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.

Before I begin I will just mention that I'm looking to buy small squads just for kill team and not an army - price, then in this case doesn't matter so much as I'm only buying a handful of models.

I was looking to start a Necron kill team as I feel reanimation rules make for a fun force to play against. I don't think I'm too keen on the Necron minis though! They look a bit comical in my mind (not a bad thing necessarily, just playing for fun), those feet! A bit too chunky.

I was looking for replacements and found these from the infinity skirmish game:

- looks like a resurrection orb to me?!


I like the more functional legs and more robotic (rather than skeletal) look.

Which style do you prefer, GW or Infinity? Do you like the chunky GW minis as they are easier to paint, easier to pick out on the battlefield and more characterful or the more 'realistic' and overly detained infinity ones?

Just thinking about it now, maybe GW necrons have a certain charm?

I started with Necrons in 8th edition and I have to say the models are WONDERFUL. Especially the older sculpts with the classic neon green gauss rods.

I love the skeletal "Tomb Kings in SPAAAAAACE" vibe of the army. Than again I played Tomb Kings in fantasy in 8th edition, so I am incredibly biased.

I like the green glow effect gw does with them.

My 12 year old collects necron and I do think they are cool. But... I never really got it, if they are like sentient metal terminators, or more like undead in metal armour, they sort of sit between the two.

Necrons do have some cool looking models though, the triarch stalkers are very nice.

Not my cup of tea, but, I can appreciate them, if that makes sense.

I don't play Necrons and probably won't ever, but honestly, I actually like the GW guy way better than the Infinity guy(s).

The only think I don't like about him is his scythe, because it looks like a farming scythe instead of a war scythe. Like, how does he even use that in battle? If he was my guy, I'd probably cut the head off and place a Lychguard Warscythe part that looks normal instead.

I just don't like the Infinity guys. Their aesthetic lacks the charm that the robot skeleton guy has, and feels really generically sci-fi in a bad way.

I hate the squatting i need to take a dump look of the warriors.

Well Necrons got me in to 40k and are the only army I've ever collected or probably will ever collect. So, yeah safe to say I like the aesthetic. More-so the old stuff, some of the 5th/6th edition models are not to my taste or just look goofy, although there's been a recent return to form.

The Canoptek Tomb Stalker and the new Seraptek Construct are some of the coolest models FW has ever designed in my opinion

my roommate plays crons and I love how they look on the battlefield, I have a lot of fun playing against them and hate them at the same time lol

I like most of the necron line. Their vehicles look amazing, canoptic anything looks like lethality incarnate and most of their infantry looks aight. Warriors and flayed ones make me mad though. Why do warriors hunch over like that? And don't get me started on flayed ones. I have...plans...for both of them :p

The general units look fine, the characters mostly look like warmed over ass.

In general I like the look of the GW Necrons. My favorites, barring the destroyers though, are the original late 2e/early 3e warriors, immortals, lord, & scarabs. And the current wraiths are pretty cool.

I like the models but they are just tomb kings in space doubled down on the egyptian theme with the tomb worlds/iconography in style of heiroglyphics and I am bitter due to their dquatting but they are nice models, couldndo with a bit more thenold terminator styling to them coming back

How are the infinity models "realistic"? Greebles are not realistic, and they are a blight upon aesthetics on a whole.

The design of the Elites is great, and I happen to think Canoptek Wraiths are one of the coolest looking units in the game full stop.

But not enough is done to visually distinguish the HQs though. Nemesor Zahndrek's model is great, but I don't think the sculpts for Trazyn, Imotekh or Anrakyr are in any way striking.

Some of the vehicles while they look alright are not fun to build. I wouldn't want to be a young person new to to the hobby trying to build a Doomsday Ark.

Not a fan at all of most of the infantry. I like Egyptian stuff, I like undead stuff, I like robot stuff... so the recipe is good but the end result is not.

HATE the plastic gauss rods. The air bubbles in them ruin the sense of scale.

The vehicles are a mixed bag too... Quite like Canoptek Wraith stuff and Doom Blades. The big smooth surfaces on curved frames...

But the Doomsday Ark model is up there with that Slaanesh Chariot thing in the "I honestly cant believe anyone has ever built and painted one of those I would rather scoop my intestines out with a rusty spoon" charts

I quite like the range but the bog standard warriors and flayed ones need some love.

Particularly like the new cryptek

Personally I love the Necron range. Except maybe the new style Failed Ones. Glad I managed to get a squad of 10 of the original Edwards Scissorhands style back in the day. On the other hand, I much prefer the new Spiders and Wraiths to their old metal counterparts.

Infinity models never really appealed to me, despite being metal and truescale. I guess I just like the more clunky GW style.
Necrons are a pretty nice army, even their old warriors still hold their own.

