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.

MrPieChee wrote:

@vipiod - that's a really complex way to achieve exactly my suggestion from the 1st(?) page:

I know it's a bit complex, but generally you need to be precise with wargaming rules. I'd rather have a wordy rule that takes a couple of reads to fully understand but which leaves little room for interpretation than one which is simple to read but leads to all sorts of issues in practise.

MrPieChee wrote:

When a rp model is killed, leave it on the table. At the start of the necron player turn roll rp for all models killed last turn. Those that fail are removed. No having to worry about counters or keep track of anything. This also means you can roll for wiped units. Simple. It's a Nerf because you only roll for models that died last turn, but a buff because focus fire doesn't negate the rule.

- How do you tell the difference between a 'killed' Necron model and an 'alive' Necron model?
- Can 'dead' Necron models still move?
- Can 'dead' Necron models still attack?
- Can dead Necron models still be attacked?
- Can wounds be allocated to 'dead' Necrons?
- Can enemy models move within 1" of 'dead' Necrons?
- Can enemy models charge 'dead' Necrons?
- If a Necron unit suffers losses due to Morale, can 'dead' Necrons be removed instead of 'living' ones?
- When Necron models revive, do they remain where they are even if they are out of coherency with their unit?
- If they remain where they are, what happens if their are enemy units within 1" of them?

I'm not trying to bash your idea. I'm just saying that there was a reason I chose to make my version 'wordy'.

Why not let an annihilation barge carry a heavy gauss cannon as an option for the twin Tesla destructor?

BTW I like theAB, I just think i'd like it more if itcs cost wasn't so high, or I could lark a spider behind it to buff it's living metal effect. Also not letting it take a heavy gauss cannon seems dumb.

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
Why not let an annihilation barge carry a heavy gauss cannon as an option for the twin Tesla destructor?

BTW I like theAB, I just think i'd like it more if itcs cost wasn't so high, or I could lark a spider behind it to buff it's living metal effect. Also not letting it take a heavy gauss cannon seems dumb.

Because GW says no.
I would totally be on board with more weapon options for the AB though.
I'm not just talking about twin heavy gauss either. I'm talking about heat rays, particle shredders and deathrays.
The fact that weapon options are locked to single, specific units is a weak point in the necron army. I don't mind our infantry having limited options, but our vehicles should really have an expanded armory.

 vipoid wrote:

- How do you tell the difference between a 'killed' Necron model and an 'alive' Necron model?
- Can 'dead' Necron models still move?
- Can 'dead' Necron models still attack?
- Can dead Necron models still be attacked?
- Can wounds be allocated to 'dead' Necrons?
- Can enemy models move within 1" of 'dead' Necrons?
- Can enemy models charge 'dead' Necrons?
- If a Necron unit suffers losses due to Morale, can 'dead' Necrons be removed instead of 'living' ones?
- When Necron models revive, do they remain where they are even if they are out of coherency with their unit?
- If they remain where they are, what happens if their are enemy units within 1" of them?

I'm not trying to bash your idea. I'm just saying that there was a reason I chose to make my version 'wordy'.

Killed models are lying on their side (which I normally do out of habit from whfb while phases are ongoing). None of your other questions matter - rp is at the beginning of your turn - models that revive are back in the unit, and models that don't are removed. Models on their side don't interact in anyway. They are effectively a marker.

Presumably if the unit is wiped out this still works (otherwise no point to it), so there would need to be a mechanism to determine where they pop up (models on their side are less precisely positioned than ones stood on their base).

I would like to see more long ranged weapons available - Necrons are really a short range shooting army I always feel outgunned against a "proper" shooting army that we have to spend a couple of turns advancing to get into range, and against a melee army we need to get close enough that we have only 1 round of shooting before we get charged. I liked the long range plasma lance from the previous edition (that could be put on crypteks in a royal court and distributed amongst the troops) but that has been squatted now... Our few long range guns are all on big expensive platforms that are easy to target...

