Switch Theme:

Fixing necrons.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





I cannot comment on the strengths/weaknesses of necrons, but it seems like whenever any variation of this comes up, it seems like "reduce the cost" is many people's first reaction.

I think the base cost of most everything is too low as it is. When the dollar cost of the miniature is almost equal to its point cost, your creating a bad situation for attracting new players as well as encouraging players to try new armies.

I would really love to see reasonable suggestions for actually improving units as opposed to continuing to lower their point cost.
   
Made in us
Aspirant Tech-Adept






Well, fixng the RP would be a good start. The enemy hits one squad with everything, wipes it out and your RP is worthless. Maybe make RP better, or add a strategem that costs like 1cp and let's you make an rp roll for a squad that's been wiped out.

Maybe make a resseurection orb no longer a one shot thing.

Allow a spider to let a wiped out unit make a rp roll.

Let a monolith let a wiped out unit roll for rp.

I hope some of these suggestions meet your approval.

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

Once again, most people who want better RP want better RP for destroyers. This is because they are the central unit for our offense, without which we hit like we have pillows for hands. Thus most of the dislike for RP in its current incarnation is actually misplaced annoyance at being so reliant on destroyers, who typically gain very little from RP. If we fixed our reliance on destroyers by adding more offensively viable options to the necron list, I think people could even come to like RP for the much more fluffy and potentially snowballing power that it is.

One of the things GW could do to wean us from the destroyer reliance we currently have is make a minor alteration to tesla destructors and up. All they need to do is give tesla destructors a -1 ap and 2 damage. It's not a huge buff but would bring tesla destructors into line with twin las cannons against most heavy vehicles. This would give us a lot of ways to deal with heavier targets, doom scythes, night scythes, annihilation barges, hell maybe even the obelisk would see some use. Combined with some points reductions for our melee focused war gear, and we could get to be a mid tier army pretty easily.

Necrons - 4k
Dark angels - 2k


"You know what they say about brute force, if it's not working you are not using enough of it" 
   
Made in us
Aspirant Tech-Adept






 Grimgold wrote:
Once again, most people who want better RP want better RP for destroyers. This is because they are the central unit for our offense, without which we hit like we have pillows for hands. Thus most of the dislike for RP in its current incarnation is actually misplaced annoyance at being so reliant on destroyers, who typically gain very little from RP. If we fixed our reliance on destroyers by adding more offensively viable options to the necron list, I think people could even come to like RP for the much more fluffy and potentially snowballing power that it is.

One of the things GW could do to wean us from the destroyer reliance we currently have is make a minor alteration to tesla destructors and up. All they need to do is give tesla destructors a -1 ap and 2 damage. It's not a huge buff but would bring tesla destructors into line with twin las cannons against most heavy vehicles. This would give us a lot of ways to deal with heavier targets, doom scythes, night scythes, annihilation barges, hell maybe even the obelisk would see some use. Combined with some points reductions for our melee focused war gear, and we could get to be a mid tier army pretty easily.


Maybe make annihilation barges more effective? Maybe give tomb blades anti vehicle weapon options?

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura. 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





RP needs a rework for sure, tbh i dont care if it goes to a fnp as long as the points spent are actually viable for the army.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 06:54:41


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

Absolutely, mine isn't the only solution, and I would be stoked at any solution that achieved the same end. I think mine is the easiest and requires the least new rules, but I've been pleasantly surprised by GW in the past.

However it's done, The goal is to make us a less dependent on Destroyers. Once it's done, we can leave destroyers as High risk high reward unit, like dark reapers are for eldar (but significantly less OP). This would make them an interesting tactical choice than a required staple.

If they are going to keep destroyers as our only viable offensive option, then they need an invul or something to make them more durable against heavy weapons fire. Maybe something crazy like a rule where heavy weapons get a -1 to hit them, but I think that's a less clean solution.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 07:00:14


Necrons - 4k
Dark angels - 2k


"You know what they say about brute force, if it's not working you are not using enough of it" 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Give Destroyers a ‘half damage rounding up’ rule? It’d make them tough against heavy weapons but still susceptible to Assault Cannons and the like. Just spitballing though, not sure if it’s a workable solution.

