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.
2021/02/15 00:36:47
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Necrons are the "undead" army. I want my undead army to have a variety of typical "undead" play styles.
Like zombie hordes.
Necron warriors allow you to have a zombie horder Necron force.
You can use Immortals if you want a more elite feel. And they are elite. They're as good, more or less, as superhuman genetically engineered warriors in power armor. Despite being naked.
2021/02/15 01:26:34
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Charistoph wrote: Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
But that is what you're complaining about, and if you're complaining, then you do care. It's not like this relativstic standard for Necrons hasn't been around for quite some time now.
And the funny thing is that this is coming about due to the inflation of an Imperium group that is indicated in your avatar, is it not?
The point is, people disagree with your fundamental premise that marines are intrinsically better than everyone in the setting.
Despite the fact that necrons have been described as superior (and had rules that reflected that) for several editions, despite that the eldar aspects were either as good or better than marines for many editions and their background made them lethal space ninjas.
I don't agree that the lore you cite means marines are superior to everyone else in 40k. They're definitely superior to other HUMAN forces, because if they weren't what would be the point?
TBH I believe you are underselling 40k humans a bit too much.
I mean. What do Necrons or Eldars had that was better than the Emperor? Even on their prime, I cannot thing on anything they both had, or an individual, more powerfull, advanced and intelligent than the Emperor.
Thats the point of the empire. They had the most powerfull being of the galaxy at their head (Ignoring literal gods). And it all went to gak and now are using his literal corpse to remain alive and still be the main force in the galaxy. They are literally living under the shadow of the Emperor.
The Great Crusade was a war of the Emperor agaisnt the Xenos on the galaxy. And they won. Agaisnt everything they faced. With space marines. Yeah, in that age they were legions commanded by primarchs, but present space marines are better than legionary space marines, for example.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/15 01:33:42
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2021/02/15 01:39:13
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Galas wrote: TBH I believe you are underselling 40k humans a bit too much.
I mean. What do Necrons or Eldars had that was better than the Emperor? Even on their prime, I cannot thing on anything they both had, or an individual, more powerfull, advanced and intelligent than the Emperor.
Thats the point of the empire. They had the most powerfull being of the galaxy at their head (Ignoring literal gods). And it all went to gak and now are using his literal corpse to remain alive and still be the main force in the galaxy. They are literally living under the shadow of the Emperor.
The Great Crusade was a war of the Emperor agaisnt the Xenos on the galaxy. And they won. Agaisnt everything they faced. With space marines. Yeah, in that age they were legions commanded by primarchs, but present space marines are better than legionary space marines, for example.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'better' than the emperor? And what that has to do with 'superiority' of individuals in a species?
The emperor is in effect a Daemon, formed from the gestalt of the souls of dead hominid psykers in a regenerating meat suit. He's basically a daemon prince. Individual eldar lived for thousands of years and reincarnated, so the concept of being super smart because you're old doesn't mean much.
The eldar forged gods from the psychic might, which took physical form and strode the galaxy. They did it again with Slannesh - creating a one quarter of the most powerful force in 40k.
The great crusade was a war against everything they could find in the galaxy, not specifically xenos. And you are forgetting that what the emperor did, was wait for the galactic nuke of slannesh to demolish the single greatest empire of the galaxy - the Eldar Dominion, and then sweep into the post apocalyptic void of the aftermath to secure his hold on the galaxy before anyone else managed to.
In that time the orks spread further than they ever had while the eldar controlled everything, so his marines were mostly created to deal with them - you can see it in their weapons as well - chainswords and bolters are brutal weapons to destroy very resilient orks.
Hellebore wrote: The point is, people disagree with your fundamental premise that marines are intrinsically better than everyone in the setting.
Despite the fact that necrons have been described as superior (and had rules that reflected that) for several editions, despite that the eldar aspects were either as good or better than marines for many editions and their background made them lethal space ninjas.
I don't agree that the lore you cite means marines are superior to everyone else in 40k. They're definitely superior to other HUMAN forces, because if they weren't what would be the point?
Please quote where I said that Marines are superior to everyone else in 40K.
Marines are supposed to be the best of humanity that isn't a Custodes or Primarch. As such they are at a higher standard of expectations. They are the most elite of the Imperium's military that actually goes out and fight on a regular basis.
What I have said is that Necron Warriors are for the Necron Army the same as the Imperial Guard's Conscripts are for the Imperuim's military. That Necron Immortals are the Imperial Guardsmen or Scions of the Necron Army. In terms of lore representation of forces, you have to go to Lychguard or Praetorians before you find the Necron equivalent of the Astartes.
