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.
2020/06/16 19:37:50
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm curious how they're going to make speed a weakness and shift emphasis onto infantry, for a faction that built most of its fire support into vehicles and has units like Jetbikes, Skimmer & Flyer transports, swarms & wraiths, etc that can get speed pretty much wherever it wants it. My gut says that they're probably not going to achieve this but will attempt to do so by adding gobs of special rules and ability interactions to infantry units
Yea, I've been wondering the same thing as I glace back at my necron fly/hover/phase through objects shelf...
DA KRIMSON KLAWZ
2020/06/16 19:42:49
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Probably nerf the movement profiles of everything that was introduced in 5th ed except for flyers. I can see Annihilation barges and arks getting dropped down to Movement 8".
I'm fine with this. Necrons were supposed to get around primarily through teleportation. 5th ed forgot about that and just made them tougher Eldar with their fast and sort of flimsy vehicles that rely on gimmicks to survive...you know, like Wave Serpents.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/16 19:43:01
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2020/06/16 20:19:13
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
It's super easy to make us an infantry focused army, give Gauss a mortal wound rule. For instance it could mirror the sniper rifle rule, "When a natural 6 to hit is rolled, this attack inflicts a mortal wound in addition to causing a hit". Suddenly we want as much gauss as we can get, which means warriors and immortals. They'll have to jack up the cost of tomb blades to keep people from spamming them, but GW has always been willing to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.
That could easily double the output of a squad of immortals against tough opponents, and quite a bit more for warriors.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2020/06/16 21:17:39
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Grimgold wrote: It's super easy to make us an infantry focused army, give Gauss a mortal wound rule. For instance it could mirror the sniper rifle rule, "When a natural 6 to hit is rolled, this attack inflicts a mortal wound in addition to causing a hit". Suddenly we want as much gauss as we can get, which means warriors and immortals. They'll have to jack up the cost of tomb blades to keep people from spamming them, but GW has always been willing to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.
That could easily double the output of a squad of immortals against tough opponents, and quite a bit more for warriors.
If we make a 6 a mortal wound at most it'll cause 2 extra wounds with warriors and 1 with immortals a turn. It won't make a massive difference to Gauss in the grand scheme of things. Fair enough you could have a lucky turn but statistically speaking with 20 warriors in rapid fire you'll get 26 hits of which 13 will wound and 2 should be a 6 so that's not a massive difference maybe 1 more dead primaries.
In previous editions before everything got so many wounds this would be a big change but nowadays it wouldn't make a humongous difference.
It would mean they could slowly pick off a T 8 model but 2 wounds a turn isn't exactly gonna turn the tide
2020/06/16 23:40:24
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Sasori wrote: Here is an updated and more through transcript that somebody took of today's stream
stream highlights:
-Redesigning necron models provided insight into how GW wants necrons to play, both in strengths and weaknesses
-GW want to play up the horror aesthetic with the new necrons
-Reanimation Protocols have been given a big overhaul
-Right now there are a lot of ways to mitigate RP. GW wants to make it so bringing back your units is constant and consistent
-Canoptek Reanimator uses it's nano-scarab beam to break down and reconstruct necron units. For enemies, it's just the break down part.
-New necron codex has a lot of emphasis on being broken down and getting back up again.
-"A relentless, grinding playstyle" with a mid-field shooting emphasis
-Command phase will prompt decisions for in what way necron units should reanimate. The player should be responsible more making the decisions, they are the overlord
-"Dynastic noble" aesthetic will still exist with the triarch units
-While necrons do have fast units, they want necrons to be slow and methodical, with lots of firepower
-"100% more guns"
-Necrons will get other army-wide rules besides Reanimation Protocols
-Necrons main weakness is their speed. They also want necrons to use more infantry than vehicles
This is the first thing I've heard for 9th that's actually got me interested (and maybe even the tiniest bit enthused), rather than making me express a deep sigh.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2020/06/17 01:47:21
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Grimgold wrote: It's super easy to make us an infantry focused army, give Gauss a mortal wound rule. For instance it could mirror the sniper rifle rule, "When a natural 6 to hit is rolled, this attack inflicts a mortal wound in addition to causing a hit". Suddenly we want as much gauss as we can get, which means warriors and immortals. They'll have to jack up the cost of tomb blades to keep people from spamming them, but GW has always been willing to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.
That could easily double the output of a squad of immortals against tough opponents, and quite a bit more for warriors.