It’s actually something I originally suggested to fix all units with the Terminator keyword, along with being allowed to Deep Strike at 6” rather than 9”
   
Made in us
Aspirant Tech-Adept






Give destroyers some of the option tomb blades have like shieldvanes or shadow looms?

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura. 
   
Made in gb
Loyal Necron Lychguard





They already have a 3+, and -1 to hit on a unit that can delete pretty much anything it looks at is silly-levels of OP

I think the people who are saying buff our Heavy Weapons to be worth a damn are on the right track

Experience is something you get just after you need it
The Narkos Dynasty - 10k
The Iron Serpents - 7.5k
Vulker Cavaliers - 3k  
   
Made in us
Aspirant Tech-Adept






Heavy weapons are often used to snuff vehicles and other are targets like daemons, monsters, etc. Maybe my idea of focused gauss fire rules being used to let flayer and blaster units damage vehicles could be of some help there.

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura. 
   
Made in gb
Loyal Necron Lychguard





I mean, Heavies need an overhaul regardless

but, if we keep the "Guass is just Necron-flavour Bolters", then we need them to actually hit like Lascannons/Battle Cannons/other species-specific heavy weapon like a pulse laser or a railgun

If we dont have heavy weapons worth that title, which is so to say that they remain the same as they are now, good enough to function but not good enough to excel, we need to be able to have our little guns do something to metal boxes again.

I like the "6s do Mortal Wounds to anything with the <Vehicle> keyword" suggestion I saw flaoting about, which means our destroyers can stick to tracking down things like MCs and elites, and allow infantry to crack tanks like they always have, until now

Experience is something you get just after you need it
The Narkos Dynasty - 10k
The Iron Serpents - 7.5k
Vulker Cavaliers - 3k  
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

 Grimgold wrote:

-Repair protocols, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but RP is inline with other core abilities from other codexes, it's better than ATSKNF, about the same as synapse, isn't backloaded like power from pain (thought RP can become better over time via snowballing), and compares pretty well to Disgustingly resilient.


Comparing RP to ATSKNF seems nonsensical because the SM codex isn't built around ATSKNF. Same goes for Power from Pain.

Disgustingly Resilient is the best juxtaposition and I'd argue that RPs fall flat in comparison because Disgustingly Resilient doesn't have an easy counter like RPs do. Disgustingly Resilient also works on Characters, unlike RPs. Disgustingly Resilient allows models that succeed to fight in combat on the same turn (unlike RPs) and means that they don't count towards morale losses (again, unlike RPs - which are doubly bad in that any resulting morale losses further counter RPs).

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker




Somerdale, NJ, USA

 vipoid wrote:
 Grimgold wrote:

-Repair protocols, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but RP is inline with other core abilities from other codexes, it's better than ATSKNF, about the same as synapse, isn't backloaded like power from pain (thought RP can become better over time via snowballing), and compares pretty well to Disgustingly resilient.


Comparing RP to ATSKNF seems nonsensical because the SM codex isn't built around ATSKNF. Same goes for Power from Pain.

Disgustingly Resilient is the best juxtaposition and I'd argue that RPs fall flat in comparison because Disgustingly Resilient doesn't have an easy counter like RPs do. Disgustingly Resilient also works on Characters, unlike RPs. Disgustingly Resilient allows models that succeed to fight in combat on the same turn (unlike RPs) and means that they don't count towards morale losses (again, unlike RPs - which are doubly bad in that any resulting morale losses further counter RPs).


That's a very well though out response; how would you suggest GW fix RP?


On a separate note, personally I'm a fan of Gauss causing a Mortal Wound on a natural Wound roll of 6. It fits their fluff where the shot peals back layers of paint, then armor, then skin, muscle, all the way to bone. Or the stories where a Gauss shot slowly eats it's way through a tanks armor. We're not talking about a lucky las shot hitting a vision slot or a weakened weld seam; physically breaking down the tanks armor.

"The only problem with your genepool is that there wasn't a lifeguard on duty to prevent you from swimming."

"You either die a Morty, or you live long enough to see yourself become a Rick."

- 8k /// - 5k /// - 3k /// - 4k /// - 6k /// - 2k (take out the actual Genestealers, only 1.1k) 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




You could make RP work like the Tomb Kings banners in AoS where they return a set number (or random like D3 or D6) of models to the unit each turn depending on the unit. It would be easier to cost aswell.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut




Darsath wrote:
You could make RP work like the Tomb Kings banners in AoS where they return a set number (or random like D3 or D6) of models to the unit each turn depending on the unit. It would be easier to cost aswell.


