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.

SecondTime wrote:


But they weren't good mechanically in 6th, or 5th, and arguably 4th. That's the trend I'm talking about. And then if you factor in the lore to any degree at all, they were utter dog dodo. All this being said, they have added way too much too quickly to marines I think.

which troops were good in 4th, 5th and 6th? Honest question. I can not remember any specific stand out infantry troops. There were the outliers like taking a specific HQ and then being able to take Bikes as troops etc, but I am talking about regular infantry troops. Whose were good or on a complete other level from Tactical Marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bro - in this eddition...Eldar windriders were fething troops!

SemperMortis wrote:

SecondTime wrote:


But they weren't good mechanically in 6th, or 5th, and arguably 4th. That's the trend I'm talking about. And then if you factor in the lore to any degree at all, they were utter dog dodo. All this being said, they have added way too much too quickly to marines I think.

which troops were good in 4th, 5th and 6th? Honest question. I can not remember any specific stand out infantry troops. There were the outliers like taking a specific HQ and then being able to take Bikes as troops etc, but I am talking about regular infantry troops. Whose were good or on a complete other level from Tactical Marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bro - in this eddition...Eldar windriders were fething troops!

I wasn't going to bring that up, but there it is. Troops that could reliably bring down IKs from 36" away.

 Xenomancers wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

SecondTime wrote:


But they weren't good mechanically in 6th, or 5th, and arguably 4th. That's the trend I'm talking about. And then if you factor in the lore to any degree at all, they were utter dog dodo. All this being said, they have added way too much too quickly to marines I think.

which troops were good in 4th, 5th and 6th? Honest question. I can not remember any specific stand out infantry troops. There were the outliers like taking a specific HQ and then being able to take Bikes as troops etc, but I am talking about regular infantry troops. Whose were good or on a complete other level from Tactical Marines?

Windriders weren't able to take down Knights in 4th, 5th or 6th edition ....since knights didn't exist yet. Plus their gun got buffed in 7th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:


No - they were legit troops in that edition. No special requirements. CAD...Take windriders and farseer - you good!

The nobz had a requirement, and you were limited to 1 unit just like with Warbikes, I could take them as troops but I had to take a specific HQ in order to do so.

So they were troops, but required a special requirement to be met.

SemperMortis wrote:


So literally none within the last 30 or so tournaments, none in the entire month of October and of those finishes you mentioned, in September, only 1 list was buggies and it was actually a 4th place finish not 3rd, not your fault the website lied. And finally, from August, only the 1st list was a Buggies list, in other words, when 9th was brand new and everyone was basically using 8th rules still, and nobody had any real experience against our Supplement bonuses yet.

The 5th most recent tournament, the Iron Man on sept 26th was won by orks.

But what you're saying is that any evidence to suggest orks aren't in bad shape doesn't count because either 9th was too new, their PA book was too new, or wasn't in the last X days?

SemperMortis was asking/challenging about the claim that Ork buggies are the lists winning these tournaments.

Nothing else.

pothocboots wrote:
SemperMortis was asking/challenging about the claim that Ork buggies are the lists winning these tournaments.

Nothing else.

This is the section he replied to me with:

Can you find me these Tournament winning lists from any of the last 30 or 40 tournaments? Pretty much since Codex SM OP V2.0 dropped those buggies have disappeared. Probably has something to do with Eradicators being able to 1 shot them for almost a 100% return on investment in 1 turn.

I took that to mean any winning list. If it's been misinterpreted then I apologise but I fail to see why it has to win a tourney this month to count either.

Dudeface wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:


So literally none within the last 30 or so tournaments, none in the entire month of October and of those finishes you mentioned, in September, only 1 list was buggies and it was actually a 4th place finish not 3rd, not your fault the website lied. And finally, from August, only the 1st list was a Buggies list, in other words, when 9th was brand new and everyone was basically using 8th rules still, and nobody had any real experience against our Supplement bonuses yet.

The 5th most recent tournament, the Iron Man on sept 26th was won by orks.

But what you're saying is that any evidence to suggest orks aren't in bad shape doesn't count because either 9th was too new, their PA book was too new, or wasn't in the last X days?

You do know there are other websites that give you tournament data besides 40kstats right? like this one https://www.frontlinegaming.org/40k-itc-calendar-of-events/ which has over 40 events played so far this month. And again, I got tired of looking through all of them but I did find that 1 result where an ork actually placed well and POSSIBLY had a buggies list. But as far as the bigger events...no, no buggies. Also, the real key takeaway is that this is POST OP Space Marine release. 3 eradicators 1 shotting a buggy is not conducive to that list surviving

I never said Orkz are in a bad place. I think we are when compared to SMs but in general we are fine. Codex creep is going to probably cause issues but maybe orkz will get a good codex




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:


I took that to mean any winning list. If it's been misinterpreted then I apologise but I fail to see why it has to win a tourney this month to count either.

