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.

Who's hoping we'll get a gargantuan C'tan again in 8th? The Tesseract Vault was underwhelming for obvious reasons. Void Dragon triumvirate? Plus I'd really like to see the random generated shooting attacks go away. Maybe a little extra movement distance and wounds added to current C'tans? One can only pray. These models are collecting dust.

There is no such thing as gargantuan in 8th. So good luck with that.

Come on, you know what I mean. The equivalent to a current gargantuan.

I think we're more likely to see the Silent King return.

The thought is GW is going to make them worth taking, so random shooting phase is probably gone. I'm guessing that the nightbringers gaze will replace his shooting powers, probably to function similarly to a heavy flamer, d6 autohits, str 6, ap -2, 1 damage.

Fluff wise we can expect the nightbringers melee attack to be around as powerful as an avatar of Khaine, str 8, ap -3, d6 damage with around 4 attacks hitting on 2s or 3s. Whereas the AoK has a melta profile on his attacks night bringer will probably heal himself by killing people.

Finally Neither the AoK nor the Nightbringer will be able to hide behind nearby units, so they will be in the 10+ wound range, 12 at a guess.

Nightbringer
M: 12" WS: 3+ BS: 4+ S: 6 T: 6 W:12 A: 4 Ld: 10 Save: 4++

Voidreaper: S: +2, AP -3, D: D6
When a model is slain with this weapon the night bringer regains a lost wound up to his maximum wounds.

Gaze of Death: In the shooting phase Nightbringer may use gaze of death as a shooting attack, it has the following profile:

Assault d6 autohits R: 12" S: 6 AP: -2 D: 1

Immune to natural law: The nightbringer ignores terrain and opposing units while moving but can not end his movement in impassable terrain or within 1 " of an enemy unit. He may also leave combat and shoot in the same turn if he desires.

Not bad stats. In just hoping they're usable, and the overall assumption will be that they will be as powerful as other MCs, but with the wounds to not die to bolt guns in 1 round of shooting.

Also, please make our Superheavies comparable to others.

As other have said, make them more durable, faster and remove the random powers.

The Nightbringer should be really durable and destructive while the Deceiver should have debuffs and illusions.
I have no opinion on the Trancendant, bring the Void Dragon instead!

They have so much potential. Make them fun to play and unique.

I've always been of the opinion ever since Gargantuans began and the Transcendent being... underwhelming in size, that there should be two stat lines for every C'tan, one as a "small" MC Shard and the other as the Transcendent culmination of numerous Shards which leads to a Garganutan version.

Sadly, if AoS is any indication, we're not likely to see that happen until new models for all three are released.

I note that you missed the Necrodermis explosion, Grimgold. Do you not like it, or think that it doesn't deserve the room for it?

 Charistoph wrote:
I've always been of the opinion ever since Gargantuans began and the Transcendent being... underwhelming in size, that there should be two stat lines for every C'tan, one as a "small" MC Shard and the other as the Transcendent culmination of numerous Shards which leads to a Garganutan version.

Sadly, if AoS is any indication, we're not likely to see that happen until new models for all three are released.

I note that you missed the Necrodermis explosion, Grimgold. Do you not like it, or think that it doesn't deserve the room for it?

lol, actually I just forgot it . Though since seeing a swarmlord, I think I might have lowballed the night bringer, before that faction focus all I had to go off of was the dreadnought, and a swarm lord could eat dreads all day. I'd probably up his stats a little, first A 2+ for nightbringer to hit in CC and a 4+ ranged seems a bit more likely than a balanced approach, and the number of attacks is probably low. The nightbringer should be THE melee unit for the necrons, the kind of unit when you see him drop onto the board you start making plans to deal with him. The fact he was a slightly juiced up lychguard with a worse save is telling, the only cool things about him were gaze of death (which was only cool because it was so poorly worded) and all the USRs he got from being a monstrous creature.

He was definitely on the list of unit in the necron codex I thought could use some love, which was hard to ask for since the necrons were in a good place overall and so many other armies were not. The others were the obelisk, destruction ark, annihilation barge, the other C'Tan, and doom scythes. The fact they were mostly vehicles is not a coincidence, so the change in 8th ed will probably help most of them.

Pffft, the Obelisk and Doom Scythes were actually pretty solid in 7th edition, but I agree with the others listed. I'm already disappointed with the released stats for the A barge, but I'll have to hold judgement until I see what Living Metal and Quantum Shielding do.

If the Obelisk had a similar unit type and price point to the Monolith, it would have been solid. However, it is a Super-Heavy with under-whelming Firepower and an ability which was 'meh' at best and useless at worst.

The problem with the obelisk is that tesla kind of sucks in 7th, It's basically a slightly beefier scatter laser, that never gets to the volume of fire that made scatter lasers dangerous. The obelisk is about equivalent fire power wise to 6ish scatter bikes, but without their maneuverability or jink. It also brought all the baggage of being a super heavy LoW, and would get rolled by any other super heavy. Gravity pulse was also underwhelming.

