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 here is my rant. As you can probably tell I play Necrons. I love them. They were my first army and remain my only army. I love to read the background fluff, history of the Necrotyr race and the C’Tan. I just like their story the best out of all other armies.
That being said… there are a lot of people who think they are an inferior race/army and think that the average Necron Warrior cannot be on par with the average Space Marine.
My question is why not? Here I plan to restate the statements that I think are wrong along with some other things that irritate me about people’s perception of Necrons and why I think they are wrong. Hopefully we can have a friendly debate on this subject and have some fun at the same time. So here goes.
1. Necrons are programmed in and speak using binary code.
a. This is just silly. 60,000,000 years ago the Necron technology was so advanced it was near magical. We can barely comprehend their ability with geometry mathematics and science. I think it ridiculous and somewhat arrogant to think their technology is based on such a basic and HUMAN system of 0s and 1s.
2. Necrons shouldn’t be as strong as Space Marines.
a. Why not? They are super advanced robots made from super advanced materials. Would you argue that The Terminator is only as strong as the strongest human? No, so why would you try with something even more advanced?
3. Necrons shouldn’t be as tough as Space Marines.
a. Why not? They are super advanced robots made from super advanced materials. Would you argue that The Terminator is only as tough as the toughest human? No, so why would you try with something even more advanced? I’ve actually heard people say that their toughness should be T3…
4. Necrons should only have 4+ Sv.
a. WHAT!!! Why? Again, super advanced robots made from the same stuff the Monolith is made of! Super strong and it self repairs. I can use the terminator reference again but that would get annoying. So I will use the Monolith. A giant floating building that moves around puking out lightning and Necrons and is probably the toughest tank in the 40k universe. It always uses its full armor value and meltas loose its big advantage against it. Necron bodies are made of the same stuff. Why not 3+ Sv
5. Necrons should only have a BS3.
a. OK, look here now. We currently can launch a missile from 1000 mile away from a moving weapons platform (usually a boat of some sort) and watch it as it moves at supersonic speeds, then either guide it or let it guide itself through the front window of its intended target. How long have we been doing this warfare thing? Oh yeah about 2000 years. How long have they been doing it? A couple million years! I think they can figure out a system that can do just as good or even beter.
This should be enough to start the debate. It sounds (to me) like there are a bunch of haters out there and those haters play Space Marines. So let’s chew on this for a little bit and then I will add some more. Have fun!

The assertions that you are refuting seem odd, I have personally never read or heard discussion stating that necrons should have their stats reduced. Can you post an example of a thread where that is discussed, or is it all from people you know off the internet?

Because of game balance? If they improve necrons in any significant way without addressing either their toughness, save, or double wbb'ing through monos, crons would be ridiculously op

Heh, let's face it... Necrons should in reality have much higher BS... after all, surely such advanced targeting mechanisms should have more than a 2/3 chance of hitting any said target! I'm sure most soldiers are more accurate than that... In reality they'd hit pretty much whatever they fired at (because their weapons basically fire at laser-speeds).

Also, surely their self-repair systems would in reality work against any attack, and have a better than 50% chance of working! In fact, the codex mentions a necron reforming from a pile of molten metal...

Oh well, got to keep the game fair, I suppose!

On a similar note, have you ever noticed that the ultra-slick, ultra advanced warheads that the Tau Empire have as 2 of their strategic assets have both a 1/6 chance of doing nothing when triggered, AND a 1/6 chance of breaking down permanently when triggered. Nice job with the technology, Tau!

I'm fairly certain I've never heard any of these arguments you're refuting.

I've never heard of those arguments, ever.

Alot of them have come from the necron rumor threads as what people think they SHOULD be and not acuall rumours. Now your going to make look them up and post them arent you! In the mean time please lets hear your sides.

Fair enough.

I agree. I think Crons should be MEqs. That fits the fluff. As for buffing them up, well, GW's gonna have to find a way to do that and keep them balanced without messing with their stats. I think their stats are right where they need to be.

However, I would propose that the entire army with the exception of a few units (Pariahs, Destroyers) be made Slow and Purposeful. That also fits the fluff.

