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.

Am compiling massive file on Google Docs (using format outlined in "Love for Destroyers" thread).
Incorporating some points from this thread, but also a lot of points yet untouched on.
Will post results when complete.
...
unless you guys want to help with the input?
(a little wary, most of the things put forward in this thread so far have been alright, but some have bordered on wildly OP, eg. unit of free Praetorians O__O )

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
So skoffs, what do you want help with in particular from your crack team?

I'd post what I've got already, but it's going to be a looooooong f'ing post.
Here's the work-in-progress Google Doc instead-
Necron Codex 2.0 (basic evaluations)

I've gotten mostly through the basics/most pressing entries (eg. Wraiths, Nightscythes, Annihilation Barges), but still have quite a few units yet to address (eg. Triarch Stalker, Command Barge, Monolith, etc.).
Haven't really started on the Wargear/Rules section yet, but it will have to be dealt with at some point (eg. "Undying Servitude" rule and "Grav Stabilizers" wargear, just to name a couple).
Also, the HQ section needs some work as well.

Remember: this is still the "what needs to be addressed" stage, so the

Name
Price: _________
Stats: _________
Equip: _________
Rules: _________
Other: _________

format applies.
Once the basics are are settled, THEN the individual fine tuning should happen.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
*reads*
...
ugh, sorry, looks like my inner project leader is leaking through.
(stupid business management training...)

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
It's fine someone has to take charge.

Umm, okay, but I must warn you, I am extremely strict on excess (very much in favor of less is more).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 happygolucky wrote:
MSS: Either get rid of them or make the enemy target take a normal LD test if failing that the suffer -D3 to their WS.

Actually, that Splinter of Madness ability Kutlakh from IA12 has (both he and enemy roll a D6 and add their LD. Enemy model has WS reduced by difference in total) would make a pretty good replacement for the current rules of Mindshackle Scarabs... but it doesn't quite match the fluff (mind control, so forced to attack allies).
Perhaps increasing their price would be best.

deathmagiks wrote:
If you're going to balance some units in the necron codex and make them better (flayers, LG, etc) you need to remove the effectiveness of some of your bread and butter units (Night scythe, AB, etc.).

... uhh, yes, it's been stated several times that the intention of this exercise is to balance the codex.
Obviously that means nerf as well as buff.
(why do so many people think we're only out to make a broken codex even more OP?)

Regardless, I already had some ideas regarding Nightscythes and Annihilation Barges that run along the lines you suggested.

Nightscythe
Price: Increase (115 points)
Stats: N/A
Equip: Remove Tesla Destructors as standard, replace with twin linked Tesla Cannons. Can swap for twin linked Gauss Cannons or upgrade to twin linked Tesla Destructors.
Rules: Change the rule so that when Nightscythe is shot down, if there is a unit on board, roll a D6. On a 1, the embarked unit is lost (like deep strike mishap).
Other: N/A

Annihilation Barge
Price: N/A (you’ll see why no decrease in a second)
Stats: N/A
Equip: Remove Tesla Destructors as standard, replace with twin linked Gauss Cannons. Can be swapped for twin linked Tesla Cannons, or upgraded to twin linked Tesla Destructors or twin linked Heavy Gauss Cannons.
Rules: N/A
Other: N/A

With the Tesla Destructor no longer coming as stock standard, both vehicles are much less intimidating. The ability to use the weapon is still there, but at a premium now, so will discourage abuse.

More entry evaluations will follow.

 skoffs wrote:
More entry evaluations will follow.

Actually, screw it, It's 3:30am, I have work in a matter of hours.
I'll just post the link to the as-is Google Doc.

Necron Codex 2.0 (basic evaluations)

Leave comments on what you think should be added/changed.
(I'll update the post at the top of this page to include the link as well, so it's more visible)

Some of these things are looking pretty good, but just a reminder:
We're not just balancing the codex in a vacuum, we've gotta keep the balance with the other codecies in mind.

Certain units need to be nerfed because they are TOO good as they are, especially when compared to things available to other races. We can't just have the entire book full of nothing but the greatest stuff ever.

So maybe, in addition to, "does changing this make it better?", we need to also ask, "does changing this make it better than something equivalent from another codex?"
If the answer is yes, maybe we should rethink some of the changes.

Okay, let's discuss this one section at a time.