MrPieChee wrote:

Killed models are lying on their side

And?

They're still models and they're still on the table. The game does not differentiate between 'live models that are on the table' and 'dead models that are still on the table', and laying those models on their sides doesn't change that.

If you think that no one will ever claim that they can see an otherwise out-of-sight Necron unit because they can see some 'dead' members of their unit or that a Necron player will never attempt to allocate wounds to a 'dead' Necron, then clearly you have never read the YMDC section of this forum.

What are the oldest kits to the Necron army right now? The Warriors and the Monolith, right?

If they were to be updated, more than likely new options will become available. Either a second/third unit added or a new weapon mix included.

Either way, what new versions of these units do you think would be for consideration?

Should Warriors get another weapon to dakka with, or have an updated version of their old Disruption Fields (remember when they actually had options besides numbers), or should their chassis make a new unit with a new weapon?

Should a new Monolith kit be set up between tank and dedicated restoration teleporter, or should it involve more of an artillery beast?

Odds are, with any effective update, you'll be looking at new models along with them as well.

 vipoid wrote:

MrPieChee wrote:

Killed models are lying on their side

And?

They're still models and they're still on the table. The game does not differentiate between 'live models that are on the table' and 'dead models that are still on the table', and laying those models on their sides doesn't change that.

If you think that no one will ever claim that they can see an otherwise out-of-sight Necron unit because they can see some 'dead' members of their unit or that a Necron player will never attempt to allocate wounds to a 'dead' Necron, then clearly you have never read the YMDC section of this forum.

There isn't really a response to that. I'm suggesting a rule to replace rp. I could spend lots of time making perfect wording so there are no loop holes and 100% of people completely understand the rule, but gw doesn't do that, and this is a forum where in reality the rule doesn't have a chance of being implemented. The key to a good ruleset is clarity.

If it makes you happy then every model could be removed when killed and replaced with a marker. However if you're playing with people who require that then you need a better gaming group. It's tolerating people who act like that which keeps them around.

 vipoid wrote:

They're still models and they're still on the table. The game does not differentiate between 'live models that are on the table' and 'dead models that are still on the table', and laying those models on their sides doesn't change that.

Are there any examples of this already?

 Charistoph wrote:
What are the oldest kits to the Necron army right now? The Warriors and the Monolith, right?

If they were to be updated, more than likely new options will become available. Either a second/third unit added or a new weapon mix included.

Either way, what new versions of these units do you think would be for consideration?

Should Warriors get another weapon to dakka with, or have an updated version of their old Disruption Fields (remember when they actually had options besides numbers), or should their chassis make a new unit with a new weapon?

Should a new Monolith kit be set up between tank and dedicated restoration teleporter, or should it involve more of an artillery beast?

Odds are, with any effective update, you'll be looking at new models along with them as well.

Destroyers, Warriors, scarabs and the Monolith.
All of these are unchanged. The ones I got more than a decade ago are still the same design as the ones today.
That's just the plastic kits. If we were to go by aesthetic instead of material, then the Nightbringer, Deceiver, Destroyer Lord and Heavy Destroyer are also unchanged.

Flayed Ones, Spyders and Wraiths look nothing like their 3rd ed counterparts. The latter 2 are pretty good, even though wraiths moved from being necrons to canopteks. The new Flayed Ones are a joke, and whoever designed them shouldn't be allowed to touch necrons again. Ever.
Immortals may look similar to their 3rd versions, but there are some subtle differences - they aren't as bulky and they don't have a glyph on their forehead. Instead they have these depressions.

Disruption fields already exist as a stratagem, I believe. Its actually pretty nice. It works well with Novokh.
I would like to see more necron heavy vehicles. Something that's more inline with the monolith or the obelisk, like a big chunk of masonry.
A heavy weapons platform variant would be a nice tank stand in.

8,000 points of Necrons with another couple hundred points in the works were all relegated to a bin in my garage. I will never play 8th edition again.

