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.

 Togusa wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Hoping for lots of new kits - especially Warriors, but also Destroyers/ Flayed Ones. Pariahs would be great.

Let's hope new means in line with modern standards and not "Primarisization."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with the miniatures range.

, the vehicles have some really odd design choices (exposed cockpit on the flyers).

I actually liked that detail. They're robots, they wouldn't need to be shielded from wind or a vacuum. A windshield would actually make LESS sense.

They fly at supersonic speeds, and enter planetary atmospheres from space. They'd be torn to pieces.

Yadda yadda force field etc. but at that point you might as well just have fitted a canopy.

Aren't necrons and their tech all made from the most advanced and durable materials in the universe? Self-repairing and nearly impossible to destroy? I remember reading a long time ago that their Ctan crypts are constantly in a never ending state of being destroyed and repaired.

I'd prefer not to have windows and the like. Leave that to the fleshy bits!

They can self repair, but just because they can self-repair doesn't mean they should damage themselves when its avoidable. There is nothing logical about wasting time and energy self-repairing when they could just, idk, weld a piece of metal over that gaping weak point they call a cockpit.

 Tokhuah wrote:

Their introduction in the 8th ed codex explicitly refers to them as androids.
Androids are humanoid robots. Therefore, necrons are robots.

Calling Necrons androids, robots, or iron men is straight up Imperium racist speak. It is no surprise... Any culture who uses terms like Xenos to describe people unlike themselves, has by their own use of language, defined themselves as xenophobes.

Actually those would all be really mild for Imperium descriptors of alien machine entities, though I'm not sure the first two are actually in their lexicon.

The xenos/xenophobe bit reads like a tautology. Xeno simply means foreigner or different in origin. Anything from another planet is exactly that, by definition.
Yes, the Imperium is xenophobic, but the particular wacky word derivative GW chose to use instead of 'alien' isn't why they're xenophobic.

 Tokhuah wrote:

Their introduction in the 8th ed codex explicitly refers to them as androids.
Androids are humanoid robots. Therefore, necrons are robots.

Calling Necrons androids, robots, or iron men is straight up Imperium racist speak. It is no surprise... Any culture who uses terms like Xenos to describe people unlike themselves, has by their own use of language, defined themselves as xenophobes.

Except they literally are androids / robots though?
I mean, what do you see when you see a necron? I don't know about you, but I think "Wow, James Cameron is going to sue someone!"

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Hoping for lots of new kits - especially Warriors, but also Destroyers/ Flayed Ones. Pariahs would be great.

Let's hope new means in line with modern standards and not "Primarisization."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with the miniatures range.

, the vehicles have some really odd design choices (exposed cockpit on the flyers).

I actually liked that detail. They're robots, they wouldn't need to be shielded from wind or a vacuum. A windshield would actually make LESS sense.

They fly at supersonic speeds, and enter planetary atmospheres from space. They'd be torn to pieces.

Yadda yadda force field etc. but at that point you might as well just have fitted a canopy.

Aren't necrons and their tech all made from the most advanced and durable materials in the universe? Self-repairing and nearly impossible to destroy? I remember reading a long time ago that their Ctan crypts are constantly in a never ending state of being destroyed and repaired.

I'd prefer not to have windows and the like. Leave that to the fleshy bits!

They can self repair, but just because they can self-repair doesn't mean they should damage themselves when its avoidable. There is nothing logical about wasting time and energy self-repairing when they could just, idk, weld a piece of metal over that gaping weak point they call a cockpit.

But what kind of cockpit would be more durable than a necron?

 Galas wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Hoping for lots of new kits - especially Warriors, but also Destroyers/ Flayed Ones. Pariahs would be great.

Let's hope new means in line with modern standards and not "Primarisization."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with the miniatures range.

, the vehicles have some really odd design choices (exposed cockpit on the flyers).

I actually liked that detail. They're robots, they wouldn't need to be shielded from wind or a vacuum. A windshield would actually make LESS sense.

They fly at supersonic speeds, and enter planetary atmospheres from space. They'd be torn to pieces.

Yadda yadda force field etc. but at that point you might as well just have fitted a canopy.

Aren't necrons and their tech all made from the most advanced and durable materials in the universe? Self-repairing and nearly impossible to destroy? I remember reading a long time ago that their Ctan crypts are constantly in a never ending state of being destroyed and repaired.

I'd prefer not to have windows and the like. Leave that to the fleshy bits!

