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.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
\
(The Immortal has a vastly better gun than even an Intercessor though.)

At the moment the Intercessor gun can fire twice at 30" and at AP-2 for most of the game.

for 2/5s of the game and not the first turn - plus it is str 4...half as effective at damaging t5. It is a much worse weapon. If it turns out that every army has 50% flat 2 wepaons in their army T5 with a better gun is going to be superior to 2 wounds for 2 additional points. The way I see it. Primaris will do better against trash units while immortals will do better against elite firepower. I am liking Immortals. Reaper bomb seems to be the best option to me though.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
\
(The Immortal has a vastly better gun than even an Intercessor though.)

At the moment the Intercessor gun can fire twice at 30" and at AP-2 for most of the game.

for 2/5s of the game and not the first turn - plus it is str 4...half as effective at damaging t5. It is a much worse weapon. If it turns out that every army has 50% flat 2 wepaons in their army T5 with a better gun is going to be superior to 2 wounds for 2 additional points. The way I see it. Primaris will do better against trash units while immortals will do better against elite firepower. I am liking Immortals. Reaper bomb seems to be the best option to me though.

With just the -1 on the Bolt Rifle:

Intercessors vs.
GEQ .666 x .666 x .83 x2 = .73
MEQ .666 x .5 x .5 x2 = .333
TEQ .666 x .5 x .333 x 2 = .22
Custodes EQ .666 x .333 x .333 x2 =.14

Immortals vs.
GEQ .666 x .666 = .44
MEQ .666 x .666 x .666 = .29
TEQ .666 x .333 x .5 = .22
Custodes EQ .666 x .5 x .5 = .16

2 shots with a Bolt Rifle is still equal to 1 shot of the Gauss Blaster shooting at Terminators, and the Blaster barely beats the Bolt Rifle firing at Custodes. It only really becomes a better gun in double-tap range or firing at T8.

 Xenomancers wrote:
for 2/5s of the game and not the first turn - plus it is str 4...half as effective at damaging t5. It is a much worse weapon. If it turns out that every army has 50% flat 2 wepaons in their army T5 with a better gun is going to be superior to 2 wounds for 2 additional points. The way I see it. Primaris will do better against trash units while immortals will do better against elite firepower. I am liking Immortals. Reaper bomb seems to be the best option to me though.

If Immortals got "Gauss Discipline" they'd be great.
But as far as I'm aware they don't (or at least they don't yet). So you need to get into 15" (dynasty code dependent) to be really effective and that's not guaranteed on a slow model. 15" obviously helps over 12", and the missions force people into the middle of the board more than before, but gauss was generally considered the weaker option so thinking its going to be amazing now may be pushing it.

The meta may shake out, GW may throw 2 damage onto almost anything largely than a bolter, but there are a lot of damage one guns out there right now.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
\
(The Immortal has a vastly better gun than even an Intercessor though.)

At the moment the Intercessor gun can fire twice at 30" and at AP-2 for most of the game.

for 2/5s of the game and not the first turn - plus it is str 4...half as effective at damaging t5. It is a much worse weapon. If it turns out that every army has 50% flat 2 wepaons in their army T5 with a better gun is going to be superior to 2 wounds for 2 additional points. The way I see it. Primaris will do better against trash units while immortals will do better against elite firepower. I am liking Immortals. Reaper bomb seems to be the best option to me though.

With just the -1 on the Bolt Rifle:

Intercessors vs.
GEQ .666 x .666 x .83 x2 = .73
MEQ .666 x .5 x .5 x2 = .333
TEQ .666 x .5 x .333 x 2 = .22
Custodes EQ .666 x .333 x .333 x2 =.14

Immortals vs.
GEQ .666 x .666 = .44
MEQ .666 x .666 x .666 = .29
TEQ .666 x .333 x .5 = .22
Custodes EQ .666 x .5 x .5 = .16

2 shots with a Bolt Rifle is still equal to 1 shot of the Gauss Blaster shooting at Terminators, and the Blaster barely beats the Bolt Rifle firing at Custodes. It only really becomes a better gun in double-tap range or firing at T8.

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

So you're assuming one Chapter at turns 2-3. That's not a solid argument in your favor. Also standing still really isn't always an option, so you're having to assume both of those turns you're standing still.

 vict0988 wrote:

I don't understand what you mean? The core rules of 8th were so good that despite Index Necrons being terrible they were still fun to play.

I have to say, I didn't find Necrons fun to play in 8th.

Not because of power level either. I just found their general design and army builds unbelievably uninspiring.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

So you're assuming one Chapter at turns 2-3. That's not a solid argument in your favor. Also standing still really isn't always an option, so you're having to assume both of those turns you're standing still.