Because 2 Codex have dropped which ramped up anti-vehicle firepower somewhat heavily and since SM make up at least 15-20% of the playerbase that is a big deal.

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

This is in direct opposition to GW, since GW wants your choices you make at the cash register to be the meaningful ones. They want peoples' solution to not winning to be BUY MOAR, or maybe buy an entirely different army with an OP Codex. Enjoy your game. Having a braindead game where you cannot outplay your opponent is great for them; it means that kids can get right into the game without feeling outmatched, and it means that people have to buy whatever OP unit or army they produce to stand a chance .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

Hecaton wrote:

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

I think Mr Morden sums it up nicely. too many people use Marines as "whats typical" but they really shouldn't be, and it detracts from the faction when thats the case. the "gold standard" for comparison should indeed, be the guard.

I can understand people wanting necron warriors to be what they originally were but thats now for Inmortals. Necron Warriors have been fluff and rule degraded quite a bit in the past 20 years.

I don't blame people for assuming "Marines" as the typical, given:

1) Most of the fluff is about them
2) Most of the army rules are about them
3) Most of the Warhammer Community articles are about them
4) Most of the online debating is about them
5) Most players play some form of them or another, even as a backup army or shelf army.

If the game made it actually feel like marines were elite, rather than a polychromatic horde that you fight in half your games in a game with 17 factions, then there'd be less dissonance.

 Galas wrote:
I can understand people wanting necron warriors to be what they originally were but thats now for Inmortals. Necron Warriors have been fluff and rule degraded quite a bit in the past 20 years.

They were always Slow in Close combat with Very good ranged weapons and highly durable - unless you focussed fire on them or used close combat weapons that did not allow a save.

Even Immortals were slow

They were after all Undead in space.

BrianDavion wrote:
I think Mr Morden sums it up nicely. too many people use Marines as "whats typical" but they really shouldn't be, and it detracts from the faction when thats the case. the "gold standard" for comparison should indeed, be the guard.

Then you really need to ask GW to stop putting Marines in all the branding, stop putting them in every starter box, stop writing power-fantasy fluff that plays up how cool Marines are, stop releasing more Primaris Lieutenants than some factions have units, stop giving Marines 10+ individually supported subfaction supplements/codices, stop giving them constant rules attention, and start treating Marines like the other red-headed stepchildren (see: xenos) while they instead start to fluff up Guard the way they currently do for Marines.

Because as long as Marine players outnumber Guard players ten-to-one, they'll be 'what's typical'. Heck, they're so ubiquitous they're not even under 'Imperium' on GW's webstore anymore. It is just not possible for your faction to be anything but the baseline when they're by far the most commonly-seen faction in the game. Same as it is for Horus Heresy. Same as it ever was.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

In their big 3rd Ed launch, the only way in which a Necron Warrior was inferior to a Marine was Initiative.

From 5th up until SM2.0, Necron Warriors were still pretty comparable to Marines. Slightly worse save, slightly slower, slightly better gun.

This idea of Marines being superhuman elites that Necrons just don't compare to is a very recent change, and it does feel pretty spank-y; another entry to the list of things that used to be equals to Marines, but now aren't. Timmy's space men have to be the very bestest in the galaxy, so a roided-up primate created by cargo-culting regressives has to be, like, twice as good as an ancient Lovecraftian horror from a race that can blow up stars on a whim.

 catbarf wrote:
In their big 3rd Ed launch, the only way in which a Necron Warrior was inferior to a Marine was Initiative.

From 5th up until SM2.0, Necron Warriors were still pretty comparable to Marines. Slightly worse save, slightly slower, slightly better gun.

This idea of Marines being superhuman elites that Necrons just don't compare to is a very recent change, and it does feel pretty spank-y; another entry to the list of things that used to be equals to Marines, but now aren't. Timmy's space men have to be the very bestest in the galaxy, so a roided-up primate created by cargo-culting regressives has to be, like, twice as good as an ancient Lovecraftian horror from a race that can blow up stars on a whim.

They have been equal in their statline, but Necrons could be overrun rather easily after their morale was broken, while Marines kept on fighting.
It was much easier to finish off a Necron unit completely.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
In their big 3rd Ed launch, the only way in which a Necron Warrior was inferior to a Marine was Initiative.