They can self repair, but just because they can self-repair doesn't mean they should damage themselves when its avoidable. There is nothing logical about wasting time and energy self-repairing when they could just, idk, weld a piece of metal over that gaping weak point they call a cockpit.

But what kind of cockpit would be more durable than a necron?

A cockpit made out of the same material as the necron, except without exposing the sensitive parts? Necron vehicles are also made out of Living Metal. Its why they have the rule, "living metal".
You can see the console right there. That necron pilot is not going to be able to protect it from a missile.

I mean, if you want to go that route, then literally everything in the necron arsenal should just have warriors strapped to it, because apparently that's the best defense in the setting now.
Monolith? Strap warriors onto it. Obelisk? Get the duct tape. Tomb World? Ever played Castlevania?

From page 49 of Codex Necrons (8th edition):

The Tomb Blade was originally designed as a void-capable, single-pilot fighter during the final days of the War in Heaven. As Necrons’ robotic bodies are immune to the hazards of interplanetary space, traditional pressure sealed and canopied craft were unnecessary from the very outset.

So no, Necron vehicles do not need canopies on the cockpits of their vehicles..

Their vehicles shouldn't even have crew in the first place...

Its not about the vacuum of space, its about enemy fire.
Just because they can do it, doesn't mean its not dumb.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Their vehicles shouldn't even have crew in the first place...

Exactly lol.

Thats why I filled my cockpits in and modified by Arks to have wraith bodies and heads as optics and no pilots. I imagine them like the hunter killers Skynet uses in Terminator, why would they have a derpy half brained warrior as a pilot when you can have the Overlord and AI do it directly.

Power Armor is also void capable, but Space Marines still put cockpits on things. Necron flyers should just look like new Cylon Fighters, even if there's a body somewhere inside.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I imagine them like the hunter killers Skynet uses in Terminator, why would they have a derpy half brained warrior as a pilot when you can have the Overlord and AI do it directly.

That's what I would do, and I know people have done with Triarch Stalkers. I plan on doing the same to mine if I can figure out how.

It's another reason why I dislike Tomb Blades so much. Not only are they redundant, IMO, in a world where Destroyers exist (this is from a fluff perspective, not a rules perspective), but they have the derpy droopy pilots that just kinda hang there. Looks absurd.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Their vehicles shouldn't even have crew in the first place...

The Necrons are what was left of the Necrontyr after the biotransference. Only the crazies like the Destroyers and some Crypteks went and further modified their new bodies beyond what their original bodies were capable of. In essence, while they may now be soulless robots, their 'operating system' isn't advanced enough to control a Night Scythe or Tomb Blade without a physical interface (i.e., the Necron's body).

Just because they are machines now doesn't mean that they don't cling to their once mortal past. Heck there's a whole novella about one Lord who is somewhat insane and still think's he's alive - he holds banquets even though he cannot eat; he entertains; he thinks he's fighting a huge civil war against other living Necrons etc...

Whilst the average warrior is pretty soul-less; they still have a cling to their past within them. Hence why they have humanoid bodies and why they cling to the past through things like handles and buttons on war engines. Otherwise the whole army would just be Canoptek.

Don't get me wrong a whole Canoptek army would look freaking cool; but its a totally different asthetic and history.

 Overread wrote:
Just because they are machines now doesn't mean that they don't cling to their once mortal past. Heck there's a whole novella about one Lord who is somewhat insane and still think's he's alive - he holds banquets even though he cannot eat; he entertains; he thinks he's fighting a huge civil war against other living Necrons etc...

That would most likely be Nemesor Zahndrekh.

All the Dark Eldar vehicles with the exposed crew members, and it’s the Necrons who look weird with the same situation? :-/

As far as I can see, the reason the Monolith don’t have a Necron on the outside is that it’s an unpiloted construct.

 solkan wrote:
As far as I can see, the reason the Monolith don’t have a Necron on the outside is that it’s an unpiloted construct.

It's not. The codex specifically states it has a crew. From page 62 of Codex Necrons:

With a simple mental command, the Monolith’s crew can transform the eternity gate into a portal of exile, and those that fail to resist its pull are sucked out of reality entirely, banished forever to a temporal prison from which there can be no escape. Alternatively, the Monolith’s crew can use the eternity gate as a form of dimensional corridor, pulling squads of Necrons from elsewhere on the battlefield, orbiting starships or even far-distant tomb worlds and deploying them to the Monolith’s location.

 Ghaz wrote:
From page 49 of Codex Necrons (8th edition):

The Tomb Blade was originally designed as a void-capable, single-pilot fighter during the final days of the War in Heaven. As Necrons’ robotic bodies are immune to the hazards of interplanetary space, traditional pressure sealed and canopied craft were unnecessary from the very outset.

