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.

 ThePrimordial wrote:

Maverike_prime wrote:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
So by denying logic and displaying a lack of knowledge on said faction, you admit to your suggestion being completely random and not to be taken seriously? Well, I can live with that.

Have you considered comparing Galactus to Optimus Prime? He is the leader of his faction and was stuck in a bubble too once! So technically, Optimus Prime is a C'tan. So the Nightbringer can, technically, transform into a truck. Awesome. Comparing the lore of completely different and fully unrelated backgrounds is such an awesome and productive sport that really seems to be a good approach to back up a point!

Are you going to keep ignoring how the Outsider was imprisoned?
It shows the two characters to be very similar, in terms of how they acquire power.
It's possible the Noctus Labryinth keeps the Dragon starved like the Dyson Sphere.

Sadly saying the Void Dragon COULD be imprisoned is a self defeating argument. By the exact same logic the Void Dragon COULD be fully fed, and healthy. And by the same logic he COULD be Over Charged. Or he COULD be the heart of some doomsday machine built by the Mechanicus. Or he COULD be the Magos Supreme, a hidden mastermind behind the Mechanicum. Or he COULD be the reincarnation of the Emperor himself, time traveled back in time from some time beyond his current state. Or he could the Fifth Chaos God Malice.

"Could be" is a very shaky ground to make this kind of argument on for these reasons.

Now then for everyone... the argument has been had. The disagreements laid out. Suggestions made. Lets call an end to it. If ThePrimordial and his friends want to use the unit as outlined, that is their choice. Lets call an end to this bickering back and forth and geek dick measuring with the "I know more about X then you" that's going on.

We know the Void Dragon is imprisoned. That's a fact.
Considering the Void Dragon's current stasis, it's very likely he's in the same position as the Outsider, only he has a way out. None of the others are at all likely, or the Void Dragon would have already crushed the imperium.

This has very obviously metamorphosed into a fluff discussion, so why is it still under Proposed rules? How about you either return to the proposed unit or get a mod to move the thread to the 40k background section.

Maverike_prime wrote:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

Maverike_prime wrote:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
So by denying logic and displaying a lack of knowledge on said faction, you admit to your suggestion being completely random and not to be taken seriously? Well, I can live with that.

Have you considered comparing Galactus to Optimus Prime? He is the leader of his faction and was stuck in a bubble too once! So technically, Optimus Prime is a C'tan. So the Nightbringer can, technically, transform into a truck. Awesome. Comparing the lore of completely different and fully unrelated backgrounds is such an awesome and productive sport that really seems to be a good approach to back up a point!

Are you going to keep ignoring how the Outsider was imprisoned?
It shows the two characters to be very similar, in terms of how they acquire power.
It's possible the Noctus Labryinth keeps the Dragon starved like the Dyson Sphere.

Sadly saying the Void Dragon COULD be imprisoned is a self defeating argument. By the exact same logic the Void Dragon COULD be fully fed, and healthy. And by the same logic he COULD be Over Charged. Or he COULD be the heart of some doomsday machine built by the Mechanicus. Or he COULD be the Magos Supreme, a hidden mastermind behind the Mechanicum. Or he COULD be the reincarnation of the Emperor himself, time traveled back in time from some time beyond his current state. Or he could the Fifth Chaos God Malice.

"Could be" is a very shaky ground to make this kind of argument on for these reasons.

Now then for everyone... the argument has been had. The disagreements laid out. Suggestions made. Lets call an end to it. If ThePrimordial and his friends want to use the unit as outlined, that is their choice. Lets call an end to this bickering back and forth and geek dick measuring with the "I know more about X then you" that's going on.

We know the Void Dragon is imprisoned. That's a fact.
Considering the Void Dragon's current stasis, it's very likely he's in the same position as the Outsider, only he has a way out. None of the others are at all likely, or the Void Dragon would have already crushed the imperium.

