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.

Yeah, cause stealers are soooo good in the current meta.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yeah, cause stealers are soooo good in the current meta.

I am un familiar with the current nids deck, tell me is there a fast, relatively cheap (compared to assault marines) assault unit that can take out Necron warrior units (the unit that would have a Lord with MSS as efficiently as the marine?

Only with the support of a couple hundred point unit.
And the shots on the way in hurt. A lot.

Use gargoyles or hormagaunts then. They do just fine.

bodazoka wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
That's all very nice for people with Assault Marines and Terminators. Also, how is it my fault for taking a beatstick? Do you think I list tailor? Because if I did and I decided to take my regular list with 6 Monstrous Creatures knowing I was up against someone spamming MSS you'd be right, but I don't tailor my lists, I play TAC lists and just show up and play,

7 out of 15 codices can take assault's and terminator's, not including variant's of space marine chapters. Orc's have there own CC variant which is arguably better and Tyranids have genestealers...

Whose fault would it be if it wasn't yours? you are the one who decided to bring a knife to a gun fight!

If you play a TAC list you wont have a problem with MSS, its only cheese MC lists that would. If you have a cheese MC list then you deserve to be MSS!!!

Except apart from the Ymgarl variant Genestealers suck, for the same cost as a tactical arine you get a 6+ save unit that trades any shooting options for being good at assault, which was nerfed heavily in 6th while rapid fire got huge buffs. As far as cheesy MC lists, are you referring to triple Tervigon lists? Because they can do fine against MSS, they have Termagants, buttloads of them. I don't run cheesy lists, I only have 1 Tervigon which is more objective holding than anything, and therein lies my problem, I'd need cheese to beat this sort of cheese, but I'm lactose intolerant.

 Maelstrom808 wrote:
Use gargoyles or hormagaunts then. They do just fine.

Hormagaunts are bad. Gargoyles, however are pretty good thanks to their extra movement and cheaper upgrades, but synergy is key for Tyranids and they don't fit into a deep striking army (even though they can deepstrike, their massive footprint makes it such a horrible idea on anything but the most sparse of boards).

bodazoka wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
That's all very nice for people with Assault Marines and Terminators. Also, how is it my fault for taking a beatstick? Do you think I list tailor? Because if I did and I decided to take my regular list with 6 Monstrous Creatures knowing I was up against someone spamming MSS you'd be right, but I don't tailor my lists, I play TAC lists and just show up and play,

7 out of 15 codices can take assault's and terminator's, not including variant's of space marine chapters. Orc's have there own CC variant which is arguably better and Tyranids have genestealers...

Whose fault would it be if it wasn't yours? you are the one who decided to bring a knife to a gun fight!

If you play a TAC list you wont have a problem with MSS, its only cheese MC lists that would. If you have a cheese MC list then you deserve to be MSS!!!

My apologies but that isn't necessarily true. What about Tyranids? How many armies that you have seen that are monsterous creature heavy? Sure it is spammed, but that's one of the few competitive Nid lists. Heck, one of the most efficient Chaos Daemon lists requires using several Monsterous Creatures (one tends to be a magnet for shots). And wait, you can declare a challenge, and my leadership 9 Monsterous creature will more than 50% of the time beat himself with his own stick (Lord of Change) then you get two hits that wound me on 2+. One shouldn't be punished for bringing their beatstick unit nor should a Chaos Space Marines then be forced to challenge the enemy (and accept challenges) with a guy that will often rip them apart (even if more expensive).

*I need to quit talking so late ha ha*

 StarTrotter wrote:
My apologies but that isn't necessarily true. What about Tyranids? How many armies that you have seen that are monsterous creature heavy? Sure it is spammed, but that's one of the few competitive Nid lists. Heck, one of the most efficient Chaos Daemon lists requires using several Monsterous Creatures (one tends to be a magnet for shots). And wait, you can declare a challenge, and my leadership 9 Monsterous creature will more than 50% of the time beat himself with his own stick (Lord of Change) then you get two hits that wound me on 2+. One shouldn't be punished for bringing their beatstick unit nor should a Chaos Space Marines then be forced to challenge the enemy (and accept challenges) with a guy that will often rip them apart (even if more expensive).