That would be 3 times harder to balance than the actual RP, like it was in AoS.

No, Necrons right now need to start with Tesla destructors at damage 2 (AP-1 could be a bit too much) and with a mortal wound on 6 against vehicles for gauss weapons.
That would already completely shift the necron meta and solve most of the problems by itself.

Reducing the cost of some weapon upgrades (in particular the melee ones), could also be helpful.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 13:40:12


 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Spoletta wrote:

No, Necrons right now need to start with Tesla destructors at damage 2 (AP-1 could be a bit too much) and with a mortal wound on 6 against vehicles for gauss weapons.
That would already completely shift the necron meta and solve most of the problems by itself.

I completely agree. Those two changes alone would do us the world of good and I really don't know why GW didn't implement Gauss this way in our codex. Maybe they thought it would be OP but vehicles have so many wounds anyway and it only really benefits big blobs of Warriors and to a lesser extent Gauss Immortals. Everyone uses Tesla Immortals and nobody takes Warriors so.... maybe they need all the help they can get....
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Maybe because mortal wounds on basic weapons is absurd, and would overlap with Deathmark's gimmick?

Stop suggestion mortal wounds, the game has enough of those already. You don't put out a trash fire by pouring gasoline on it.

+1 damage is much more balanced and benefits all weapons equally, and is more useful against multi-wound units.
Or combining the hits to make stronger hits, which would compensate for the lack of heavy / special weapons option. Mortal wounds would be effective against hoards, as you can spread the mw to 1w infantry, which is not what Gauss weapons were about. This obsession for mortal wounds needs to die.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/29 14:32:36


What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Maybe because mortal wounds on basic weapons is absurd, and would overlap with Deathmark's gimmick?

Stop suggestion mortal wounds, the game has enough of those already. You don't put out a trash fire by pouring gasoline on it.

+1 damage is much more balanced and benefits all weapons equally, and is more useful against multi-wound units.
Or combining the hits to make stronger hits, which would compensate for the lack of heavy / special weapons option. Mortal wounds would be effective against hoards, as you can spread the mw to 1w infantry, which is not what Gauss weapons were about. This obsession for mortal wounds needs to die.


While I agree about Mortal Wounds being too prevalent, I think you're missing the fact this suggestion relates only to damage against vehicles. So it'd be a MW to anything with the <VEHICLE> keyword on a wound roll of 6. I think that would be OK for Necrons given the current state of their anti-tank.
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

If its locked to vehicles...maybe. I still don't like it, but if it affects a single unit type then it might not be too bad. It would do something against knights at least, which have annoyingly high invuls.

What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in us
One Canoptek Scarab in a Swarm




 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
If its locked to vehicles...maybe. I still don't like it, but if it affects a single unit type then it might not be too bad. It would do something against knights at least, which have annoyingly high invuls.


Rending could be another flavorful option. On a wound roll of 6, AP increases by 2. So a Warrior wound roll of 6 results in an AP-3 wound.
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Doesn't actually help that much against vehicles though. Against vehicles you want extra damage, not extra pen. You are already reducing more vehicle saves to 4+ anyway, and immortals can take that down to 5+.

What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

 vipoid wrote:
 Grimgold wrote:

-Repair protocols, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but RP is inline with other core abilities from other codexes, it's better than ATSKNF, about the same as synapse, isn't backloaded like power from pain (thought RP can become better over time via snowballing), and compares pretty well to Disgustingly resilient.


Comparing RP to ATSKNF seems nonsensical because the SM codex isn't built around ATSKNF. Same goes for Power from Pain.

Disgustingly Resilient is the best juxtaposition and I'd argue that RPs fall flat in comparison because Disgustingly Resilient doesn't have an easy counter like RPs do. Disgustingly Resilient also works on Characters, unlike RPs. Disgustingly Resilient allows models that succeed to fight in combat on the same turn (unlike RPs) and means that they don't count towards morale losses (again, unlike RPs - which are doubly bad in that any resulting morale losses further counter RPs).