No, I'm assuming standing still and firing with any chapter, the calculations I gave are for the -1 AP on the Bolt Rifle. Tactical Doctrine with AP 2 will just be even better than the results I posted. UM just makes it even easier.

 vipoid wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

I don't understand what you mean? The core rules of 8th were so good that despite Index Necrons being terrible they were still fun to play.

I have to say, I didn't find Necrons fun to play in 8th.

Not because of power level either. I just found their general design and army builds unbelievably uninspiring.

Same. I think for me the biggest loss was all their unique abilties some units could do.
Imotekh calling down literal storms, Crypteks being able to summon the shadows and breathe despair...

The biggest slap in the face is the infinite aged master nobles hitting like wet noodles in close combat.
Give us better warscythes again pls gw

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

I don't understand what you mean? The core rules of 8th were so good that despite Index Necrons being terrible they were still fun to play.

I have to say, I didn't find Necrons fun to play in 8th.

Not because of power level either. I just found their general design and army builds unbelievably uninspiring.

Same. I think for me the biggest loss was all their unique abilties some units could do.
Imotekh calling down literal storms, Crypteks being able to summon the shadows and breathe despair...

The biggest slap in the face is the infinite aged master nobles hitting like wet noodles in close combat.
Give us better warscythes again pls gw

This has been Necrons problem since we lost the Ward dex. All the character has been leeched out of them.

^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

While the fluff got ruined the Ward dex still had the best rules necrons have ever had in terms of making necrons fun to play.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

While the fluff got ruined the Ward dex still had the best rules necrons have ever had in terms of making necrons fun to play.

Disagree. The Teleportation shennannigans of the 3rd ed book were an absolute blast. Monolith drops to the table. Monolith pulls Cron unit out of combat, they roll for WBB again, pop out the portal of the Monolith as if from a stationary transport and start obliterating stuff. Soo juicy. Soo win.

Has the Canoptek Spyder shown up here yet (via War of Sigmar)?

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

While the fluff got ruined the Ward dex still had the best rules necrons have ever had in terms of making necrons fun to play.

Disagree. The Teleportation shennannigans of the 3rd ed book were an absolute blast. Monolith drops to the table. Monolith pulls Cron unit out of combat, they roll for WBB again, pop out the portal of the Monolith as if from a stationary transport and start obliterating stuff. Soo juicy. Soo win.

Veil of Darkness and Flayed Ones too (though their usefulness could be argued). Anyone saying Necrons were immobile was completely incorrect.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

While the fluff got ruined the Ward dex still had the best rules necrons have ever had in terms of making necrons fun to play.

Disagree. The Teleportation shennannigans of the 3rd ed book were an absolute blast. Monolith drops to the table. Monolith pulls Cron unit out of combat, they roll for WBB again, pop out the portal of the Monolith as if from a stationary transport and start obliterating stuff. Soo juicy. Soo win.

Veil of Darkness and Flayed Ones too (though their usefulness could be argued). Anyone saying Necrons were immobile was completely incorrect.

Yeah Veil of Darkness was a must-take for 60 points. Destroyers counted as Jetbikes too iirc, and so could move 24" if they needed to.

 Blndmage wrote:
How are people saying they transport Skorptekh things?

currently they can transport skorptekh lords since they are characters.

 Ghaz wrote:
Has the Canoptek Spyder shown up here yet (via War of Sigmar)?

Spoiler:

With the Tomb Blade datasheet showing up, it looks like the beamers are six shots each, so a spyder with two beamers should be 12 shots now. that makes it kind of interesting.

 vict0988 wrote:
Ghost Arks cannot transport Destroyer Lords, it's extremely obvious they won't be able to transport Skorpekhs, if not at release then whenever GW notices.

A skorpekh lord is an INFANTRY CHARACTER. A ghost ark can carry up to ten INFANTRY CHARACTER, excluding destroyer lords, but a skorpekh lord isnt a destroyer lord. As it looks like, skorpekh lords can fold like a folding bike, the destroyer lord cant. This will probably change in the codex, but right now, its possible. I already have a list with deceiver, ghost ark, three skorpekh lords. I guess you can figure out the combo.

 Sasori wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
Has the Canoptek Spyder shown up here yet (via War of Sigmar)?

Spoiler:

With the Tomb Blade datasheet showing up, it looks like the beamers are six shots each, so a spyder with two beamers should be 12 shots now. that makes it kind of interesting.

Sounds too good to be true for sure, but it would be hilarious. 9 spyders ( in three units ), keeping 27 scarabs alive indefinitely, just blazing away like crazy.. I'd love to try it. Not getting 9 spyders any time soon though.

 Blndmage wrote:
How are people saying they transport Skorptekh things?