*I need to quit talking so late ha ha*

Sorry I don't mean to suggest someone is "punished" for anything at all. I'm just trying to say that its not the best list to bring against a Necron army and its a poor example to use to suggest MSS is broken its just a bad match up is all.

Here's the thing, take a squad of Warriors/Immortals with a Necron Lord, pit them against a Trygon/Bloodthirster/Mephiston//Abaddon, who do you think is more likely to win that combat? Throw MSS in there, now who's got the edge? Nothing that can so drastically alter a matchup should be that cheap.

Here's the thing: Don't send in Mephiston against a group of 20 Necron Warriors with a Lord.
You are actually complaining that 21 models don't get wiped away that easily by one model?

Now put the same group of 20 warriors against 5 Assault Terminators.
And then the same group WITH a MSS-Lord against the same 5 Terminators.

Would you be okay with it if all Lord came with MSS standard and if they upped the base-cost by 15?

As has been stated already - if you're playing against a 'cron player who puts a weave, scythe, MSS, res orb lord in every squad then you will be playing a against a small army.

That Lord by itself is going to be 105 points....that only has 2 attacks if it gets charged.

Kangodo wrote:
Would you be okay with it if all Lord came with MSS standard and if they upped the base-cost by 15?

No - that's the point. It's. Too. Cheap.

When it's literally a no brainer upgrade (as in, you'd be dumb to drop it before dropping a model from a squad) there's a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Praxiss wrote:
That Lord by itself is going to be 105 points....that only has 2 attacks if it gets charged.

2+D3. And those 2 go before many AP2/1 attacks (and are AP1), wound against most things on a 2+...
And the D3 are auto-hits. With the AP of the attacking model.

Sure, the normal reaction is to send in the chaff to eat the MSS. That's the smart way to play.
What are Warriors, Immortals really good at? Oh. Killing chaff.

2+ Possible D3, that may or may not be useless. You have to randomize the target before challenges irrc, so you may not affect that powerfist after all. The MSS only affects things in b2b contact as well.

rigeld2 wrote:
No - that's the point. It's. Too. Cheap.

It's exactly the point!
Are Necrons overpowered in melee?
Do they win melee battles easily?
Hell, aside from some Wraiths, do they win any melee battles at all?

When it's literally a no brainer upgrade (as in, you'd be dumb to drop it before dropping a model from a squad) there's a problem.

Sounds to me like you don't play Necrons.

I think MSS does to much for it's points but it isn't a no-brainer. I've used it recently though due to the rise in MCs (especially Nids who I feel Crons struggle vs).

Kangodo wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
No - that's the point. It's. Too. Cheap.

It's exactly the point!
Are Necrons overpowered in melee?
Do they win melee battles easily?
Hell, aside from some Wraiths, do they win any melee battles at all?

Yes. They do. Quite often in fact. Go ahead and keep pretending that they always lose though.

When it's literally a no brainer upgrade (as in, you'd be dumb to drop it before dropping a model from a squad) there's a problem.

Sounds to me like you don't play Necrons.

So you'd actually rather have a single Warrior than MSS?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
2+ Possible D3, that may or may not be useless. You have to randomize the target before challenges irrc, so you may not affect that powerfist after all. The MSS only affects things in b2b contact as well.

Both happen at the same time, so the person who has the currnt turn decides

If it is the necron player they do challenge -> MSS, as you are then gteed to hit the person you are challenging

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes. They do. Quite often in fact. Go ahead and keep pretending that they always lose though.

What are you sending at those Warrior-blobs; single Ork Boyz?
If a melee-squad gets in touch with a warrior-blob, the blob is dead.

Adding MSS only changes one thing: The opponent will lose his character while wiping out your blob.

So you'd actually rather have a single Warrior than MSS?

No.
I'd rather have 5 warriors instead of the Lord with MSS.
I'd rather have two extra Wraith-models or an An-Barge which is almost the same as a Lord.

But especially for you I have been scouting through some army-lists.
Most lists only use 1 or 2 Over/Destroyer-Lords with MSS.
And the first list that actually uses a couple of Lords with MSS has a first post telling him that he invested too much in lords.

Like I said before: MSS would be undercosted if it could be given to random models.
But only Lords can take them and you don't want to field many Lords as a Necron-player.

