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.

kenzosan Wrote:

exactly why i said that transports are incredibly helpful. if they come at you with assault cannons and heavy bolters, gl using those on a transport

sure its not impossible, but i mean youll lose less units with transports then slugging it.

Then the Necrons have become another 5th ED vehicle army. An Almost army (IMHO) compared to MEQ's (with the current information being given at the moment).

Well I've already stated I'm placing my Rogue Trader Necon Army back in it's display case for viewing purposes. I know my game mechanics, the math hammer of the codexes I own (which are all of them since I need to know thy enemy on whom I shall play). I just do not see on how effective the new Necron codex will be Compared to the GK, BA, SW, IG, and DE.

Hm. I don't mind mech Necrons. Granted, all of our current knowledge is based on the current codex, but slow Necrons seem normal. Regardless, it's hard to play a competitive army with so few options, and the only real recourse is to make some vehicles. Otherwise we have more pointless infantry.

Onnotangu wrote:So dark eldar get posioned but we Lose wounding on 6s?

You mean apples aren't oranges? Who knew!?

I wouldn't expect Warriors to be the best anti vehicle unit in the game or anything. You've got heavy destroyers and the like for that.

I don't get it that basic warriors are to loose their 3+... They're made of metal, damnit. I'd rather have Toughness 3 3+ save than T4 4+ save..

motorhead1945 wrote:I don't get it that basic warriors are to loose their 3+... They're made of metal, damnit. I'd rather have Toughness 3 3+ save than T4 4+ save..

Serious Toughness 3? They're robots dammit

I'd rather get instant-deathed by a Missile Launcher than a Autocannon.

A 4+ save isn't bad, with at least a 5+ reroll. It's not as generous as the current rules, but its still good.

motorhead1945 wrote:I don't get it that basic warriors are to loose their 3+... They're made of metal, damnit. I'd rather have Toughness 3 3+ save than T4 4+ save..

It makes them not Marines, and that's a good thing for the game. It's for the best.

motorhead1945 wrote:I don't get it that basic warriors are to loose their 3+... They're made of metal, damnit. I'd rather have Toughness 3 3+ save than T4 4+ save..

See I always saw it the other way. Figured "they aren't wearing any armor, but their skin is literally metal" so wanted them to be t5 4+ save

Adam LongWalker wrote:
You are stating that in every game you are going to get same amount of terrain to make a difference in the changes in this codex?????

I have been in tournaments where there was little terrain that just slaughtered armies that NEEDED terrain to win.

When part of your game plan is to majorly rely on the percentage of terrain on any given board.

You are going to lose.

There was a good BOLS article about how much the recommended 25% terrain coverage really is, and how best to work it out. I haven't come across this trend towards 'planet bowling ball' in little old New Zealand, but I hear it can be quite bad in the USA particularly, that's just what I hear, I'm not saying it's a fact, but you appear to back this up as well.

If I turned up to a table that had approx. 10% terrain coverage, I'd be asking for more terrain! It just drains a lot of options from the game in my opinion, and obviously handicaps certain armies.

Not liking these rumors. When I started my Necron Army, Necron Raiders were T5 with a 2+ save. I was hoping in the new Codex they would go back more to how they were last century. I much preferred the old days when Necrons were fielded as a small, elite force. Like, back in 1998 or so.

I would have preferred T5, with a 4+ save. Immortals could have been T6, with 3+ save.

Mez

Mezmaron wrote:Not liking these rumors. When I started my Necron Army, Necron Raiders were T5 with a 2+ save. I was hoping in the new Codex they would go back more to how they were last century. I much preferred the old days when Necrons were fielded as a small, elite force. Like, back in 1998 or so.

I would have preferred T5, with a 4+ save. Immortals could have been T6, with 3+ save.

Mez

Are you trolling? T5 T6 troops?

KingCracker wrote:

Mezmaron wrote:Not liking these rumors. When I started my Necron Army, Necron Raiders were T5 with a 2+ save. I was hoping in the new Codex they would go back more to how they were last century. I much preferred the old days when Necrons were fielded as a small, elite force. Like, back in 1998 or so.

I would have preferred T5, with a 4+ save. Immortals could have been T6, with 3+ save.

Mez

Are you trolling? T5 T6 troops?

T5 plague marines!!! and plaguebearers so not quite trolling.

Are you trolling? T5 T6 troops?