What I have been trying to imply is that Lychguard and Praetorians should be as much above Astartes as the Immortal is above a Scion or the Warrior is above the Conscript.
I have also stated that these recent changes to the Loyal Astartes throw the previous consideration of that balance out of wack since the Necron units were not adjusted to match as well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 02:10:14
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/15 03:33:33
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
If you're not going for to literally consider a durability rule, one that is one they don't need to pay for, why bother posting if you won't be honest?
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.
2021/02/15 05:23:50
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Galas wrote: TBH I believe you are underselling 40k humans a bit too much.
I mean. What do Necrons or Eldars had that was better than the Emperor? Even on their prime, I cannot thing on anything they both had, or an individual, more powerfull, advanced and intelligent than the Emperor.
Thats the point of the empire. They had the most powerfull being of the galaxy at their head (Ignoring literal gods). And it all went to gak and now are using his literal corpse to remain alive and still be the main force in the galaxy. They are literally living under the shadow of the Emperor.
The Great Crusade was a war of the Emperor agaisnt the Xenos on the galaxy. And they won. Agaisnt everything they faced. With space marines. Yeah, in that age they were legions commanded by primarchs, but present space marines are better than legionary space marines, for example.
Have you ever considered that the “stats” and “history” are propaganda?
The myth of progress... why think that restartes are better than the people who met the rift when it opened?
Maybe they are only a “new improved” product line that differs only in the flashy marketing?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 05:26:26
.
2021/02/15 06:08:38
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
If you're not going for to literally consider a durability rule, one that is one they don't need to pay for, why bother posting if you won't be honest?
Because Immortals were equal to or more durable than marines BEFORE their RP in prior editions.
This feeble "They're more durable in this one case accounting for RP" Stll represents a backwards slide from the Immortals pov, because previously RP was added durability on top of an MEQ/MEQ+ model.
Charistoph wrote: Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
But that is what you're complaining about, and if you're complaining, then you do care. It's not like this relativstic standard for Necrons hasn't been around for quite some time now.
And the funny thing is that this is coming about due to the inflation of an Imperium group that is indicated in your avatar, is it not?
There are two "relatives" here. One is the in-game Marine vs. Necron relative power.
The other is this weird idea you're pushing that it's ok for Marines to be better, or that they should be better, because Warriors are the bottom of the barrel for the Necron infantry, not their tier of "professional Soldiers".
To which I say that's a poor argument because there's no reason why an alien faction need to operate on the same scale of capability as humans, etc. at all. None.
My avatar? Yeah. I'm saying all this pro-Necron stuff as a person who's primary army has been Marines for about 25 years. In fact here's a marine take on it: I think the continued degradation of Xenos factions and the constant inflation of the marines is bad for marines too. The chadification of my primary army is pretty tiresome. I WANT my marines to be fighting against threatening villains with gravitas and capability, not curb stomping them at their leisure. The threat of a faction is greater when even the lowliest individual in a numberless horde is better than a Marine.
Necrons are the "undead" army. I want my undead army to have a variety of typical "undead" play styles.
Like zombie hordes.
Necron warriors allow you to have a zombie horder Necron force.
You can use Immortals if you want a more elite feel. And they are elite. They're as good, more or less, as superhuman genetically engineered warriors in power armor. Despite being naked.
Warriors still worked as a zombie horde when they were equal to or better than a marine. It was fine.
Instead, now Immortals are as "Elite" as the baseline Marine. Marines just keep going up in capability though with their choices though. Heavy Intercessors, Terminators, Aggressors. . . Has the gap that the Immortals used to fill gotten a replacement? Is there a next-higher shooty Necron Infantry unit I can take? Word on the street is that Destroyers have taken a hit in 9th as well, not that they're infantry.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/02/15 06:52:12
Insectum7 wrote:The other is this weird idea you're pushing that it's ok for Marines to be better, or that they should be better, because Warriors are the bottom of the barrel for the Necron infantry, not their tier of "professional Soldiers".
As I said to Hellebore, please quote me where I said that it's okay for Marines to be better or should be better than the Necrons. In fact I have stated several times the complete opposite before these accusations have been made. You are conflating where I am saying where the Warriors lie in the Necron hierarchy and where Marines like in the Imperium's hierarchy.
Now, the Warriors may have been slightly weaker than a Tactical since their 5th Ed codex came out, and that can be fine because they are the chaff and the Immortals then take up that Troop slot of soldier, but they still have been very close to the Tactical up until very recently. The reason I find it fine is because even though they were still slightly weaker, they were still standing toe-to-toe better than any other army's chaff unit had a right to. Better than Guardians, better than Gretchin, better than Hormagaunts, better than Conscripts, and better than Cultists.