RULES
Undying Servitude - if HQ present in unit, that unit may reroll failed RP and LoS rolls. Reroll for LoS seems to fit perfectly, nice simple but effective rule that would fit their fluff... but on further consideration, the RP reroll seems a bit OP, as someone pointed out before.
Phaeron – The rule no longer grants Relentless. Instead, the Warlord may pick his Warlord trait. This would be WAY too good. Perhaps, instead, this is where the "can reroll RP" rule should go (would fit well with the fluff, too. "Only the most powerful Overlords would be worthy of this gift of true eternal life", etc.)

WARGEAR
Heat Blaster - lower strength version of the Heat Ray. 12" S7 AP1 Heavy 1 Melta/Template S5 AP4 Heavy 1. seems like AP1 might make it too good. We want it to threaten vehicles, not be a guaranteed tank killer
Gravity Stabilizers - Grants Relentless. actually, the only thing this seems like it would benefit would be Destroyers, so maybe just give it exclusively to them as an upgrade option instead of an army wide wargear option
Gauntlet of Flame - R: Template S:4 AP:5 Type: Assault 1, Torrent Okay
Mindshackle Scarabs - increase price (20 points). LD test on only 2D6, but reroll successful passes. I think this version works pretty well, but may need additional input from other non-necron players to see if they would consider it balanced
Staff of Light – This is uses the following profiles:
R:18" S:5 AP:3 Type: Assault 3
R:- S:User AP:3 Type: Melee, Two Handed Yep
Void Blade-Rends on a to wound roll of 5 or 6. Specialist Weapon. cool!
Paired Voidblades- Grants Shred. Super cool! (suddenly Praetorians might be worth considering)
Gauntlet of Flame- Give the flamer the Torrent profile. on here twice
Paired GOF- Overwatch D6+1. I assume you meant "D3+1"?
Hyperphase Sword- Free Upgrade. yup
Paired- grants +2 bonus attacks, instead of the normal +1 assuming this won't be free, correct?


WARLORD TRAITS
Favored of the Triarch – Triarch Praetorians are scoring. nah, too specific/useless without Praets. We shoukd just give that ability to the HQ instead, and come up with something else for this rule
Unyeilding Command – The Warlord and any unit within 12” gains the Stubborn rule. good
Conqueror of Old – The Warlord and any unit within 12” gains the Crusader rule also good
Ancient Hatred – The Warlord and his ... unit gain Hatred?
A Use for the Conquered – The Warlord has found a better use for the C’tan Shards –siphoning their power. Once, at the start of the game, roll a D3. The Warlord adds that much to his WS, I, and A. At the beginning of every game turn, roll a D6; on a roll of 1, the powers fade and cannot be regained. interesting. could work.
Always a Plan in Motion – You may re-roll any reserve roll. In addition, all models that can outflank gain the Acute Senses rule. looks sweet. actually, maybe it might be too good to be able to reroll EVERY reserve roll (if you could, the Comms Relay would be useless). maybe just "can reroll one reserve roll per turn"?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 McNinja wrote:
Quick question: will this thread also have an entire new profile sheet for every unit, like what I have with my Tyranid thread, or will the form Skoffs made suffice?

Nah, the form I made was just for initial evaluations (just to address what might need to be changed).
Once everything's been sorted out, we're probably going to need a legit write up/entire new profile sheet for each unit.

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
Ok so we now need a new trait, I like what you posted below
to assign traits to all named characters, we'll get to that
to reduce the AP of the Heat Blaster (AP3? or 2?) well, it still has to THREATEN vehicles, so AP3 might be too high. AP2 should be fine, shouldn't it?
and maybe tweak MSS depending on other people's views. hopefully a non-necron player can chime in
In terms of the new WT.... I suggested something earlier for Favoured of the Triarch (1 re-roll per phase to represent the fact that he is fated by the Triarch for success) oh yeah, that one. that sounds pretty decent.
but how about this;
Flayer Infection; The Warlord has begun to show signs of succumbing to the Flayer Virus, and has modified his wargear to spill as much blood in combat. His cc attacks have the Fleshbane rule oooooh, very nice! super fluffy, yet still viably sound

I meant we'll get to the discussing of those things, but if anyone else wants to jump in and start the discussion, by all means!
(it's 1am, here, so I'm out. got work in the morning).

Despite the fact that we're working on Elites at the moment, I've gotta say something about the transport section before I forget.
Nightscythes:
- need to be relegated to non-troop units only (will prevent ridiculous amounts of spam, as well as the TFG tactic of waiting until turn 5 to drop MSU Warriors on objectives to win the game).
- Tesla Destructor needs to be a purchasable upgrade, not a standard weapon.

