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.

I just got the book in the mail and the Transcendent C'tan in the games where I field him he typically puts out 24 S:8 AP:3 shots & 12 S:9 AP:2 hits(via 10"blast) per turn. Given he is also fairly durable and easy to completely deny LOS against, He seems pretty horrifically OP in the typical 3500 point games I play him in. I know people think that OP is in the eyes of the enemy but this seems undeniably & horrifically overpowered.

How many points is he and what is his stat line?

S & T9, 6 wounds, 8 attacks, 3 up armor, FNP, 4 up invul, & the board flattening powers I described for a bit over 700 points.

Sounds alright to me... Hit him with weapons designed for apocalypse and boom. Or poison...

You are asking if an Apoc unit is OP? I didn't even know if there is such a thing.

I'm sorry, I can't hear your cries of the C'tan being OP over the sound of my reaver titans obliterating the rest of your army.

 Kain wrote:
I'm sorry, I can't hear your cries of the C'tan being OP over the sound of my reaver titans obliterating the rest of your army.

Reaver? Hell, with only 6 wounds a warhound could pretty much auto kill the C'tan.

Seriously just 6? That's not a typo?(I don't have my book on me)

Strangely, I think that little guy is classified as a gargantuan creature.

 Kain wrote:
I'm sorry, I can't hear your cries of the C'tan being OP over the sound of my reaver titans obliterating the rest of your army.

If the C'tan doesn't kill the Reaver in one turn, which happens to me half the time. The point I'm trying to make is in destructive capability the Transcendent C'tan is equal to the Reaver. Plus I got a Warlord Titan w/ your armies name on it.

ThePrimordial wrote:

 Kain wrote:
I'm sorry, I can't hear your cries of the C'tan being OP over the sound of my reaver titans obliterating the rest of your army.

If the C'tan doesn't kill the Reaver in one turn, which happens to me half the time. The point I'm trying to make is in destructive capability the Transcendent C'tan is equal to the Reaver. Plus I got a Warlord Titan w/ your armies name on it.

Titan?

You're forgetting a key letter.

That would be because the Transcendent C'tan is the Necron's answer to Imperial titans...

I looked it over and I have no idea what you are bleating on about.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
That would be because the Transcendent C'tan is the Necron's answer to Imperial titans...

I still want my Medusa V tomb stalker.

 Kain wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
That would be because the Transcendent C'tan is the Necron's answer to Imperial titans...

I still want my Medusa V tomb stalker.

So do I. A titan centered on durability and melee would be so hype!!!!

You are using a (max 900 point) FW model in a 3500 point standard 40K game?

bodazoka wrote:
You are using a (max 900 point) FW model in a 3500 point standard 40K game?

Yes. Yes I am. Nobody has made such a big deal out of it that they refuse to play against it. Besides that means I'll let them use their Reaver or Reaver equivalent. Whenever you have multiples of these things running around the board then it starts to be a problem.

you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

I opened up my copy of Apocalypse and saw the hierophant stats w/ the 3++. I've accepted that and don't argue with what you said

yup, because with 4000+ points and the insane rules, an OP model is going.to be necessary.

 Von Chogg wrote:
Sounds alright to me... Hit him with weapons designed for apocalypse and boom. Or poison...

It's a gargantuan creature so poison only wounds it on 6s.

ThePrimordial wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

I opened up my copy of Apocalypse and saw the hierophant stats w/ the 3++. I've accepted that and don't argue with what you said

What? The Hierophant has 2+/6++ and 5+ FNP.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

This. Apocalypse is not a game, it's an exercise in seeing who has the most money to spend. It's deliberately unbalanced to get people with a short attention span to spend lots of money on overpowered stuff, and then throw it in the trash and buy different overpowered stuff when their opponent's overpowered stuff kills it.

Instead of playing Apocalypse you should just gather your friends and see who can light the biggest pile of money on fire, and then declare them the winner of the Apocalypse game.

 Peregrine wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

This. Apocalypse is not a game, it's an exercise in seeing who has the most money to spend. It's deliberately unbalanced to get people with a short attention span to spend lots of money on overpowered stuff, and then throw it in the trash and buy different overpowered stuff when their opponent's overpowered stuff kills it.

Instead of playing Apocalypse you should just gather your friends and see who can light the biggest pile of money on fire, and then declare them the winner of the Apocalypse game.

Some people actually enjoy Apocalypse games...

I prefer the burning money version.