As for the doom scythe, if you jink it's useless, if you don't jink it's dead. So you basically got one shot with the death ray as you came on (if you were lucky), and then hope it can suck enough fire power to justify the points. The death ray should have been str D, but instead we got the most amazing weapon that could only hit targets once, because the doom scythe has continued flying past them.

In 8th ed I imagine the deathray will have a purpose, Heavy D3, str 10, ap -4 , d6 damage, it can quite easily mess up heavies in a single shot. The addition of a damage value basically fixes it.

Tesla is tougher to fix, str 7 is awkward in the new system as it's between breakpoints, 3+ to wound MEQ and 5+ to wound heavy vehicles, which will be the same for str 5, str 6, and str 7. Basically it becomes a crappy twin linked heavy bolter because it doesn't have a rend value. So if it's the only armament an obelisk is going to need a much higher throughput. As it stands an obelisk would lose a fight with a leman russ, which flies in the face of the obelisk being the necron answer to imperial knights.

Tesla needs a fairly radical change to get it out of the master of none category. You could increase it's strength, but the lack of an AP value means it will take silly amounts of shots to hurt other vehicles. Adding AP is probably a non-starter fluff wise.

So you probably need to go with something like more attacks against larger units, or give it the ability to hit additional units near the original target. Something that would be a fairly large departure from a literal translation.

Yeah I'd kinda hope that the transcendent has a meatier statline again just so that it actually represents a transcendent C'tan rather than a generic shard.

And heck if it is a Lord of War again, that's my three lords of war sorted to do a superheavy detachment.

 Grimgold wrote:


Finally Neither the AoK nor the Nightbringer will be able to hide behind nearby units, so they will be in the 10+ wound range, 12 at a guess.
.

Unless they change their unit type to "character" it won't matter how many wounds they have. You can target any non-character unit you can see (as far as we know), regardless of range.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:


Finally Neither the AoK nor the Nightbringer will be able to hide behind nearby units, so they will be in the 10+ wound range, 12 at a guess.
.

Unless they change their unit type to "character" it won't matter how many wounds they have. You can target any non-character unit you can see (as far as we know), regardless of range.

The nightbringer and the Deceiver have been characters since 3rd, I don't see that changing. They are unique in the army, and will be viable goals for things like "Kill a character to score X victory points".

 Grimgold wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:


Finally Neither the AoK nor the Nightbringer will be able to hide behind nearby units, so they will be in the 10+ wound range, 12 at a guess.
.

Unless they change their unit type to "character" it won't matter how many wounds they have. You can target any non-character unit you can see (as far as we know), regardless of range.

The nightbringer and the Deceiver have been characters since 3rd, I don't see that changing. They are unique in the army, and will be viable goals for things like "Kill a character to score X victory points".

5th actually. The Character Type didn't exist till 6th Edition, and Necrons were given the Character Type in their 5th Edition codex as it was the last codex before 6th.

Still, they were the only unique models in the 3rd Ed codex, which is as close as you'll get to base Characters before the above.

Someone also seemed to have forgotten that Characters with a high enough Wound stat will not be able to hide with the units around them. The comparison between Guillaman and a Bloodthirster was used as this example. Even as a Character, the C'tan are still Monstrous Creatures and so will likely have the higher number of Wounds that will preclude them from hiding.

 Grimgold wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:


Finally Neither the AoK nor the Nightbringer will be able to hide behind nearby units, so they will be in the 10+ wound range, 12 at a guess.
.

Unless they change their unit type to "character" it won't matter how many wounds they have. You can target any non-character unit you can see (as far as we know), regardless of range.

The nightbringer and the Deceiver have been characters since 3rd, I don't see that changing. They are unique in the army, and will be viable goals for things like "Kill a character to score X victory points".

Huh, I'd forgotten it had Monstrous Creature (character) type. I just remembered monstrous creature. I guess we'll see how it falls. I don't see them having 11+ wounds, so whether or not they remain characters is going to be pretty important. Argh! I just want these books released already!

I'd really love to see these models get an 8th edition reboot. Have new models similar is size to Magnus or the new Lord of Change.

 Grimgold wrote:
The problem with the obelisk is that tesla kind of sucks in 7th, It's basically a slightly beefier scatter laser, that never gets to the volume of fire that made scatter lasers dangerous. The obelisk is about equivalent fire power wise to 6ish scatter bikes, but without their maneuverability or jink. It also brought all the baggage of being a super heavy LoW, and would get rolled by any other super heavy. Gravity pulse was also underwhelming.

As for the doom scythe, if you jink it's useless, if you don't jink it's dead. So you basically got one shot with the death ray as you came on (if you were lucky), and then hope it can suck enough fire power to justify the points. The death ray should have been str D, but instead we got the most amazing weapon that could only hit targets once, because the doom scythe has continued flying past them.