Assuming the unit survives (which is a big ask for destroyers, but less so for other units with RP), RP is better than DR. It's the same 5+, but can bring back multiple wounds on a single roll, can be buffed fairly easily to be 4+, and continues to function even after the first failure. So it can be way better than DR, with a single exception from our codex, which is a small unit, destroyers.

As a thought experiment to prove the point, imagine if they gave us mob up for destroyers or Destroyer max units size is now 12. This would be a game changer, You could count on RP to always occur for destroyers, because getting 9+ heavy weapon shots against destroyers is fairly easy for most list, getting 18+ less so. That's about the fire power required to down a knight in a single shooting phase, which we know most armies struggle with. In this thought experiment, RP would be giving us hundreds of points per round to snowball from, and multiple chances to silence our opponents heavy weapons making the destroyers even more safe as the battle went on. This would make RP completely overpowered, and doesn't involve a single change to RP.

Rules wise RP is a great mechanic that compares favorably to just about any other armies central gimmick, but people judge it based on a single unit that by design doesn't benefit very much from it. If they fix our big guns to be worth a fig, destroyers move from the central pillar of our offense to be a high risk high reward unit that you can bring to put some extra punch in your army.

Necrons - 4k
Dark angels - 2k


"You know what they say about brute force, if it's not working you are not using enough of it" 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




The slight problem with adding one damage on a 6 to hit is that a Gauss flayer still has to wound, meaning it's really not very useful for taking vehicles out.

I'd like to see doubling up on a 6, but again this doesn't help take out vehicles. Making the natural 6 to wound instead of to hit would probably solve this to some degree.

So, all Gauss weapons add one damage and double AP on a natural to wound roll of 6.

Not sure whether it is a better alternative to mortal wounds. Might stand out more as unique to necrons since mortal wounds are so prolific. Also vaults and ctan are our source of MW.


Still a big fan of two damage destructors and melee unit price drops. And the big fix needed is movement, i.e. teleportation transports.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grimgold wrote:


Assuming the unit survives (which is a big ask for destroyers, but less so for other units with RP), RP is better than DR. It's the same 5+, but can bring back multiple wounds on a single roll, can be buffed fairly easily to be 4+, and continues to function even after the first failure. So it can be way better than DR, with a single exception from our codex, which is a small unit, destroyers.

As a thought experiment to prove the point, imagine if they gave us mob up for destroyers or Destroyer max units size is now 12. This would be a game changer, You could count on RP to always occur for destroyers, because getting 9+ heavy weapon shots against destroyers is fairly easy for most list, getting 18+ less so. That's about the fire power required to down a knight in a single shooting phase, which we know most armies struggle with. In this thought experiment, RP would be giving us hundreds of points per round to snowball from, and multiple chances to silence our opponents heavy weapons making the destroyers even more safe as the battle went on. This would make RP completely overpowered, and doesn't involve a single change to RP.

Rules wise RP is a great mechanic that compares favorably to just about any other armies central gimmick, but people judge it based on a single unit that by design doesn't benefit very much from it. If they fix our big guns to be worth a fig, destroyers move from the central pillar of our offense to be a high risk high reward unit that you can bring to put some extra punch in your army.


So what you're saying is that if we take a unit that rp completely doesn't work for, and then change the unit so its op, then rp must be good under all situations?

Somehow I don't think your argument holds up.

As many many people have said already rp is great at low points and sucks at normal/high point levels. Fundamentally this is the issue. It needs to work better at all point levels, or at least for the standard 2k games.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 16:56:21


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




What's funny is I already know the route GW is going to take with Destroyers.

They'll increase the unit cost, but not touch Extermination Protocols.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
One Canoptek Scarab in a Swarm




I'm not sure where you're getting RP is good, except for destroyers. I've brought full units of warriors/immortals in many 1.5-2k games, and watch my opponent proceed to wipe a unit each turn, even with the prepared positions stratagem. It's pretty bad all around.

Sure, you may get lucky 1 out of 5 games, and your opponent fails to wipe a unit. Now you run through the checklist. Do I need to autopass morale? If I do, do I already have a Cryptek nearby to buff the RP roll? Basically, so many things have to fall into place to make RP work well, whereas Disgusting Resilient requires no extra interaction.