I already touch on these points a bit already, as well as the Ghost Ark, but we'll come back to the transport section later.

Yep, like I said in the Google doc, turning the Ghost Ark into a transport option that any infantry can take will reduce dependency on Nightscythes (it being an open topped transport would make it an assault vehicle that the Lychguard would love to their hands on).

However, making it AV 12 would be pushing it. That would give us (effectively) two AV 14 vehicles. That's not going to fly, as far as inter-codex balance goes.

With the Ghost Ark available to other infantry units, making the Nightscythe more of an "elite" transport option, rather than a mass transit delivery system like it is now, would work out pretty well. Like was mentioned, even with a price increase, people are still going to try to spam the best transport in the game. Limiting their ability to do so would the fairest way to balance it, without nerfing its movement/delivery rules.
Heavy Gauss cannons probably don't need to go on it, though. With the other units in the codex that are going to be able to carry them (Destroyers, Stalker, Annihilation Barge), we should be fine (we don't want to saturate the army with long range weaponry. that's not the role of our army. we're midfield kings, after all).

 King Pariah wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 King Pariah wrote:
With those options, I think I'd drop the cost of Nightscythe to 110. With TL Tesla Cannon, I feel that making it cost as much as a Vendetta is a bit OTT

The Nightscythe needs to be stock standard with Tesla Destructors, as that's the only way the kit can be built.

So, adjusting the price is the most prudent thing to do.

I still think 125 would be a fair start. You don't want to overnerf something. More Armies are getting AA, and it has been shown to have a pretty big effect. Tesla Destructors are a great weapon, but they aren't the best, second, or even third best weapons that are flyers. I'd say 135 at most, but that is quite a hefty increase.

I'm actually for keeping the Destructors, just seems like everyone else is rooting for Tesla Cannons (which I don't entirely blame them for with all the rage there is over Scythe Spam).

Anyway, with 110 base. They still end up 125 with the Destructors upgrade. Compromise.

I like it.
For the time being, the Tesla Destructors are just going to have to "count as" the other weapons (after all, we're giving Destroyers and Lychguard weapons they don't come with in the box, so it's gonna have to do until the next official model update happens, where they can insert extra weapons sprues.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
FO should have fear. not as an upgrade though. In the old rules they had the 'Terrifying Visage' rule, which is pretty much what fear is now.

Also, disruption fields should come back, but maybe as a 5-10 pts/ model upgrade that grants shred and/or rending? For Scarabs and FO only (maybe Lords?).


Also, seeming we are thinking (decided?) about a FO overlord special character, shouldn't there be a FO Overlord? (Maybe with disruption fields?)

Check out the Google doc/the update McNinja did a page or so back.

Actually, I was thinking the opposite for Wraiths. DEcrease the price by 5... and then charge 15 points per model to give the squad Phase Shifters. Without that 3++, they'll still be pretty decent as choppy infantry, just not as "OP" as they are now (and obviously the ability is still present, at the price you suggested, making them a little more fair).

For Tomb Blades, nah, keep the Shield Vanes as upgrades. Makes them a customize-as-you-see-fit strike squad if you want, while still retaining the ability to run the squad cheap and bare bones if you also want. I'll agree that perhaps some new/different equipment would be good (eg. the Heat Blaster x1 per squad, to really harass vehicles, or Transdimensional Beamers to act as our version of a JotWW-esque HQ harasser (unpredictable potential inv save negating attack). As the only unit that comes with Relentless naturally, these guys would benefit from this weapon the most (x3 per squad).)

And yeah, Scarabs just need to be updated to the IA12 versions to be adequate.

Not sure, someone with access to IA12 is going to have to help us out there with the Scarabs.

For the Heat Blaster, how much does it cost to give a Marine a Melta gun? Should be something close to that.

RE: Tomb Blades carrying TDBs as being unfluffy-
Granted... I guess the other option would be to add the Relentless usr to the others that all Canoptek units already have. (so Fearless, no RP, and Relentless... sounds about right for mindless robots). Then at least Wraiths or Arcanthrites would actually be able to use the TDB... though, it might not be bad on Spyders (not GOOD, just not bad).

RE: Nightscythes-
Make them 110 points. Restrict to only Elites section dedicated transport (can carry other infantry, but the ability to purchase them will be restricted to 3 per FOC, thus preventing spam. With all infantry having access to the Ghost Ark now, rather than just Warriors, transportation shouldn't be a problem).
Additionally, perhaps we should limit the weapon options to just Tesla Cannon (comes with) and Tesla Destructor (can be upgraded for 15 points). Lightning seems like a good fit for a "Blitzkrieg" unit.