The transport rule was written when there werent' characters that weren't infantry except destroyer lord. Thus GA can transport characters EXCEPT destroyer lord. Now with skorpek lord it slips through loophole and some people are so TFG's they want to exploit that even though it's only for brief period rather than learn how to actually win with tactics. Exploiting loopholes to compensate for own inability.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

I don't understand what you mean? The core rules of 8th were so good that despite Index Necrons being terrible they were still fun to play.

I have to say, I didn't find Necrons fun to play in 8th.

Not because of power level either. I just found their general design and army builds unbelievably uninspiring.

Same. I think for me the biggest loss was all their unique abilties some units could do.
Imotekh calling down literal storms, Crypteks being able to summon the shadows and breathe despair...

The biggest slap in the face is the infinite aged master nobles hitting like wet noodles in close combat.
Give us better warscythes again pls gw

This has been Necrons problem since we lost the Ward dex. All the character has been leeched out of them.

Yeah, for all it's faults the Ward codex at least introduced some fun mechanics and playstyles.

I still remember back in 5th/6th I had an army based around small units of Immortals with Crypteks in each.

It wasn't a strong army by any means, but it was a lot of fun to play and effectively gave me a whole array of specialist squads (I had backfield ones with the long-range Crypteks, I had anti-vehicle Storm Cryptek units, I had anti-infantry squads with Despair Crypteks and their flamers), plus all the special wargear they could access like rerolls, teleportation etc..

You can imagine my disappointment when all the Cryptek variants were removed and they just became generic HQ choices.

Also, I liked that the Destroyer Lord actually had decent synergy with Wraiths. They were good against infantry and light vehicles, whilst he was better against heavy vehicles and characters (with the dreaded Mindshackle Scarabs). Plus they made him Fearless when he was attached, so he couldn't lose his RPs by running and getting cut down.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Since we GOT the Ward dex, you mean.

For me, it's difficult because I liked aspects of both.

I definitely miss the infantry-focused playstyle of the old book. I also miss the general look of the models - particularly the HQs. I liked it when they had relatively few embellishments and just a few little details to mark their status. Now every HQ looks like its been artificially inflated by means of a bicycle pump. And rather than being soulless skeletons, they're so embellished that they resemble coral reefs on legs. Even their caps can't just be ragged cloth anymore, no they have to be made out of bead-curtains or something. It seems like the aesthetic I used to love has been all but lost. Hell, I don't even see why Overlords were needed in the first place. Lords already had nice models and Overlords didn't really have a role that wasn't just treading on their toes.

Also, I hate this robots-driving-vehicles nonsense, with Tomb Blades being the worst example. Why were they given full bodies? Why not make them like Destroyers/Wraiths and make them integrated into their 'vehicles'. Same goes for stuff like the Annihilation Barge.

Fair to say I really despise the 'Tomb Kings in Spaaaaace' crap. A fact that is in no way helped by the array of stupid names that seem like a list of horrible puns.


However, from a mechanical perspective, I did at least like some of what the Ward book brought to the table. Not least, it was nice to have some more options in terms of HQs and their weapons and wargear (for some reason I found myself really taking to the flamer-gauntlet things), and the crypteks in particular brought with them a great deal of options and possibilities for the infantry playstyle I so enjoyed.

The unfortunate thing from my perspective, though, is that the stuff I liked was largely or wholly removed in subsequent books whilst all the things I disliked (models, fluff etc.) stayed around.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

You make good points and your math checks out, but Immortals are vastly better than they used to be, period.

 MadcapMiguel wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

You make good points and your math checks out, but Immortals are vastly better than they used to be, period.

Hmmm, I believe that's kinda missing Insectum7s point that he made a while back. Are Immortals better than they used to be in 5-8th? Yes. The original point however was are they good enough in comparison to Intercessors and soon-to-be 2W Tacs?

I think yes but YMMV.

 MadcapMiguel wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

You make good points and your math checks out, but Immortals are vastly better than they used to be, period.

Depends on how far back you want to go.

 Mixzremixzd wrote:

 MadcapMiguel wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You're assuming standing still though. I never assume Bolter Discipline on anything that doesn't act stationary in the first place like Bikers (look at the new ones for example) and Terminators.

With a 30" range standing still seems like an option. Or, at the moment, if you're playing UM super doctrine like I do, where you can just run around freely and rapid fire to max range at your heart's content.

You make good points and your math checks out, but Immortals are vastly better than they used to be, period.

Hmmm, I believe that's kinda missing Insectum7s point that he made a while back. Are Immortals better than they used to be in 5-8th? Yes. The original point however was are they good enough in comparison to Intercessors and soon-to-be 2W Tacs?

I think yes but YMMV.

I'd say they're rough equivalents but that's not really my frustration. My frustration is that they used to be better than Tacs, and before that Warriors used to be better than Tacs and Immortals were vastly superior to Tacs. My irritation is the constant degradation of iconic necron core units in relation to marines.