If we make a 6 a mortal wound at most it'll cause 2 extra wounds with warriors and 1 with immortals a turn. It won't make a massive difference to Gauss in the grand scheme of things. Fair enough you could have a lucky turn but statistically speaking with 20 warriors in rapid fire you'll get 26 hits of which 13 will wound and 2 should be a 6 so that's not a massive difference maybe 1 more dead primaries.
In previous editions before everything got so many wounds this would be a big change but nowadays it wouldn't make a humongous difference.
It would mean they could slowly pick off a T 8 model but 2 wounds a turn isn't exactly gonna turn the tide
Rapid fire for warriors would be 6-ish mortals in addition to the damage they are doing now, and 3ish for immortals. So take warriors shooting at primaris marines, 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 40 = 6.6, and 6 mortal wounds, so when I say double I really mean double. Immortal shooting marines 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 20 = 5.9 + another 3, so 50% increase, against units they are already relatively good at killing, and against heavy units and units with invuls well more that double. With that rule warrior blobs will out damage DDAs against Knights, 3.5 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 3.5 = 2.7, meaning that with just the bonus mortal wounds the warriors will do twice the damage of a DDA.
It's a stupid powerful rule, meta defining even. Math hammer peeps were heavy breathing over the new GK mortal wounds total, and necrons would make that look like amature hour. You could be pumping out almost 20 mortals a round with 720 points worth of troops.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2020/06/17 02:12:28
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/17 02:12:51
2020/06/17 05:55:26
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Darsath wrote: I'm not optimistic yet. Kinda lost that after yesterday. If they want to show us that things are different, then they should just show it.
Yesterday wasn't a rules preview for anything that is going to be in our new codex or pariah. It was a focus on our current codex + 9th edition rules. You shouldn't be discouraged by that, as nothing was going to change for that article, as far as fundamental core rules go.
Supposedly this week we are taking a look at Dynasties, and they seemed to imply they were going to be new ones.
I'm only really giving it till the end of the week tbh. If Games workshop are just gonna stretch this out, then I'm not interested. If it's coming out in 3 months, then they should talk about the stuff that's coming out this month. They're just spreading it too thin, and I'm on my wit's end with it as is. I don't have the time or energy to put up with it.
They were only talking about stuff thats out within the next month when they did the faction focus, but too many people couldn't see the writing on the wall and whined about how rubbish the new units were, only previewed existing rules and that RP was crap. So they were kind enough to spell out there will be a new codex in the future with revised rules.
If your addiction can't handle not having the new rule book, new codex an every item of information on the new units available within the next week I think you need to take a break for a bit
2020/06/17 06:11:41
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Grimgold wrote: It's super easy to make us an infantry focused army, give Gauss a mortal wound rule. For instance it could mirror the sniper rifle rule, "When a natural 6 to hit is rolled, this attack inflicts a mortal wound in addition to causing a hit". Suddenly we want as much gauss as we can get, which means warriors and immortals. They'll have to jack up the cost of tomb blades to keep people from spamming them, but GW has always been willing to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.
That could easily double the output of a squad of immortals against tough opponents, and quite a bit more for warriors.
If we make a 6 a mortal wound at most it'll cause 2 extra wounds with warriors and 1 with immortals a turn. It won't make a massive difference to Gauss in the grand scheme of things. Fair enough you could have a lucky turn but statistically speaking with 20 warriors in rapid fire you'll get 26 hits of which 13 will wound and 2 should be a 6 so that's not a massive difference maybe 1 more dead primaries.
In previous editions before everything got so many wounds this would be a big change but nowadays it wouldn't make a humongous difference.
It would mean they could slowly pick off a T 8 model but 2 wounds a turn isn't exactly gonna turn the tide
Rapid fire for warriors would be 6-ish mortals in addition to the damage they are doing now, and 3ish for immortals. So take warriors shooting at primaris marines, 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 40 = 6.6, and 6 mortal wounds, so when I say double I really mean double. Immortal shooting marines 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 20 = 5.9 + another 3, so 50% increase, against units they are already relatively good at killing, and against heavy units and units with invuls well more that double. With that rule warrior blobs will out damage DDAs against Knights, 3.5 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 3.5 = 2.7, meaning that with just the bonus mortal wounds the warriors will do twice the damage of a DDA.
It's a stupid powerful rule, meta defining even. Math hammer peeps were heavy breathing over the new GK mortal wounds total, and necrons would make that look like amature hour. You could be pumping out almost 20 mortals a round with 720 points worth of troops.