RE: other Heavy Support choices-
Annihilation Barge-
-Comes with (twin linked) Gauss Cannons. Can be swapped out for Tesla Cannons (free) or upgraded to Heavy Gauss Cannons (10 points) or Tesla Destructors (15 points). No need for Skyfire, but Interceptor might be a good upgradeable option.
Doomscythe-
-No Tesla Destructor. Comes with twin linked Gauss Cannon (upgraded to Heavy Gauss Cannon for 10 points). Then we can drop the price down to 155 points. Then it would be cheap enough to consider
Spyders-
-Give them access to the TDB... though, not sure they'll need it. Also, remove the Gloom Prism and give it to the Harbinger of Order instead.
Only allowing new Scarabs to be added to existing units is probably an abuse prevention thing, so might be able to stay.
Monolith-
-Guys, if we're trying to BALANCE the codex, we can't have the old Monolith back. It was WAAAY too over powered. "Pure Invulnerability" is quite the opposite of what we're trying for.
Yeah, give it a Battle Cannon, a way to mitigate Deep Strike mishaps, and maybe that's it as far as changes go. Price increase as well, maybe.
Doomsday Ark-
-Agree with Sasori, it's not bad as it is. But S9 AP1 Large Blast (no move)/S6 AP3 Blast (move) wouldn't be a bad consideration. Perhaps a slight price drop, and the option to take Shadow Loom as an upgrade.

RE: "New Pariahs"-
Whoooooaaa, that doesn't strike you as a little too over the top?
it's going to need some major work...

The issue is, they're just Lychguard with a Warscythe AND a better version of the Gauss Blaster.
Yeah, they don't have RP, but, come on.
If you're going to make a new Pariah unit, they should be original, not just a mash up of two currently existing units.
From the fluff you wrote, they seem more defense orientated.
Perhaps focus on that. Maybe THESE guys are the ones that have 2+ armor. Without the RP, that would still make them fair.
And a 24" shooting weapon seems a bit much for something that's supposed to stand guard and only come to life when intruders are present. I say give them the TDB as their shooting weapon (with us potentially giving all Canoptek units Relentless now, it would work very well for them, and still be fluffy).
Warscythes I'm torn on. Yes, old Pariahs had them, but... okay, whatever. (they're supposed to be statues after all, right? like suits of armor lining the halls of a fancy manor. I can imagine them standing there with halberd-esqu Warscythes at their sides).

The Menace Projectors, though... something seems too much about them.
Maybe just -1 to LD of all enemy units within 12"?
(-3 for Psykers, as well as some sort of detrimental bonus affect when testing for Perils)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, petitioning to change the name of "Menace Projection Field" to "Gloom Projectors".
Would match with the other anti-psyker equipment we've already got.

That doesn't seem so bad, now.

Yeah, maybe just 1 W (they're only man sized, after all).
A 2+ save on a 2W T5 model would be a bit much, where as on a 1W model seems totally fine.

Fair enough, with the TDB, too.
That shooting weapon profile seems much more fair.

Gloom Projectors are looking a lot better, too.

I'd be about ready to sign off on these now, what's everyone else think?

Canoptek Sentinels would be perfect... if it wasn't for the fact that the name is probably too close to Forge World's new Stalker variant from IA12 (Canoptek TOMB Sentinel).
Pity, as that name would have fit the fluff perfectly.

Hmm, "Guardians" seem like they're stepping on the toes of Lychguard, too.

Hmmmm, more thinking required...

Holy poop, guys, I just had an idea.
(Now bear with me, as this deviates from the initial idea a tad much, but I think it could work):
Okay, so.
We've got these Canoptek guard statues, yes?
They sit there unmoving until something comes in, then pounce.
...
like a guard dog.
...
or guard CAT.
(reasoning: Necrons are basically Space Tomb Kings... well where are their Sphinxes?)

Canoptek Sphinx - 80pts

WS 4
BS 4
S 5
T 5
W 1
I 2
A 2
Ld 10
Sv 2+
Composition: 2 Canoptek Sphinxes
Unit Type: Beast
Wargear: Phase Talons, Sempiternal Weave
Special Rules: Fearless, Infiltrate, Acute Senses, Rage

Options:
Up to 4 more Canoptek Sphinxes ... 40pts/ model
Any Canoptek Sphinx may take a Particle Incinerator ... 5pts/ model
Any Canoptek Sphinx may take a Gloom Projector ... 15pts/ model

Phase Talons:
Range: -, Str as user, AP 2, Melee, Fleshbane,

Particle Incinerator:
Range: 12" Str 5, AP 4 Assault 1

Gloom Projector:
-1 LD to all enemies withing 12". Psykers (friend or foe!) within 6" at the start of their assault phase must pass a morale check or fall back along with their unit. If locked in combat they are instead WS 1.