2nd Ed, Tacs 30ppm, Warriors 44 ppm.
3rd Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 18 ppm, Immortals 28 ppm
5th Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 12 ppm, Immortals 17 ppm
9th Ed, Tacs 18 ppm, Warriors 11(?)ppm, Immortals 18 ppm

It's not really game balance I'm bothered by, I'm sure they'll be a fine unit. It's their relative strength that keeps dropping. When I played Crons their basic trooper was valued as superior to a Space Marine. Now their elite troops are roughly equal. I preferred it when Immortals cost about twice as much as a Space Marine and was totally worth it.

Yeah, when the most elite Xenos force is equivalent to the..fourth or fifth most elite Imperial force, it starts to become a little goofy.

We now have

Knights
Custodes
GK/DW SpecialBoy Marines
Primaris Marines
Marines

And all the most elite Xenos armies are on the tier of like, Sisters of Battle/Militarum Tempestus.

Really hammers home that narrative of the imperium being under dire threat, doesn't it...

 Insectum7 wrote:

2nd Ed, Tacs 30ppm, Warriors 44 ppm.
3rd Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 18 ppm, Immortals 28 ppm
5th Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 12 ppm, Immortals 17 ppm
9th Ed, Tacs 18 ppm, Warriors 11(?)ppm, Immortals 18 ppm

It's not really game balance I'm bothered by, I'm sure they'll be a fine unit. It's their relative strength that keeps dropping. When I played Crons their basic trooper was valued as superior to a Space Marine. Now their elite troops are roughly equal. I preferred it when Immortals cost about twice as much as a Space Marine and was totally worth it.

Quick question, given the influx of new Necron units in 5th and now 9th, would you still want Warriors and Immortals to be better than Tacs and pointed as such even if that meant Lychguard and Triarch Praetorians will most likely be 35+ ppm? Assuming their rules a worth that cost.

Edit: I should mention that from my perspective when I started playing in 6th-7th it's been natural for me to view Warriors as our chaff infantry with Immortals as the MEQ, leaving Lychguard and Praetorians as our elite MEQ similar to Bladeguard Veterans.

 Mixzremixzd wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

2nd Ed, Tacs 30ppm, Warriors 44 ppm.
3rd Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 18 ppm, Immortals 28 ppm
5th Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 12 ppm, Immortals 17 ppm
9th Ed, Tacs 18 ppm, Warriors 11(?)ppm, Immortals 18 ppm

It's not really game balance I'm bothered by, I'm sure they'll be a fine unit. It's their relative strength that keeps dropping. When I played Crons their basic trooper was valued as superior to a Space Marine. Now their elite troops are roughly equal. I preferred it when Immortals cost about twice as much as a Space Marine and was totally worth it.

Quick question, given the influx of new Necron units in 5th and now 9th, would you still want Warriors and Immortals to be better than Tacs and pointed as such even if that meant Lychguard and Triarch Praetorians will most likely be 35+ ppm? Assuming their rules a worth that cost.

As opposed to now, when they're a supercheap 30ppm?

I know I would, as they should be about the equivalent to stuff like Terminators/Gravis Units.

Off the top of my head Praetorians are 23ppm and Lychguard 25?

I'm just curious where you view Necrons as a faction on the spectrum of hordes to elite.

To me it seems like GW is aiming for the faction as a whole to offer a versatile playstyle that isn't just MEQ that get back up when killed.

 Mixzremixzd wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

2nd Ed, Tacs 30ppm, Warriors 44 ppm.
3rd Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 18 ppm, Immortals 28 ppm
5th Ed, Tacs 15 ppm, Warriors 12 ppm, Immortals 17 ppm
9th Ed, Tacs 18 ppm, Warriors 11(?)ppm, Immortals 18 ppm

It's not really game balance I'm bothered by, I'm sure they'll be a fine unit. It's their relative strength that keeps dropping. When I played Crons their basic trooper was valued as superior to a Space Marine. Now their elite troops are roughly equal. I preferred it when Immortals cost about twice as much as a Space Marine and was totally worth it.

Quick question, given the influx of new Necron units in 5th and now 9th, would you still want Warriors and Immortals to be better than Tacs and pointed as such even if that meant Lychguard and Triarch Praetorians will most likely be 35+ ppm? Assuming their rules a worth that cost.

Edit: I should mention that from my perspective when I started playing in 6th-7th it's been natural for me to view Warriors as our chaff infantry with Immortals as the MEQ, leaving Lychguard and Praetorians as our elite MEQ similar to Bladeguard Veterans.

That'd be totally fine by me, yes.

And instead of Praetorians/Lychguard they should be Pariahs, who actually were 36 points a model or something, back in the day.