of the things the tactica says about C'tans, if only so you guys can disprove their effectiveness.

- Has a profile that can fight a Greater Daemon to a standstill

My bloodthirster, KoS and even LoC are saying "bring it on" (although the LoC would dance around you then charge in for a killing blow). Looking at the C'tan's profile, I gotta say the thirster and KoS would eat them up for breakfast. More attacks, higher WS, higher initiative, shenanigous powers...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

loreweaver wrote:
- 4 wounds with a 4++ Invulnerable at T7 isn't all that survivable. If they were T8, it'd be much better (can't be wounded by S4).

Wow. Try playing daemons. Daemon prince it T5 with a 5++. I can get a 3+ for an exorbitant price, and wings I have to sell my children into slavery to afford. I can buff up to T6, but in doing so I can't buff my invul save to 4++. And I haven't even given him powers yet! And I really really want to, since I have practically no shooting he's got to do something. So I have to pay a huge price for a beatstick that gets beaten by every other bloody beatstick in the game, or I have to pay a hefty price for a shooter who has a single shot against vehicles-something I NEED to destroy badly- and he rolls a 1. Great. I can make him slightly better vs vehicles, for a even bigger cost, but all I'm doing is giving him wings and breath. 220+ for a model that eats a MEQ squad and then dies.


Don't get me started on 'nids.

OP: These threads are borderline trolling. If you want to discuss a unit, put up a bloody thread saying you want to discuss the unit and its tactics. Stop this stupid childish "X unit is the worst, discuss!" because that translates into "prove X unit is viable, so I can understand why its good". Stop getting other people to do your analysis for you

I play chaos space marines and demon princes are the best unit in the 'dex. And C'tan look a whole lot better than a demon prince.

The C'tan is one of the better monstrous creatures in the game right now. It is also unusably bad. So, there you go.

When you are on average taken down by two Venoms, it just isn't a good situation for a 230+ point model.

Dunwich wrote:But Matt Ward says they are pretty cool in the Necron Tactica of the latest White Dwarf. Matt Ward would never lie to me.

Heh heh...

Dunwich wrote:But Matt Ward says they are pretty cool in the Necron Tactica of the latest White Dwarf. Matt Ward would never lie to me.

Mat with one T

C'tan with Time's Arrow + Wraiths with Whip Coils = AWESOME SAUCE!!!!!!!

Do I hate the invulnerable save? Yes I do, if it were even just a 3+/4++ I'd be happy. However, the C'tan can certainly be used in an effective manner such as in my last battle in which he, alongside wraiths, wiped out a Tau Crisis Commander, Bodyguards, and drones within 3 turns... But the T7, even though it acts like a good filter, against Tau it wouldn't have mattered if it were the S4 untouchable T8, stupid S5 pulse rifles...

bagtagger wrote:I'm going to be blunt, matt ward is slowed and has nothing in mind when he writes these things, Necrons are what happens when they actually assign editors to help matt ward, grey knights are what happens when you give him free reign.

GK aren't that bad...
Also you're being a bit personal with your insults...

I agree Necrons are now an impressive army.. Not unbeatable, but impressive if played well. GK, except for some pretty fluffy - dumb units (Jaekero), are a little broken... hence not in check...
But then I am not a Matt Ward fan either. I do believe people are entitled to their opinions though... I guess if Matt Ward comes on here and reads the threads, his feelings may get hurt.

Kevlar wrote:I play chaos space marines and demon princes are the best unit in the 'dex. And C'tan look a whole lot better than a demon prince.

Yes...but CSM Daemon Princes don't pay 60 points for wings. And they get the 3+ armor and s6 standard. So...you pay 130 points vs 170 for a MC that moves like Jump Infantry. Assuming that you are responding to Jidmah's statement, you are comparing apples to oranges. Also, the CSM codex is...not good.

While C'tan are probably better than a DP, they can't move as jump infantry, which hurts them. S7 with 2d6 armor pen is useless if you can't get into base contact with the vehicle you are trying to kill. And if you're trying to kill infantry...they might very well be faster than you too.

As far as "Giving Greater Daemons a run for their money" (or whatever malarkey he's saying)...a C'tan is slower than all of the Greater Daemons (except Fateweaver, and possibly the GUO...I don't have my codex on me), and has a worse weapon skill than all but a LOC. Also, Bloodthirsters will hit and wound you on 3s. Not a chance, bub.

Not wanting to go too far off topic, I think that C'tan offer some neat tricks, and can add some synergy to a synergistic army (aren't all xenos armies that way?), but I think you would need at least two to make them worthwhile, but that's 25% of a 2000 point army....so perhaps they are just better off left at home...