(... basically, just think Ravage, from Transformers).

This way, we have our anti-psyker role that Pariahs used to fill, but faster movement, so we can get them where we need them sooner, and without having yet another Lychguard/Praetorian lookalike (yes, I know everybody really liked the old Pariahs, but admit it, if we fix Lychguard, we don't really need more Warscythe wielders). Plus, this way, the whole "Canoptek constructs look like animals" thing still remains intact.

I propose we put all of the Forge World Necron units into the Fandex as well (most of them will probably not need any adjusting).

 Iron Dragon wrote:
I have to say, judging by what I've read in this thread, this 'fandex' thing is ridiculous. You're taking one of the consistently strongest codexes and buffing it, for only very minor points increases here and there. Wanting to have 6 really great Warlord Traits? Wanting to give all units in a 36" radius a +1 to RP? Wanting to give all units within a 24" radius ATSKNF? That's just silly. I won't even get into the suggestion of the 36" bubble of twin-linked everything.

There are NO new codexes that have 6 perfect warlord traits. I didn't see a single suggested warlord trait that wouldn't be awesome to have, and that aren't better than any other warlord traits in any other book.

This isn't at all realistic, and isn't fitting with 6th edition's trend of having non-overpowering codexes like CSM, Daemons, DA, etc.

And paying 5 or 10 points more for a model, then massively buffing them isn't "balancing" anything. You think every model in a codex should be perfect? That'd make the codex even more overpowered.

This.
This is exactly what we needed to hear: an outsiders opinion.
Creating in a vacuum leads to problems, and here we finally have someone pointing it out.

I keep trying to stress,
we can't just bump up prices and expect that fixes everything.
we HAVE to reduce the overall effectiveness of these overpowered units!
then we can focus on buffing the crappy units.
but above all, NO PERFECT UNITS.
having everything in a category be "decent" should be our aim, with no one specific unit standing out as the "must take" (and definitely nothing that dominates over its peers in other codecies *coughOLD-MONOLITH/PARIAHScough*)

To Iron Dragon (and to any any other non-Necron players out there), help us out here, man.
What needs to happen to bring the codex to a more balanced level like that of CSM?


First obvious one would be Warlord Traits.
You're completely right. Having all six be good really isn't fair. There has to be some "meh, I guess it's okay..." ones as well as "all right! I got the REALLY good one!"

And we have to be careful about effective range.
We are MAINLY 24 inch shooting. We have to limit our 36"+ shooting AND effects. (no ATSKNF. It doesn't fit).

Come on, man.
Are you telling me anyone from another army wouldn't look at this and say this isn't broken?

The rule of thumb should be,
More "huh, that's not too bad"
Less "Holy hell, that's f'ing AWESOME!"

the reason I tried to suggest the Sphinx was to provide an alternative anti-psyker role to the OPed-ness that was the Pariahs (smaller squads, but faster with slightly different abilities. like an anti-psyker version of Fenris Wolves). Combing them both into the same unit just drives the OP levels into the stratosphere.

Yeah, updated Pariahs are looking better, but they need to be 1W (T5 2+ saves with 2W is too much).
Psykers treating Gloom Projector carriers as having Fear is a good idea.
Warstave looks fairer, too. Might even be able to make it AP 4 for shooting.
With the changes to Ghost Arks (allow any infantry on board), or even dropping them off via Nightscythe (they're Elites, I'm assuming, so would be eligible to take it as a transport under the new restrictions), these guys could be decent.
Not sure about Adamantine Will, though. Relentless doesn't seem necessary, but if we're just giving it to all Canoptek units, then whatever.


Also,

 StarTrotter wrote:
And They Shall know no fear.
it has been a loyalist Space Marine thing.
EXACTLY.
No ATSKNF for Necrons.

how do you plan to fix MSS (too good)?
Reduce the test to 2D6, with reroll on successful pass (math says this will still be good, but not OP)

And what about the Monolith (heard it isn't a good pick)?
Mitigate deep strike mishaps, make the gun slightly more useful... possibly make more resilient to melta, but not sure on that one yet

2.1 ?!
We haven't even finished compiling 2.0 yet!
:O

 King Pariah wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 King Pariah wrote:

 McNinja wrote:
Tau have warlord traits that are all good. Please, yes, let's make sure your army has a chance of getting some gakky trait that doesn't go with the army. The point of randomness is that it balances getting great traits with getting bad ones, which is fething stupid. If you have a table that has only good traits, you're never stuck with something you don't want or need. I'm not saying make them all awesome, just make them all decent. Like instead of a 12" fearless bubble, make it stubborn, etc.