So no, Necron vehicles do not need canopies on the cockpits of their vehicles..

The 'fluff says so' doesn't actually address the problems with it.
An open cockpit is a structural and aerodynamic weakness regardless of whether the pilot needs to breathe or not. Winning a simple dogfight (by getting in and behind the opposing fighter) means you've got flaming wreckage coming right at your pilot and control surfaces- that's just unexcuseably dumb

And I've no idea how tomb blades would make for even a laughably ineffective space fighter, even compared to what the necrons actually use as fighters, the tomb blade doesn't have enough armament, speed or armor to fill that role. That's just bad, bad fluff.

 Overread wrote:
Just because they are machines now doesn't mean that they don't cling to their once mortal past. Heck there's a whole novella about one Lord who is somewhat insane and still think's he's alive - he holds banquets even though he cannot eat; he entertains; he thinks he's fighting a huge civil war against other living Necrons etc...

Whilst the average warrior is pretty soul-less; they still have a cling to their past within them. Hence why they have humanoid bodies and why they cling to the past through things like handles and buttons on war engines. Otherwise the whole army would just be Canoptek.

Don't get me wrong a whole Canoptek army would look freaking cool; but its a totally different asthetic and history.

I think that was from the Mephiston novel. If I recall he even keeps the organic corpse of his brother on a throne next to him, talking to said corpse like it was still alive. Very, very much insane.

Voss wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
From page 49 of Codex Necrons (8th edition):

The Tomb Blade was originally designed as a void-capable, single-pilot fighter during the final days of the War in Heaven. As Necrons’ robotic bodies are immune to the hazards of interplanetary space, traditional pressure sealed and canopied craft were unnecessary from the very outset.

So no, Necron vehicles do not need canopies on the cockpits of their vehicles..

The 'fluff says so' doesn't actually address the problems with it.
An open cockpit is a structural and aerodynamic weakness regardless of whether the pilot needs to breathe or not. Winning a simple dogfight (by getting in and behind the opposing fighter) means you've got flaming wreckage coming right at your pilot and control surfaces- that's just unexcuseably dumb

And I've no idea how tomb blades would make for even a laughably ineffective space fighter, even compared to what the necrons actually use as fighters, the tomb blade doesn't have enough armament, speed or armor to fill that role. That's just bad, bad fluff.

Sorry, but it does answer the question. Real life 'problems' don't factor into alien metals, power fields, etc.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Hoping for lots of new kits - especially Warriors, but also Destroyers/ Flayed Ones. Pariahs would be great.

Let's hope new means in line with modern standards and not "Primarisization."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with the miniatures range.

, the vehicles have some really odd design choices (exposed cockpit on the flyers).

I actually liked that detail. They're robots, they wouldn't need to be shielded from wind or a vacuum. A windshield would actually make LESS sense.

They fly at supersonic speeds, and enter planetary atmospheres from space. They'd be torn to pieces.

Yadda yadda force field etc. but at that point you might as well just have fitted a canopy.

Aren't necrons and their tech all made from the most advanced and durable materials in the universe? Self-repairing and nearly impossible to destroy? I remember reading a long time ago that their Ctan crypts are constantly in a never ending state of being destroyed and repaired.

I'd prefer not to have windows and the like. Leave that to the fleshy bits!

They can self repair, but just because they can self-repair doesn't mean they should damage themselves when its avoidable. There is nothing logical about wasting time and energy self-repairing when they could just, idk, weld a piece of metal over that gaping weak point they call a cockpit.

Living Metal is the apex material in the cosmos next to wraithbone. Who says that they are damaged at all when flying about. I seem to recall Roboute surviving in space with no helmet on. Seems to me those arguing this point here are doing it just to argue and not because there is any merit. I enjoy the necron aesthetic, I'm sorry that other do not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
From page 49 of Codex Necrons (8th edition):

The Tomb Blade was originally designed as a void-capable, single-pilot fighter during the final days of the War in Heaven. As Necrons’ robotic bodies are immune to the hazards of interplanetary space, traditional pressure sealed and canopied craft were unnecessary from the very outset.

So no, Necron vehicles do not need canopies on the cockpits of their vehicles..

