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.

Just....I dont know, cut the tail connection off?

 Geifer wrote:

I'm not even sure I'd go that far. I seem to recall from the reveal video that the backpack he's wearing over his cloak (the part painted black/green) extend further down and is quite substantial, so I'm not sure saying he's basically identical to a foot version. It's definitely not as obvious as wings, which as you say have a long tradition and are thus generally accepted.

When I say 'basically identical' I'm not including the actual wings/jetpack.

I meant that nothing had really been done to make the cryptek look like it had been adapted for flight in any way - they'd just bolted the backpack to it. I know it's what they do for their human models, but I'd like to think a machine could display a bit more modification.

 Geifer wrote:

I know where you're coming from. While I can't say that I'm too fussed about the changed aesthetic of 5th ed simply because we have so many nice, plain plastic kits to convert stuff from, this is actually one of the most tiresome things related to GW for me. I mean, for me it's the background that they changed with no regard for the identity of the army or the people who actually liked it, but yeah. The model equivalent of that is hardly any better.

Yeah, I really liked the old Necron background. Even if they'd wanted to give themselves more options, I feel it could have been tweaked a bit, without needing to be replaced entirely.

I'm also not a fan of Necron Lord basically being shafted in favour of Overlords.

 Geifer wrote:

But that's probably just GW's special service just for me. They squatted my favorite Fantasy army (Tomb Kings) and retconned my favorite 40k army beyond recognition, to the point where it might have been more merciful to let it die in peace instead.

Ouch. I hadn't realised Tomb Kings had been squatted (AoS killed any interest I had in Fantasy, so I haven't looked at it since then). Were they merged into another faction or just removed altogether?

 Geifer wrote:

Agreed. But they wrote themselves into a corner when they gave Necrons the insatiable desire to retain as much of their physical form as they could with the eventual aim to return to being flesh bags.

It squanders the potential of a high tech mechanical race and is one of the bigger issues I have with Tomb Kings in Space.

Well, you'd think they could still make the most of their mechanical bodies until the can get their fleshy ones back.

 vipoid wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

I'm not even sure I'd go that far. I seem to recall from the reveal video that the backpack he's wearing over his cloak (the part painted black/green) extend further down and is quite substantial, so I'm not sure saying he's basically identical to a foot version. It's definitely not as obvious as wings, which as you say have a long tradition and are thus generally accepted.

When I say 'basically identical' I'm not including the actual wings/jetpack.

I meant that nothing had really been done to make the cryptek look like it had been adapted for flight in any way - they'd just bolted the backpack to it. I know it's what they do for their human models, but I'd like to think a machine could display a bit more modification.

Oh, I see. Yeah. Having a body that could be adapted without loss or hassle certainly raises the question why that doesn't happen.

 vipoid wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

I know where you're coming from. While I can't say that I'm too fussed about the changed aesthetic of 5th ed simply because we have so many nice, plain plastic kits to convert stuff from, this is actually one of the most tiresome things related to GW for me. I mean, for me it's the background that they changed with no regard for the identity of the army or the people who actually liked it, but yeah. The model equivalent of that is hardly any better.

Yeah, I really liked the old Necron background. Even if they'd wanted to give themselves more options, I feel it could have been tweaked a bit, without needing to be replaced entirely.

I'm also not a fan of Necron Lord basically being shafted in favour of Overlords.

I thought at the time it really showed their will to devastate the established background, even if it wasn't apparent why. One could have easily incorporated almost everything in the new background without even touching the old one. Expansion rather than replacement. Guess that wasn't good enough for them. Eh.

 vipoid wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

But that's probably just GW's special service just for me. They squatted my favorite Fantasy army (Tomb Kings) and retconned my favorite 40k army beyond recognition, to the point where it might have been more merciful to let it die in peace instead.

Ouch. I hadn't realised Tomb Kings had been squatted (AoS killed any interest I had in Fantasy, so I haven't looked at it since then). Were they merged into another faction or just removed altogether?

They got legacy rules like everyone else, then half a year later when undead were formalized in Grand Alliance Death (Index equivalent in case you don't know) and only Vampire Counts plus Nagash and his homies showed up. Tomb Kings went to last chance to buy and that was that.

