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.
So they are, I missed them (most are at the bottom of the list).
That said, most of those are relatively lightly armored (IIRC the Lynx is AV11 6HP, the Scorpion AV12 9HP) while the Shadowsword is far less mobile and has half the shots the Scorpion does IIRC.
They're a relatively small handful either way.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Oh, I don't know about that. I don't bother with anything other than wish listing discussions before I've read the book. I can understand not needing to play test obvious imbalances, but I at least need to read them first.
krodarklorr wrote: So, going over the codex again and again, and talking with some friends of mine, I've realized that Necrons, while very well balanced internally, are crazy powerful compared to how they used to be. I've sat down and thought of all the issues I've had fighting against other armies, and no armies out there (save for an entire Imperial Knight army) really threatens me anymore. Necrons see to have an answer for everything, since all of their units are viable now. HQs aren't quite as killy, but more supportive, and arguable harder to kill. Troops are tough as nails. Elites are cheaper and everything has a viable use. Heavy Supports are worth it now. Fast Attack are still good, and even more became good. And the Decurion Detachment is ridiculous. Sure, I personally feel it gives the book it's own flavor, and is very fluffy in itself, but the benefits seem to be too good, when you think about it.
Necrons very well could be the next Eldar in terms of power level, though without a lot of cheese. I don't wanna become "that guy" that nobody wants to play because Necrons are too good.
Do you guys think the power level is in a good spot? Or is it too much to handle compared to other 7th edition codexes? And if it is too much, what can we expect to see from other 7th edition codexes when they start updating them. What are your guy's thoughts on this matter?
I also apologize ahead of time if there is a thread already about this and I missed it.
I really doubt it.
Let's go over things:
What got buffed? Things that were useless before are now decent to good.
And things that were 'overpowered' before got nerfed really hard.
No more CCB-spam, no Night Scythe-spam, no Annihilation Barge-spam and no 'Wraiths with D-Lord'-spam.
The old list now pays more for the NS, more for the mandatory troops that go in them, more for Barges, can no longer decently use the D-Lord with Wraiths and they pay more for the Wraiths.
Sure, Wraiths are better now.. But that is only their Toughness, you get a lot less attacks for the same amount of points.
The Decurion sounds really nice, but you are still paying a 479 price for it and you need an Auxiliary Formation with it.
This really limits you in your option and often forces you to take sub-optimal options.
So my thought is that the strength is really overrated at this point.
krodarklorr wrote: So, going over the codex again and again, and talking with some friends of mine, I've realized that Necrons, while very well balanced internally, are crazy powerful compared to how they used to be. I've sat down and thought of all the issues I've had fighting against other armies, and no armies out there (save for an entire Imperial Knight army) really threatens me anymore. Necrons see to have an answer for everything, since all of their units are viable now. HQs aren't quite as killy, but more supportive, and arguable harder to kill. Troops are tough as nails. Elites are cheaper and everything has a viable use. Heavy Supports are worth it now. Fast Attack are still good, and even more became good. And the Decurion Detachment is ridiculous. Sure, I personally feel it gives the book it's own flavor, and is very fluffy in itself, but the benefits seem to be too good, when you think about it.
Necrons very well could be the next Eldar in terms of power level, though without a lot of cheese. I don't wanna become "that guy" that nobody wants to play because Necrons are too good.
Do you guys think the power level is in a good spot? Or is it too much to handle compared to other 7th edition codexes? And if it is too much, what can we expect to see from other 7th edition codexes when they start updating them. What are your guy's thoughts on this matter?
I also apologize ahead of time if there is a thread already about this and I missed it.
I really doubt it.
Let's go over things:
What got buffed? Things that were useless before are now decent to good.
And things that were 'overpowered' before got nerfed really hard.
No more CCB-spam, no Night Scythe-spam, no Annihilation Barge-spam and no 'Wraiths with D-Lord'-spam.
The old list now pays more for the NS, more for the mandatory troops that go in them, more for Barges, can no longer decently use the D-Lord with Wraiths and they pay more for the Wraiths.
Sure, Wraiths are better now.. But that is only their Toughness, you get a lot less attacks for the same amount of points.
The Decurion sounds really nice, but you are still paying a 479 price for it and you need an Auxiliary Formation with it.