T5 plague marines!!! and plaguebearers so not quite trolling.

Yeah, not trolling. I'm fine with Immortals being Elites.

Oh, and I wanted Stubborn too. Raise their point costs to compensate, I don't care. It seems they are making them cheaper, when they should be making them better for the same cost.

Nic

T5 troops is fairly rare, T6 just doesnt happen. First you have to look at it from GW perspective, if you can build an army of say 2k points using only 10 models, they WONT make money. Why? Well, to make it on par, one mini would have to cost somewhere in the $50+ range, and no one would pay that for a warrior.

Im liking the aspect of toning them down a bit, and lowering the costs. It allows me to take even more warriors/Immortals for the same points cost. And Ive already done some fantastic bate/trap units into rapid fire range with warriors (and Ive only run 20 in my games upto 2k)

Youve got to remember GW is about making money first these days, and having a small super duper pricey army isnt where they make that money. Sounds like your dreaming/wishlisting a bit

Mezmaron wrote:

Are you trolling? T5 T6 troops?

T5 plague marines!!! and plaguebearers so not quite trolling.

Yeah, not trolling. I'm fine with Immortals being Elites.

Oh, and I wanted Stubborn too. Raise their point costs to compensate, I don't care. It seems they are making them cheaper, when they should be making them better for the same cost.

Nic

Well for me, and obviously for others, I wanted

1)Them not to be marines
2)To be tougher and more elite

others wanted a shambling horde, aka undead in space.

I think we may get a bit of both. Immortals as troops, sounds like some tough elites (T5 S5) and cheapish warriors that are extremely tough for their points and do not want to die.

*edit to the above I think most of this thread, complaints and compliments a like, are due to rumors either agreeing with or disagreeing with our wishlisting

Well, for one thing we don't know the full story as it is, for another thing Plague Marine don't have WBB or Resurrection orbs or the like either, as well as costing 5pts more...

I'm liking the sounds of this 4+/5++ depiction. Necrons were portrayed as tough, but more than tough, relentless. It's not that they were incredibly tough (including stat characteristic wise), it's that they wouldn't stay down. As many others have said; 4+ actually makes little difference, particularly with permanent WBB and the abundance of cover.
Necrons are portrayed as a relentless horde of implacable, hard-ass robots. Game-wise, it'd be very difficult to represent this whilst allowing the Necrons to be fielding in suitable numbers.

With this update however, they will still be as TOUGH (and they don't really have armour anyway), but now they can be fielded in suitable numbers as depicted in the background and with permanent 5+ WBB, easy access to 4+ WBB and ALL SORTS OF OTHERS THINGS NOT YET DISCLOSED, it's looking like they'll be just as tough - or slightly less - but much more numerous. As the fluff appears to depict it.

That's my take on things anyway. Either way it's far too earlier to be crying the end of the world and the death of Games Workshop...

KingCracker wrote:T5 troops is fairly rare, T6 just doesnt happen. First you have to look at it from GW perspective, if you can build an army of say 2k points using only 10 models, they WONT make money. Why? Well, to make it on par, one mini would have to cost somewhere in the $50+ range, and no one would pay that for a warrior.

Im liking the aspect of toning them down a bit, and lowering the costs. It allows me to take even more warriors/Immortals for the same points cost. And Ive already done some fantastic bate/trap units into rapid fire range with warriors (and Ive only run 20 in my games upto 2k)

Youve got to remember GW is about making money first these days, and having a small super duper pricey army isnt where they make that money. Sounds like your dreaming/wishlisting a bit

Just as a note, there are T6 troops in the eldar book (wraithguard).

But I'd agree with the rest, although there is precedent for being able to build small armies, such as paladins which let you field a ~20-25 man 2000 point army

`Nids get the T6 Tervigons as Troops too.

Aduro wrote:`Nids get the T6 Tervigons as Troops too.

Eh. Taking up a Troops slot in the FOC and being a troop that one can take squads of feel like different things.

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

Aduro wrote:`Nids get the T6 Tervigons as Troops too.

Eh. Taking up a Troops slot in the FOC and being a troop that one can take squads of feel like different things.

