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.

 adamsouza wrote:
Getting the thread back on topic, we can hope for deep strike mishap protection for Monoliths. If a space marine drop pod has protection the much more advanced Necron tech should as well.

Debatable. Remember that the Monolith had DS protection whereas the monolith has it had removed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

3. Death rays are a pain to explain to people because they break all the rules, hit flyers

Wrong. Please familiarize yourself with the rules before spreading misinformation.

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:

3. Death rays are a pain to explain to people because they break all the rules, hit flyers

Wrong. Please familiarize yourself with the rules before spreading misinformation.

On the contrary. RAW they hit flyers and no matter how stupid it is it's still what's written.
Apparently it's on the wrong side of the line for some rules lawyers though, perhaps because it makes little sense, but it does not change what is written.
It was clarified in a v6 FAQ because the wording allowed for it.
And it was not clarified in the v7 FAQ, and the wording still allows for it.
It's a YMDC discussion of course so take it there if you want to discuss it once again.

morgoth wrote:

On the contrary. RAW they hit flyers and no matter how stupid it is it's still what's written.

Read the "Hard to Hit" chapter. Appreciated.

morgoth wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:

3. Death rays are a pain to explain to people because they break all the rules, hit flyers

Wrong. Please familiarize yourself with the rules before spreading misinformation.

On the contrary. RAW they hit flyers and no matter how stupid it is it's still what's written.
Apparently it's on the wrong side of the line for some rules lawyers though, perhaps because it makes little sense, but it does not change what is written.
It was clarified in a v6 FAQ because the wording allowed for it.
And it was not clarified in the v7 FAQ, and the wording still allows for it.
It's a YMDC discussion of course so take it there if you want to discuss it once again.

Nope, the shot hits automatically and therefore cannot hit a flyer. Hard to hit. YOu tried it in YMDC, were roundly shown the error there, yet continue to pretend otherwise

morgoth wrote:


And I also hope they fix the death ray / reword it so it doesn't just hit invisible / flyers.

Please don't troll the forums with false interpretations of the rules. Numerous people have presented you undisputable RAW of how you are wrong in that claim. Just because you lack the cognitive capability of comprehending the RAW doesn't mean that you can be dismissive about evidence that refutes your wrongful claims.

morgoth wrote:

Drakmord wrote:
And if that was in 6th too, then I deserve a kick in the pants for never noticing.

I'll take care of that, thank you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Some things I would like to see.

Something that allows tesla to be on a 5, maybe a warlord trait that the stormlord comes with.
Warlord trait of some sort for +1 to res protocals

Death rays to be more descriptive on how they work. Still a pain to explain to people.

different/more viable royal court options.

1. Yes, because it's not way too strong already.
2. Same. +1 to res protocols ? the guy would cost 350+
3. Death rays are a pain to explain to people because they break all the rules, hit flyers and invisibles RAW when they clearly should not do either and may not even snap fire at all being very much akin to a template weapon.
4. more viable than undercosted crypteks ?

I don't think you play the same game we do tbh.

It's a wish listing thread, no need to be a debbie downer. Jeeze. Tesla isn't overpowered, twin linked Tesla destructors are under priced. If tesla was overpowered we would see immortals hit the table in tournaments.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
It's a wish listing thread, no need to be a debbie downer. Jeeze. Tesla isn't overpowered, twin linked Tesla destructors are under priced. If tesla was overpowered we would see immortals hit the table in tournaments.

My wish is to see Tesla nerfed hard with regards to snap fire. It's ridiculously overpowered in that department.

morgoth wrote:
My wish is to see Tesla nerfed hard with regards to snap fire. It's ridiculously overpowered in that department.

I thought that was supposed to be one of Tesla's main selling points?

 vipoid wrote:

morgoth wrote:
My wish is to see Tesla nerfed hard with regards to snap fire. It's ridiculously overpowered in that department.

I thought that was supposed to be one of Tesla's main selling points?