Kangodo wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes. They do. Quite often in fact. Go ahead and keep pretending that they always lose though.

What are you sending at those Warrior-blobs; single Ork Boyz?
If a melee-squad gets in touch with a warrior-blob, the blob is dead.

Termagants with Tervigon support (not in combat so just AG/TS).

Adding MSS only changes one thing: The opponent will lose his character while wiping out your blob.

It can (and has) turn a "wipe out the blob" into a "win combat, kill character and route unit".

So you'd actually rather have a single Warrior than MSS?

No.
I'd rather have 5 warriors instead of the Lord with MSS.
I'd rather have two extra Wraith-models or an An-Barge which is almost the same as a Lord.

But especially for you I have been scouting through some army-lists.
Most lists only use 1 or 2 Over/Destroyer-Lords with MSS.
And the first list that actually uses a couple of Lords with MSS has a first post telling him that he invested too much in lords.

Like I said before: MSS would be undercosted if it could be given to random models.
But only Lords can take them and you don't want to field many Lords as a Necron-player.

And on models that can take them they're undercosted.

So after reading all 6 pages of comments I have come to the conclusion that most of the complaints/comparisons are coming mostly from players who have armies that are in dire need of a codex update. The Necron Dex, and every one since then has had a pretty good advantage over all others. There has been such a radical change in some of the core rules with 6th (overwatch and cover being 2) that older codexs are hampering their armies.

That being said, do I believe MSS, Wraiths, etc.... are overpowered/under priced? No. Without those I'm almost sure that my loss count would skyrocket! Don't get me wrong, I have played without, but my wins were not very high at all. I was getting swept in CC almost everytime. I'd be an idiot not to use the tools given. I've fought against Necrons with CSM and DA. It was difficult before their codex updates, but a some strategy helped me pull it off quite often. I just expected my challenger to take those units/abilities and played accordingly.

Some people on here seem to be just complaining because they can't win and probably play the same army list every time. Others on this thread do have some valid points but are coming from armies that, again, are in dire need of 6th ed rules. If GW was a lot faster with updating everybody and not taking years; I'm sure a lot of the complaints would be trivial.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

I think it's a little dismissive to just say "when your codex is updated, you'll be just as good", look at the newer codices, how many complaints have you seen about CSM, daemons, DA, or Tau? There has been 4 codices since necrons, and still necrons is 1 of the more talked about codices in term of overpowerness, the other one being GK... So if anything, the pattern should indicate that the problem lies in... Ward's writing.

I do wonder if the 4 new codices have as much trouble against crons as pre-necron update codices though.

 GrimScorpio wrote:
So after reading all 6 pages of comments I have come to the conclusion that most of the complaints/comparisons are coming mostly from players who have armies that are in dire need of a codex update. The Necron Dex, and every one since then has had a pretty good advantage over all others. There has been such a radical change in some of the core rules with 6th (overwatch and cover being 2) that older codexs are hampering their armies.

That being said, do I believe MSS, Wraiths, etc.... are overpowered/under priced? No. Without those I'm almost sure that my loss count would skyrocket! Don't get me wrong, I have played without, but my wins were not very high at all. I was getting swept in CC almost everytime. I'd be an idiot not to use the tools given. I've fought against Necrons with CSM and DA. It was difficult before their codex updates, but a some strategy helped me pull it off quite often. I just expected my challenger to take those units/abilities and played accordingly.

Some people on here seem to be just complaining because they can't win and probably play the same army list every time. Others on this thread do have some valid points but are coming from armies that, again, are in dire need of 6th ed rules. If GW was a lot faster with updating everybody and not taking years; I'm sure a lot of the complaints would be trivial.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

I agree that the Codexes designed during 6th Edition are well balanced against each other and could fight on a level that would be VERY fun. However some of the 5th Edition Codexes that were made with an idea of 6th Edition(or maybe by accident in relation to 6th Edition) are the ones that give problems to the game, in my honest opinion.

Adepticon shows how nasty some of those 5th Edition Codexes are when the great internal balance of 6th Edition Codexes are taken as comparison. Aside form the Helldrake's amazing ability for its points value, no other unit or combination of units in a 6th Edition Codex stands out as much as a some units and combinations present in Grey Knights and Necrons.