The 'fluff says so' doesn't actually address the problems with it.
An open cockpit is a structural and aerodynamic weakness regardless of whether the pilot needs to breathe or not. Winning a simple dogfight (by getting in and behind the opposing fighter) means you've got flaming wreckage coming right at your pilot and control surfaces- that's just unexcuseably dumb

And I've no idea how tomb blades would make for even a laughably ineffective space fighter, even compared to what the necrons actually use as fighters, the tomb blade doesn't have enough armament, speed or armor to fill that role. That's just bad, bad fluff.

I think you guys are just arguing this for the sake of arguing. Jesus Christ man, we're talking about a universe with nigh unkillable orks, space marines whose bodies can't physically exist in real life due to their dimensions and build, and a whole host of other off the wall nonsense. Literal Gods and Deamons, ships that move with no engines, etc.

It's SciFi. It doesn't need to match real life physics. Come on now.

Writing that is believable even with non realistic elements because it has logic of it own which doesn't require "it's magic" is difference between professional and amateur.

Gw being full of amateurs no wonder you need 'its magic"

 Togusa wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Hoping for lots of new kits - especially Warriors, but also Destroyers/ Flayed Ones. Pariahs would be great.

Let's hope new means in line with modern standards and not "Primarisization."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with the miniatures range.

, the vehicles have some really odd design choices (exposed cockpit on the flyers).

I actually liked that detail. They're robots, they wouldn't need to be shielded from wind or a vacuum. A windshield would actually make LESS sense.

They fly at supersonic speeds, and enter planetary atmospheres from space. They'd be torn to pieces.

Yadda yadda force field etc. but at that point you might as well just have fitted a canopy.

Aren't necrons and their tech all made from the most advanced and durable materials in the universe? Self-repairing and nearly impossible to destroy? I remember reading a long time ago that their Ctan crypts are constantly in a never ending state of being destroyed and repaired.

I'd prefer not to have windows and the like. Leave that to the fleshy bits!

They can self repair, but just because they can self-repair doesn't mean they should damage themselves when its avoidable. There is nothing logical about wasting time and energy self-repairing when they could just, idk, weld a piece of metal over that gaping weak point they call a cockpit.

Living Metal is the apex material in the cosmos next to wraithbone. Who says that they are damaged at all when flying about. I seem to recall Roboute surviving in space with no helmet on. Seems to me those arguing this point here are doing it just to argue and not because there is any merit. I enjoy the necron aesthetic, I'm sorry that other do not.

They're in battle. They're going to get damaged. Necrons are tough, but not indestructible.
Roboute has plot armor thicker than the Statue of Liberty's thighs. Any character seen without a helmet should have his head blown off, but that would make for a short story.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
From page 49 of Codex Necrons (8th edition):

The Tomb Blade was originally designed as a void-capable, single-pilot fighter during the final days of the War in Heaven. As Necrons’ robotic bodies are immune to the hazards of interplanetary space, traditional pressure sealed and canopied craft were unnecessary from the very outset.

So no, Necron vehicles do not need canopies on the cockpits of their vehicles..

The 'fluff says so' doesn't actually address the problems with it.
An open cockpit is a structural and aerodynamic weakness regardless of whether the pilot needs to breathe or not. Winning a simple dogfight (by getting in and behind the opposing fighter) means you've got flaming wreckage coming right at your pilot and control surfaces- that's just unexcuseably dumb

And I've no idea how tomb blades would make for even a laughably ineffective space fighter, even compared to what the necrons actually use as fighters, the tomb blade doesn't have enough armament, speed or armor to fill that role. That's just bad, bad fluff.

I think you guys are just arguing this for the sake of arguing. Jesus Christ man, we're talking about a universe with nigh unkillable orks, space marines whose bodies can't physically exist in real life due to their dimensions and build, and a whole host of other off the wall nonsense. Literal Gods and Deamons, ships that move with no engines, etc.

It's SciFi. It doesn't need to match real life physics. Come on now.

tneva82 wrote:

punisher357 wrote:

I'm not getting my hopes way up for the Pariah book, but I have my fingers crossed that we get the build-a-bear treatment so we can make custom dynasties. Tyranids had 7 or 8 hive fleets, but crons only got 5 codes in their codex....two of which are utter garbage. I think/hope it would be reasonable to get customer dynasties. I just don't know how they would balance it. For the nids, if you build a custom fleet, you can't use the hive fleet specific psychic powers and WL traits, if I remember right. Not a huge penalty, but enough to think about. I don't know what would happen with custom dynasties. There would have to be some kind of a downside or no one would use the original 3 codes (5 if you count the crap ones).

Well you would lose Imotek and stratagem for 4+ tesla effects. Both which are used a lot in competive lists.

I don't care about competitive lists, personally. You can still use imotekh but you can't use MWBD twice.