And I repeat again, the rest of the Necron army should be considered in that relative vein. The problem is that Marines already start at a higher point of rank than most of the armies that are out there. The Marines are literally an army of Elites, but they have been pretty close to equal to the Necron's chaff, with the exception of the flexibility of Marine options and slightly better armor telling in the last Edition and better Initiative in Editions before that.
These changes to Marines (and I would even toss the Primaris in to that) have thrown that out the window because the Necrons were not changed along with it in the same proportionality. How many times do I have to repeat this statement? At best, the Primaris should have been trading shots with Immortals like Tacticals did with the Warriors, not overwhelming the Lychguard, Praetorians, and Destroyers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 22:05:18
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/15 07:49:52
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Hellebore wrote: And you are forgetting that what the emperor did, was wait for the galactic nuke of slannesh to demolish the single greatest empire of the galaxy - the Eldar Dominion, and then sweep into the post apocalyptic void of the aftermath to secure his hold on the galaxy before anyone else managed to.
This may have been covered in one of the Horus Heresy line of novels, but I was always under the impression that Big E was waiting for the Warp to calm the feth down before starting the Great Crusade - that this coincided with the Eldar screwing themselves into a self-inflicted mass suicide that broke realspace and birthed the fifth Chaos God would merely be a helpful happenstance, rather than part of a grand strategy.
If you can't navigate the Warp with some degree of safety, you ain't launching much of a Crusade...
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
2021/02/15 09:26:52
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Plus, humanity did go to war against a self replicating plague of machines, and actualy won it not by the opponent going to sleep, but by destroying them, durning the dawn of the golden age of humanity.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2021/02/15 10:16:59
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Hellebore wrote: And you are forgetting that what the emperor did, was wait for the galactic nuke of slannesh to demolish the single greatest empire of the galaxy - the Eldar Dominion, and then sweep into the post apocalyptic void of the aftermath to secure his hold on the galaxy before anyone else managed to.
This may have been covered in one of the Horus Heresy line of novels, but I was always under the impression that Big E was waiting for the Warp to calm the feth down before starting the Great Crusade - that this coincided with the Eldar screwing themselves into a self-inflicted mass suicide that broke realspace and birthed the fifth Chaos God would merely be a helpful happenstance, rather than part of a grand strategy.
If you can't navigate the Warp with some degree of safety, you ain't launching much of a Crusade...
He was waiting for the warp storms to abate and knew it would happen when the Eldar empire collapsed. He could see what was happening.
Karol wrote:Plus, humanity did go to war against a self replicating plague of machines, and actualy won it not by the opponent going to sleep, but by destroying them, durning the dawn of the golden age of humanity.
They did and effectively destroyed their society and blasted themselves into the techno stone Age as a result. They emerged from that war as victors in name only.
Karol wrote: Plus, humanity did go to war against a self replicating plague of machines, and actualy won it not by the opponent going to sleep, but by destroying them, durning the dawn of the golden age of humanity.
Ne ego si iterum eodem modo vicero, sine ullo milite Epirum revertar.
If I achieve such a victory again, I shall return to Epirus without any soldier.
— Orosius[2]
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2021/02/15 14:45:47
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
If you're not going for to literally consider a durability rule, one that is one they don't need to pay for, why bother posting if you won't be honest?
Because Immortals were equal to or more durable than marines BEFORE their RP in prior editions.
This feeble "They're more durable in this one case accounting for RP" Stll represents a backwards slide from the Immortals pov, because previously RP was added durability on top of an MEQ/MEQ+ model.
Charistoph wrote: Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
But that is what you're complaining about, and if you're complaining, then you do care. It's not like this relativstic standard for Necrons hasn't been around for quite some time now.
And the funny thing is that this is coming about due to the inflation of an Imperium group that is indicated in your avatar, is it not?
There are two "relatives" here. One is the in-game Marine vs. Necron relative power.
The other is this weird idea you're pushing that it's ok for Marines to be better, or that they should be better, because Warriors are the bottom of the barrel for the Necron infantry, not their tier of "professional Soldiers".
To which I say that's a poor argument because there's no reason why an alien faction need to operate on the same scale of capability as humans, etc. at all. None.
