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.

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
This is a little bit rantish so feel free to delete, but I am hoping for a sensible discussion about this.

Still, after I don't know how long, when I rock up to the local game group with my crons, I'm still met with groans of disgust and choruses of "they don't die".
Have they no been around long enough for us to know how to work around them with every army? Is the only solution people come up with now just " hey paul, grab your destroyer EEldar, we got Necrons over here."

I hate to say it, but in many instances, no, there's not much many other armies can do. Much like with Eldar, there's no new "trick" to learn, no hidden "weakness" to take advantage of, the Necrons are simply just better than they were, and yes, that much insanely harder to kill, without any corresponding increase in killing power to deal with it, particularly with Decurion bonuses.

Can some armies deal with them? Sure, Eldar, Space Marines, etc. Can other armies do so? Not on anything near an equal basis (and especially without including allies from other armies). Try finding a battle report on IG vs Necrons where the IG win, and if you can find one, compare it to the number where the Necrons win, it'll be overwhelmingly in favor of the Necrons. I don't think I saw a Batrep where the IG won vs Necrons until the second half of 2015, and even those are almost impossible to find. Same with Chaos Space Marines.



.

Is it just a mentality that the little plastic models have to disappear. That models have to die and if entire units aren't being wiped out in a single phase then there's not enough damage being done moar dakka!

In some cases, sure. In others, no, when you actually look at the average amount of fire some Necron units can take, it's simply so far beyond what their opposition is capable of mustering that there's nothing an opponent can do but throw spitwads and hope the Necron player rolls statistically improbable poor results.

Most starkly, if you look at something like Wraiths in a Decurion, they require nearly 900 Lasgun shots to kill a unit of 6, and more S10 AP1 firepower to kill than you'd typically need to bring down a Warhound Titan. Granted, you can nullify some of that by killing the Spyder in the Harvest formation, but that's often difficult in and of itself if the Necron player has any sort of brain, and then there may be no firepower left over to engage much of anything else, and even without such benefits, the Wraiths are absolutely absurdly over-resielient for their speed and cost.

Even the basic Necron Warrior, when getting full Decurion & Legion benefits, is beyond reasonably hard to kill. They can take almost as much small arms fire as Terminators at 13pts a pop, while being vastly more resistant to heavy AP2/1/D/Grav/Etc weapons that erase Terminators, with their only real weakness being things like Heavy Bolters if they're caught out in the open (where they're still not terribly easy to kill between a 4+RP roll that gets to reroll 1's).

The problem with RP has many levels. It always functions (unlike other abilities like FNP and previous iterations of RP/WBB) and there's no way to negate it (e.g. Instant Death or wiping out the entire unit in one phase with concentrated fire), and it applies on *every* wound, not just the *last* wound like it used to (which vastly increases multi-wound model survvivability), and to compound that they gave more models more wounds (e.g. Destroyers), on top of doing silly things like giivng already bemoaned Wraiths a Toughness boost.

The army just went overboard on survivability. Even this might have been ok if the army were slow and ponderous, bu Necrons can absolutely be amongst the fastest armies in the game, with probably still the best flyers (and by far the best flyer transports), a curiously 4HP transport with even more firepower that can Jink and still have dudes inside fire to full extent after disembarking and relrentless assault, and Jetbikes with incredible speed and hilariously cheap 3+ save upgrades.

The army just works astoundingly well on every level. It's fast. It's incredibly hard to kill. and they certainly don't lack for killing power.

I've had some people rant that crons should t be able to get up at all, that even their 5+ is op...well last I checked nurgle had 5+ FNP which until it comes to I'd is exactly the same as the rp in which case it goes to 6+ and frankly is you're passing 6+ you deserve it.

5+FNP can be negated and isn't being enhanced significantly, and the Nurgle Daemons aren't getting FNP across the board like they used to, and are slow and aren't shooting anything, nor do they have a 4+ or 3+ armor save on top of that, nor generally any shooting. Meanwhile the Necrons have solid shooting, are typically Relentless, and aren't slow at all.

If that's the sort of argument were stooping to, why don't we tell eldar they can't move more than 6" a turn or tell marines they have to follow the rules or orks and nids that they can't field hordes. Every army has their flavour and fluff.

There's flavor, and then there's "oh they went wayyyyy too far".

If you approach a game from a narrative perspective, everything makes sense.

By that standard an IG player should be able to drop a basilisk shell on every unit before the game starts to because of their preliminary bombardments (and they used to have rules to such effect). You probably wouldn't find that very fun however. Neither do people enjoy games where they can't do anything to their opponent's armies.

 Vaktathi wrote:

If you approach a game from a narrative perspective, everything makes sense.

By that standard an IG player should be able to drop a basilisk shell on every unit before the game starts to because of their preliminary bombardments (and they used to have rules to such effect). You probably wouldn't find that very fun however. Neither do people enjoy games where they can't do anything to their opponent's armies.