It is. Tesla has the advantage of additional shots at the cost of no AP. Not to mention that it's on bodies that are terrible in melee.

 vipoid wrote:

morgoth wrote:
My wish is to see Tesla nerfed hard with regards to snap fire. It's ridiculously overpowered in that department.

I thought that was supposed to be one of Tesla's main selling points?

Which accidentally counters air and invisible units pretty handily.
When Tesla gets an additional hit on 4+ on invisible / hard to hit, I'll be okay with it.

 Sigvatr wrote:

It is. Tesla has the advantage of additional shots at the cost of no AP.

No Gauss either...

morgoth wrote:

Which accidentally counters air and invisible units pretty handily.

How is that accidental?

morgoth wrote:

When Tesla gets an additional hit on 4+ on invisible / hard to hit, I'll be okay with it.

Why?

How about we instead fix those two broken mechanics? Invisibility is a spell that makes no sense whatsoever and shouldn't exist at all.

Fliers were badly shoehorned into the game and time has not sweetened their stupid mechanics.


What I wouldn't object to is removing all this snapshot nonsense completely and finding a better mechanic to represent fliers. Maybe one that actually fits into a sci-fi game, as opposed to one that appears to have been stolen from the a really awful historic game.

Like in Dropzone commander?

In that game, flyers are never actually on the field; they have their own phase, and only dedicated AA units and other flyers can intercept them.

 vipoid wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Which accidentally counters air and invisible units pretty handily.

How is that accidental?

Because it was not planned.
Invisibility and Hard to Hit were not written thinking "har har har, we'll give another advantage to Tesla weaponry".

You think invisibility, snap shots or hard to hit are broken ?
I totally agree.

But until the mechanic itself is addressed, I would like to see the worst offenders nerfed to be on par with the "standard case", i.e. lose 75% of their damage output when snap firing, even if they have BS2 or Tesla weapons.

morgoth wrote:

Because it was not planned.

How do you know?

Ward wrote both the Necron codex and the 6th edition rules (which brought in the whole idea of snap-shots). It could easily have been planned.

morgoth wrote:

But until the mechanic itself is addressed, I would like to see the worst offenders nerfed to be on par with the "standard case", i.e. lose 75% of their damage output when snap firing, even if they have BS2 or Tesla weapons.

Thing is, this seems like an unnecessary nerf to Tesla weapons. Currently, only one is too good (mainly thanks to 4 TL S7 shots), while the other instances of Tesla are sub-par.

A nerf like this would relegate all other Tesla weapon to the shelf.

 vipoid wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Because it was not planned.

How do you know?

Ward wrote both the Necron codex and the 6th edition rules (which brought in the whole idea of snap-shots). It could easily have been planned.

morgoth wrote:

But until the mechanic itself is addressed, I would like to see the worst offenders nerfed to be on par with the "standard case", i.e. lose 75% of their damage output when snap firing, even if they have BS2 or Tesla weapons.

Thing is, this seems like an unnecessary nerf to Tesla weapons. Currently, only one is too good (mainly thanks to 4 TL S7 shots), while the other instances of Tesla are sub-par.

A nerf like this would relegate all other Tesla weapon to the shelf.

4TLS7 shots, i.e. 6S7 hits is indeed a good deal of hurt, especially for the price paid. They could easily buff the other ones and nerf that one if it's still problematic after the snap shot fix tbh.

I'm fine with buffing Tesla overall - I just find it ridiculous that one of the base weapons of an army just says "50% ignore snap shots" - it just doesn't make sense.

Just like Orks should have a 75% damage output reduction on snap shots rather than just 50% with their BS2. They can't hit a static defense yet they can hit a plane just as well as an Eldar ? feth yeah.

morgoth wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Because it was not planned.

How do you know?

Ward wrote both the Necron codex and the 6th edition rules (which brought in the whole idea of snap-shots). It could easily have been planned.

morgoth wrote:

But until the mechanic itself is addressed, I would like to see the worst offenders nerfed to be on par with the "standard case", i.e. lose 75% of their damage output when snap firing, even if they have BS2 or Tesla weapons.