Honestly, if I could find a banging headswap option for Immortals, I'd probably have started a small cron army by now. I don't think there's much wrong with the bodies, and a lot of their vehicles look great. It's just their dorky skeletor faces that I can't stand. If anyone has any bright ideas in this department, please let me know!

Maybe some face swamps if AoS undead, or go full egyptian and replace all necron heads with animal ones. I know there is a polish guy that makes 1ksons helmets theamed to look like old egypt gods. Maybe someone does just animal heads that are proper scale for necron.


How do they get the infinity models so unchunky? the GW necron, although am not sure about the scale of infinity models, look twice as broad as the infinity robots.

BUDFORCE wrote:
My 12 year old collects necron and I do think they are cool. But... I never really got it, if they are like sentient metal terminators, or more like undead in metal armour, they sort of sit between the two.

Necrons do have some cool looking models though, the triarch stalkers are very nice.

Not my cup of tea, but, I can appreciate them, if that makes sense.

If I understand correctly, the C'tan kinda tricked them. They promised the Necrons immortality, but I'm not sure the Necrons knew what it would cost them. Again, if I understand/remember correctly, the C'tan lead those who wanted immortality into some kind of machine that replaced their current bodies with robotic/metallic bodies that wouldn't wear out. Therefore they wouldn't die. That said, it happened at the cost of their soul. The C'tan machine sucked the souls out of the Necrons during the immortality procedure, and the C'tan fed on these souls.

So, they are now sentient cyborgs/robots who were once flesh and bones beings except that they now have no soul.

SG

I generally like the look of necrons in their concept art - the warriors look truly soulless and intimidating, but that feel doesn't translate as well to the minis for the warriors. The ones with one eye are really well done as are alot of the rest of the range. However, when it comes to the vehicles with thrones/chairs or any of the HQs with ornate headdresses and egyptian-ish style armor - I don't like it at all.

I can even forgive the cheesy ornate decorations on the HQs. Some don't even look so bad, but it's the throne-vehicles that really get me. They're living robots. Why would they need chairs? There was alot of space for creativity there that was just tossed away. They could have been melded into the vehicle. Imagine the existing vehicles except the sitting guys had their legs removed and a bunch of tubes & interfeces welded to their bodies.

There was alot that could have been done with the designs other than "have them sit in a chair like a king".

usernamesareannoying wrote:I hate the squatting i need to take a dump look of the warriors.

Merkabah wrote:I like most of the necron line. Their vehicles look amazing, canoptic anything looks like lethality incarnate and most of their infantry looks aight. Warriors and flayed ones make me mad though. Why do warriors hunch over like that? And don't get me started on flayed ones. I have...plans...for both of them :p

We don't really know much about the Necrontyr, except that they were "short-lived" in relation to the Old Ones (who were functionally immortal...). Therefore, just because the Necrons are humanoid, we should not ascribe human biological norms to the models.

If I remember correctly, the Warriors are the lowest caste of Necron society- they used to be the workers and slaves of the Necrontyr. As a distinct social caste, it is not at all unreasonable to assume they were not allowed to breed with higher castes, and could well have exhibited notably different phenotypes to the warrior, professional, and noble castes above them. The hunched appearance could be due to literal genetic differences, or possibly simply through the burden of work. The fact this has been carried over into their mechanical forms is not at all surprising for a society divided upon such classist lines as the Necrons- the nobles would not want the bottom classes to loose sight of their place, and it is entirely in keeping for them to be petty and enforce the hunched appearance of a worker upon their ascended robotic forms as a reminder of their place in society.

Of course, doesn't mean you have to like the models, but I don't think it is at all implausible that the lowest class models are hunched and distorted.

I love most of the range. The fails in my opinion:

- New flayed ones. I hate the giant scissors rather than the old style claws.

- Tails on the cryptek. I don't need robot monkey hqs, these things get clipped immediately.

- Robots piloting robots. They have the tech to make canoptek units autonomous, there is no reason the vehicles can't all make use of this tech.

- Tomb Blades. Mr. Garrison would be proud. Aside from being guilty of the previous sin, they look goody as hell.

I don't dislike the official Necron models as models. But they don't look like the products of a 60-million-year-old alien civilization to me. With the obviously skeletal appearance and all the faux-Egyptian stuff, they're just too damned human. They'd work fine as Men of Iron, but they don't fit the Necron fluff at all.

I would prefer if they were based more off the T1000? Terminator in the second film made from liquid metal. This would fit their reanimation and 'living metal' ideas. They would look more organic and alien.

I really love the monolith model, think its so iconic. Quite like the night scythes too.
Would be less partial to tomb blades though-its like they tried too hard with them.
Unsure of the ghost arks too.

To an extent I'm a fan of the new aesthetics when it comes to weaponry. I don't like the head crowns or the loincloths but that's easily fixed via the Praetorian heads and just not using those loincloths.