 Peregrine wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

This. Apocalypse is not a game, it's an exercise in seeing who has the most money to spend. It's deliberately unbalanced to get people with a short attention span to spend lots of money on overpowered stuff, and then throw it in the trash and buy different overpowered stuff when their opponent's overpowered stuff kills it.

Instead of playing Apocalypse you should just gather your friends and see who can light the biggest pile of money on fire, and then declare them the winner of the Apocalypse game.

Some people enjoy being rich idiots with more money than sense to buy on models/monuments to our egos.

This is probably why my wife controls the family budget.

 Sasori wrote:
Some people actually enjoy Apocalypse games...

I don't really see how, especially now that GW has done even more to replace what little strategy there was in the old version with more "buy this $100000000000 one-click bundle and remove your opponent's whole army from the table" balance disasters and random event tables full of different ways of removing lots of models without the players ever interacting or making decisions. The only way to make Apocalypse enjoyable is to house rule it so heavily that it barely resembles the game GW created.

And I say this as someone who has spent thousands of dollars on superheavies and more tanks/flyers than I can use in a single non-Apocalypse game.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
Some people actually enjoy Apocalypse games...

I don't really see how, especially now that GW has done even more to replace what little strategy there was in the old version with more "buy this $100000000000 one-click bundle and remove your opponent's whole army from the table" balance disasters and random event tables full of different ways of removing lots of models without the players ever interacting or making decisions. The only way to make Apocalypse enjoyable is to house rule it so heavily that it barely resembles the game GW created.

And I say this as someone who has spent thousands of dollars on superheavies and more tanks/flyers than I can use in a single non-Apocalypse game.

I dunno, maybe it's because I role play in it more than in a typical game of Champions or D&D.

Some people find that habit of mine annoying, some also get into it.

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't really see how, especially now that GW has done even more to replace what little strategy there was in the old version with more "buy this $100000000000 one-click bundle and remove your opponent's whole army from the table" balance disasters and random event tables full of different ways of removing lots of models without the players ever interacting or making decisions. The only way to make Apocalypse enjoyable is to house rule it so heavily that it barely resembles the game GW created.

And I say this as someone who has spent thousands of dollars on superheavies and more tanks/flyers than I can use in a single non-Apocalypse game.

Because people won't buy those bundles?

Apocalypse isn't about seeing who can win a game, it's about playing it with your friends.
I take roughly 6k of my models, my friend takes 6k of his models and we play all day long.
That is Apocalypse.

And if you can't accept that and want to keep trolling every single Apocalypse thread, than maybe you should start thinking about ignoring those threads?

 Peregrine wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
you do realize everything in Apocalypse is pretty OP, right?

This. Apocalypse is not a game, it's an exercise in seeing who has the most money to spend. It's deliberately unbalanced to get people with a short attention span to spend lots of money on overpowered stuff, and then throw it in the trash and buy different overpowered stuff when their opponent's overpowered stuff kills it.

Instead of playing Apocalypse you should just gather your friends and see who can light the biggest pile of money on fire, and then declare them the winner of the Apocalypse game.

Learn to scratchbuild?

 Peregrine wrote:


Some people enjoy being rich idiots with more money than sense to buy on models/monuments to our egos. This is probably why my wife controls the family budget

Maybe some of us are educated and therefore have decent jobs in which we can afford our toys without taking away from our families. Don't knock people who play the game because you can't afford it or manage your own finances.

IMO large scale Apocalypse games are really fun (even if a bit time consuming) and there's no other game out there like it in scale and scope.

Back on topic: Apoc is deceptive in that its touted as a "bring everything and play" type system, however lists are still important so that you have the proper OP counters to your opponent's OP stuff. 3,500 points seems a bit low in order to have all your bases covered. I think Apoc works best starting at 5,000+ points a side.

 D6Damager wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:


Some people enjoy being rich idiots with more money than sense to buy on models/monuments to our egos. This is probably why my wife controls the family budget

Maybe some of us are educated and therefore have decent jobs in which we can afford our toys without taking away from our families. Don't knock people who play the game because you can't afford it or manage your own finances.

IMO large scale Apocalypse games are really fun (even if a bit time consuming) and there's no other game out there like it in scale and scope.

Back on topic: Apoc is deceptive in that its touted as a "bring everything and play" type system, however lists are still important so that you have the proper OP counters to your opponent's OP stuff. 3,500 points seems a bit low in order to have all your bases covered. I think Apoc works best starting at 5,000+ points a side.

I'm making fun of myself because I'm GW's favorite kind of customer, an impulse buyer with money to burn who will keep on coming back again and again.