Also, new question: why are overlords and destroyer lords WS and bs 4? Surely their skills were better than that, even though they are slower robots. Obyron proves that they can be better.

Obyron isn't a Lord, he's a bodyguard.

Indeed. Why would a bodyguard be better than an Overlord at anything? Obyron can easily outfight any lord or OL without MSS. I would gladly pay 100 points base for an Overlord with WS and BS 5

Because in reality, it's typically not the nobility who does the fighting, but his men. And of course, wouldn't one of nobility want the best fighters under his pay to protect him?

Hit the nail on the head.
Throughout history, the nobility were usually the tacticians, with their bodyguards being the best fighters under their command.
... really, Zahndrekh and Obyron are the perfect illustration of this.

deathmagiks wrote:
Perhaps this comes from the Bias of an Eldar player, but it would seem to me that the Necron weaknesses are, currently, lack of psychic defenses and lack of easy access to extreme long range weaponry. I don't believe this should change. And here's why:

Necrons have surprising maneuverability for how durable they are as a whole. Your leadership stat alone is quite a big deal, especially since RP makes it so a number of times you would normally take a LD test, you avoid it. Perfect example: Wraiths. 12" movement, ignores all terrain, even impassible, 2W and a 3+ invul save. There needs to be a chink in the armor of a codex, and outranging Necrons is one of those. Psychic abilities is another.

It's my opinion that there should be definite weaknesses in a codex, and they should be obvious. More importantly, they should not be corrected with additional units, rules, or things specifically hand crafted to counter them. This is where tactics and strategy come into play. A game should not be won in the list building phase. No game should ever have a participant that isn't at some kind of a disadvantage somewhere.

Hear, hear.
I do agree that we have to keep reigns on long range weaponry and psychic defense, but it shouldn't come as a complete lack. After all, both are already present in the current codex, just in a very limited capacity/come as a premium.

Right now our psychic defense comes on the back of Spyders... this makes no sense what so ever. I had hoped by giving the Gloom Prism to a Harbinger that might have made it a bit more functional without having to introduce any more anti psyker additions to the dex. But the clamor for Pariahs was extremely strong, so we thought we'd take a look at some options... but you're right. By making an uber strong "omg, I'm gonna spam the hell out of these!" anti psyker unit, we will be negating the weakness our army is supposed to come with to balance our strengths.

In regards to your "perfect example", we're trying to figure out how to balance Wraiths without fundamentally changing what they are (so movement and rules remain unchanged enough that we don't just craft them into something else).
Right now the ideas were to A) keep them as they are, but raise the price, or B) remove the Phase Shifter (their inv save), but keep it as an upgrade option (at a premium price, however). Any other suggestions?

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
That way we can fix them [Pariahs] to have AP3 and 3+ Sv to keep them on a par with LG and TP on price and ability. Just keep Relentless and Fearless, maaybe drop anti-psych from the gloom projector and leave it there?

but then... why would anyone take Lychguard or Praetorians?

Also, guys, Wraiths are one of the most common units people single out when trying to illustrate how unfair the Necron codex is.
A five point increase is NOT enough to balance them. Anything less than 45 point per model at the current iteration would be unrealistic.
However, at 45 points per model, that is very cost prohibitive (280 for a full squad, one with Whip Coils).
THAT is why I suggested dropping the Phase Shifter as comes-with wargear and making it a purchasable unit upgrade: so the option to run them cheap still exists.
You can either have a normal 3+ Wraith squad for 30 points per model (fast, cheap, and choppy, but weak. Like an assault version of Tomb Blades), or for 15 points more you can give them 3++ (tankable but expensive).

One wound wouldn't be unreasonable, if it meant reducing the price, but the models are a little huge to single wound, I think...

^
That second idea wouldn't be so bad if there was a way for them to be able to assault after deep strike. Otherwise, as soon as you roll snake eyes, they're effectively useless for two turns. Having that big of a handicap would render them untakeable. If it were only one turn of inactivity, able to come back the next turn and be of use again, well, that's not so bad.