This has very obviously metamorphosed into a fluff discussion, so why is it still under Proposed rules? How about you either return to the proposed unit or get a mod to move the thread to the 40k background section.

That's something I never wanted or anticipated but now that's over,
It's back to being about the rules.

 Kain wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
^ That. I find it hard to believe anyone on this planet has an army large enough to justify Mr. Dragon facing it. Even with allied players.

And when the Old Ones were pouring fire from multiple blackstone fortresses into it (you know, those things that use the power of the warp in such tremendous ways as to tear apart planets and solar systems with ease and fire the things that the C'tan are weak to) the Void Dragon at best got sleepy.

No one has that kind of dakka. Even in Battlefleet Gothic, the Void Dragon would be an auto-win.

Not to mention that as a reality warper, the Void Dragon can just wave his hand and now your army is a bunch of ducks or gravity applies in the opposite direction for them; sending them all careening helplessly into space, drain everyone on the planet like a super-sized metroid, or throw the entire planet into the sun.

He wouldn't even be trying really.

Giving rules to full powered and actual physical gods is not within the scope of any rules for any game system that the 40k setting is run under.

Play it in E:A with the following:

1 Void Dragon (Represented by w/e you want, it really does not matter).
100,000 points.

Rules: Remove up to any ten enemy formations per turn.
The Dragon is indestructible.

Maverike_prime wrote:

This has very obviously metamorphosed into a fluff discussion, so why is it still under Proposed rules? How about you either return to the proposed unit or get a mod to move the thread to the 40k background section.

If you're going to post ideas for a character for a certain faction, you have to keep in line with its fluff / background. That's why OP's suggestion has two main flaws:

A) The rules are completely random and there wasn't much thought put into it. At the beginning, a lot of these proposed rules did not even make sense and still, a lot of them are way over the top.

B) OP has no idea of Necron and, on a larger scale, 40k fluff. He therefore makes a comparison with a completely unrelated universe, further showing that he lacks understanding of how 40k fluff works. Any cross-fluff comparison is a waste of time for all sides - it's complete and utter nonsense.

So all in all, this suggestion falls short of both being a good rules suggestion and breaks with any coherent fluff in 40k. Make of that what you want.

As others have already stated, making rules for gods is a fruitless endavor. They are so far up above any regular unit that they cannot be appropriately represented on the tabletop. If you work with NewCron instead of TruCron fluff, you might say that it's a more powerful shard, but if following TruCron fluff, there is no way to even be close to represent the C'tan or, similarily, the Chaos Gods on the tabletop.

 Selym wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
^ That. I find it hard to believe anyone on this planet has an army large enough to justify Mr. Dragon facing it. Even with allied players.

And when the Old Ones were pouring fire from multiple blackstone fortresses into it (you know, those things that use the power of the warp in such tremendous ways as to tear apart planets and solar systems with ease and fire the things that the C'tan are weak to) the Void Dragon at best got sleepy.

No one has that kind of dakka. Even in Battlefleet Gothic, the Void Dragon would be an auto-win.

Not to mention that as a reality warper, the Void Dragon can just wave his hand and now your army is a bunch of ducks or gravity applies in the opposite direction for them; sending them all careening helplessly into space, drain everyone on the planet like a super-sized metroid, or throw the entire planet into the sun.

He wouldn't even be trying really.

Giving rules to full powered and actual physical gods is not within the scope of any rules for any game system that the 40k setting is run under.

Play it in E:A with the following:

1 Void Dragon (Represented by w/e you want, it really does not matter).
100,000 points.

Rules: Remove up to any ten enemy formations per turn.
The Dragon is indestructible.

Roll a d6 every turn.

On a 4+ or more, the Void dragon swallows the sun, ensuring the enemy dies an icy death.

 Sigvatr wrote:

Maverike_prime wrote:

This has very obviously metamorphosed into a fluff discussion, so why is it still under Proposed rules? How about you either return to the proposed unit or get a mod to move the thread to the 40k background section.