Moving forward, I will not longer purchase any products from GW including Citidel paints or any other hobby supplies until Necrons are fixed.

The upshot, I have extra money to purchase fuel to pilot airplanes and more Keyforge!

If my focused gauss fire option to inflict a mortal wound on one target per 3 hits whether they wound and penetrate or not might make large units too powerful suppose we cap it at like 3-4 wounds regardless of the number of units and hits?

But still allow it to work with rapid fire.

 Tokhuah wrote:
8,000 points of Necrons with another couple hundred points in the works were all relegated to a bin in my garage. I will never play 8th edition again.

Moving forward, I will not longer purchase any products from GW including Citidel paints or any other hobby supplies until Necrons are fixed.

The upshot, I have extra money to purchase fuel to pilot airplanes and more Keyforge!

That is the most hypocritical thing i have ever herd on dakka.

For those that dont know, Keyforge is a new card game like MTG without mana and you are always 3 colors, but, you can not build your deck, they are all pre-built, completely random and have power levels (that you have to log into and use the deck code to find out your power level), with 7 colors that are based on a type of playstyle, you could get a low power level deck, with 0 synergies and your opponent get get a higher power level with perfect synergies. Yes they have a "way" to balance the power levels a tiny bit, but its still not balance in anyway. Its a cash grab game that is completely made to trick you into that dopamine rush.

Once you buy your deck, if its bad, its literally unplayable and no one wants it, so you cant even get your 10$ back, you might be able to sell it for 1-2$ tho... at least in 40k you models serve multi-purpose, can resell for over 50% the value. Decks are 100% unique and 1 time use as well, so you cant build/copy others.

That game sounds terrible, why would anyone want to blow money on it?

Oh, dont forget, b.c of the "balance" you could get a level 8 deck with bad synergies, and you oppnent could get a level 5 or 6 with good synergies, b.c of that, the higher PL deck will have a handicap, but b.c his deck doesnt work well with the cards he is now at a disadvantage.

This tho is just from watching 6-7 games online (not many online atm) and reading the rules/having it in person. Im still new to the game.

But from my PoV and a couple others (a player that is huge into card games and been playing them for years) all agree its currently not a balanced game.

This isnt to say after mass player beta runs they cant balance future decks better, but currently i wouldnt touch it.

PS: event organizers can already super easily pop open the decks, scan the codes and find the "high" power level ones, and deck the color combinations, there are a few colors that are better right now, and they can already cheat the events/games/sell to friends. I mean its super easy, like it takes 30sec to do.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Tokhuah wrote:
8,000 points of Necrons with another couple hundred points in the works were all relegated to a bin in my garage. I will never play 8th edition again.

Moving forward, I will not longer purchase any products from GW including Citidel paints or any other hobby supplies until Necrons are fixed.

The upshot, I have extra money to purchase fuel to pilot airplanes and more Keyforge!

That is the most hypocritical thing i have ever herd on dakka.

For those that dont know, Keyforge is a new card game like MTG without mana and you are always 3 colors, but, you can not build your deck, they are all pre-built, completely random and have power levels (that you have to log into and use the deck code to find out your power level), with 7 colors that are based on a type of playstyle, you could get a low power level deck, with 0 synergies and your opponent get get a higher power level with perfect synergies. Yes they have a "way" to balance the power levels a tiny bit, but its still not balance in anyway. Its a cash grab game that is completely made to trick you into that dopamine rush.

Once you buy your deck, if its bad, its literally unplayable and no one wants it, so you cant even get your 10$ back, you might be able to sell it for 1-2$ tho... at least in 40k you models serve multi-purpose, can resell for over 50% the value. Decks are 100% unique and 1 time use as well, so you cant build/copy others.

I know this is OT but holy gak that game sounds awful! A card game with ZERO collectibility or deck building? Those are like the only two things WORTH doing in a TCG.