This really limits you in your option and often forces you to take sub-optimal options.
So my thought is that the strength is really overrated at this point.
I don't really see any unit in this book to be sub-optimal now. Almost everything is good imo.
Davor wrote: Oh the Tau codex sucks. The Eldar codex sucks. Oh wait this was when people were reading the books and didn't try it. Now look. OMG Tau is OP. OMG Eldar is OP.
Now it's Necrons are OP by reading but yet no games played. Why not play over 10 games with the new Necrons before crying Chicken Little or saying how OP is everything?
Funny nobody, NOBODY was saying that when Tau and Eldar came out. Look what happens when a few games are played and proves everyone wrong.
I say take the ants out of the pants, relax, play a few games first and then see what happens.
That's some pretty intense history rewriting. I know for certain our group was floored within an hour of reading the books by tau and eldar power jump. I also know I had discussions online about how strong they were.
I don't know about you, but some of us are good enough at the game that we can read the rules, points, and stats and know the quality without play testing 100 times. Maybe it's just my long gaming background, or long time of playing 40k through several editions including designing several homebrew units and scenarios, but anything that feels off by more than like...5 points is glaringly obvious to me.
Not rewriting history at all. Dakka, Bells of Lost Souls, Warseer, I clearly remember a lot of people complaining how boring and underpowered Tau and Eldar were when they were released. About 2 months later that all changed because people actually played them and they saw and tried what other people theoryhammered was saying was a very DA/CSM type codex.
Maybe your play group is really smart, but man Dakka had a lot of people crying thinking they had another DA/CSM type codex for Tau and Eldar.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/07 01:44:08
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
Davor wrote: Oh the Tau codex sucks. The Eldar codex sucks. Oh wait this was when people were reading the books and didn't try it. Now look. OMG Tau is OP. OMG Eldar is OP.
Now it's Necrons are OP by reading but yet no games played. Why not play over 10 games with the new Necrons before crying Chicken Little or saying how OP is everything?
Funny nobody, NOBODY was saying that when Tau and Eldar came out. Look what happens when a few games are played and proves everyone wrong.
I say take the ants out of the pants, relax, play a few games first and then see what happens.
That's some pretty intense history rewriting. I know for certain our group was floored within an hour of reading the books by tau and eldar power jump. I also know I had discussions online about how strong they were.
I don't know about you, but some of us are good enough at the game that we can read the rules, points, and stats and know the quality without play testing 100 times. Maybe it's just my long gaming background, or long time of playing 40k through several editions including designing several homebrew units and scenarios, but anything that feels off by more than like...5 points is glaringly obvious to me.
Not rewriting history at all. Dakka, Bells of Lost Souls, Warseer, I clearly remember a lot of people complaining how boring and underpowered Tau and Eldar were when they were released. About 2 months later that all changed because people actually played them and they saw and tried what other people theoryhammered was saying was a very DA/CSM type codex.
Maybe your play group is really smart, but man Dakka had a lot of people crying thinking they had another DA/CSM type codex for Tau and Eldar.
I don't recall this at all, these books were widely predicted to be very powerful immediately.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
An example of some people saying the new Tau codex was no good or Underwhelming.
So yes people were saying the Tau codex was no good before actually playing it.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
An example of some people saying the new Tau codex was no good or Underwhelming.
So yes people were saying the Tau codex was no good before actually playing it.
There are always going to be THOSE people. They're usually the same ones that want a custom character with str D melee and a 2++ for 100 points.
I never said that NOBODY was wrong about tau, but YOU did say that "NOBODY" was right about them. You even capitalized NOBODY and all that. If you walk into a bar at night and ask what color the sky is, you're not gonna get the same answer all 10 times either.
Humorously enough, there's a post in one of those where a guy hypothesizes the "new things will be OP" theory, with tau and the upcoming eldar. He should've tried to sound more serious, because he accidentally hit a bullseye.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (It is kind of hilarious to rummage through those old posts and see people talking completely clueless. Like one of those time warp premise shows that says "ah this internet thing will never take off" or some junk like that.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/07 02:23:09
Davor wrote: Oh the Tau codex sucks. The Eldar codex sucks. Oh wait this was when people were reading the books and didn't try it. Now look. OMG Tau is OP. OMG Eldar is OP.