If you're going to post ideas for a character for a certain faction, you have to keep in line with its fluff / background. That's why OP's suggestion has two main flaws:

A) The rules are completely random and there wasn't much thought put into it. At the beginning, a lot of these proposed rules did not even make sense and still, a lot of them are way over the top.

B) OP has no idea of Necron and, on a larger scale, 40k fluff. He therefore makes a comparison with a completely unrelated universe, further showing that he lacks understanding of how 40k fluff works. Any cross-fluff comparison is a waste of time for all sides - it's complete and utter nonsense.

So all in all, this suggestion falls short of both being a good rules suggestion and breaks with any coherent fluff in 40k. Make of that what you want.

As others have already stated, making rules for gods is a fruitless endavor. They are so far up above any regular unit that they cannot be appropriately represented on the tabletop. If you work with NewCron instead of TruCron fluff, you might say that it's a more powerful shard, but if following TruCron fluff, there is no way to even be close to represent the C'tan or, similarily, the Chaos Gods on the tabletop.

Only problem is these rules would actually make sense for a starved Void Dragon, which has one if it's inspirations in Galactus.
Warhammer tends to "borrow" a lot of ideas.
You again avoid giving the quote that shows I know more about the background than you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
I might as well say "well Santa comes from the sky, so here's rules for Santa like a drop pop because they're BASICALLY the same."

Santa is not a drop pod full of presents?!

The c'tan are bodies of energy held within necrodermis bodies. The energy lessens as they exert their abilities, and more can be gained by devouring energy.
Adding credence/ flat out proving the argument is the imprisonment of The Outsider, also unsharded, within a dyson sphere, keeping him starved, and on the verge of death. Like Galactus.
The C'tan were never as powerful as Galactus who when fully fed is basically second to The Living Tribunal. He's a universal threat.
Reality warping? Care to post some quotes from books where they do that? They seem to just throw hilarious amounts of energy out, in creative ways maybe.

Remember this?

For the one wanting to get back to the rules, you are awfully focused on the fluff (or lack thereof) again to make your arguments.

So I'll repeat the hard rules facts about this:

This guy is broken. While fluff-wise he certainly SHOULD be broken, the bottom line is that he has no place on the tabletop. Let's look at your 'revised' version just to point out why:

He is still vastly more durable than any Titan of equivalent points value, and vastly more destructive. The whole 'charges' and menu of abilities shows this, as it means that using this guy is not anything approaching tactical, and you do not need to think about how to use it. It simply has all of the tools to beat anything. Fluff-accurate yes, but completely unfun to bring to the battlefield.

Likewise, he still more or less doubles the durability of any army he is with. Between this and Reaimation Protocols, it becomes harder and harder to hurt the allies around this guy. This is a multiplying force, and not one that you can simply handwave and nerf into anything approaching valuable. If there were a Titan that said "and half of most wounds to your army are ignored" (which is what a 4+ FNP is), it would be laughed right out the door. Which is the case for this guy.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:


@Primordial. Even so, i would still argue a Transcendent C'Tan is by far the best place to start before adding extras. Ok, you want to make the Void Dragon the base of the game, have you though of instead of having a super powerful 'beat this, you win' model you could integrate the Void Dragon into the mission itself?

Say you start off with a C'Tan shard (Embodiment of the Void Dragon) which is basically just a normal Transcendent C'Tan which is a bit more survivable as well as your Necron army, then the rest of the game will be about keeping that Shard alive while ''empowering' it. You could maybe use objectives or relics or something, that everytime the Necron army accomplishes some goal the C'Tan Shard gets better, and everytime the Imperium accomplish a goal he gets weaker. This kind of battle would involve the other player more, you still end up with a super powerful C'Tan Shard BUT he has a legitimate weakness. Also Cinematic, Gamesworkshop loves to 'Forge a Narrative'.