And if the IG player loses then the opponents army is automatically wiped out in the ensuing exterminatus.

I'm fine with things being powerful and I love when things from the background are reflected on the table top. What I have a problem with is things being undercosted or as GW has done lately with formations is give bonuses for free, just take these units you were going to anyway and get all these MEGA bonuses. It derails the game and limits what you see on the table.

RP is really the only thing going for Necrons now. I do not consider them top tier.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
RP is really the only thing going for Necrons now. I do not consider them top tier.

They seem to be ranking pretty consistently from what I can see. Just off the top of my head I know they made top 10 at both Nova and Adepticon, they appear to place highly rather consistently.

I had a big block of text to go here but dropped out of reception as I was sending it and lost it all.

Basic jist I yes I get it, crons are tough, as I said I've versed my fair share and I can concede many arguments especially the undercosted units.

But because decurion exists doesn't mean it has to be taken and its people grabbing the shiniest to be the biggest kid on the block that's caused most the problems. Decurion decurion decurion always the recurring argument. We have tongues in our heads, and this is a social game; when did we stop communicating with our opponents to work together to make a game both sides can enjoy instead of grumbling and tailoring?

Because communication shouldn't exist outside of deciding point values and missions.

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
I had a big block of text to go here but dropped out of reception as I was sending it and lost it all.

Basic jist I yes I get it, crons are tough, as I said I've versed my fair share and I can concede many arguments especially the undercosted units.

But because decurion exists doesn't mean it has to be taken and its people grabbing the shiniest to be the biggest kid on the block that's caused most the problems. Decurion decurion decurion always the recurring argument. We have tongues in our heads, and this is a social game; when did we stop communicating with our opponents to work together to make a game both sides can enjoy instead of grumbling and tailoring?

Because if it's available, and the player actively wants to win, like say at an event with a best general prize, it WILL be taken. TO's can't do anything about it because they don't want a bunch of angry necron players screaming at them about how Decurion isn't the only broken thing in the game (and it isn't.)

Even in casual play sometimes people want to win. Telling the necron player time after time "eh I don't feel up to versing Decurion today" is BOUND to get old to them.

And honestly the necron players shouldn't have to hold back. It isn't their fault Decurion is broken. It isn't the other factions' faults that some of them get rolled by it without a dice-related miracle. It's the game designer's fault for sucking at their job and lowering the quality of the game at large.

Clearly I'm part of a minority that are of a very different mentality. If my desire to play was tied to my win tally, I would never play. I play for fun and try to actively seek out other player who play for fun.

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Clearly I'm part of a minority that are of a very different mentality. If my desire to play was tied to my win tally, I would never play. I play for fun and try to actively seek out other player who play for fun.

But different people find different things fun. An Eldar player could find playing an all jetbike army fun, or an all wraith units army fun. They get punished for enjoying what they do in the form of people not playing them because it isn't fun for the other player because GW cannot or will not balance the game effectively.

And if GW were good at its job of making a balanced game then it wouldn't matter what specific things about the game that people found fun as everyone could play everyone and have a good time.

Well then I think we've come to a cyclic argument where the only solution is for developer correction but as long as GWs view is:
Sales: first
Game: what's that?
We will only see greater disparagements and power creep. How does balance get implemented? Gradual codex "nerf" till all are the same level? En mass? That won't happen.

Except that you can play a Jetbike themed army without taking the best build (does your "Jetbike themed" army REALLY need 2 wraithknights?) or a wraith army without the best build (bet you a dime they don't include Wraithlords or Wraithblades, 2 of the 4 wraith units )

If you find it "fun" BECAUSE your opponents can never win, then yeah, players like that are being jerks. It'd be great if GW fixed that. But that's not the player "enjoying the flavor" that's them taking pleasure in having an unfair advantage.

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Clearly I'm part of a minority that are of a very different mentality. If my desire to play was tied to my win tally, I would never play. I play for fun and try to actively seek out other player who play for fun.

Winning isn't necessary for me to have fun, but having a fair battle is.

Also, I remember when my SOB exorcists could one shot wraiths. That was my only protection against them. Now? I'm not sure what I'd do. Probably roll on the ground and die.

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
I had a big block of text to go here but dropped out of reception as I was sending it and lost it all.

Basic jist I yes I get it, crons are tough, as I said I've versed my fair share and I can concede many arguments especially the undercosted units.

But because decurion exists doesn't mean it has to be taken and its people grabbing the shiniest to be the biggest kid on the block that's caused most the problems. Decurion decurion decurion always the recurring argument. We have tongues in our heads, and this is a social game; when did we stop communicating with our opponents to work together to make a game both sides can enjoy instead of grumbling and tailoring?