My avatar? Yeah. I'm saying all this pro-Necron stuff as a person who's primary army has been Marines for about 25 years. In fact here's a marine take on it: I think the continued degradation of Xenos factions and the constant inflation of the marines is bad for marines too. The chadification of my primary army is pretty tiresome. I WANT my marines to be fighting against threatening villains with gravitas and capability, not curb stomping them at their leisure. The threat of a faction is greater when even the lowliest individual in a numberless horde is better than a Marine.
Necrons are the "undead" army. I want my undead army to have a variety of typical "undead" play styles.
Like zombie hordes.
Necron warriors allow you to have a zombie horder Necron force.
You can use Immortals if you want a more elite feel. And they are elite. They're as good, more or less, as superhuman genetically engineered warriors in power armor. Despite being naked.
Warriors still worked as a zombie horde when they were equal to or better than a marine. It was fine.
Instead, now Immortals are as "Elite" as the baseline Marine. Marines just keep going up in capability though with their choices though. Heavy Intercessors, Terminators, Aggressors. . . Has the gap that the Immortals used to fill gotten a replacement? Is there a next-higher shooty Necron Infantry unit I can take? Word on the street is that Destroyers have taken a hit in 9th as well, not that they're infantry.
You're referring to only one edition, which was second edition when they were introduced, and on top of that those rules weren't even around for that long. You really are the epitome of "change bad" as an argument hahahaha
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.
2021/02/15 15:52:38
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
You're referring to only one edition, which was second edition when they were introduced, and on top of that those rules weren't even around for that long.
Eh?
Immortals were more durable than Marines (even without RP) through 3rd and 4th also. Warriors were equally durable without RPs.
In 5th, Warriors became slightly less durable than Marines (though were still more durable with RPs), whilst Immortals without RPs became equal to Marines. It remained this way in 7th, though with RPs both were significantly more durable.
It was the same even in 8th, with the main difference being the rather unreliable nature of RPs.
It's literally only since the beginning of 9th that Marines have shot ahead of Necrons in terms of durability.
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.
2021/02/15 16:25:57
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
If you're not going for to literally consider a durability rule, one that is one they don't need to pay for, why bother posting if you won't be honest?
Because Immortals were equal to or more durable than marines BEFORE their RP in prior editions.
This feeble "They're more durable in this one case accounting for RP" Stll represents a backwards slide from the Immortals pov, because previously RP was added durability on top of an MEQ/MEQ+ model.
Charistoph wrote: Even then Immortals shouldn't be considered the same equivalent level in the Necron Army of a Tactical Marine in the Lore, but against the Scions, Fire Warriors, Dire Avengers, and 'Ard Boys. Remember if the Imperium was all one codex, the Tactical/Intercessor would be Elites, and the Scouts MIGHT be Troops.
I really don't care about this reletavistic worming as an excuse to justfy the deflation of Xenos units.
But that is what you're complaining about, and if you're complaining, then you do care. It's not like this relativstic standard for Necrons hasn't been around for quite some time now.
And the funny thing is that this is coming about due to the inflation of an Imperium group that is indicated in your avatar, is it not?
There are two "relatives" here. One is the in-game Marine vs. Necron relative power.
The other is this weird idea you're pushing that it's ok for Marines to be better, or that they should be better, because Warriors are the bottom of the barrel for the Necron infantry, not their tier of "professional Soldiers".
To which I say that's a poor argument because there's no reason why an alien faction need to operate on the same scale of capability as humans, etc. at all. None.
My avatar? Yeah. I'm saying all this pro-Necron stuff as a person who's primary army has been Marines for about 25 years. In fact here's a marine take on it: I think the continued degradation of Xenos factions and the constant inflation of the marines is bad for marines too. The chadification of my primary army is pretty tiresome. I WANT my marines to be fighting against threatening villains with gravitas and capability, not curb stomping them at their leisure. The threat of a faction is greater when even the lowliest individual in a numberless horde is better than a Marine.
Necrons are the "undead" army. I want my undead army to have a variety of typical "undead" play styles.
Like zombie hordes.
Necron warriors allow you to have a zombie horder Necron force.
You can use Immortals if you want a more elite feel. And they are elite. They're as good, more or less, as superhuman genetically engineered warriors in power armor. Despite being naked.
Warriors still worked as a zombie horde when they were equal to or better than a marine. It was fine.
Instead, now Immortals are as "Elite" as the baseline Marine. Marines just keep going up in capability though with their choices though. Heavy Intercessors, Terminators, Aggressors. . . Has the gap that the Immortals used to fill gotten a replacement? Is there a next-higher shooty Necron Infantry unit I can take? Word on the street is that Destroyers have taken a hit in 9th as well, not that they're infantry.