Thing is, this seems like an unnecessary nerf to Tesla weapons. Currently, only one is too good (mainly thanks to 4 TL S7 shots), while the other instances of Tesla are sub-par.

A nerf like this would relegate all other Tesla weapon to the shelf.

4TLS7 shots, i.e. 6S7 hits is indeed a good deal of hurt, especially for the price paid. They could easily buff the other ones and nerf that one if it's still problematic after the snap shot fix tbh.

I'm fine with buffing Tesla overall - I just find it ridiculous that one of the base weapons of an army just says "50% ignore snap shots" - it just doesn't make sense.

Just like Orks should have a 75% damage output reduction on snap shots rather than just 50% with their BS2. They can't hit a static defense yet they can hit a plane just as well as an Eldar ? feth yeah.

You know it's a Sci-Fi game right? How much of it really needs to make sense? How much sense does it make that a shield on a transport can shoot 60" and ignore cover? Yet serpent shields are still a thing and they never got nerfed.

morgoth wrote:

Just like Orks should have a 75% damage output reduction on snap shots rather than just 50% with their BS2. They can't hit a static defense yet they can hit a plane just as well as an Eldar ? feth yeah.

Again though, this seems more like a problem with the snapshot mechanics in general - in that they take no account of the firer's BS.

There were rumours that 7th edition might change snapshots to -2BS instead, though this never materialised. Possibly the designers have a crippling fear of money and success.

Also, I'd have thought technology might have evolved sufficiently in the 41st millennium, such that fliers can be actually be targeted by ground troops - rather than everyone just firing their guns into the air and hoping they get lucky.

And don't get me started on knowing roughly where an invisible unit is, yet being unable to fire blasts or flamers at it. You know, the most logical and practical weapons you could possibly employ against an invisible opponent.

In essence, we seem to be searching for the solution to a problem that should never have existed in the first place.

So, on a more realistic note, apparently around Halloween is when the new book is being released. Thoughts? I'm personally terrified. I don't want a GK release...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:


Also, I'd have thought technology might have evolved sufficiently in the 41st millennium, such that fliers can be actually be targeted by ground troops - rather than everyone just firing their guns into the air and hoping they get lucky.

I actually thought that maybe one of Zandrekh's abilities he can pass out would be Skyfire. As well as Ignores Cover. I doubt this would happen, but it's nice to dream, eh?

 krodarklorr wrote:

I actually thought that maybe one of Zandrekh's abilities he can pass out would be Skyfire. As well as Ignores Cover. I doubt this would happen, but it's nice to dream, eh?

Well, as above, I don't think Skyfire should need to exist at all.

Regardless, I'm not sure about Ignores Cover, but it might be nice if he could remove Shrouded as well as Stealth.

However, knowing GW, he'll get the amazing ability to give a friendly Necron unit Fear. Probably in exchange for all the other rules he can hand out - to balance out the pure awsome factor of Fear.

...

Am I too cynical?

 vipoid wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

I actually thought that maybe one of Zandrekh's abilities he can pass out would be Skyfire. As well as Ignores Cover. I doubt this would happen, but it's nice to dream, eh?

Well, as above, I don't think Skyfire should need to exist at all.

Regardless, I'm not sure about Ignores Cover, but it might be nice if he could remove Shrouded as well as Stealth.

However, knowing GW, he'll get the amazing ability to give a friendly Necron unit Fear. Probably in exchange for all the other rules he can hand out - to balance out the pure awsome factor of Fear.

...

Am I too cynical?

Lol, I question why Fear exists. But the reason I think those two rules would make sense is A. Guardsmen can be ordered to Ignore Cover, and Zandrekh is a damn good tactician, so it isn't beyond his reach to be able to do the same. B. Same thing goes for Skyfire. He can pass coordinates to his troops and tell them where to shoot to hit Flyers.

I don't think it would be too far out of the question. Also, Monster Hunter. Please God....