The problem is that many people show up to play a game with a pre-built army list, they want to play a specific list, this is very common in pickup play, and often that'll be a Decurion. Additionally, the Decurion can be fluffy, there's an attractiveness in that, that fact that it enhances the strengths of the Necrons for new additional cost is just a pleasant bonus for some, and of course, at a tournament, people are going to bring their most powerful list.

If you're got a small group of pals where you talk a lot about what each player will play and everyone understands that bringing a face smashing list will result in a poor experience for all, things can be adjusted and everyone can have a great experience. Unfortunately many, if not most, gamers don't have this kind of a tight knit playgroup, instead relying on pickup games of various sorts, even often store/club league play will be very Pickup centric or may have a competitive impetus behind it even if they're not trying to replicate a tournament.

This isn't unique to Necrons, 7th edition as a whole is like this and is why there's so much discontent in general.

The reason we have the new fnp rules to begin with is people complained that mss was op. Tesla snap shots were unfair, and spiders and scarabs needed to be nerfed too. Give me back my old necrons and stop your bitching, we didn't ask for these new rules, you did!

Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Clearly I'm part of a minority that are of a very different mentality. If my desire to play was tied to my win tally, I would never play. I play for fun and try to actively seek out other player who play for fun.

Since winning isn't that critical, you can always play against Eldar scatbikes. For fun. Problem solved.

 darthdaddy wrote:
The reason we have the new fnp rules to begin with is people complained that mss was op. Tesla snap shots were unfair, and spiders and scarabs needed to be nerfed too. Give me back my old necrons and stop your bitching, we didn't ask for these new rules, you did!

That is the lamest excuse i've heard yet. Nothing about balancing old issues has anything to do with new unrelated broken issues.

My best friend at our local store plays Necrons. Everytime I play him I feel like flipping the table. It's gotten better after twisting some wrists for the group to mix in maelstrom with their "kill everything" games, and I can camp objectives with daemons. The main issue here tho? My friend doesn't use decursion for most games, and in fact takes suboptimal units just to try and be fair. You know how many times he has Lost since he began playing? Once, and that was him forgetting since neither side was budging and he was facing Eldar cheese from 7th.

Currently I think Necrons went from bad to worse. MSS were the bane of my existence in 6th, as I primarily melee'd with my Nurgle daemons and black Templar, and auotlost because that item was sooooo cheap and broken that I would forfeit games if they were taken. Now we have these situations with 4++ retooling 1's, with forces speeding across the field (jetbikes and wraiths), while his Warlord has NEVER died. One on one challenges against a Great Unclean One with fleshbane AP2? Nope, not even a wound.

Another very very bad issue is the crappy weight distribution on the Necron fliers. You can almost guarantee that at least one will tip over every turn, crushing your models for real.

autumnlotus wrote:
My best friend at our local store plays Necrons. Everytime I play him I feel like flipping the table. It's gotten better after twisting some wrists for the group to mix in maelstrom with their "kill everything" games, and I can camp objectives with daemons. The main issue here tho? My friend doesn't use decursion for most games, and in fact takes suboptimal units just to try and be fair. You know how many times he has Lost since he began playing? Once, and that was him forgetting since neither side was budging and he was facing Eldar cheese from 7th.

Currently I think Necrons went from bad to worse. MSS were the bane of my existence in 6th, as I primarily melee'd with my Nurgle daemons and black Templar, and auotlost because that item was sooooo cheap and broken that I would forfeit games if they were taken. Now we have these situations with 4++ retooling 1's, with forces speeding across the field (jetbikes and wraiths), while his Warlord has NEVER died. One on one challenges against a Great Unclean One with fleshbane AP2? Nope, not even a wound.

Either you're exaggerating or it was a very isolated case of (un)luck.

A GUO, without fleshbane mind you, should be making 1 to 2 wounds every turn (after saves) against an Overlord. At the same time, an Overlord (equipped with the flesbane relic) should make 1 wound each turn, reduced to one wound every other turn when not equipped with the flesbane relic. Seeing has how a GUO has double the wounds of a Necron Overlord, I hardly see how the GUO would lose unless there were some (un)lucky dice involved.

If his warlord has NEVER died, maybe you should look at your own army and figure out what's wrong with it instead of looking for fault with your friends army because mine dies nearly every game because my opponents realize it's a priority target because he is the one allowing the Reanimation rolls of 1 to be rerolled.

Also you're contradicting yourself, because you say your friend almost never uses a Decurion, but go on to rant about how you have to deal with 4++, re-rolling 1's which is actually the benefit given by the decurion and one of the formations from it.

 darthdaddy wrote:
The reason we have the new fnp rules to begin with is people complained that mss was op. Tesla snap shots were unfair, and spiders and scarabs needed to be nerfed too. Give me back my old necrons and stop your bitching, we didn't ask for these new rules, you did!