You're referring to only one edition, which was second edition when they were introduced, and on top of that those rules weren't even around for that long. You really are the epitome of "change bad" as an argument hahahaha
Immortals didn't exist in 2nd edition, and were T5 from 3rd through most of 5th.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 16:26:39
12 S4 hits against Tac Marines is 6 wounds and 2dmg for 1 dead Marine.
12 S4 hits against Immortals is 4 wounds and 1.34dmg for 1.34 dead Immortals. Reanimation protocol has a 1/3rd chance to bring back 1 Immortal. So .9 dead Immortals.
So yes, Immortals are every so slightly more durable vs S4 weapons. S2-3 the Marines have an edge and against S6-7. But the likelihood is they will face S4 and S5 which is where the necrons excel. Of course, if the unit is wiped out than its irrelevant
12 S4 hits against Tac Marines is 6 wounds and 2dmg for 1 dead Marine. 12 S4 hits against Immortals is 4 wounds and 1.34dmg for 1.34 dead Immortals. Reanimation protocol has a 1/3rd chance to bring back 1 Immortal. So .9 dead Immortals.
So yes, Immortals are every so slightly more durable vs S4 weapons. S2-3 the Marines have an edge and against S6-7. But the likelihood is they will face S4 and S5 which is where the necrons excel. Of course, if the unit is wiped out than its irrelevant
I've run the math, and it's pretty hard to wipe Immortals (even a 5-man) in one go. It CAN be done, but it's not the kind of thing most lists are ready for.
That being said, I do think that Immortals should be significantly tougher than Marines, and more expensive as befitting that.
Edit: This, of course, assumes no Apothecary or Iron Hands.
That would change the math to 5/6 dead MEQ from 12 shots, with 8/9 dead Immortals.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 16:52:15
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2021/02/15 16:53:37
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Insectum7 wrote:The other is this weird idea you're pushing that it's ok for Marines to be better, or that they should be better, because Warriors are the bottom of the barrel for the Necron infantry, not their tier of "professional Soldiers".
As I said to Hellebore, please quote me where I said that it's okay for Marines to be better or should be better than the Necrons. In fact I have stated several times the complete opposite before these accusations have been made. You are conflating where I am saying where the Warriors lie in the Necron hierarchy and where Marines like in the Imperium's hierarchy.
Now, the Warriors may have been slightly weaker than a Tactical since their 5th Ed codex came out, and that can be fine because they are the chaff and the Immortals then take up that slot, but they still have been very close to the Tactical up until very recently. The reason I find it fine is because even though they were still slightly weaker, they were still standing toe-to-toe better than any other army's chaff unit had a right to. Better than Guardians, better than Gretchin, better than Hormagaunts, better than Conscripts, and better than Cultists.
And I repeat again, the rest of the Necron army should be considered in that relative vein. The problem is that Marines already start at a higher point of rank than most of the armies that are out there. The Marines are literally an army of Elites, but they have been pretty close to equal to the Necron's chaff, with the exception of the flexibility of Marine options and slightly better armor telling in the last Edition and better Initiative in Editions before that.
These changes to Marines (and I would even toss the Primaris in to that) have thrown that out the window because the Necrons were not changed along with it in the same proportionality. How many times do I have to repeat this statement? At best, the Primaris should have been trading shots with Immortals like Tacticals did with the Warriors, not overwhelming the Lychguard, Praetorians, and Destroyers.
You seem to be saying that you're not sayin what you're saying.
You appear to claim that it's ok for Warriors to be weaker than Marines because Warriors are the "chaff" of Necrons.
They did and effectively destroyed their society and blasted themselves into the techno stone Age as a result. They emerged from that war as victors in name only.
No, what destroyed them is eldar nuking the World for everyone. Humans were on the bring of invading the web way, had planet killing fleets and eldar only survived them, because they were dieing out and too unimportant for humans to bother. But even lets look at eldar achivments. A whole craftworld destroyed by a single tyranid organism, and then rolled over by slanesh demons. A whole craft world of eldar couldn't deal with that. It marines a squad of dudes to cleanse it, and they even were nice enough to guard the soul stone, till picked up. Eldar needed an entire army made out of 4 warhosts, and ally from the harlequins to evacute a single exodite world. GK on the other hand with a single brotherhood of under 200man, destroyed a much bigger invasion, and then wiped out all the left alive imperial forced and subdued an strike force made out of 3 space marine companies, suffering minimal loses.
Necron needed an entire war fleet respawning bilions of warriors to achive anything similar.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2021/02/15 22:35:38
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Insectum7 wrote: You seem to be saying that you're not sayin what you're saying.