Now it's Necrons are OP by reading but yet no games played. Why not play over 10 games with the new Necrons before crying Chicken Little or saying how OP is everything?
Funny nobody, NOBODY was saying that when Tau and Eldar came out. Look what happens when a few games are played and proves everyone wrong.
I say take the ants out of the pants, relax, play a few games first and then see what happens.
That's some pretty intense history rewriting. I know for certain our group was floored within an hour of reading the books by tau and eldar power jump. I also know I had discussions online about how strong they were.
I don't know about you, but some of us are good enough at the game that we can read the rules, points, and stats and know the quality without play testing 100 times. Maybe it's just my long gaming background, or long time of playing 40k through several editions including designing several homebrew units and scenarios, but anything that feels off by more than like...5 points is glaringly obvious to me.
Not rewriting history at all. Dakka, Bells of Lost Souls, Warseer, I clearly remember a lot of people complaining how boring and underpowered Tau and Eldar were when they were released. About 2 months later that all changed because people actually played them and they saw and tried what other people theoryhammered was saying was a very DA/CSM type codex.
Maybe your play group is really smart, but man Dakka had a lot of people crying thinking they had another DA/CSM type codex for Tau and Eldar.
I don't recall this at all, these books were widely predicted to be very powerful immediately.
I absolutely remember folks online crying that Tau had been given a poor book due to nerfs to broadsides and what was perceived as a dead on arrival flyer. I'm not sure what initial thoughts were on the Riptide, but I do recall the Wraithknight being discussed online as possibly an overcosted, inefficient unit. Some things are obvious from the get-go, but to argue that the fractured 40k player base nails it every time is a stretch.
Davor wrote: Oh the Tau codex sucks. The Eldar codex sucks. Oh wait this was when people were reading the books and didn't try it. Now look. OMG Tau is OP. OMG Eldar is OP.
Now it's Necrons are OP by reading but yet no games played. Why not play over 10 games with the new Necrons before crying Chicken Little or saying how OP is everything?
Funny nobody, NOBODY was saying that when Tau and Eldar came out. Look what happens when a few games are played and proves everyone wrong.
I say take the ants out of the pants, relax, play a few games first and then see what happens.
That's some pretty intense history rewriting. I know for certain our group was floored within an hour of reading the books by tau and eldar power jump. I also know I had discussions online about how strong they were.
I don't know about you, but some of us are good enough at the game that we can read the rules, points, and stats and know the quality without play testing 100 times. Maybe it's just my long gaming background, or long time of playing 40k through several editions including designing several homebrew units and scenarios, but anything that feels off by more than like...5 points is glaringly obvious to me.
Not rewriting history at all. Dakka, Bells of Lost Souls, Warseer, I clearly remember a lot of people complaining how boring and underpowered Tau and Eldar were when they were released. About 2 months later that all changed because people actually played them and they saw and tried what other people theoryhammered was saying was a very DA/CSM type codex.
Maybe your play group is really smart, but man Dakka had a lot of people crying thinking they had another DA/CSM type codex for Tau and Eldar.
Dammit, I can't find the exact thread, but there was one made a while ago because this discussion comes up every time a new book comes out. Anyway, someone did a thread where they went through the main Daemons/Tau/Eldar discussion threads and counted every posters' analysis. Tau and Eldar were both overwhelmingly positive. The only real surprise Codex was Daemons, but that's because it took about a month to figure out Screamerstar.
Davor wrote: Oh the Tau codex sucks. The Eldar codex sucks. Oh wait this was when people were reading the books and didn't try it. Now look. OMG Tau is OP. OMG Eldar is OP.
Now it's Necrons are OP by reading but yet no games played. Why not play over 10 games with the new Necrons before crying Chicken Little or saying how OP is everything?
Funny nobody, NOBODY was saying that when Tau and Eldar came out. Look what happens when a few games are played and proves everyone wrong.
I say take the ants out of the pants, relax, play a few games first and then see what happens.
That's some pretty intense history rewriting. I know for certain our group was floored within an hour of reading the books by tau and eldar power jump. I also know I had discussions online about how strong they were.