If RP were changed to a 5+++, for example, the effective wounds on a 20 model squad is now around 26, which is significantly better than not being able to roll for RP at all. RP as it stands is too volatile to build a competitive army around.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 17:18:07


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

As to discussing the specific of giving tesla destructors a -1 AP and two damage. Here is the math that shows, it just brings it into line with twin las cannons:

Twin Lascannon at a LRBT:
2/3 * 2/3 * 5/6 * 3.5 * 2 = 2.59 damage per round on average
Suggested destructor at a LRBT
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 2 * 8 = 2.66 damage per round

We are not talking about a huge change, if you brought two annihilation barges and a couple of flyers, it's the equivalent of 8 extra lascannons worth of firepower. Added to a DDA it's 11 or 12 lascannons worth of output for the army, formidable certainly (especially compared to our current abilities), but well short of what's required to drop a knight in a round. The above scenario would require an investment of 820 points minimum, so it's not like we are getting all of this for an absurdly low cost.

As for other changes I've seen in this thread

tesla destructor with just -1 AP
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 8 = 1.33 damage per round

Tesla destructor with just 2 damage
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 * 1/3 * 2 * 8 = 1.74 damage epr round

So each change by themselves fall pretty short of where we need to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Necronplayer wrote:
I'm not sure where you're getting RP is good, except for destroyers. I've brought full units of warriors/immortals in many 1.5-2k games, and watch my opponent proceed to wipe a unit each turn, even with the prepared positions stratagem. It's pretty bad all around.

Sure, you may get lucky 1 out of 5 games, and your opponent fails to wipe a unit. Now you run through the checklist. Do I need to autopass morale? If I do, do I already have a Cryptek nearby to buff the RP roll? Basically, so many things have to fall into place to make RP work well, whereas Disgusting Resilient requires no extra interaction.

If RP were changed to a 5+++, for example, the effective wounds on a 20 model squad is now around 26, which is significantly better than not being able to roll for RP at all. RP as it stands is too volatile to build a competitive army around.


I've put in over a hundred games with necrons this edition, and my experience is completely different. My infantry almost always get a few rounds of RP, because by the time they can afford to waste firepower on low threat units like troops, they've already won the game by dunking my destroyers. If someone is devoting the firepower to completely kill a 20 man blob of warriors, or a squad of immortals in cover, they've already wiped out your dangerous units and already won the game, or they are making a terrible mistake. Do you need to see the math on what incredible efforts it takes to wipe out those units in a single turn, I'm happy to show you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrPieChee wrote:


So what you're saying is that if we take a unit that rp completely doesn't work for, and then change the unit so its op, then rp must be good under all situations?

Somehow I don't think your argument holds up.

As many many people have said already rp is great at low points and sucks at normal/high point levels. Fundamentally this is the issue. It needs to work better at all point levels, or at least for the standard 2k games.


Ok so let's walk down the garden path since I seem to have lost you at some point.

1.) Compared to other central gimmicks, RP is mathematically a good ability. It's better than DR for the vast majority of our units.
2.) A single unit in the necron codex doesn't benefit from RP much, which is by design.
3.) If that unit were able to take better advantage of RP, it would be completely OP as shown in my thought experiment.
4.) We are heavily dependent on the single unit in our codex that doesn't benefit much from RP.
5.) The combination of point 2 and point 4 make people feel like point 1 isn't true.

I was in the same boat, I used to not like RP, because I felt it was too weak, You can check my post history to verify. I was hung up on how good RP was in 7th ed, but I know that the ability to ignore wounds almost 2/3 of the time was not good for the game. I was also suffering like every other necron player with trying to find ways to keep my destroyers alive. What's different now is that I experimented with list without destroyers, I did the math, played other armies, played against necrons with other armies. This challenged my assumptions on RP, and rather than ignoring it I did more research into why observations didn't match what I expected to see. The math said what I was observing wasn't even all that unlikely, and when the math says your wrong it's time to reconsider your view point. This allowed me to think about the problem in new ways, and that's how I came to the conclusion I did.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/29 18:28:21


Necrons - 4k
Dark angels - 2k


"You know what they say about brute force, if it's not working you are not using enough of it" 
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grimgold wrote:
As to discussing the specific of giving tesla destructors a -1 AP and two damage. Here is the math that shows, it just brings it into line with twin las cannons:

Twin Lascannon at a LRBT:
2/3 * 2/3 * 5/6 * 3.5 * 2 = 2.59 damage per round on average
Suggested destructor at a LRBT
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 2 * 8 = 2.66 damage per round

We are not talking about a huge change, if you brought two annihilation barges and a couple of flyers, it's the equivalent of 8 extra lascannons worth of firepower. Added to a DDA it's 11 or 12 lascannons worth of output for the army, formidable certainly (especially compared to our current abilities), but well short of what's required to drop a knight in a round. The above scenario would require an investment of 820 points minimum, so it's not like we are getting all of this for an absurdly low cost.