Aah I see, I had my numbers wrong fair enough sorry about that
Wait and see. Dunno about pariahs unless they do a last minute reveal we aren't getting any and for flayed ones we haven't heard anything. Going by the fact they say they want our army to effectively be a rolling gun line it makes me wonder how they are gonna fit Flayed ones in
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/17 07:14:18
2020/06/17 10:02:02
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Vaktathi wrote: I'm curious how they're going to make speed a weakness and shift emphasis onto infantry, for a faction that built most of its fire support into vehicles and has units like Jetbikes, Skimmer & Flyer transports, swarms & wraiths, etc that can get speed pretty much wherever it wants it. My gut says that they're probably not going to achieve this but will attempt to do so by adding gobs of special rules and ability interactions to infantry units
I agree. The whole strong midfield shooting approach to Necrons is their main problem in 8th. Yes, getting a whole bunch of Gauss Blasters in 12" is great, as is walking a blob of 20 Warriors into rapid fire range and opening up with MWBD and a Lord nearby. But the core rules of 8th and the general design philosophy of the edition don't lend themselves to mid-range shooting. Everything else is too lethal at too long a range so Necrons just can't get their infantry into range to be effective. That's why most successful Necron armies in 8th contained very few actual Necron models and barely any infantry. If they want this playstyle to work in 9th Necrons need one of two things:
1. More resilience. We need to get into that effective range and doing so means we need to stay alive through walls of bolter fire.
2. Better effectiveness when we do get there. If Necrons still struggle to survive in large numbers then we need to be utterly lethal once we're at optimal range. As 8th went on getting a bunch of S4 AP-1 shots just wasn't that impressive.
2020/06/17 11:55:33
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Or they copy 3rd ed and give necrons some actual teleportation abilities back.
So unlimited VoD usage, Monoliths actually doing their jobs, remove that stupid dynasty lock on the teleport stratagem, Tomb World Deployment and Invasion Beams actually useful, etc.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2020/06/17 13:17:18
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Or they copy 3rd ed and give necrons some actual teleportation abilities back.
So unlimited VoD usage, Monoliths actually doing their jobs, remove that stupid dynasty lock on the teleport stratagem, Tomb World Deployment and Invasion Beams actually useful, etc.
That'd be nice. One thing I don't like about Necrons now is how few of their rules really evoke the idea of a ridiculously technologically advanced civilisation. I think QS is about the only rule that really represents it particularly well, maybe Living Metal as well. But there really isn't that sense of being utterly technologically inferior as there was when they were first released, or even in previous editions when gauss weapons were ripping tanks to shreds. Much of their supposed superior technology functions exactly like everyone else's, or worse in the case of our teleport-based transport vehicles.
2020/06/17 16:13:42
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
The new Overwatch rules are nice, but I don't see them greatly benefiting Necrons unless we have a viable assault loadout. Guess it depends on how easily Pratorians/Lychguard/Skorpekh can get into combat
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
2020/06/17 16:17:27
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Or they copy 3rd ed and give necrons some actual teleportation abilities back.
So unlimited VoD usage, Monoliths actually doing their jobs, remove that stupid dynasty lock on the teleport stratagem, Tomb World Deployment and Invasion Beams actually useful, etc.
That'd be nice. One thing I don't like about Necrons now is how few of their rules really evoke the idea of a ridiculously technologically advanced civilisation. I think QS is about the only rule that really represents it particularly well, maybe Living Metal as well. But there really isn't that sense of being utterly technologically inferior as there was when they were first released, or even in previous editions when gauss weapons were ripping tanks to shreds. Much of their supposed superior technology functions exactly like everyone else's, or worse in the case of our teleport-based transport vehicles.
Totally agree, this has also been a sticking point with me and one of the reasons I haven't picked them back up after selling my old army back in 5th Ed. The 3rd, 4th Ed Crons could move like no other army at the time with their teleportation, and it was incredibly fun to play. Double Monolith and VoD constantly rearranging your battle line felt so good.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2020/06/17 16:49:25
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
2020/06/17 16:51:50
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
DA KRIMSON KLAWZ
2020/06/17 16:51:51
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
You know what else kills those? Bolt shots. You don't NEED Mortal Wounds for that.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2020/06/17 16:55:44
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
We also have the ability to get some easy Ap-3 on gauss too (Provided you field mephrit) so they could even cap it on a 5++ or 6++
Definitely gives our weapons some of that much needed punch
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
2020/06/17 16:57:55
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
We also have the ability to get some easy Ap-3 on gauss too (Provided you field mephrit) so they could even cap it on a 5++ or 6++
Definitely gives our weapons some of that much needed punch
Perhaps Gauss could get a rule where the save can never be better than X?