Thats how I was looking at it. Actual troops, not something that can be troops

Just Dave wrote:With this update however, they will still be as TOUGH (and they don't really have armour anyway), but now they can be fielded in suitable numbers as depicted in the background and with permanent 5+ WBB, easy access to 4+ WBB and ALL SORTS OF OTHERS THINGS NOT YET DISCLOSED, it's looking like they'll be just as tough - or slightly less - but much more numerous. As the fluff appears to depict it.

New-WBB is not permanent - it is in fact removed by the two conditions where a WBB save would be most important: to avoid being wiped out, and to avoid failing a morale test.

If you can focus your fire, they are now no tougher than Scouts.

if thats the case wouldnt we count termis as troops? i mean i know they can be but i still feel they fit in more as an elite choice simply for the point costs. numbers, points, and/or stats/gear are what feels like troops to me.

but then again, technically termis are troops.

Are you responding to what I said? If so, yea in the GK book they are troops, but uh, they are not T6


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlexHolker wrote:

Just Dave wrote:With this update however, they will still be as TOUGH (and they don't really have armour anyway), but now they can be fielded in suitable numbers as depicted in the background and with permanent 5+ WBB, easy access to 4+ WBB and ALL SORTS OF OTHERS THINGS NOT YET DISCLOSED, it's looking like they'll be just as tough - or slightly less - but much more numerous. As the fluff appears to depict it.

New-WBB is not permanent - it is in fact removed by the two conditions where a WBB save would be most important: to avoid being wiped out, and to avoid failing a morale test.

If you can focus your fire, they are now no tougher than Scouts.

*blinks a few times*

no tougher then scouts? How on Earth did you figure that one out?

KingCracker wrote:
no tougher then scouts? How on Earth did you figure that one out?

Nothing's tougher than scouts if I'm shooting my demolishers at them

KingCracker wrote:Are you responding to what I said? If so, yea in the GK book they are troops, but uh, they are not T6


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlexHolker wrote:

Just Dave wrote:With this update however, they will still be as TOUGH (and they don't really have armour anyway), but now they can be fielded in suitable numbers as depicted in the background and with permanent 5+ WBB, easy access to 4+ WBB and ALL SORTS OF OTHERS THINGS NOT YET DISCLOSED, it's looking like they'll be just as tough - or slightly less - but much more numerous. As the fluff appears to depict it.

New-WBB is not permanent - it is in fact removed by the two conditions where a WBB save would be most important: to avoid being wiped out, and to avoid failing a morale test.

If you can focus your fire, they are now no tougher than Scouts.

*blinks a few times*

no tougher then scouts? How on Earth did you figure that one out?

I mean its true... t4 4+ save. if you can find a way to ignore wbb.

Nothing's tougher than scouts if I'm shooting my demolishers at them

not even tougher than grots!!! (unless 1 survives then they are as good as terminators!!!)

tiekwando wrote:
I mean its true... t4 4+ save. if you can find a way to ignore wbb.

The rumor is that they can always take their 5+ WBB save, which means they are, in fact, better than scouts when getting shot at.

If Crypteks are done the way Yakface is stating, then pretty much every important unit will be getting a 4+WBB save.

You know, with Crypteks being able to be assigned to units and being able to take a Resurrection Orb.

I just hope I can stick VOD AND the res orbs on those fellas...... and further wishlisting I hope it doesnt cost me 75pts each to do it. Being able to leap frog around with a 4+/4+ wbb would rule ass.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother SRM wrote:

KingCracker wrote:
no tougher then scouts? How on Earth did you figure that one out?

Nothing's tougher than scouts if I'm shooting my demolishers at them

Well........thats like....your opinion man

KingCracker wrote:I just hope I can stick VOD AND the res orbs on those fellas...... and further wishlisting I hope it doesnt cost me 75pts each to do it. Being able to leap frog around with a 4+/4+ wbb would rule ass.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother SRM wrote:

KingCracker wrote:
no tougher then scouts? How on Earth did you figure that one out?

Nothing's tougher than scouts if I'm shooting my demolishers at them

Well........thats like....your opinion man

lets just hope that demolisher doesnt scatter

Brother SRM wrote:

tiekwando wrote:
I mean its true... t4 4+ save. if you can find a way to ignore wbb.

The rumor is that they can always take their 5+ WBB save...

No, not always. If your army can focus enough firepower to kill 10 scouts, or if you can inflict enough wounds in close combat to make a unit of 10 scouts fail a morale test, doing the same to a unit of Necron Warriors will negate their WBB save.