Have you considered this Primordial? You said this is for a ''One off'' game, so what is the need for rules as straight up powerful as this? You say you want a massive game, well believe me, it is IMPOSSIBLE to play apocalypse sized game of annihilation until the end, to play a game that size which *both* players will enjoy you need objectives. So why not include the Void Dragon into the very mission itself?

 ThePrimordial wrote:

Only problem is these rules would actually make sense for a starved Void Dragon, which has one if it's inspirations in Galactus.

Could you please post the image of the C'tan design document that you certainly seem to possess?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

Only problem is these rules would actually make sense for a starved Void Dragon, which has one if it's inspirations in Galactus.

Could you please post the image of the C'tan design document that you certainly seem to possess?

I love you bro. The same way you love the 3rd string goofball who makes you look good.
The above points out a very blatant similarity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:


@Primordial. Even so, i would still argue a Transcendent C'Tan is by far the best place to start before adding extras. Ok, you want to make the Void Dragon the base of the game, have you though of instead of having a super powerful 'beat this, you win' model you could integrate the Void Dragon into the mission itself?

Say you start off with a C'Tan shard (Embodiment of the Void Dragon) which is basically just a normal Transcendent C'Tan which is a bit more survivable as well as your Necron army, then the rest of the game will be about keeping that Shard alive while ''empowering' it. You could maybe use objectives or relics or something, that everytime the Necron army accomplishes some goal the C'Tan Shard gets better, and everytime the Imperium accomplish a goal he gets weaker. This kind of battle would involve the other player more, you still end up with a super powerful C'Tan Shard BUT he has a legitimate weakness. Also Cinematic, Gamesworkshop loves to 'Forge a Narrative'.

Have you considered this Primordial? You said this is for a ''One off'' game, so what is the need for rules as straight up powerful as this? You say you want a massive game, well believe me, it is IMPOSSIBLE to play apocalypse sized game of annihilation until the end, to play a game that size which *both* players will enjoy you need objectives. So why not include the Void Dragon into the very mission itself?

If you were to scale up a warlord Titan to 4000 points it'd be way stronger. Despite already being tougher with 27 HP and 6 Void Shields.

A point which is totally irrelevant to what i was suggesting.

None of us can help you in any meaningful way unless you tell us *specifically* what type of game you want to play. You described it as a ''one time "what if game" which suggests to me there is both fluff and a theme for it. Will it be objectives? Kill Points? Annihilation? You also said the imperials have 2k more points then the Necrons, which considering this guy you want to play is 4k and he should (at least from a fluff stand point) have a Legion of Necrons at his back suggests a point limit of at least 8k Necrons/10k Imperial. This in turn suggests that you are not playing Annihilation due to sheer size or kill points due to the unfairness of the Imperium having more units to kill.

So, that leaves objectives or a special scenario. The problem with this guy thematically is that he has Zero interaction with the opponent in anyway other then blasting him off the board, and as i am guess this guy is what the entire battle premise is based on, this makes a massive Warlord Titian-Esque a poor choice. Unless of course you just want to play a normal apocolyspe battle with this guy included 'for the lulz' in which case he ceases to be of any importance and he becomes an ''Oh, Necrons don't get titains. Can i make up some rules for a Necron type Apoc Monster?''.

I'm asking you right now, is this guy important to your battles 'feel' or not? If not, continue as is. If he is a few hundred points OP, who cares, it's Apoc, it's for the Lulz anyway. But if this guy is of any relevence to the battles 'feel', 'theme' or 'fluff' then you need to come up with something far more creative then just a big scary monster. Preferably with rules that tie in specifically to the mission and the opposing army.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
A point which is totally irrelevant to what i was suggesting.