Bringing back Pariahs would be a start. Just my 2p. Give them some smite defense.

If the CA 2018 teaser is literal, there are no rules changes in CA 2018, only points changes. So expect necrons to stay boned at least the summer FAQ. The necrons will get a new trait though, dust of a thousand shelves.

Army gets cheaper cross codex, I’m good with not getting rules.

 IHateNids wrote:
Army gets cheaper cross codex, I’m good with not getting rules.

Lacking anti-vehicle that can withstand a stiff breeze, it would take some silly big points reductions to make us effective in the current meta.

 Grimgold wrote:
If the CA 2018 teaser is literal, there are no rules changes in CA 2018, only points changes. So expect necrons to stay boned at least the summer FAQ. The necrons will get a new trait though, dust of a thousand shelves.

I made this prediction a fair few weeks ago based on the information that I gathered from Warhammer World back in July. I suspected that there could have been changes in opinion since then, and there still could. However, I don't think that change will be a very large change, since they do believe that Necrons as an army are in a decent spot as it stood back in July.

 vipoid wrote:

MrPieChee wrote:

Killed models are lying on their side

And?

They're still models and they're still on the table. The game does not differentiate between 'live models that are on the table' and 'dead models that are still on the table', and laying those models on their sides doesn't change that.

If you think that no one will ever claim that they can see an otherwise out-of-sight Necron unit because they can see some 'dead' members of their unit or that a Necron player will never attempt to allocate wounds to a 'dead' Necron, then clearly you have never read the YMDC section of this forum.

At that point you smack them with the BRB for being TFG




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimgold wrote:
If the CA 2018 teaser is literal, there are no rules changes in CA 2018, only points changes. So expect necrons to stay boned at least the summer FAQ. The necrons will get a new trait though, dust of a thousand shelves.

The chance of a rule overhaul was already extremely slim so banking on that was a recipe for disappointment. If they get a sufficient points drop across the board it would be enough to make them at least playable.

 Grimgold wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
Army gets cheaper cross codex, I’m good with not getting rules.

Lacking anti-vehicle that can withstand a stiff breeze, it would take some silly big points reductions to make us effective in the current meta.

I mean, Destroyers and DDAs remain our collective answer to everything not infantry, so I’m still good with paying less to get more of them

I think Necrons should be allowed to work a bit differently to other armies. They are Xenos and crazy advanced after all - they don’t have to stick to the tropes of more conventional armies.

Aside from the Ghost Ark, which is more of an ambulance, we don’t use transports per se, but rather teleportation. This is a nice distinction that gives the army character, just the execution is a bit lacking. It’s not unfixable, though. Similarly, we don’t have to stick to the idea of ‘this is an anti-infantry unit, this is an anti-tank unit’. Having our anti-tank coming from basic troops was another fun distinction, and I’d like to go back to it.

With that in mind, I think the ‘combined fire’ idea posited above has merit. Something where minor anti infantry firepower snowballs into heavy anti-tank as they focus fire. Something like this:

‘If a single model suffers two unsaved wounds from Gauss weapons fired by one unit in one phase, the Damage characteristic for those wounds is increased by 1. If a single model suffers three or more unsaved wounds from Gauss weapons fired by one unit in one phase, the Damage characteristic for those wounds is increased by 2. Note that the increase in Damage is resolved before rolling for abilities that ignore unsaved wounds such as Disgustingly Resilient.’

I’m not sure if it would be too powerful - you’d need 36 Warriors or 14 Immortals in rapid fire range to kill a Leman Russ - but it’d solve our anti-tank woes and would mean we wouldn’t need a price reduction for our troops.

 Grimgold wrote:
If the CA 2018 teaser is literal, there are no rules changes in CA 2018, only points changes. So expect necrons to stay boned at least the summer FAQ. The necrons will get a new trait though, dust of a thousand shelves.

That's GW for you. Release a flawe d army, keep! People buying CA hoping to fix it, then maybe halfway fix it with faq updates and when itcs finally halfway decent, NEW EDITION TIME!