You're right though. You would lose out on the methodical destruction strat.

I think that if the custom dynasties are as good as the ones tyranids received it would be worth it. When I say "good" keep in mind I'm not talking competitive/tournament lists.

 Ghaz wrote:

 solkan wrote:
As far as I can see, the reason the Monolith don’t have a Necron on the outside is that it’s an unpiloted construct.

It's not. The codex specifically states it has a crew. From page 62 of Codex Necrons:

With a simple mental command, the Monolith’s crew can transform the eternity gate into a portal of exile, and those that fail to resist its pull are sucked out of reality entirely, banished forever to a temporal prison from which there can be no escape. Alternatively, the Monolith’s crew can use the eternity gate as a form of dimensional corridor, pulling squads of Necrons from elsewhere on the battlefield, orbiting starships or even far-distant tomb worlds and deploying them to the Monolith’s location.

Which was one of the more disappointing retcons, tbh.
I liked the monolith being an autonomous pyramid of death. The fact it has a crew takes a bit of the menace and mystique away, really.

40K has always been "fantasy in space" and "magic with space ships". It's not "real" SciFi and it's definitely not "hard SciFi".

Necron's designs are therefore perfectly adapted to warfare because of their magic metal bodies and magic forcefields. Why ? Because fantasy in space.

You really struggle with what's known and accepted by everyone else. As always, Dakkadakka at its finest.

That still doesn't change the fact that the design looks like crap and doesn't actually make sense. Do you know how I know it looks like crap? Because Forgeworld has a necron flyer variant that doesn't have a gaping hole that invites every missile in the solar system to have a prod and it looks so much better.
Its like those video game bosses with the obvious weak point that the player has to shoot. I just can't take it seriously as a design.
"Lul magic" is not valid justification and is just bad writing.

Selfcontrol wrote:
40K has always been "fantasy in space" and "magic with space ships". It's not "real" SciFi and it's definitely not "hard SciFi".

Necron's designs are therefore perfectly adapted to warfare because of their magic metal bodies and magic forcefields. Why ? Because fantasy in space.

You really struggle with what's known and accepted by everyone else. As always, Dakkadakka at its finest.

Literally yadda yadda forcefields.

But again - if the Necrons are going to use forcefields to protect their pilots and make their aircraft aerodynamic...
a) why not just use a canopy?
b) why not use that forcefield tech elsewhere - for example to protect ground units?
c) why does the Night Shroud not have an open cockpit?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:
40K has always been "fantasy in space" and "magic with space ships". It's not "real" SciFi and it's definitely not "hard SciFi".

Necron's designs are therefore perfectly adapted to warfare because of their magic metal bodies and magic forcefields. Why ? Because fantasy in space.

You really struggle with what's known and accepted by everyone else. As always, Dakkadakka at its finest.

Literally yadda yadda forcefields.

But again - if the Necrons are going to use forcefields to protect their pilots and make their aircraft aerodynamic...
a) why not just use a canopy?
b) why not use that forcefield tech elsewhere - for example to protect ground units?
c) why does the Night Shroud not have an open cockpit?

Shhh its space magic don't think about just let GW take a crap all over necrons shhh

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
That still doesn't change the fact that the design looks like crap and doesn't actually make sense. Do you know how I know it looks like crap? Because Forgeworld has a necron flyer variant that doesn't have a gaping hole that invites every missile in the solar system to have a prod and it looks so much better.
Its like those video game bosses with the obvious weak point that the player has to shoot. I just can't take it seriously as a design.
"Lul magic" is not valid justification and is just bad writing.

If you prefer a different design, that's fine. I don't like all GW miniatures and it's the same for everyone.

But don't try to justify it by saying "it's not realistic and in real life it would suck".

Removed - Rule #1 please

Selfcontrol wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
That still doesn't change the fact that the design looks like crap and doesn't actually make sense. Do you know how I know it looks like crap? Because Forgeworld has a necron flyer variant that doesn't have a gaping hole that invites every missile in the solar system to have a prod and it looks so much better.
Its like those video game bosses with the obvious weak point that the player has to shoot. I just can't take it seriously as a design.
"Lul magic" is not valid justification and is just bad writing.

If you prefer a different design, that's fine. I don't like all GW miniatures and it's the same for everyone.

But don't try to justify it by saying "it's not realistic and in real life it would suck".

Removed - Rule #1 please

You know people can have reasons for not liking stuff, right?
Removed - Rule #1 please
See, I can be one too. Its not hard. Or clever.