I don't know about you, but some of us are good enough at the game that we can read the rules, points, and stats and know the quality without play testing 100 times. Maybe it's just my long gaming background, or long time of playing 40k through several editions including designing several homebrew units and scenarios, but anything that feels off by more than like...5 points is glaringly obvious to me.
Not rewriting history at all. Dakka, Bells of Lost Souls, Warseer, I clearly remember a lot of people complaining how boring and underpowered Tau and Eldar were when they were released. About 2 months later that all changed because people actually played them and they saw and tried what other people theoryhammered was saying was a very DA/CSM type codex.
Maybe your play group is really smart, but man Dakka had a lot of people crying thinking they had another DA/CSM type codex for Tau and Eldar.
I don't recall this at all, these books were widely predicted to be very powerful immediately.
I absolutely remember folks online crying that Tau had been given a poor book due to nerfs to broadsides and what was perceived as a dead on arrival flyer. I'm not sure what initial thoughts were on the Riptide, but I do recall the Wraithknight being discussed online as possibly an overcosted, inefficient unit. Some things are obvious from the get-go, but to argue that the fractured 40k player base nails it every time is a stretch.
Well, in fairness to those people, they were right about the flyers, and the changes to the Broadsides were nerfs if you look at the rail version. It just turned out that a few other units turned out to be quite impressive, and that they had an amazing synergy with Eldar in sixth.
An example of some people saying the new Tau codex was no good or Underwhelming.
So yes people were saying the Tau codex was no good before actually playing it.
There are always going to be THOSE people. They're usually the same ones that want a custom character with str D melee and a 2++ for 100 points.
I never said that NOBODY was wrong about tau, but YOU did say that "NOBODY" was right about them. You even capitalized NOBODY and all that. If you walk into a bar at night and ask what color the sky is, you're not gonna get the same answer all 10 times either.
Humorously enough, there's a post in one of those where a guy hypothesizes the "new things will be OP" theory, with tau and the upcoming eldar. He should've tried to sound more serious, because he accidentally hit a bullseye.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (It is kind of hilarious to rummage through those old posts and see people talking completely clueless. Like one of those time warp premise shows that says "ah this internet thing will never take off" or some junk like that.)
Yeah you are right. I see I made the mistake of saying Nobody. Should have said a lot of people. Then again back then it seemed it was like nobody .
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
An example of some people saying the new Tau codex was no good or Underwhelming.
So yes people were saying the Tau codex was no good before actually playing it.
There are always going to be THOSE people. They're usually the same ones that want a custom character with str D melee and a 2++ for 100 points.
I never said that NOBODY was wrong about tau, but YOU did say that "NOBODY" was right about them. You even capitalized NOBODY and all that. If you walk into a bar at night and ask what color the sky is, you're not gonna get the same answer all 10 times either.
Humorously enough, there's a post in one of those where a guy hypothesizes the "new things will be OP" theory, with tau and the upcoming eldar. He should've tried to sound more serious, because he accidentally hit a bullseye.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (It is kind of hilarious to rummage through those old posts and see people talking completely clueless. Like one of those time warp premise shows that says "ah this internet thing will never take off" or some junk like that.)
Yeah you are right. I see I made the mistake of saying Nobody. Should have said a lot of people. Then again back then it seemed it was like nobody .
regardless if your argument was they were thought to be bad books that turned out to be OP at the time they came out, shouldn't we be more worried that there are a fair amount of people (including Necron players) who are already looking at this book and saying it could very well be OP? lol
The battle results of people who have played are seeming to back it up as well, including many Necron players now openly saying the Decurion formations everliving bonus is OP after playing games with it.
Sometimes it takes a while to notice something's power. Sometimes this is weird builds or combos that aren't immediately evident (screamer star, even the siren bomb took a bit to get going back in the day. Iron warriors were a lot easier to see, though weaker). Sometimes it involves clunky mechanics that are not clearly understood (That daemon summoning thing, it seems needlessly complicated).
Usually though, it seems most people aren't wrong the opposite way. By that I mean, although many gamers are surprised when something is overpowered but was considered weak, its much rarer to see us blindsided by something considered op turning out weak.