None of us can help you in any meaningful way unless you tell us *specifically* what type of game you want to play. You described it as a ''one time "what if game" which suggests to me there is both fluff and a theme for it. Will it be objectives? Kill Points? Annihilation? You also said the imperials have 2k more points then the Necrons, which considering this guy you want to play is 4k and he should (at least from a fluff stand point) have a Legion of Necrons at his back suggests a point limit of at least 8k Necrons/10k Imperial. This in turn suggests that you are not playing Annihilation due to sheer size or kill points due to the unfairness of the Imperium having more units to kill.

So, that leaves objectives or a special scenario. The problem with this guy thematically is that he has Zero interaction with the opponent in anyway other then blasting him off the board, and as i am guess this guy is what the entire battle premise is based on, this makes a massive Warlord Titian-Esque a poor choice. Unless of course you just want to play a normal apocolyspe battle with this guy included 'for the lulz' in which case he ceases to be of any importance and he becomes an ''Oh, Necrons don't get titains. Can i make up some rules for a Necron type Apoc Monster?''.

I'm asking you right now, is this guy important to your battles 'feel' or not? If not, continue as is. If he is a few hundred points OP, who cares, it's Apoc, it's for the Lulz anyway. But if this guy is of any relevence to the battles 'feel', 'theme' or 'fluff' then you need to come up with something far more creative then just a big scary monster. Preferably with rules that tie in specifically to the mission and the opposing army.

It's till one side is wiped out, or until the Dragon is "dead"/ asleep again.
The Mechanicum side has a 2000 point advantage. The mission points are a variety of hugely scaled down reactors for the Mechanicum to defend, or the Necron side to feed to the Dragon. Every reactor under Necron control, grants the Dragon an additional 2 charges produced per turn, and 10 wounds
AV 14 with 27 HP, and 6 Void Shields is tougher than T10 and 25 wounds.
Just like 2 Volcano Cannons, and 2 Apocalypse Launchers is more destructive than what this guy has.
This guy pays out the ass for options, army buffs, and Versatility.

 ThePrimordial wrote:

AV 14 with 27 HP, and 6 Void Shields is tougher than T10 and 25 wounds.

Are you deliberately ignoring that one has a save and the other does not?

Effectively making the 25 wounds the equivalent of 37.5 HP, assuming every shot is AP1 or 2, not to mention how the vehicle damage table can cause multiple HPs, while only D weapons can do the same to this guy.

Not to mention FnP and IWND.

You still have a very poor understanding of how balance works, and continue to use poor benchmark comparisons.

 curran12 wrote:
For the one wanting to get back to the rules, you are awfully focused on the fluff (or lack thereof) again to make your arguments.

So I'll repeat the hard rules facts about this:

This guy is broken. While fluff-wise he certainly SHOULD be broken, the bottom line is that he has no place on the tabletop. Let's look at your 'revised' version just to point out why:

He is still vastly more durable than any Titan of equivalent points value, and vastly more destructive. The whole 'charges' and menu of abilities shows this, as it means that using this guy is not anything approaching tactical, and you do not need to think about how to use it. It simply has all of the tools to beat anything. Fluff-accurate yes, but completely unfun to bring to the battlefield.

Likewise, he still more or less doubles the durability of any army he is with. Between this and Reaimation Protocols, it becomes harder and harder to hurt the allies around this guy. This is a multiplying force, and not one that you can simply handwave and nerf into anything approaching valuable. If there were a Titan that said "and half of most wounds to your army are ignored" (which is what a 4+ FNP is), it would be laughed right out the door. Which is the case for this guy.

The fact that you don't have a counter argument, and insult mine, lets me taste the salty buttpain.
No he's not more durable than a Warlord with a higher toughness with the AV14, and 8 more effective wounds. You know why? And this answers Blacksails too. Because the vast majority of what these guys will face is S: D and ignores saves.
Vastly more destructive? The Warlords 2 S: D, AP:1,10 inch blasts, and 10 apocalyptic barrages would like to have a word with you.
So this guy is paying 2000 points for that buff, and the variety he has.