In 8th ed I imagine the deathray will have a purpose, Heavy D3, str 10, ap -4 , d6 damage, it can quite easily mess up heavies in a single shot. The addition of a damage value basically fixes it.

Tesla is tougher to fix, str 7 is awkward in the new system as it's between breakpoints, 3+ to wound MEQ and 5+ to wound heavy vehicles, which will be the same for str 5, str 6, and str 7. Basically it becomes a crappy twin linked heavy bolter because it doesn't have a rend value. So if it's the only armament an obelisk is going to need a much higher throughput. As it stands an obelisk would lose a fight with a leman russ, which flies in the face of the obelisk being the necron answer to imperial knights.

Tesla needs a fairly radical change to get it out of the master of none category. You could increase it's strength, but the lack of an AP value means it will take silly amounts of shots to hurt other vehicles. Adding AP is probably a non-starter fluff wise.

So you probably need to go with something like more attacks against larger units, or give it the ability to hit additional units near the original target. Something that would be a fairly large departure from a literal translation.

I used the Doom Scythe formation a few times. The good thing with it was that you could obliterate something from the table. Take those scatterbikes for example. There's not many places you can hide from a flyer. What I noticed was that many player ignored the Doom Scythes after their first run because the next turn they were either going to ongoing reserves or positioned in such a way that they could only shoot at a low priority target or not at all. So what usually happened was that they only shoot a couple if times each game, but I could pretty much decide what they would shoot at and most of the times they killed the target. Was it worth it? Definetly in some games and in other games they didn't do so much.

I've never used an Obelisk (don't own one either), but the rules seems poor and weapons weak, the only redeeming fact seems to be that it's a super heavy vehicle.
I would have liked to try one out and will most likely buy one soon if the rules seems ok and fun in 8th.

As for C'tans I've only used the Nightbringer once. It was quickly shot to pieces by Obliterators. It actually absorbed a surprising amount of firepower which allowed the rest of my army to do their thing.

I agree with you assessment of tesla in 8th, if the rules are simply ported over.
As you say the way to do it would be to increase the amount of shots somehow. Perhaps 3 extra shots instead of 2?
Looking at how GW has tried to balance weapons to make all weapons viable then either gauss will be nerfed and tesla stay the same or gauss will have the same effectiveness and tesla buffed.
Snap shooting seems to be a rule of the past so I would guess that tesla at least would benefit from that.

To be fair, for doom scythe/night scythe and the annihilation barge, 8th ed is going to flat double those shots because of them being twin linked. That should help them significantly, but still leaves the tesla carbine and tesla spheres with something to be desired.

The grav flux bombard might give us a hint on how Tesla could work, for every five models in the target unit it gets an extra d3 shots. If on a six you could add additional hits equal to 1 + 1 for every five models in the target unit, it would be a nice boost against horde armies.

Of course we might be barking up the wrong tree, maybe they won't mess with tesla and instead will make gravity pulse actually worth remembering to use.

This is from the 4chan leak compilation.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/6e294v/leak_compilation_4chan/
I have not seen any conclusive evidence of this yet.

C'tan 220/230 points
M8 WS2+ BS2+ S8 T8 W8 4++
melee AP-4 d6 damage nightbringer, the same
but 3 damage the deceiver.
Deceiver can redeploy itself and 1d3 units
everywhere at almost 12" from the enemy but
can't charge.
Nighbringer has a shooting attack 12" assault
d6 S8 AP -4 d3 damage
They know a c'tan power listed at the beginning.
Apparently they are characters so holy gak they
can't be targeted.

I wonder if you have to buy a C'tan power for the just as with wargear?

 Cmdr_Sune wrote:

I wonder if you have to buy a C'tan power for the just as with wargear?

Probably not. I would imagine we treat C'tan powers the way other races treat Psionics.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Cmdr_Sune wrote:

I wonder if you have to buy a C'tan power for the just as with wargear?

Probably not. I would imagine we treat C'tan powers the way other races treat Psionics.

Except for them being handled in the Psychic Phase, of course.

 Charistoph wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

 Cmdr_Sune wrote:

I wonder if you have to buy a C'tan power for the just as with wargear?

Probably not. I would imagine we treat C'tan powers the way other races treat Psionics.

Except for them being handled in the Psychic Phase, of course.

Have any of the leaks mentioned when Powers of the C'tan are used? I remember GW mentioning that each race will have something to do in the Psychic Phase, so I assumed our powers would be moved from Shooting to Psychic.

They said they didn't mean Tau or Necrons for psychic stuff, So I imagine it's a shooting attack. Little disappointed to see they aren't as beef as the avatar of Khaine, and a little weirded out that someone who had a rule "above all others" can now hide behind infantry. But hey progress is a weird thing.