That's just my experience. I haven't been keeping track of a trend or anything similar, just my personal instinct on the subject in the various games I play
(DnD, WoD, WMH, 40k, Fantasy, Necromunda, Gorka, Morden)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/07 05:28:02
Indeed, history tells that we should wait two months to rate the new Necrons.
But I think everybody can see the value of the book and the units and formations in it.
I'm going to play Necrons in an apoc battle today. Happy hunting.
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
krodarklorr wrote: I don't wanna become "that guy" that nobody wants to play because Necrons are too good.
Too late.
Pretty sure decursion is gona get banned from tournaments that don't allow stuff with S: D blasts.
Wait, what has S: D blast in the Necron Codex?
edit: god damn Orkmoticon
You got me wrong.
I was saying that it's gona be quite hard to kill even regular necrons for a common tac army (not mellee-heavy) without S: D blasts and stomps.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/07 09:05:25
I think, barring wraiths and mephrit being made separate, they are pretty balanced.
But since wraiths are a thing and people can have silly barge lords still...
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
krodarklorr wrote: I don't really see any unit in this book to be sub-optimal now. Almost everything is good imo.
That is not what I said, everything in the book is good.
But the best performing armies on tournaments don't perform well because everything in the book is good, they win those tournaments because one unit is overpowered, can be spammed and they have great combo's.
The most 'overpowered' thing we seem to have are Wraiths with RP4+, which requires over 800 points for 6 Wraiths with all the 'tax' you need to take.
If we could take RP-Wraiths without all the Decurion stuff than we'd have a chance at being overpowered in competitive play.
At the moment it just seems like we have a strong army, but nothing that screams 'overpowered!'.
Wraiths can however get RP 5+ for *wayyyy* cheaper, and that 800pts is going to more than just the Wraiths, the rest of those points aren't dead weight.
Either way, even naked Wraiths are still absurdly overcapable and undercosted. The RP buffs are just gravy.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
I thought Necrons were good before but didn't see as many players using them at tourney (though we actually have several who play them to one extent or another here locally so I am very familiar with their power level).
The new codex changed them a lot. Some of it makes way more sense in how it works now. Internal balance as was said already seems quite good.
My one concern with the Necrons is that I recall two things historically. First was my Eldar Warlock army in 3rd/4th Edition. 4+ re-rollable saves on large units made those units GREAT and scary. The other thing i remember is the 3+/4+ FnP Blood Angels. That was equally no fun.
I dont QUITE think the Necrons approach that power level because in both cases there were a couple other contributing factors, but they sure skirt the edge. I forsee good Generals being able to do really well with this force. I also think its going to be a really fun challenge to face and should elevate what was and seemingly always has been a little behind the curve codex into a much more fair chance of winning without the expedient of Croissants.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/07 10:05:20
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
I dont QUITE think the Necrons approach that power level because in both cases there were a couple other contributing factors, but they sure skirt the edge. I forsee good Generals being able to do really well with this force. I also think its going to be a really fun challenge to face and should elevate what was and seemingly always has been a little behind the curve codex into a much more fair chance of winning without the expedient of Croissants.
I second this. Necron were technically powerful before because of cheese (MSS, Scythe Spam, Wraith spam) but thats sadly because most of their old codex wasn't even worth fielding in a fun game. Now, they've nerfed the cheese, yet giving players a slew of new options, which imo are all excellent choices, to do well with.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crazyterran wrote: I think, barring wraiths and mephrit being made separate, they are pretty balanced.
But since wraiths are a thing and people can have silly barge lords still...
Silly barge lords die when the vehicle dies now, so bye bye. Also, no 2+/3++ anymore. Plus, they're not as killy, yet more of a support HQ. So, still good, but people won't be bring 2+ of them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/07 16:58:24
4+ RP is wrong, utterly wrong.
The Decurion detachment is practically a no-brainer: why shouldn't I use it, when I was already going to pick the units listed it? Free 4+ RP not just to the Reclamation Legion models, but ALL FORMATIONS is a terrible design choice since it provides no real counter to it, and being unable to counter it at all in a tactical game provides no real enjoyment but pure tears of frustation
20000+ points
Children of Stirba 
Order of Saint Pan Thera 
.
7150+ 
2500+
6200+
" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever." 