Av14 is equivalent to T10, but you get an armour save against anything not AP1 or AP2, and a 4+ against everything else. So no, a titan is not more durable. Run any math against him and a comparable number of AV14 hull points and you'll find your... Thing is more durable.

Remember that D weapons only ignore everything on a roll of 6. You'll still be getting that 4+ most of the time.

Seriously. Do. The. Math.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Look, I'll do some basic ones for you.

Let's shoot 6 S: D weapons at an AV14 target, and the same number at a T10 target. Let's assume for number's sake that all hit.

The new D table is a little less powerful, so only a roll of 6 is ignoring that 4++ the GC.

Let's do some quick math. Assuming out of those 6 hits, 1 of them rolled a 1, another rolled a 6, and the rest fell somewhere in between.

The titan just eats those hits with no saves anyways (it doesn't have any), so it take four hits at D3 Hullpoints each, for approx. 8 Hull points. Then the '6' rolls a D6+6, for another 9.5, for a total of 17.5 Hull points.

Your GC takes the same number of hits, but ignores half of the 2-5 rolls, meaning it only suffers 4 Wounds to the titan's 8. Then it too eats another 9.5 from the '6', for a total of 13.5.

For everything else, the wound/glance/pen mechanic is fundamentally the same thing for AV14/T10. S10 wounds on a 4+, and glances AV14 on a 4+. However, with every other weapon, you get a 4++, meaning you would have to shoot twice the amount of non-S D weapons to kill it, and that's only AP1 and AP2 weapons! Anything else would require six times the amount!

And it has IWND, but I guess that's fair compared to void shields, so I'll call it a wash.

^
You mean by 7th edition which has been out for like a week?
Which given how big a game this is, common sense dictates the game having been planned for a little over a month?
Yeah.........

That's your response? I show you math that undeniably proves that at the very least it's as durable as a titan against destroyer weapons and more durable against everything else (using 6th rules), and you dismiss by claimi g some common sense nonsense?

How am I supposed to know when this game is for?

How am I supposed to know how long it's been planned for?

How am I supposed to know which edition you were planning on using?

It's perfectly reasonable common sense to post something assuming the new rule set, especially considering it makes this unit better.

Regardless, this guy is absolutely more durable, regardless of the edition.

 Blacksails wrote:
That's your response? I show you math that undeniably proves that at the very least it's as durable as a titan against destroyer weapons and more durable against everything else (using 6th rules), and you dismiss by claimi g some common sense nonsense?

How am I supposed to know when this game is for?

How am I supposed to know how long it's been planned for?

How am I supposed to know which edition you were planning on using?

It's perfectly reasonable common sense to post something assuming the new rule set, especially considering it makes this unit better.

Regardless, this guy is absolutely more durable, regardless of the edition.

The edition makes a load of difference.
6th edition Apoc was way better for making the balance between GCs and Super Vehicles.
Otherwise GCs always came out ahead because of saves.
Do you ever have hilarious 10,000+ point games with a custom game ruleset to show the biggest event in imperial history since the Heresy with only a week of planning?
Doesn't sound very reasonable to me.

 ThePrimordial wrote:

The edition makes a load of difference.
6th edition Apoc was way better for making the balance between GCs and Super Vehicles.
Otherwise GCs always came out ahead because of saves.
Do you ever have hilarious 10,000+ point games with a custom game ruleset to show the biggest event in imperial history since the Heresy with only a week of planning?
Doesn't sound very reasonable to me.

I have actually. Which is why I was working under the assumption I was. For future clarification, maybe you should state what edition this is for, as posting it two days before the drop will definitely get people here assuming its for the new edition.

And as I showed you, Destroyer weapons in 6th are the same effectiveness against GC and Titans. Therefore, against D weapons, the difference in durability is purely a numbers game between HP and W. Which, 25 and 27 are remarkably similar. Its hardly being honest claiming 27HP is more durable than 25W by any margin worth considering when you're looking at D weapons.