From 5th up until SM2.0, Necron Warriors were still pretty comparable to Marines. Slightly worse save, slightly slower, slightly better gun.

This idea of Marines being superhuman elites that Necrons just don't compare to is a very recent change, and it does feel pretty spank-y; another entry to the list of things that used to be equals to Marines, but now aren't. Timmy's space men have to be the very bestest in the galaxy, so a roided-up primate created by cargo-culting regressives has to be, like, twice as good as an ancient Lovecraftian horror from a race that can blow up stars on a whim.

They have been equal in their statline, but Necrons could be overrun rather easily after their morale was broken, while Marines kept on fighting.
It was much easier to finish off a Necron unit completely.

I have the 3rd ed dex in front of me - bought it and Necron army when they first came out.

Yep the IN 2 was a big thing - and you had to take them in CC as otherwise they came back and their shooting was too nasty to allow.

AGAIN - Necron Warriors are not the pinancle of Nercon tech - they are simply walking metal skeletons with limited mental capacity and ability that can come back - very similar to those in fantasy except much more durable. - they are hard to put down and hard to keep down but they are not fast, skilled and effective close combat fighters although they retain good Shooting skills with deadily guns.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

A superhuman warrior still limited by the Imperium's backwards (alledgedly) technology.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
In their big 3rd Ed launch, the only way in which a Necron Warrior was inferior to a Marine was Initiative.

From 5th up until SM2.0, Necron Warriors were still pretty comparable to Marines. Slightly worse save, slightly slower, slightly better gun.

This idea of Marines being superhuman elites that Necrons just don't compare to is a very recent change, and it does feel pretty spank-y; another entry to the list of things that used to be equals to Marines, but now aren't. Timmy's space men have to be the very bestest in the galaxy, so a roided-up primate created by cargo-culting regressives has to be, like, twice as good as an ancient Lovecraftian horror from a race that can blow up stars on a whim.

They have been equal in their statline, but Necrons could be overrun rather easily after their morale was broken, while Marines kept on fighting.
It was much easier to finish off a Necron unit completely.

I have the 3rd ed dex in front of me - bought it and Necron army when they first came out.

Yep the IN 2 was a big thing - and you had to take them in CC as otherwise they came back and their shooting was too nasty to allow.

AGAIN - Necron Warriors are not the pinancle of Nercon tech - they are simply walking metal skeletons with limited mental capacity and ability that can come back - very similar to those in fantasy except much more durable. - they are hard to put down and hard to keep down but they are not fast, skilled and effective close combat fighters although they retain good Shooting skills with deadily guns.

Necron tech is so much ahead of the Imperium that the pinnacle should unapproachable by the Imperium, and warriors easily the match for marines. That's how tech works.

SecondTime wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

A superhuman warrior still limited by the Imperium's backwards (alledgedly) technology.

Same as the Necron Warrior is limited by the fact that they have very limited minds and abilities - this changes as you go up the heriarchy of the Necrons - so Necron lords combine incredable technology with vast experience, skills. But again the basic warrior is strong, insanely durable but often does not even react to stimuli until commanded to do so.

Imperial Technology as I am sure you know varies between the incredably advanced and the primative.

Shall we also compare (in game terms) a base line Necron Warrior to a Kabalite or Guardian - who again I am sure you know also have highly advanced tech.

a_typical_hero wrote:

They have been equal in their statline, but Necrons could be overrun rather easily after their morale was broken, while Marines kept on fighting.
It was much easier to finish off a Necron unit completely.

Sure. But that represented an issue of speed (plus a somewhat weird issue of leadership) - not durability.

 Mr Morden wrote:

AGAIN - Necron Warriors are not the pinancle of Nercon tech - they are simply walking metal skeletons with limited mental capacity and ability that can come back - very similar to those in fantasy except much more durable. - they are hard to put down and hard to keep down but they are not fast, skilled and effective close combat fighters although they retain good Shooting skills with deadily guns.

But surely that's the whole point?

Necron Warriors are not the pinnacle of Necron tech, but they were still almost the equal of Space Marines.

Necron Warriors had two defining features - their guns (which fluctuated a bit between editions but were always at least slightly stronger than bolters), and their durability (which varied a bit but, again, was always strictly superior to that of Marines due to their ability to resurrect).

Where Necron Warriors fell behind was primarily in Leadership and speed (also access to special weapons, if you count that). Marines had better reflexes and were also much better in terms of discipline (courtesy of ATSKNF). In general, this gave Necrons the advantage in shooting, where they'd easily win battles of attrition, but gave Marines the edge in melee where Necron warriors were far more likely to run and get cut down.