I also think Gauss guns should be Heavy 1 with an 18" range. 24" is a bit much, especially with Slow and Purposeful, and Rapid Fire just makes them ridiculous up close, especially with Gauss rules...

WS 1 or 2 and BS 3, I 1

Why? These are shells initially programed with the minds of former living creatures. Millions of years later, they should not be as good as they were coming out of the factory, as it were. See how good you are at shooting a gun after a few-million-year nap.

But, they should be Ld 10 and Stubborn. They're going to suck in close combat, but they're (almost) never going to run. Think of it like the cold-blooded rule for the Lizardmen (if it still exists).

Keep all the rest, change WBB to FNP and I think you've got a winner.

They should not be marines, but they can be equivalent. Just do something to make them different.


edit: Slow and purposeful on the basic Warriors sounds good to me too.

I disagree. If you were talking about modern appliances, absolutely - but here are legions of eternal warriors made of living nonsynthetic material and programmed by beings beyond the comprehension of a mortal man.

Even after a couple million years, they'd be fresh.

Would they be slow, though? Probably. So I see no problem with I1 and a low WS, maybe 2 or 3 but not 1.

BS4 should remain though.

SaintHazard wrote:Fair enough.

I agree. I think Crons should be MEqs. That fits the fluff. As for buffing them up, well, GW's gonna have to find a way to do that and keep them balanced without messing with their stats. I think their stats are right where they need to be.



i agree there, i do not advocate changing any stats and am all for leaving them the way they are. as for the rumoured toughness ging to T5, i can go with or with out, its cool but not a must have for me.

SaintHazard wrote:I disagree. If you were talking about modern appliances, absolutely - but here are legions of eternal warriors made of living nonsynthetic material and programmed by beings beyond the comprehension of a mortal man.

Even after a couple million years, they'd be fresh.

Would they be slow, though? Probably. So I see no problem with I1 and a low WS, maybe 2 or 3 but not 1.

BS4 should remain though.

Okay, 1 is a bit low. I'd be okay with 3 as long as the BS was 3 too. 6 million years is a long time and these are still constructed beings made mobile by code, however advanced..

Mostly I think I want it to differentiate them from Marines. I'm super happy that scouts are only WS and BS 3 now. It fits them.

First off I would like to state that i love necrons as well. I do not play them but i have a buddy who does and i think their pretty awesome. With that said, I think that if the Crons were giving a T5 they would be damn near impossible to kill. Has anyone ever played against a mass Warrior/2Monolith list? If so then you already know how annoying it is to take out those warriors when their given 2 WBB rolls on top of their 3+ armor save...its kind of insane. So take that and give them a T5...thats just sick...but i think they should get it =)

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I've never heard of those arguments, ever.

ditto

Nothing remains 'fresh' over time.

This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;
Gnaws iron, bites steel;
Grinds hard stones to meal;
Slays king, ruins town
And beats high mountain down.

>Nurgle<

I hate the spiders....

The Power Cosmic wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:I disagree. If you were talking about modern appliances, absolutely - but here are legions of eternal warriors made of living nonsynthetic material and programmed by beings beyond the comprehension of a mortal man.

Even after a couple million years, they'd be fresh.

Would they be slow, though? Probably. So I see no problem with I1 and a low WS, maybe 2 or 3 but not 1.

BS4 should remain though.

Okay, 1 is a bit low. I'd be okay with 3 as long as the BS was 3 too. 6 million years is a long time and these are still constructed beings made mobile by code, however advanced..

Mostly I think I want it to differentiate them from Marines. I'm super happy that scouts are only WS and BS 3 now. It fits them.

Again you are assuming that they just sat there and collected dust. The C'Tan knew that they would be in stasis for a long time and built the necrons to last forever (forever is alot longer than 60,000,000 years). besides while in stasis they were constantly being maintained by the scarabs and tomb spiders and other serviceing devices

That's how I've interpreted the stuff I've read about them. Take that egyptian theme and go with it. Everything Necron was sitting and waiting. If you have a different interpretation, that's cool. I just don't imagine underground lairs being maintained Matrix-style. I see a tomb and that's all.