As for other changes I've seen in this thread

tesla destructor with just -1 AP
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 8 = 1.33 damage per round

Tesla destructor with just 2 damage
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 * 1/3 * 2 * 8 = 1.74 damage epr round

So each change by themselves fall pretty short of where we need to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Necronplayer wrote:
I'm not sure where you're getting RP is good, except for destroyers. I've brought full units of warriors/immortals in many 1.5-2k games, and watch my opponent proceed to wipe a unit each turn, even with the prepared positions stratagem. It's pretty bad all around.

Sure, you may get lucky 1 out of 5 games, and your opponent fails to wipe a unit. Now you run through the checklist. Do I need to autopass morale? If I do, do I already have a Cryptek nearby to buff the RP roll? Basically, so many things have to fall into place to make RP work well, whereas Disgusting Resilient requires no extra interaction.

If RP were changed to a 5+++, for example, the effective wounds on a 20 model squad is now around 26, which is significantly better than not being able to roll for RP at all. RP as it stands is too volatile to build a competitive army around.


I've put in over a hundred games with necrons this edition, and my experience is completely different. My infantry almost always get a few rounds of RP, because by the time they can afford to waste firepower on low threat units like troops, they've already won the game by dunking my destroyers. If someone is devoting the firepower to completely kill a 20 man blob of warriors, or a squad of immortals in cover, they've already wiped out your dangerous units and already won the game, or they are making a terrible mistake. Do you need to see the math on what incredible efforts it takes to wipe out those units in a single turn, I'm happy to show you.


You are approaching this the wrong way.
Tesla destructors are not lascannons, they don't cover the same role. Lascannons are there to hurt T8 3+ targets, because they have high AP and high strenght, but lose efficency as soon as invul saves get into the picture, and can't kill more than one guy.
A tesla destructor (new version) is a multi damage high ROF weapon, which isn't impaired by invul saves and can make a mess of heavy infantry, but is countered by high T. If it has the same efficency as a lascannon against it's preferred target, then it means that it is completely broken, it would be in a situation identical to the current dissie cannons.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 wuestenfux wrote:
Some way to block psychic powers would be nice.


This so much. I always found it odd that the faction of soulless robots that created the pylons that held back the eye of terror had such poor psychic defense. They should have the strongest along side sisters of silence.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Grimgold wrote:
As to discussing the specific of giving tesla destructors a -1 AP and two damage. Here is the math that shows, it just brings it into line with twin las cannons:

Twin Lascannon at a LRBT:
2/3 * 2/3 * 5/6 * 3.5 * 2 = 2.59 damage per round on average
Suggested destructor at a LRBT
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 2 * 8 = 2.66 damage per round

We are not talking about a huge change, if you brought two annihilation barges and a couple of flyers, it's the equivalent of 8 extra lascannons worth of firepower. Added to a DDA it's 11 or 12 lascannons worth of output for the army, formidable certainly (especially compared to our current abilities), but well short of what's required to drop a knight in a round. The above scenario would require an investment of 820 points minimum, so it's not like we are getting all of this for an absurdly low cost.

As for other changes I've seen in this thread

tesla destructor with just -1 AP
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 *1/2 * 8 = 1.33 damage per round

Tesla destructor with just 2 damage
(1/2 + 1/6 * 3) * 1/3 * 1/3 * 2 * 8 = 1.74 damage epr round

So each change by themselves fall pretty short of where we need to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Necronplayer wrote:
I'm not sure where you're getting RP is good, except for destroyers. I've brought full units of warriors/immortals in many 1.5-2k games, and watch my opponent proceed to wipe a unit each turn, even with the prepared positions stratagem. It's pretty bad all around.