 NurglesR0T wrote:

The chance of a rule overhaul was already extremely slim so banking on that was a recipe for disappointment. If they get a sufficient points drop across the board it would be enough to make them at least playable.

What are they going to reduce the price on that would make a difference in the current meta? I know we are due some points reductions, but even after points reductions It's hard to bring more destroyers, because a lot of lists are already brining three units of them, same with DDAs. Are we going to get enough reduction to regularly bring three units of heavy destroyers, and are they going to be cheap enough that them getting popped like balloons won't matter? We are already filling up our detachments with our best units and it's flat not enough, with the rule of three there is a hard limit on how much points reductions can help us, and alot of our top lists are already near those limits.

I'm not saying points reduction won't help, or are a bad solution for other armies (both admech and marines could be much more competitive with points reductions), but necrons are lacking in certain capabilities, and bringing more incapable units won't make up for that fact. Half of our vehicles are a joke, you could cut the cost on a annihilation barge by quarter and it still wouldn't be worth taking, and if you cut it in half it would only be worth taking for an extra gauss cannon. Doom scythes don't have hover or strafing run, so always hit on a 4+ with their only gun that matters, The obelisk is bad joke with no AP, and the nightscythe is basically unarmed and requires CP to make tomb world deployment work well enough to be useful. Maybe if they cut the cost of the monolith in half we could use it as a battle tank, but they are never going to reduce it that much because it has too many special rules.

Destroyers don't fit the bill for Necrons; they're a glass cannon model in an army that is intended to win by outlasting the enemy. Destroyers would be really good in Eldar but I think as long as Destroyers are our best unit Necrons will continue to be bad.

Does anyone think that the problem with immortals is that gauss and tesla are the wrong way round - Gauss blasters should be assault 2 and Tesla carbines should be Rapid Fire 2 (and loose their special rule).

Tesla is a big lightening bolt, so it would make sense over range it would get worse as it grounds itself, but over short distances it hits everything.

Gauss Blasters have two barrels and so should be able to make use of them all the time.


This has two bonuses, Blasters are now more equal, and tesla now doesn't suffer from stupid -1's to hit removing their bonus.

You remove the "Tesla" rule and we no longer have any answer to hordes

MrPieChee wrote:
Does anyone think that the problem with immortals is that gauss and tesla are the wrong way round - Gauss blasters should be assault 2 and Tesla carbines should be Rapid Fire 2 (and loose their special rule).

Tesla is a big lightening bolt, so it would make sense over range it would get worse as it grounds itself, but over short distances it hits everything.

Gauss Blasters have two barrels and so should be able to make use of them all the time.


This has two bonuses, Blasters are now more equal, and tesla now doesn't suffer from stupid -1's to hit removing their bonus.

Spoiler:

This might not work well if applied to other gauss and tesla weapons, but it doesn't have to. All gauss weapons look quite different, so having smaller guns rapid fire and bigger heavy doesn't matter. Tesla mounts everything else on vehicles so doesn't matter either.

However making tesla sphere rapid fire 4 might be more interesting... and a tesla destructor rapid fire 4 with str 8 and dmg 2....

Gauss Blasters were assault 2 weapons to begin with. I don't know why they changed them to rapid fire in 5th.
Maybe rapid fire 2? That way they are sort of equal with tesla at 24", but are deadlier at close range.
Tesla shouldn't lose their extra hits rule.

Making them rapid fire 2 and keeping their 6+ hit rule would make them really expensive.

Rapid fire 2 means 4 hits at 12" all the time, so you don't care about needing to roll a 6+. Imo it's more robust. With no AP, going to rapid fire 3 could be an option, but it's probably OTT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IHateNids wrote:
You remove the "Tesla" rule and we no longer have any answer to hordes

Yes we would, it would just be at 12" instead, and wouldn't be screwed by -1 to hit.