However, the current situation is that Marines are instead more durable than Necron Warriors for . . . absolutely no reason.What a marvellous example of fluff-based game design.

 Mr Morden wrote:

SecondTime wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Corseth wrote:
This game is best when the choices you make versus the choices your opponent makes ON THE TABLE are interesting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, technology should matter. For all their advanced technology, Necrons basic trooper is inferior to the backwards Imperium? That's bull. It didn't used to be that way, and it's marine spank that it is.

The Imperiums basic trooper is a Guardsman or women - which a Necron Warrior is superior to in terms of durability, accuracy, etc.

Remember Necron Warriors have ALways been the sci-fi equivalent to skeletons in Fantasy - they are hard to kill but limited abilities and mental comprehension. This is VERY clear in all the lore.

A Marine is a Elite superhuman warrior, totally different thing.

A superhuman warrior still limited by the Imperium's backwards (alledgedly) technology.

Same as the Necron Warrior is limited by the fact that they have very limited minds and abilities - this changes as you go up the heriarchy of the Necrons - so Necron lords combine incredable technology with vast experience, skills. But again the basic warrior is strong, insanely durable but often does not even react to stimuli until commanded to do so.

Imperial Technology as I am sure you know varies between the incredably advanced and the primative.

Shall we also compare (in game terms) a base line Necron Warrior to a Kabalite or Guardian - who again I am sure you know also have highly advanced tech.

Those units should be far more dangerous than they are as well. The game gets a lot wrong when it comes to tech. It just doesn't get a pass because its been getting it wrong for a long time. 40K heavily implies that a revolutionary war army could take on a WWII army by shouting "Emprah!". The marine fapping is getting pretty bad.

SecondTime wrote:
Necron tech is so much ahead of the Imperium that the pinnacle should unapproachable by the Imperium, and warriors easily the match for marines. That's how tech works.

We have the technology for liquid nitrogen cooled supercomputers, doesn't mean that my PC at home is anywhere near that.
We have the technology to travel into space, doesn't mean that the cooking pot I have is much more sophisticated than it was 2000 years ago.

Asymmetric warfare is a thing, too.

And lastly: The Imperium got a million Marines. This is not your standard human with a flakk west. Necron warriors are much more numerous and outclass any Guardsman with the exception of Sly Marbo

They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point - "We'll be back" was even the original rule. AS you specifically say they were more durable BUT ONLY because they would come back.

Also the entire army could fade out if you lost too much stuff - not seeing that anymore?

Necron LD was 10, they stil followed simple protocals that included basic retreat options in specific situations.

Gauss Flayers used to be awesome - auto wound /glance on 6's was devestating - I donlt have the new Codex so can't comment on their current ability.

40K heavily implies that a revolutionary war army could take on a WWII army by shouting "Emprah!"

The fact that Magic/Faith is real in that universe does make a difference especially IF God (the Emperor) does actually protect (or potentially does) and if He is on your side.

a_typical_hero wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
Necron tech is so much ahead of the Imperium that the pinnacle should unapproachable by the Imperium, and warriors easily the match for marines. That's how tech works.

We have the technology for liquid nitrogen cooled supercomputers, doesn't mean that my PC at home is anywhere near that.
We have the technology to travel into space, doesn't mean that the cooking pot I have is much more sophisticated than it was 2000 years ago.

Asyemmetric warfare is a thing, too.

And lastly: The Imperium got a million Marines. This is not your standard human with a flakk west. Necron warriors are much more numerous and outclass any Guardsman with the exception of Sly Marbo

But this is a military application. Not cooking pots. That's not exactly a fair comparison.

Are marines ever shown doing asymmetrical warfare? I dunno.

Internal consistency is important for generating dramatic tension. If race A is purported to be more advanced than marines, but marines are still betterer, it just makes me root against marines. Marines become bullies, not "heroes".

Devastating is a hell of a stretch for the Gauss rule. Basically 10% of your shots will glance. If you're talking about the bigger more expensive vehicles it looks nice, but anything around 100 points it's hilariously inefficient.

SecondTime wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
Necron tech is so much ahead of the Imperium that the pinnacle should unapproachable by the Imperium, and warriors easily the match for marines. That's how tech works.

We have the technology for liquid nitrogen cooled supercomputers, doesn't mean that my PC at home is anywhere near that.
We have the technology to travel into space, doesn't mean that the cooking pot I have is much more sophisticated than it was 2000 years ago.