You appear to claim that it's ok for Warriors to be weaker than Marines because Warriors are the "chaff" of Necrons.
Or maybe you're translating it in to your brain to what you want to read instead of what I'm saying.
They are only slightly weaker than Tacticals used to be, if you only look at the Armor Save (and now defunct Initiative). However, WBB/RP made up for that, and their base weapons have been slightly better. In general, it has been a wash when looking at the base system. It has been this way since the end of 5th and along with that change, the Necron army has become more extensive and diverse on internal options for players to use. If you can argue otherwise, please provide evidence.
In terms of Wargear options, Marines have ALWAYS been better than Necrons, because the options for Necrons have always been minimal and the options for humanity has always been the most extensive. It's literally taken till now to break out the shotguns for the Necrons, whereas they had only Melee Gauss before and lost for two codices. If you think otherwise, please provide evidence.
Now when you think that this Human Elite Tactical Marine is on par with the what amounts to the Necron Conscript Warrior, that should be considered scary. But you don't want to think that, you want the Conscript Warrior to be better than the Elite Space Marine, period (even though that's only been the case once in an edition with a vastly different game system). If you think that a Tactical Space Marine isn't an elite unit of Humanity and the Necron Warrior isn't Conscript chaff, please provide your evidence.
Now, it doesn't help that same Space Marine got a buff recently AND the rest of the Necron Army kept going on as if that change never happened. To which I have agreed that it very much sucks. If you believe I am saying otherwise, please quote me as saying it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/15 22:37:45
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/16 04:58:12
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Insectum7 wrote: You seem to be saying that you're not sayin what you're saying.
You appear to claim that it's ok for Warriors to be weaker than Marines because Warriors are the "chaff" of Necrons.
Or maybe you're translating it in to your brain to what you want to read instead of what I'm saying.
They are only slightly weaker than Tacticals used to be, if you only look at the Armor Save (and now defunct Initiative). However, WBB/RP made up for that, and their base weapons have been slightly better. In general, it has been a wash when looking at the base system. It has been this way since the end of 5th and along with that change, the Necron army has become more extensive and diverse on internal options for players to use. If you can argue otherwise, please provide evidence.
In terms of Wargear options, Marines have ALWAYS been better than Necrons, because the options for Necrons have always been minimal and the options for humanity has always been the most extensive. It's literally taken till now to break out the shotguns for the Necrons, whereas they had only Melee Gauss before and lost for two codices. If you think otherwise, please provide evidence.
Now when you think that this Human Elite Tactical Marine is on par with the what amounts to the Necron Conscript Warrior, that should be considered scary. But you don't want to think that, you want the Conscript Warrior to be better than the Elite Space Marine, period (even though that's only been the case once in an edition with a vastly different game system). If you think that a Tactical Space Marine isn't an elite unit of Humanity and the Necron Warrior isn't Conscript chaff, please provide your evidence.
Now, it doesn't help that same Space Marine got a buff recently AND the rest of the Necron Army kept going on as if that change never happened. To which I have agreed that it very much sucks. If you believe I am saying otherwise, please quote me as saying it.
"please quote me saying it." These are the relevant passages of your post, logically combined:
"The Necron Conscript Warrior is only slightly weaker than what Tacticals used to be, that should be considered scary." It is what you are saying.
Necrons were introduced in 1997, and the base Warrior remained a higher ppm than the bas Tactical until 2011, 14 years later. For more than half of their existence, the base Warrior was valued higher than the base Tactical. You could take the data points form each iteration and draw a graph of their slow decline in relation to the base Marine. And more to the point, in terms of durability for an army built around durability, the base stats in particular have continued to decline. I.E. one of their core traits that made them better than Marines has been eroded. If you think otherwise, please provide your evidence.
On top of that, their elite shooty unit was suffered even moreso. Immortals used to cost nearly twice as much as a Marine, at 28 ppm to the Marine 15. Since 5th ed, the Immortal sits roughly where the 3rd Ed. Necron used to.
Insectum7 wrote: "please quote me saying it." These are the relevant passages of your post, logically combined:
"The Necron Conscript Warrior is only slightly weaker than what Tacticals used to be, that should be considered scary." It is what you are saying.
How interesting that you start off with a misquote that you use to justify jambling some more misquotes. And by misquote, I mean you exclude vital information which provided context.
Insectum7 wrote: Necrons were introduced in 1997, and the base Warrior remained a higher ppm than the bas Tactical until 2011, 14 years later. For more than half of their existence, the base Warrior was valued higher than the base Tactical. You could take the data points form each iteration and draw a graph of their slow decline in relation to the base Marine. And more to the point, in terms of durability for an army built around durability, the base stats in particular have continued to decline. I.E. one of their core traits that made them better than Marines has been eroded. If you think otherwise, please provide your evidence.