It's impossible to predict where the next necron codex will place them in turns of power. If GW is smart they will put them a little bit ahead of SM in terms of power, which is more or less where they are at right now.

I am sure they will adjust some Necron mechanics but what GW chooses to adjust is again unpredictable. MSS may seem like an obvious target for adjustment but really the whole issue of whether or not something like MSS gets adjusted depends on the overall picture that GW which no one knows for sure.

I do think they will nudge the point values around to encourage the sale of neglected models and support any new models. I don't think this is a bad thing at all. I don't mind building a deeper collection.

So maybe Lychguard, Praetorians, Destroyers, and the Stalker will get buffs and their competition get nerfs so those models see the light of day.

Well, if it's just about shifting boxes of models, they should nerf it

I mean, they've been selling 'crons for 3 editions, maybe they want people investing in something else now.

morgoth wrote:
Well, if it's just about shifting boxes of models, they should nerf it

I mean, they've been selling 'crons for 3 editions, maybe they want people investing in something else now.

I so hope Eldar get the nerfbat shoved up their hind quarters in their next update. That would make my day.

I'm pretty sure they will get it hard. You may still be hit harder though. You've had it good for too long, the bill is sky-high

Most of what I've known of Eldar was underpowered, I don't think they'll keep it on top for very long.

I'm really curious as to the post-BeastStar tournament scene, it might already downgrade Eldar enough for me to buy them cheaper on ebay.

I'd be extremely surprised if GW even gives Eldar another 14 months of top dog (counting from now), but I think it's far more likely the eye of Sauron will turn to the Imperium once more, for another long while.

morgoth wrote:
Well, if it's just about shifting boxes of models, they should nerf it

I mean, they've been selling 'crons for 3 editions, maybe they want people investing in something else now.

Nerfhammering a codex into oblivion as you are suggesting makes zero business sense, so yeah, that ain't going to happen.

Shift things around and make things a bit more powerful than the center (ie SM) is the smartest business decision. So yeah, most likely to happen.

col_impact wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Well, if it's just about shifting boxes of models, they should nerf it

I mean, they've been selling 'crons for 3 editions, maybe they want people investing in something else now.

Nerfhammering a codex into oblivion as you are suggesting makes zero business sense, so yeah, that ain't going to happen.

Shift things around and make things a bit more powerful than the center (ie SM) is the smartest business decision. So yeah, most likely to happen.

Yeah, we may simply have different definitions of "hard".

What I mean is that it will probably be impossible to win tournaments using a Necron list, barring incredible luck.

morgoth wrote:

col_impact wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Well, if it's just about shifting boxes of models, they should nerf it

I mean, they've been selling 'crons for 3 editions, maybe they want people investing in something else now.

Nerfhammering a codex into oblivion as you are suggesting makes zero business sense, so yeah, that ain't going to happen.

Shift things around and make things a bit more powerful than the center (ie SM) is the smartest business decision. So yeah, most likely to happen.

Yeah, we may simply have different definitions of "hard".

What I mean is that it will probably be impossible to win tournaments using a Necron list, barring incredible luck.

Huh? We get it. You don't like Necrons and want them punished and want your fantasy fulfilled that they will be punished. But, you can't predict GW. And, GW doesn't release fresh codexes where it's impossible to win tournaments. I would suggest you quit spouting nonsense.

It would be amazing if Zahndrekh could take away Skyfire from units.

 Sigvatr wrote:
It would be amazing if Zahndrekh could take away Skyfire from units.

Considering one of the main complaints I hear about Necrons is their ability to spam fliers, I don't think removing the enemy's skyfire will do much to endear us to other players.

 vipoid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
It would be amazing if Zahndrekh could take away Skyfire from units.

Considering one of the main complaints I hear about Necrons is their ability to spam fliers, I don't think removing the enemy's skyfire will do much to endear us to other players.

Oh, I would love to be able to remove Skyfire from my own units. Fortifications, Sentry Pylons etc.