Certainly explains the differences, though.

We'll have to leave it at that.

lowmanjason wrote:

The Power Cosmic wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:I disagree. If you were talking about modern appliances, absolutely - but here are legions of eternal warriors made of living nonsynthetic material and programmed by beings beyond the comprehension of a mortal man.

Even after a couple million years, they'd be fresh.

Would they be slow, though? Probably. So I see no problem with I1 and a low WS, maybe 2 or 3 but not 1.

BS4 should remain though.

Okay, 1 is a bit low. I'd be okay with 3 as long as the BS was 3 too. 6 million years is a long time and these are still constructed beings made mobile by code, however advanced..

Mostly I think I want it to differentiate them from Marines. I'm super happy that scouts are only WS and BS 3 now. It fits them.

Again you are assuming that they just sat there and collected dust. The C'Tan knew that they would be in stasis for a long time and built the necrons to last forever (forever is alot longer than 60,000,000 years). besides while in stasis they were constantly being maintained by the scarabs and tomb spiders and other serviceing devices

I seem to recall fluff that stated everytime they "died" (Became unusable in combat, and then teleported back to home base/tomb/whatever) they came back slightly wrong, slower, dumber, etc. A Necron who had never died would still have the mind of a Necrontyr, but that 60,000,000,000 year old Necron whose died more times than you could count, is about as smart as a Dog who has been hit in the head with a club a few times. Is this still the case?

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

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

Think you answered your own question there.

As for soldiers being more accurate than 2/3rds .... you greatly overestimate their accuracy, modern armies are 20% or less in combat situations.

That may be true but this is and army that doesnt have to worry about adriniline, nerves or fear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Power Cosmic wrote:

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

Think you answered your own question there.

I said i read it in fan fiction not that it was only fan fiction. just because i havet read its "offical fluff" doesnt mean that it isnt official. like i said, i dont know.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I've never heard of those arguments, ever.

ditto

see above posts!

Actually, I think Necron Warriors could do with WS and BS of 3 or less, and an initiative of 2. But! Immortals and other more "elites" should have BS/WS/I of 4 or better.

The reasoning behind this is simple-- the warriors have been allowed to degrade more than the leaders and elites.

Not sure why people are picking on there troop choice. That is actually there strong point. Its there total lack of options across the board that makes them weak. Fix there point cost a bit and give everything some equal options as all the other armies have and issue solved.

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.

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.

str 3 no way, ap 3 lasguns with st3 get about 3 kills in 20 shots, ap 5 str 3 heavy 1 is epic fail for 25 points. str 4 at LEAST

Um, rending+relentless? When shooting with large units, one tends to roll enough sixes. I play necrons and I'm still of this opinion. I suppose I'm not used to fielding them against MEQ though, so I probably have a skewed perspective.

I’m a little puzzled by the need in this thread to reduce the effectiveness of the Necrons. In all the games I’ve played against necrons I never thought “these things would be more interesting to play against if their stats were worse.” Every time I’ve played them they’ve wandered about for a bit, doing a bit of shooting damage, before I’ve piled into assault, broken the warriors and either run them down or chased them off the board.

I think Necron stats are fine as they are, and what they really need is a boost to damage output of their basic troops and to be a bit more resilient in combat. I think ‘stubborn’ would solve the latter quite nicely, I’m not sure what would fix the former.

kill dem stunties wrote:As for soldiers being more accurate than 2/3rds .... you greatly overestimate their accuracy, modern armies are 20% or less in combat situations.

The 2/3 hit ratio of BS 4 doesn’t actually mean 2/3 of all shots fired hit the target. If that was the case then we’d be looking at a universe where human vs humans (IG vs IG) would hit half the time, but only half of those hits would have any effect on the target. Which makes no damn sense. BS 4 just means the guy is more effective at shooting than a BS 3 guy, the actual dice rolled and successes scored don’t mean anything in and of themselves.

Are necrons great? Sure. Do I play them? Absolutely. Collect them? Yes. Like asking and then answering my own questions? Absolutely.