What stats changed in the Warriors between the 5th, 7th, 8th, and 9th Edition codices? In order for there to be a continuous decline, then we should have some obvious changes in that. The Reanimation Protocols have been questionable, to be sure, but those are Special Rules, not stats.
Even in the 3rd Edition, Necron Warrior's statline was the same as Tacticals, save for Initiative and Leadership. At this point of consideration they are generally weaker as the lower Initiative will cause more problems than the higher Leadership. Their gun's stats are equivalent: Str: 4, AP: 5 Rapid Fire. Out of this, only the Warrior's Armor Save changed between them in 5th Edition.
Then you consider special rules, and WBB is superior to ATSKNF in most situations, and Gauss was superior to the Boltgun's lack of anything else. But then, the Astartes can have a close combat specialist with a weapon that will cause WBB to not be usable, they can also add a Special weapon (1 of which would cause WBB to be ignored) and a Heavy Weapon (3 of which can cause WBB to be ignored), as well as get Grenades. Meanwhile the Warriors had the option to outnumber the Tactical Squad and/or have Vehicle Gauss in Melee. At this point, if it wasn't for WBB and other resources like the Monolith's Gate, Warrior's would be weaker than Astartes, and in Melee (especially with an equipped Sergeant) they most definitely are. At range, the Astartes would be hard pressed to keep up unless they are dedicating AT weapons to slowly whittle away at the unit. In many respects, this is a draw, especially if one considers other support elements like a Lord and Monolith's Gate.
And this is the Necron's Conscripts that the Elite Astartes are being compared against.
Insectum7 wrote: On top of that, their elite shooty unit was suffered even moreso. Immortals used to cost nearly twice as much as a Marine, at 28 ppm to the Marine 15. Since 5th ed, the Immortal sits roughly where the 3rd Ed. Necron used to.
Where the 3rd Ed Necron "what" used to? The Warrior? Not quite. The Immortals' base guns are still superior to the Boltgun and Gauss Flayer. And unless the Battlescribe Author I'm using is in error (I don't have access to the current Necron codex at this time and game stores are stingy about attendance and having codices to peruse), the Immortals have +1 T, +1 A, and +3 Ld compared to the Tactical who have +1 W and still have all their old options that they've had since 3rd Edition (with Combi-weapons getting a boost), plus some new toys on top of that.
Even with that, Immortals are not the Elites of the Necron Army. They are the "professional trooper" of the Army, the equivalent of the Guardsman, Scion, or Dire Avenger. No, to look at what we should be comparing a Tactical against, we need to look at the Lychguard, the Praetorians, and the Pariahs (I REALLY wish they hadn't gotten rid of those guys). The Space Marine players are partly lucky in that their army is an army of Elites to begin with who barely stood toe-to-toe with Necron Conscripts (and that SM are the poster children of GW) instead of having to take Guardsmen or Conscripts as Troops to bring in the Astartes as Elites like every other specie in the galaxy.
However, the Astartes have gotten a LOT more Special Rules added on to them along with their +1 W over the years. This is the type of feaping creaturism that I think we are both against, especially when the more fearsome armies, like the Necrons, stagnate or progress slowly (Chapter Tactics have been out how long, and Necrons just get Dynasties when?).
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/02/16 06:10:06
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/16 13:43:14
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
Necron Inmortals eat both tacticals and intercessors for breakfast.
At the end of the day, this is all about that second wound space marines received. It irked a ton of people the wrong way. And I can understand why. It feels "wrong". But lets just not ignore how the actual units feel on the table.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2021/02/16 18:49:09
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
How interesting that you start off with a misquote that you use to justify jambling some more misquotes. And by misquote, I mean you exclude vital information which provided context.
The context is just you trying to justify the point that Necron Warriors are weaker than tacticals, not disproving it.
2021/02/16 20:20:04
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
How interesting that you start off with a misquote that you use to justify jambling some more misquotes. And by misquote, I mean you exclude vital information which provided context.
The context is just you trying to justify the point that Necron Warriors are weaker than tacticals, not disproving it.
The misquote is how I said was asking for "where I said that it's okay for Marines to be better or should be better than the Necrons", meaning the army as a whole, not one unit of the whole.
I pointed out the Necron Warriors being SLIGHTLY weaker than the Tacticals is okay considering they are the Conscript chaff of the Necron army, especially when the Astartes are NOT Humanity's Conscripts (because those are Conscripts), but their Elites.