Asyemmetric warfare is a thing, too.

And lastly: The Imperium got a million Marines. This is not your standard human with a flakk west. Necron warriors are much more numerous and outclass any Guardsman with the exception of Sly Marbo

But this is a military application. Not cooking pots. That's not exactly a fair comparison.

For a fair comparison - you need to compare a Necron Warrior with Imperial Guardsman or woman as has been repeatedly stated - you then compare elite Necron Units with Marines.

Devastating is a hell of a stretch for the Gauss rule. Basically 10% of your shots will glance. If you're talking about the bigger more expensive vehicles it looks nice, but anything around 100 points it's hilariously inefficient.

You mean roughly one in 6 shots will glance right?

I remember playing with and against them - a unit of 10-20 shooting at a Land Raider was either hugely satisfying or horrifying.

 Mr Morden wrote:

SecondTime wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
Necron tech is so much ahead of the Imperium that the pinnacle should unapproachable by the Imperium, and warriors easily the match for marines. That's how tech works.

We have the technology for liquid nitrogen cooled supercomputers, doesn't mean that my PC at home is anywhere near that.
We have the technology to travel into space, doesn't mean that the cooking pot I have is much more sophisticated than it was 2000 years ago.

Asyemmetric warfare is a thing, too.

And lastly: The Imperium got a million Marines. This is not your standard human with a flakk west. Necron warriors are much more numerous and outclass any Guardsman with the exception of Sly Marbo

But this is a military application. Not cooking pots. That's not exactly a fair comparison.

For a fair comparison - you need to compare a Necron Warrior with Imperial Guardsman or woman as has been repeatedly stated - you then compare elite Necron Units with Marines.

Common WWII soldiers had better tech than revolutionary war elites. And would massacre them. Common/elite doesn't matter with technology gulfs. 40K talks about technology, but doesn't really apply such a concept.

 Mr Morden wrote:
They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point

Except that they're now nowhere near as durable as Marines - which is the whole point.

Coming back on a 5+ *if* the unit is even still alive, makes them far less durable than Marines with 2 wounds apiece.

 vipoid wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point

Except that they're now nowhere near as durable as Marines - which is the whole point.

Coming back on a 5+ *if* the unit is even still alive, makes them far less durable than Marines with 2 wounds apiece.

Thats what it was orginally - you came back only if other Necrons were about or Res Orbs.

Plus now you don;t fade out when you loose too many units.

I personally feel that 2W works for Marines - and yes I am a Marine player (and most other factions, and get acused of Hating Marines by great minds like Breton) but for me it fits narrratively as long as pts are right.

Again compare Necron Warriors with Guard - Necron Elites with Marines.

 vipoid wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point

Except that they're now nowhere near as durable as Marines - which is the whole point.

Coming back on a 5+ *if* the unit is even still alive, makes them far less durable than Marines with 2 wounds apiece.

More specifically, 13 pts for a warrior v 18 pts for a tac just seems like pure unadulterated marine fapping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point

Except that they're now nowhere near as durable as Marines - which is the whole point.

Coming back on a 5+ *if* the unit is even still alive, makes them far less durable than Marines with 2 wounds apiece.

Thats what it was orginally - you came back only if other Necrons were about or Res Orbs.

Plus now you don;t fade out when you loose too many units.

I personally feel that 2W works for Marines - and yes I am a Marine player (and most other factions, and get acused of Hating Marines by great minds like Breton) but for me it fits narrratively as long as pts are right.

Again compare Necron Warriors with Guard - Necron Elites with Marines.

Why? Those are arbitrary labels. Necron warriors are conceptually nothing like guardsmen.

SecondTime wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They are still durable - they come back if even if you kill them - thats the whole point

Except that they're now nowhere near as durable as Marines - which is the whole point.

Coming back on a 5+ *if* the unit is even still alive, makes them far less durable than Marines with 2 wounds apiece.

More specifically, 13 pts for a warrior v 18 pts for a tac just seems like pure unadulterated marine fapping.

AGAIN points need to be right - are they - not sure but as not been able to game for six months I don't know,

Why? Those are arbitrary labels. Necron warriors are conceptually nothing like guardsmen.

OH FFS - because someone was going on about them being baseline units - and Gaurdsmen (and PDF) are the Imperial base line.

We can compare what we like - should we be comparing Warlord Titan to Necron Warriors and complaining that a Necron Warrior is not as good??? no because that would be fething stupid

No we are looking at comparing the standard basic infantry of each faction - which is Guardsmen vs Necron Warriors.