Sure, you may get lucky 1 out of 5 games, and your opponent fails to wipe a unit. Now you run through the checklist. Do I need to autopass morale? If I do, do I already have a Cryptek nearby to buff the RP roll? Basically, so many things have to fall into place to make RP work well, whereas Disgusting Resilient requires no extra interaction.

If RP were changed to a 5+++, for example, the effective wounds on a 20 model squad is now around 26, which is significantly better than not being able to roll for RP at all. RP as it stands is too volatile to build a competitive army around.


I've put in over a hundred games with necrons this edition, and my experience is completely different. My infantry almost always get a few rounds of RP, because by the time they can afford to waste firepower on low threat units like troops, they've already won the game by dunking my destroyers. If someone is devoting the firepower to completely kill a 20 man blob of warriors, or a squad of immortals in cover, they've already wiped out your dangerous units and already won the game, or they are making a terrible mistake. Do you need to see the math on what incredible efforts it takes to wipe out those units in a single turn, I'm happy to show you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrPieChee wrote:


So what you're saying is that if we take a unit that rp completely doesn't work for, and then change the unit so its op, then rp must be good under all situations?

Somehow I don't think your argument holds up.

As many many people have said already rp is great at low points and sucks at normal/high point levels. Fundamentally this is the issue. It needs to work better at all point levels, or at least for the standard 2k games.


Ok so let's walk down the garden path since I seem to have lost you at some point.

1.) Compared to other central gimmicks, RP is mathematically a good ability. It's better than DR for the vast majority of our units.
2.) A single unit in the necron codex doesn't benefit from RP much, which is by design.
3.) If that unit were able to take better advantage of RP, it would be completely OP as shown in my thought experiment.
4.) We are heavily dependent on the single unit in our codex that doesn't benefit much from RP.
5.) The combination of point 2 and point 4 make people feel like point 1 isn't true.

I was in the same boat, I used to not like RP, because I felt it was too weak, You can check my post history to verify. I was hung up on how good RP was in 7th ed, but I know that the ability to ignore wounds almost 2/3 of the time was not good for the game. I was also suffering like every other necron player with trying to find ways to keep my destroyers alive. What's different now is that I experimented with list without destroyers, I did the math, played other armies, played against necrons with other armies. This challenged my assumptions on RP, and rather than ignoring it I did more research into why observations didn't match what I expected to see. The math said what I was observing wasn't even all that unlikely, and when the math says your wrong it's time to reconsider your view point. This allowed me to think about the problem in new ways, and that's how I came to the conclusion I did.

If you're having a tough time killing a 17 point Marine or 12 point Marine I think your army has issues.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

Spoletta wrote:


You are approaching this the wrong way.
Tesla destructors are not lascannons, they don't cover the same role. Lascannons are there to hurt T8 3+ targets, because they have high AP and high strenght, but lose efficency as soon as invul saves get into the picture, and can't kill more than one guy.
A tesla destructor (new version) is a multi damage high ROF weapon, which isn't impaired by invul saves and can make a mess of heavy infantry, but is countered by high T. If it has the same efficency as a lascannon against it's preferred target, then it means that it is completely broken, it would be in a situation identical to the current dissie cannons.


We are already a nightmare for elite infantry thanks to the gauss blaster, which is str 5 ap -2 rapid fire, and available on tomb blades/immortals, units which are staples of every necron list. So this changes nothing on that front, Custodes and terminators are already good matchups for us, and this change isn't likely to affect their viability.

As for tesla destructors not being las cannons, sure that's absolutely true as of right now. There are two problems with the status quo on that though; first tesla destructors are useless, with mid strength, no ap, and a single damage the current TD is a slight upgrade to a hurricane bolter. This is the main armament of four of our vehicles, and that makes them completely useless. The other problem is we aren't able to bring our lascannon equivalents in any quantity, two units can bring them, one of which falls over in a stiff breeze, and the other is a dreadnought equivalent, with some neat rules and half again the cost. We are failing in the current meta because of this, we can't counter vehicles/monsters, and in the current meta that is a death sentence.

So my proposed solution, is by design a change to the status quo, because the current status quo blows for necrons. It fixes two big issues with necrons, the viability of TD and therefore a large chunk of our vehicles, and our inability to effectively take on heavy units.

Necrons - 4k
Dark angels - 2k


"You know what they say about brute force, if it's not working you are not using enough of it" 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: