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.

EightFoldPath wrote:
CCB looks a lot less good once you see what everyone else gets in the HQ slot for 160 points, 1 relic and 1 warlord trait.

160 - Tau Commander with 3 Fusion Blasters, Shield Gen, punchy fist and re-roll all their hits and wounds in all phases.

175 - Dark Angel Talonmaster with twin HB, twin AC, relic sword, melee trait.

150 - TSon Exalted on Disc with 3 MW powers and a relic/trait to help them cast.

160 - Trajan Valoris, hilarious.

Shows off the overcosted chassis of the CCB, the lacklustre relics and the somehow even less impressive warlord traits on offer. Would you rather have a trait that gives re-roll wounds in combat or re-roll hits and wounds in both shooting and combat?

This is really why I asked in the first place. I do think the Necron codex still have pricing issues, not even looking at the stats/ability issues. I do appreciate all of your thoughts on the CCB, and it definitely seems to be a common addition to everyone who responded, but I still feel like it is a bit of a tax.

EightFoldPath wrote:
CCB looks a lot less good once you see what everyone else gets in the HQ slot for 160 points, 1 relic and 1 warlord trait.

160 - Tau Commander with 3 Fusion Blasters, Shield Gen, punchy fist and re-roll all their hits and wounds in all phases.

175 - Dark Angel Talonmaster with twin HB, twin AC, relic sword, melee trait.

150 - TSon Exalted on Disc with 3 MW powers and a relic/trait to help them cast.

160 - Trajan Valoris, hilarious.

Shows off the overcosted chassis of the CCB, the lacklustre relics and the somehow even less impressive warlord traits on offer. Would you rather have a trait that gives re-roll wounds in combat or re-roll hits and wounds in both shooting and combat?

-1 damage and permanent transhuman is pretty cool IMO, he doesn't look bad next to a Talonmaster. Voltaic staff and Veil of Darkness are two of the best relics in the game. The Tau WL trait is insane, but a Commander is a lot squishier than a CCB.

I agree there is a tax on Nobles, but I think the Noble tax is worth paying to get Command Protocols if you're not running SK. I think they are all about equally overpriced. It barely matters that our HQs aren't worth it, if you really want to run 2 nobles that is not going to tank your list on its own.

I think the Royal warden would be worse as an Elite, where the 3 units or Skorpekh and Flayed ones live.

 Manchild 1984 wrote:
I think the Royal warden would be worse as an Elite, where the 3 units or Skorpekh and Flayed ones live.

Mostly agree, I think he would be slightly less crowded out in Elites than HQs, but only very slightly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

teamtigerstripe wrote:
This is really why I asked in the first place. I do think the Necron codex still have pricing issues, not even looking at the stats/ability issues. I do appreciate all of your thoughts on the CCB, and it definitely seems to be a common addition to everyone who responded, but I still feel like it is a bit of a tax.

You do want to take at least one noble for MWBD and some slight use of protocols, so the extra cost over an Overlord isn't too bad. Maybe the best tax unit out of the nobles is the way to think of him?

I have the opposite problem of people in this threat.

I can barely find an HQ I like

 vict0988 wrote:

-1 damage and permanent transhuman is pretty cool IMO, he doesn't look bad next to a Talonmaster. Voltaic staff and Veil of Darkness are two of the best relics in the game. The Tau WL trait is insane, but a Commander is a lot squishier than a CCB.

I agree there is a tax on Nobles, but I think the Noble tax is worth paying to get Command Protocols if you're not running SK. I think they are all about equally overpriced. It barely matters that our HQs aren't worth it, if you really want to run 2 nobles that is not going to tank your list on its own.

I am not saying those traits are not useful, but they simply are not good compared to other competitive choices. For instance, the -1 dmg trait is probably our best warlord trait in my opinion. That is quickly becoming a very common side rule to many other competitive models: the new Avatar (which is a better version of this, but similar in effect in many instances), crusher stampede, dreadnoughts, the entirety of Deathguard...

Permanent transhuman, I will give you as certainly a very strong ability, but again, like the -1 dmg, it is not that uncommon even if some people have to pay a CP for it. the fact that you have to pay 2 CP for phaeron more than evens out this benefit in my opinion.

I do love the voltaic staff, but I think it is far from being one of the best relics in the game. I think it is solidly in the bottom of the good relics in the game. The VoD probably is toward the high end, you are right, but when is the last time you put that on a CCB and not a cryptek?

What I am really saying is that I feel like CCBs (and Overlords really) are a tax because we need MWBD and command protocols. If we need to include them, then I wish they had a few better options or were more competitive in their own right.

 Manchild 1984 wrote:
I have the opposite problem of people in this threat.

I can barely find an HQ I like

Elaborate?
CCB is almost mandatory. Fast, deadly (against small shooty units) and able to disrupt enemy plans.

CCB is still 155+ points with 4-5 attacks, you can replace that easily. Siegler has it as situational, but good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjWDIGOgnqA

In my opinion. The CCB gives you so much more value over the overlord on foot. If he’s trying to buff quicker units like wraiths or skorpkh, the ccb is an absolute must. If he’s just going to be chilling with some warriors or lychguard then you could probably go with the economic option.

or just go with 1 technomancer + silent king now that he got cheaper

I feel that Necron still suffer quite heavy from early-codex-syndrome. Compare out units to similar picks from other books and you will find a lot of frustration. As we are no Marines I see little to no odds for a Necron 2.0 dex. With current design approaches, I would expect several units simply to have other rules. I had several matchups which all ended up with opponents simply stomping my crons. The edition hit once again the point at which Necrons are no fun to play, and sadly cost reductions and core buff changed little.

And GWs lack of balancing. All the point changes across all factions from CA2022 were ridiculous.

So today I learnt that Skorpekh Destroyers are Power Level 4, so play crusade and spam those.

Edit: Flayed Ones are PL 2 which means 1 model is "8 points"

 Manchild 1984 wrote:
So today I learnt that Skorpekh Destroyers are Power Level 4, so play crusade and spam those.

Edit: Flayed Ones are PL 2 which means 1 model is "8 points"

If you think this way you're not allowed to play Crusade, it's in the rules.

I agree that the CCB is overpriced, the small increase last year was ridiculous as it was on the NB and Chronomancer. Personally I think a base CCB is worth 125 points.

charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote:
I feel that Necron still suffer quite heavy from early-codex-syndrome. Compare out units to similar picks from other books and you will find a lot of frustration. As we are no Marines I see little to no odds for a Necron 2.0 dex. With current design approaches, I would expect several units simply to have other rules. I had several matchups which all ended up with opponents simply stomping my crons. The edition hit once again the point at which Necrons are no fun to play, and sadly cost reductions and core buff changed little.

I think it's too easy to blame being early. In 8th we were one of the later codexes to be released and it was possibly the weakest book of the whole edition. I just don't think the GW rules team "gets" Necrons, and there definitely isn't a fan amongst them - whereas with other armies it's obvious to see who are favourites within the team.

charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote:
I feel that Necron still suffer quite heavy from early-codex-syndrome. Compare out units to similar picks from other books and you will find a lot of frustration. As we are no Marines I see little to no odds for a Necron 2.0 dex. With current design approaches, I would expect several units simply to have other rules. I had several matchups which all ended up with opponents simply stomping my crons. The edition hit once again the point at which Necrons are no fun to play, and sadly cost reductions and core buff changed little.

Strength of Necrons in the 8th ed came from the Decurion formation.
Decurion kept my army alive at several occasions even when it came under heavy fire.
There is nothing like this in the current edition and GW will hardly revive something like a Decurion in the current state of the game.
Only a significant improvement would bring Necrons on par with the tier 1/2 armies.
Nevertheless Necrons is still fun to play.
But in tourneys you will barely end up in the upper bracket.

What happens if the next wound regained with living metal is the first wound on a destroyed Menhir? Do I get a Menhir with 1 wound?

Unfortunately no

 wuestenfux wrote:

charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote:
I feel that Necron still suffer quite heavy from early-codex-syndrome. Compare out units to similar picks from other books and you will find a lot of frustration. As we are no Marines I see little to no odds for a Necron 2.0 dex. With current design approaches, I would expect several units simply to have other rules. I had several matchups which all ended up with opponents simply stomping my crons. The edition hit once again the point at which Necrons are no fun to play, and sadly cost reductions and core buff changed little.

Strength of Necrons in the 8th ed came from the Decurion formation.
Decurion kept my army alive at several occasions even when it came under heavy fire.
There is nothing like this in the current edition and GW will hardly revive something like a Decurion in the current state of the game.
Only a significant improvement would bring Necrons on par with the tier 1/2 armies.
Nevertheless Necrons is still fun to play.
But in tourneys you will barely end up in the upper bracket.

Decurion was 7th.

8th crons were bad until they were point reduced so far down they became viable again.

i dont think the Warden would have a problem in Elites.

Battalions give you 6 Elite slots, and unless youre running no heavies/FA and/or running min squads of the other elites, those 6 slots arent usually filled (least for me) since they arent cheap and their supporting units arent other elites.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote:
I feel that Necron still suffer quite heavy from early-codex-syndrome. Compare out units to similar picks from other books and you will find a lot of frustration. As we are no Marines I see little to no odds for a Necron 2.0 dex. With current design approaches, I would expect several units simply to have other rules. I had several matchups which all ended up with opponents simply stomping my crons. The edition hit once again the point at which Necrons are no fun to play, and sadly cost reductions and core buff changed little.

Strength of Necrons in the 8th ed came from the Decurion formation.
Decurion kept my army alive at several occasions even when it came under heavy fire.
There is nothing like this in the current edition and GW will hardly revive something like a Decurion in the current state of the game.
Only a significant improvement would bring Necrons on par with the tier 1/2 armies.
Nevertheless Necrons is still fun to play.
But in tourneys you will barely end up in the upper bracket.

Decurion was 7th.

8th crons were bad until they were point reduced so far down they became viable again.

Indeed, this was 7th ed.
This was the time when I brought Necrons to tourneys.
They were hard to defeat that time.

At that time Necrons were Tier 1 or 2. Now they are lowest Tier (Tier 4, see Goonhammer, end of 2021).

I think honestly the best thing for Crons right now is likely to get a rules patch via a Regiment of Renown type formation, giving them a new layer of rules or something. I don't know what form that would take.

That, or its just further sustained point cuts.

10 point warriors might be enough

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think honestly the best thing for Crons right now is likely to get a rules patch via a Regiment of Renown type formation, giving them a new layer of rules or something. I don't know what form that would take.

That, or its just further sustained point cuts.

RP of 4+ instead of 5+ would definitely help a lot.
But this won't happen in this edition.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think honestly the best thing for Crons right now is likely to get a rules patch via a Regiment of Renown type formation, giving them a new layer of rules or something. I don't know what form that would take.

That, or its just further sustained point cuts.

RP of 4+ instead of 5+ would definitely help a lot.
But this won't happen in this edition.

4+ reanimations would be too good, but rerolling 1s across the board would help.

Bracketed reanimations would be doable though. Something like the following?

wounds characteristic of 1 is one dice on 5+ rerolling 1s

wounds characteristic up to 3 you have to successfully roll 2D6 per mini.

wounds of 4 or more would be 3D6 per mini.

being able to roll for reanimations after the last model in the unit dies would also be nice - i know it helps the attacker but theoretically i don't know why it stops at that stage.

 Crafter91 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think honestly the best thing for Crons right now is likely to get a rules patch via a Regiment of Renown type formation, giving them a new layer of rules or something. I don't know what form that would take.

That, or its just further sustained point cuts.

RP of 4+ instead of 5+ would definitely help a lot.
But this won't happen in this edition.

4+ reanimations would be too good, but rerolling 1s across the board would help.

Bracketed reanimations would be doable though. Something like the following?

wounds characteristic of 1 is one dice on 5+ rerolling 1s

wounds characteristic up to 3 you have to successfully roll 2D6 per mini.

wounds of 4 or more would be 3D6 per mini.

being able to roll for reanimations after the last model in the unit dies would also be nice - i know it helps the attacker but theoretically i don't know why it stops at that stage.

A more ingenuous implementation of the RP would be highly welcome such as a bracketed RP.
Point reductions have been done recently and they don't seem to have much influence on the game.

Tournament stats show It is possible the points drops have made Necrons strong-ish now.

Not good enough to actually take 1st to 3rd place.

But good enough to stack up wins against the other factions.

My level of fun with Necrons has been great, but then again, I don't subject myself to tournaments anymore. :-)

EightFoldPath wrote:
Tournament stats show It is possible the points drops have made Necrons strong-ish now.

Not good enough to actually take 1st to 3rd place.

But good enough to stack up wins against the other factions.

I think so, but you need to shelf a lot of units.

You don't own The Silent King, 60 Flayed Ones and 18 Skorpekhs already? Well, for the low low GW price of £680 RRP you too can have 1,560 points of well balanced goodness.