The timing of that was pretty grand, too. I don't recall exactly, but it went up either after I went to bed or the next morning after I left for my local store for some fun gaming. When I did have the chance to check the GW site, three quarters of the kits were already gone. Shame, too. I would have bought another 11 or 12 kits right away and probably some more down the line had the models stayed available.

At least I got the last sphinx my local store had left in stock.

 vipoid wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

Agreed. But they wrote themselves into a corner when they gave Necrons the insatiable desire to retain as much of their physical form as they could with the eventual aim to return to being flesh bags.

It squanders the potential of a high tech mechanical race and is one of the bigger issues I have with Tomb Kings in Space.

Well, you'd think they could still make the most of their mechanical bodies until the can get their fleshy ones back.

You'd think.

Its alright. I think I will convert mine so he is attached directly to the Canoptek Crab instead.

Otherwise, I generally like the look of the necron range, minus the newer vehicles. And that is mostly because they are a PAIN to put together.

I like the model.

 Geifer wrote:
Since I'm not a fan of any of the ornamentation tacked onto Necron bodies from 5th ed onward

5th edition you say?

Cheeslord wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Well, the actual Cryptek part looks okay . . . except for that ridiculous chin.

I think it's supposed to be a beard, because the Crypteks are supposed to be wise, and wise people are often old, and old people often have beards...

Doesn't really work for me either. When you are immortal, hairless and your "beard" is a chunk of metal...

Or, you know, based on this:

He looks like he's catching a wave. The hand doesn't help.

I find him kind of endearingly humorous, though he would look better if he was actually riding the megascarab.

the scarab I don't think is intended to be part of the flight system so much as a scenic part of the base. the cloak are basicly those links forming a cloak along his back

BrianDavion wrote:
the scarab I don't think is intended to be part of the flight system so much as a scenic part of the base. the cloak are basicly those links forming a cloak along his back

Its litterally attached to his back by a spinal column. Hes being held above the scarab like a scorpion stinger. If the scarab isn't flying then hes not flying.

Cheeslord wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Well, the actual Cryptek part looks okay . . . except for that ridiculous chin.

I think it's supposed to be a beard, because the Crypteks are supposed to be wise, and wise people are often old, and old people often have beards...

An ornamental false beard is a well-known feature on Egyptian pharoanic art. That's why some necron characters have elongated chins.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
An ornamental false beard is a well-known feature on Egyptian pharoanic art. That's why some necron characters have elongated chins.

I know why they'be been given those stupid chins, but it doesn't make them look any less godawful.

 Irbis wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Since I'm not a fan of any of the ornamentation tacked onto Necron bodies from 5th ed onward

5th edition you say?

It's true of course that the 2nd ed Lord is gaudy. Mine is painted golden for full bling effect because of this. I've never been able to take this particular model serious.

My statement stems from not considering 2nd ed Necron design relevant anymore. Visually nothing made it across when Necrons were fully rolled out in 3rd ed. Warriors changed, Immortals changed, Scarabs changed, Immortals changed, Lords changed. And if you ask me, for the better. I still use my 2nd ed Warriors because of nostalgia, but even then they've been relegated to my two reserve squads that I bring when I don't have enough modern, painted Warriors for my needs. That effectively makes 3rd ed models the baseline, even if technically there was another baseline before that.

It is of course relevant in so far as GW has for the past decade gone back to drawing heavily on 2nd ed and Rogue Trader designs for many armies. Daemons are perhaps the most notable instance of this. It's the reason why I've never been too harsh on GW for making 5th ed Necrons Tomb Kings in Space, visually. They were that from day one when I started Necrons and while I was perfectly happy with that aspect being toned down with the first plastic models, I do acknowledge the return of these visual elements and addition of similar new ones is just GW going back to the roots. Nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned, but not to my taste either. Certainly not in the quantities we get.

I believe the origin or presence of ornamentation to be far less relevant to the image of Necrons than the look of 3rd ed Warriors on which everything else in the Necron range is based (vehicles excluded, obviously - but even then with the presence of crew the appearance of Necrons become relevant again). And, when all is said and done, it's still the core model of modern armies and the only Necron Warrior many players have ever known. Thus my original statement not accounting for 2nd ed models.