Two very important pieces of context that were ignored.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/16 20:33:13
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
How interesting that you start off with a misquote that you use to justify jambling some more misquotes. And by misquote, I mean you exclude vital information which provided context.
The context is just you trying to justify the point that Necron Warriors are weaker than tacticals, not disproving it.
The misquote is how I said was asking for "where I said that it's okay for Marines to be better or should be better than the Necrons", meaning the army as a whole, not one unit of the whole.
I pointed out the Necron Warriors being SLIGHTLY weaker than the Tacticals is okay considering they are the Conscript chaff of the Necron army, especially when the Astartes are NOT Humanity's Conscripts (because those are Conscripts), but their Elites.
Two very important pieces of context that were ignored.
Let's grant for the moment that a necron warrior is the same as a marine...I don't know, scout, or something.
There's not really an instance that I'm able to come up with where necrons (or eldar, or dark eldar, or whatever xenos faction you please) have a unit that exists in a role that is arguably more elite, as in higher quality for the points, than the marine equivalent thing that fulfills that general role.
Compare a space marine dreadnought, not even redemptor dreadnought, to ANY of the following:
every single one of them is worse in almost every aspect than the marine dreadnought.
The whole point of this thread isn't "some factions should have some unit that is better in every way than the marine equivalent" it's "some factions should get to do SOMETHING better than the marine equivalent".
The tau thing should be shootier
the eldar thing should be more mobile
the necron thing should be tougher
the ork thing should be better at melee
but right now, theyre alllllllllllllllllllllllll worse at practically everything than the astartes equivalent, and even if they're worth it due to being less points, that sucks from a narrative standpoint, and nobody signed up to be the NPCs in marine players' masturbatory power fantasies.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2021/02/16 20:47:06
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
12 S4 hits against Tac Marines is 6 wounds and 2dmg for 1 dead Marine.
12 S4 hits against Immortals is 4 wounds and 1.34dmg for 1.34 dead Immortals. Reanimation protocol has a 1/3rd chance to bring back 1 Immortal. So .9 dead Immortals.
So yes, Immortals are every so slightly more durable vs S4 weapons. S2-3 the Marines have an edge and against S6-7. But the likelihood is they will face S4 and S5 which is where the necrons excel. Of course, if the unit is wiped out than its irrelevant
I've run the math, and it's pretty hard to wipe Immortals (even a 5-man) in one go. It CAN be done, but it's not the kind of thing most lists are ready for.
That being said, I do think that Immortals should be significantly tougher than Marines, and more expensive as befitting that.
Edit: This, of course, assumes no Apothecary or Iron Hands.
That would change the math to 5/6 dead MEQ from 12 shots, with 8/9 dead Immortals.
You forgot Raven Guard too and Stalwart or whatever Deathwing Lite is, but keep in mind these are specific Chapters. On that comparison you can't forget that, while Immortals don't have a more defensive Code outside one or two of the custom ones (plus Nephrekh conferring an overall useless 6++), they get a more offensive punch too. This whole argument with W2 Marines being close to the durability level of Immortals, and the fact this is somehow bad, is just silly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/16 20:47:36
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.
2021/02/16 20:47:08
Subject: Thematically, should lesser demons, Necron warriors, etc, be less impressive than a basic Astartes?
the_scotsman wrote: but right now, theyre alllllllllllllllllllllllll worse at practically everything than the astartes equivalent, and even if they're worth it due to being less points, that sucks from a narrative standpoint, and nobody signed up to be the NPCs in marine players' masturbatory power fantasies.
And then people tend to only take a sentence or two of what I say, and then go off on it while ignoring some of the conclusions. Should I say it again?
Charistoph wrote:These changes to Marines (and I would even toss the Primaris in to that) have thrown that out the window because the Necrons were not changed along with it in the same proportionality. How many times do I have to repeat this statement? At best, the Primaris should have been trading shots with Immortals like Tacticals did with the Warriors, not overwhelming the Lychguard, Praetorians, and Destroyers.
Charistoph wrote:Now, it doesn't help that same Space Marine got a buff recently AND the rest of the Necron Army kept going on as if that change never happened. To which I have agreed that it very much sucks.
Charistoph wrote:However, the Astartes have gotten a LOT more Special Rules added on to them along with their +1 W over the years. This is the type of feaping creaturism that I think we are both against, especially when the more fearsome armies, like the Necrons, stagnate or progress slowly (Chapter Tactics have been out how long, and Necrons just get Dynasties when?).
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
