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.

Pony_law wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that the primary rules writter at GW plays necrons and must be terrible. He is constantly buffing them with rules interpretations when they don't need it. DA on the other hand always gets screwed with the rules interpretations.

I feel the same way. Has there been a single ruling in the Necron FAQ that went against them?

Imhotek got better, Monliths, being Heavy and deepstriking, got better, and their infantry got better with the ruling RP and removed from play...Meanwhile, Daemon armies lost the ability to put units at 0 initiative (admittedly very powerful) and still don't have a working Burning Chariot.

Am I the only one that feels the Necron codex is in a more dire need of a rewrite than any of the older ones