Crons just do so many things so well in the environment of 6th. Glancing can destroy a vehicle handily? Win for Necrons. Troops able to steal objectives reliably from a flyer with strong shooting potential? Win for Necrons. The points cost of units like A-Barge? Win for Necrons.

MSS is not necessarily unbalanced on its own, but with its relatively low points cost....taken with the rest of the amazing discounts found in Codex: Necrons...just kinda adds to the general dislike of MSS.

 GrimScorpio wrote:
So after reading all 6 pages of comments I have come to the conclusion that most of the complaints/comparisons are coming mostly from players who have armies that are in dire need of a codex update. The Necron Dex, and every one since then has had a pretty good advantage over all others. There has been such a radical change in some of the core rules with 6th (overwatch and cover being 2) that older codexs are hampering their armies.

That being said, do I believe MSS, Wraiths, etc.... are overpowered/under priced? No. Without those I'm almost sure that my loss count would skyrocket! Don't get me wrong, I have played without, but my wins were not very high at all. I was getting swept in CC almost everytime. I'd be an idiot not to use the tools given. I've fought against Necrons with CSM and DA. It was difficult before their codex updates, but a some strategy helped me pull it off quite often. I just expected my challenger to take those units/abilities and played accordingly.

Some people on here seem to be just complaining because they can't win and probably play the same army list every time. Others on this thread do have some valid points but are coming from armies that, again, are in dire need of 6th ed rules. If GW was a lot faster with updating everybody and not taking years; I'm sure a lot of the complaints would be trivial.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

Personally my largest gripes are just behind that of Nids, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Space Marines. Having known Nid players, you really need monsterous creatures and I'm not quite sure how they could really fix this. Their synapse thing really makes a difference and the sorts. The only way I can think of that could make up for this problem is if they entirely change Nids (and from observations of Necrons, changing too much leads to some love it or hate it). Chaos daemons, I prefer the gods of Tzeentch and Khorne which happen to have the worst of the four god troop choices. So instead I build my list to be top heavy to make up for this glaring flaw. Even when I eventually get all of the four gods, monsterous creatures tend to be extremely popular (there is something glorious about having a Lord of Bloodthirster Keeper of Unclean Ones) leading your army to battle. Not to mention it helps you get to the enemy faster. And... one can say to ignore the lord but besides that I don't have many options. I cannot shoot him down easily (our most common shooting units have to pass perils, deny the witch, and then might give the enemy feel no pain) and charging into close combat against Necrons can be extremely painful (especially since even bloodletters are now only toughness 3). And then declaring challenges begins to glare. Heralds are great, and in some cases almost manditory, but with them brings a character that can be challenges.... and these guys only have a leadership of 8. Which means most of the time they will fail. Well okay it really does impede the troops but he wasn't that expensive. But what could best counter them? Hordes? Difficulty with hords is that although they make up for their enhanced fragility as well as (coughallofthoseunfairrules) Grey Knights however then you give up the take all comers which leans towards a more top heavy army. Finally, against Chaos Space Marines, mindshackle scarabs make a laughing stock of their "lovely" special rule that forces them to declare and accept challenges. Sending another warrior instead of Abby works for one turn, after that, whelp here comes Abby. A unit that costs night on 300 points whom has a 50% chance of killing himself.

(I don't look at others that use Wraiths and MSS with indignation though. Honestly, for such a cheap price, I would likely hop on it as well. Not to mention there is something funny about a metallic scarab latching to my head and making me beat myself to death with my own sword/arm)

Baronyu wrote:
I think it's a little dismissive to just say "when your codex is updated, you'll be just as good", look at the newer codices, how many complaints have you seen about CSM, daemons, DA, or Tau? There has been 4 codices since necrons, and still necrons is 1 of the more talked about codices in term of overpowerness, the other one being GK... So if anything, the pattern should indicate that the problem lies in... Ward's writing.

I do wonder if the 4 new codices have as much trouble against crons as pre-necron update codices though.

I'd say CSM are better against the necrons than before, what with the Heldrake, Chaos Lord/Sorc improvements and the Cultists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
Having known Nid players, you really need monsterous creatures and I'm not quite sure how they could really fix this. Their synapse thing really makes a difference and the sorts. The only way I can think of that could make up for this problem is if they entirely change Nids (and from observations of Necrons, changing too much leads to some love it or hate it).