However, as I also showed, against every single other weapons, GCs are more durable simply due to the saves. Your creature ignore half of all AP1/2 shots, and ignores 5/6 shots from every other weapon. If you don't think that's more durable, than there's no point in me trying to convince you.

Oh, and on Void shields, yeah they help Turn 1, but in a 10k+ Apoc game, dealing with the equivalent of two chimeras before shooting the D weapons is hardly noticeable. Further, they're only regenerating 2 of those every turn, which are a pittance to remove.

 Blacksails wrote:

 ThePrimordial wrote:

The edition makes a load of difference.
6th edition Apoc was way better for making the balance between GCs and Super Vehicles.
Otherwise GCs always came out ahead because of saves.
Do you ever have hilarious 10,000+ point games with a custom game ruleset to show the biggest event in imperial history since the Heresy with only a week of planning?
Doesn't sound very reasonable to me.

I have actually. Which is why I was working under the assumption I was. For future clarification, maybe you should state what edition this is for, as posting it two days before the drop will definitely get people here assuming its for the new edition.

And as I showed you, Destroyer weapons in 6th are the same effectiveness against GC and Titans. Therefore, against D weapons, the difference in durability is purely a numbers game between HP and W. Which, 25 and 27 are remarkably similar. Its hardly being honest claiming 27HP is more durable than 25W by any margin worth considering when you're looking at D weapons.

However, as I also showed, against every single other weapons, GCs are more durable simply due to the saves. Your creature ignore half of all AP1/2 shots, and ignores 5/6 shots from every other weapon. If you don't think that's more durable, than there's no point in me trying to convince you

Oh, and on Void shields, yeah they help Turn 1, but in a 10k+ Apoc game, dealing with the equivalent of two chimeras before shooting the D weapons is hardly noticeable. Further, they're only regenerating 2 of those every turn, which are a pittance to remove.

Not mentioning what edition this was for, was a very gakky thing for me to do.
My apologies.

The dragon (almost certainly sharded ) was beaten by the emperor, but we can assume it was a close fight.

The emperor, was beaten (ish) by a souped up horus, and horus has rules, so you have a reference point for power level. It is nowhere near warlord, trancendent c'tan is more appropriate.

Before he got sharded.. yeah that would have been powerful.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
The dragon (almost certainly sharded ) was beaten by the emperor, but we can assume it was a close fight.

The emperor, was beaten (ish) by a souped up horus, and horus has rules, so you have a reference point for power level. It is nowhere near warlord, trancendent c'tan is more appropriate.

Before he got sharded.. yeah that would have been powerful.

Chaos Empowered Horus is vastly more powerful than regular Horus.

The amount of favor Abaddon has from the gods doesn't even rate next to what Horus had.

 Kain wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Haha

Just looking for another one right now. I like switching things up.

Also: how do you dare having friends who do not know what a squig is?!

I found an avatar you might like.

Please can you turn that into a Necron Slash playing a guitar?

God In Action wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Haha

Just looking for another one right now. I like switching things up.

Also: how do you dare having friends who do not know what a squig is?!

I found an avatar you might like.

Please can you turn that into a Necron Slash playing a guitar?

Ask and ye shall receive.

How did C'Tans get beaten in the first place if they're all like '...alter phisycs with a blink of an eye and go eat the nearby sun...'

 koooaei wrote:
How did C'Tans get beaten in the first place if they're all like '...alter phisycs with a blink of an eye and go eat the nearby sun...'

The Necrons deployed weapons that shook the very universe to it's core to break apart the C'tan right after they vanquished the Old Ones.

 Kain wrote:

God In Action wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Haha

Just looking for another one right now. I like switching things up.

Also: how do you dare having friends who do not know what a squig is?!

I found an avatar you might like.

Please can you turn that into a Necron Slash playing a guitar?

Ask and ye shall receive.

Awesome! Thanks!