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
We also have the ability to get some easy Ap-3 on gauss too (Provided you field mephrit) so they could even cap it on a 5++ or 6++
Definitely gives our weapons some of that much needed punch
Perhaps Gauss could get a rule where the save can never be better than X?
So against MEQ, they'd get a 4+ even in cover against the Flayers, but GEQ still get reduced to a 6+.
I'm not so sure about that, maybe make it that any unit that suffers casualties/wounds worsens their saves by 1 to a cap of X for the rest of the battle? That way the AP system's not mitigated?
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
2020/06/17 17:08:31
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
We also have the ability to get some easy Ap-3 on gauss too (Provided you field mephrit) so they could even cap it on a 5++ or 6++
Definitely gives our weapons some of that much needed punch
Perhaps Gauss could get a rule where the save can never be better than X?
So against MEQ, they'd get a 4+ even in cover against the Flayers, but GEQ still get reduced to a 6+.
I'm not so sure about that, maybe make it that any unit that suffers casualties/wounds worsens their saves by 1 to a cap of X for the rest of the battle? That way the AP system's not mitigated?
But then you'd have to roll each shot individually, till the cap is hit.
That'd be tedious as all heck.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2020/06/17 17:15:57
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Maybe make Gauss AP work on invulns? A gauss flayer shooting a terminator with storm shield would give it a 3+/4++ rather than a 3+/3++
Or make it to where one less ap works, so Ap-2 would worsen an invuln by 1?
I like the idea of gauss ap working on invulns. It's unique and solves some of our issues.
We also have the ability to get some easy Ap-3 on gauss too (Provided you field mephrit) so they could even cap it on a 5++ or 6++
Definitely gives our weapons some of that much needed punch
Perhaps Gauss could get a rule where the save can never be better than X?
So against MEQ, they'd get a 4+ even in cover against the Flayers, but GEQ still get reduced to a 6+.
I'm not so sure about that, maybe make it that any unit that suffers casualties/wounds worsens their saves by 1 to a cap of X for the rest of the battle? That way the AP system's not mitigated?
But then you'd have to roll each shot individually, till the cap is hit.
That'd be tedious as all heck.
Make it a per turn/phase mechanic that goes into effect after a unit makes its attacks, that would get rid of tediousness I think
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
2020/06/17 17:17:17
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
JNAProductions wrote: Which loops around to the RP issue-if you're gonna shoot a unit, you typically shoot it dead, not just a bit.
Point taken, so maybe just ap works on invuln to a min 6++?
I'd rather not have that happen-that disproportionately effects units like Harlequins or Daemonettes.
They don't HAVE an armor save to start with (well, a 6+) so they get shafted, whereas a Terminator with a Storm Shield still gets a 3+ (Flayer) or 4+ (Reaper/Blaster).
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2020/06/17 17:23:41
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Eonfuzz wrote: mortal wounds are bad design and should be removed. It makes offensive stats all that matter (ie, it's defensive just hit it with mortals lol1).
Why not just have Gauss gain +2S if a 6 to hit is rolled. Making it slightly better against most things.
Doing that would *also* make it contrast nice with tesla. Gauss gets stronger, tesla hits more.
If you get rid of mortal wounds you have to get rid of invul saves, because there is no way around invuls except for mortal wounds. Like I have a player in my local meta who runs two max squads of vanguard vets with TH/SS, and mortal wounds is the only way to deal with them effectively.
Yes there is. You do know right inv saves fail right? You don't auto pass inv saves.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2020/06/17 17:25:59
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
JNAProductions wrote: Which loops around to the RP issue-if you're gonna shoot a unit, you typically shoot it dead, not just a bit.
Point taken, so maybe just ap works on invuln to a min 6++?
I'd rather not have that happen-that disproportionately effects units like Harlequins or Daemonettes.
They don't HAVE an armor save to start with (well, a 6+) so they get shafted, whereas a Terminator with a Storm Shield still gets a 3+ (Flayer) or 4+ (Reaper/Blaster).
Fair enough. I don't think we'll be seeing a change to gauss though, it seems like they wouldve mentioned it by now, or in the article with the Gauss reaper
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
DA KRIMSON KLAWZ 
~4100
~1660
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze 
~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps 
~3250pts
Admech (TBN) 