While I agree with "too much change" causing hatred, the idea of changingg nids from an MC army into a bug-spam horde is actually fluffier than MC spam. The whole idea of the nids was that the apocalypse had come in the form of a swarm of giant mutant locusts.

The change in Newcrons completely rewrote the fluff. While I understand why it was done, it was done in a rageworthy way, and changed thefeel of the entire race. they went from "Terminator" to "Walk Like an Egyptian" in theme.
Bringing nids to swarm mode actually fits with how the nids are supposed to feel.

[On a side note, changing nids into a horde would fit GW's theme of spammier codicies, and making more sales]

Horde was a good build in 5th. It's just bad in 6th.

Tbh My opinion on necrons is that they can be balanced but thay are always hard as hell to beat since there one major weakness imo is there int value... but then they have something to cover that... the dreaded MSS...

Why is this so bad? If you throw a hoard of something at a blob of warriors with a lord with MSS there not gonna do so well as your Sargent will throw a high Str weapon at your own squad or kill himself and that kinda really grinds my gears as that means you don't have a chance in hell to get that squad down as much as you want, yes you will throw a lot down and you will cause casualties but its standard for a lord to take a res orb meaning those troops get back up on a 4+ meaning that those massive casualty's you thought you were gonna make, well at least one third of the squad will come back, and now you have lost melee simply because your Sargent died from MSS and then that lord had a Warscythe plus the many attacks from the Warrior blob.

so you cant get them in combat? why not shoot them? ok then the casualty's you made from plasma/melta/bolter/etc just got back up on a 4+, yeah its not great when that happens.

Also that CC Deathstar unit that you knew was going to do well because of what it brings is now rendered useless all because of that lord with MSS since your deathstar is usually in small numbers therefore if you dont go into a change with the lord, you will be clobbering your own squad, and its not too great top see that either...

Honestly I don't have a problem with the Necron Codex, I think everything is quite good in it, but I don't think Ward was thinking when he put in MSS that's the only thing I deem OP, because it makes up for a major weakness in the army, and while I believe weaknesses should be covered they shouldn't be covered at such a scale where it will render some units on the opponents army useless as I believe them too be, this wasn't intended to be a rant at Necrons, as I have said that its a good codex, just I feel that one piece of wargear (that can be spammed like no tomorrow on lords) is the only thing in 40k that REALLY grinds my gears.

*note: I play Orks and CSM and so I know both ends of the spectrum (from small elite squads of troops with good guns to hoards of boys with a power klaw nob getting stuck into combat) when going though against this threat on the battlefield.

On a side note I would say to improve the MSS (for next edition...yes I know thats far away) is to make me take a normal LD test. If I fail I suffer -D3 to my WS/BS that would make it seem more balanced IMO, either that or make it a one off upgrade to an overlord (like the black mace, and daemon weapons for example) and 45pts should be good enough price for it imo.

I'd say if you managed to get a good size assault-build horde(is there non-assault ones?) into combat with even a full 20 warriors blob with a MSS OL, you'd win combat... at least for turn one, if you can deal enough wounds to reduce necrons' Ld so they fail the morale test, you can sweep them away rather easily due to their I2-ness, and they won't get to RP at all if you sweep. Problem is, of course, how are you gonna get a good size horde up against necrons' shooting, which they are pretty good at, top it with overwatch, and their good Ld meaning they might not even fail the morale, then come next turn with your sarge dead, half of the warriors back up, your horde having taken a few hits, the crons might just be able to turn the table on you!

So, dice luck is everything!

I really don't think crons are as bad in assault as people make them out to be. Sure, a warriors blob, or immortal, or any of crons' shooting unit(the large majority of the codex) would stand no chance, on their own, against any assault-dedicated unit out there, but that's the same fate for any army out there, longfangs don't stand a chance against any assault either, neither are tac squad, even the hybrid grey hunters won't do so well against a good assault unit(I hope). But being WS4 S4 T4 Ld10 with a good save generally, as well as RP, crons are doing better than, say.. Tau or other T3 poor save shooting units out there.