Mind Shackle Scarabs were overpowered. A 3D6 leadership+1 test to avoid not only doing zero damage to your opponent that turn but, to add salt to the wound, to instead hit yourself in the face was absurd. When your opponent can die in close combat against your model without the combat even getting to your initiative step you potentially have a very broken mechanic.

Which army doesn't have one or two op rules? I lost close combat and had my whole unit swept just as many times as mss helped me win in close combat. It balanced out having a op captain or hq killing 3-6 models and easily sweeping the whole unit. The new fnp rules are a direct result of this issue. The decurion is another issue. I believe this was designed to replace the attacks our crypteks and C'tan use to have. As I have stated I would be happy to go back. I feel like how I played my Necrons was unique before, now it's cookie cutter. I don't want to play the way GW wants Necrons to play.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
A necron warrior is more durable, cheaper and has better standard weaponry than a marine for the low downside of Initiative 2

This

 darthdaddy wrote:
Which army doesn't have one or two op rules? I lost close combat and had my whole unit swept just as many times as mss helped me win in close combat. It balanced out having a op captain or hq killing 3-6 models and easily sweeping the whole unit. The new fnp rules are a direct result of this issue. The decurion is another issue. I believe this was designed to replace the attacks our crypteks and C'tan use to have. As I have stated I would be happy to go back. I feel like how I played my Necrons was unique before, now it's cookie cutter. I don't want to play the way GW wants Necrons to play.

Chaos Marines have exactly 0 op rules, while Chaos Daemons only requires an investment of at least 600+pts to build their op combos.

And yet more tournaments are won by SM than any other army.

 darthdaddy wrote:
And yet more tournaments are won by SM than any other army.

That's because Space Marines have grav weapons, ignore sweeping advances etc. Chaos Marines don't. They have the high price per model without the advantages in special rules or wargear, unless they spend more points and still typically get less effective versions.

Chaos Marines << Space Marines in terms of power level.

I've always hated this attitude by people playing shooting armies.

I paid 40 points for a weapon, 35 points for armor, 50 points for better combat stats and 35 points for an assault transport to get them there. You paid points for the ability to shoot at supremely long range. I don't want 10 point upgrades to deflect your shooting back at you, you paid points for that shooting. I don't want invuln saves on all my models for free, you paid points for low AP.

This means, when you shoot at me, I remove models. No complaint there, I'm not asking for the ability to shoot back on your turn.

But the second my assault units might actually get some points back for all the melee abilities I bought, people playing shooting armies think they deserve to get 15 point upgrades to invalidate 150+ point characters, they think they're justified that they get to shoot out of turn sequence at me for no cost, and they still find one of the very, very few assault-favoring rules in the game oh so broken.

 darthdaddy wrote:
And yet more tournaments are won by SM than any other army.

Nice claim there, could use some evidence in it though, in case you wanted to back up your point.

https://www.tabletoptournaments.net/t3_armies.php?cid=0&gid=3

I can't believe how long it has taken for people to realize that MSS was overpowered

It was just as broken and dumb on the first day of that Necron Codex release as it was on the last, as I recall only Calgar ever gained immunity to it through selective wording on his leadership rule

Necrons are a poorly written Codex because as one person pointed out it fails the basics of game design which is to facillitate an experience where both people get enjoyment from playing. If you play someone with an Astra Militarum army, you could very well get blown off the board, but odds are you'll kill a lot of Guardsmen or blow up some light vehicles first. Its okay to have things like common place AV14 tanks if an assault is basically a guaranteed kill for most units and at its side armour it becomes almost 20% more vulnerable. There are clear, massive vulnerabilities that any army can take advantage of, and make things not just a binary outcome on those poiints for the other player.

With Necrons, if you came across pre-nerfed MSS, your character was screwed the vast majority of the time. There was no defence, no way to plan for it, (outside of Calgar) you could only just refuse and try kill the Lord in shooting or by other means. If you take a heavy melee character, well that investment just became invalid. With the RP Decurion abuse, there's no way for all but one army to really destroy it. Its something that is so likely to work it is basically guaranteed - like taking a Land Raider that's venerable, has melta immunity and can also be hit only on 6's, even in melee. Like playing Starcraft in a video game or whatever and suddenly your opponent gets a god unit as part of his faction that you can only avoid or hope doesn't influence the game outcome. That's a sign of a terrible strategy element.

If that wasn't bad enough, those warriors all have gauss so as part of the deal the Necron player gets that much extra anti-tank/anti-mc firepower thrown in. And surely, this investment, its a massive sacrifice for the Necron player to take, with high oppurtunity cost? Lol no.

Yeah, you can rinse repeat recite lines about how Necrons are beatable by xyz codex or select strategy all day long Sun Tzu but if they fail at being fun to play against on this level, they're overall a failure as a Codex.