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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
The point would be for that +1 attack and +1 leadership. If you're making a melee unit then the extra attack is a big deal, and Night Lords will take all the leadership we can get for the maximum opportunity to use Prey On the Weak. An all chainswords and pistols Chosen squad will look just like an all chainswords and pistols CSM squad. It isn't how I run my Chosen but some might.

The most obvious example of two units in the same army that are virtually indistinguishable from each other is intercessors and Veteran intercessors. Exact same weapons, just +1 attack and +1 leadership, not even the additional options Chosen have compared to CSM. If those are allowed I don't see how Insectum's ideas for Warriors would be a problem.

But we're also talking better weapons, better armor, and more Wounds as well, if not more stats, but still with the same model? Again, it is using Scout models to be Intercessors is the equivalence we're talking here.

 Argive wrote:

Karol wrote:

Maybe its because you're not used to them being as or more powerful than Marines in the first place. It's not like they are the Plague Zombies that Nurgle causes, nor are they just bones, but have bodies of living metal that can repair themselves. Think T-800s that can almost repair themselves as well as a T-1000.

I don't know what a t800 or t1000 is. So I can't really give an anwser to this statment.

What do kids even watch these days growing up..

Peppa pig and blippi

I still don't understand what the attachment to specifically the warrior unit is.

Necrons now have several layers of infantry unit, and warriors are just the most basic.

If you want to run a "space marine equivalent" or super elite force, just don't use warriors--use immortals. Or run all lychguard or destroyers--the game doesn't even require you to bring troops anymore aside from wanting objective secured or needing a few more CP.

I guess I'm really not seeing the problem aside from the unit named "necron warrior" is weaker than it used to be compared to a space marine. Back when they were stronger, there were far fewer options.

Quasistellar wrote:
I still don't understand what the attachment to specifically the warrior unit is.

Necrons now have several layers of infantry unit, and warriors are just the most basic.

If you want to run a "space marine equivalent" or super elite force, just don't use warriors--use immortals. Or run all lychguard or destroyers--the game doesn't even require you to bring troops anymore aside from wanting objective secured or needing a few more CP.

I guess I'm really not seeing the problem aside from the unit named "necron warrior" is weaker than it used to be compared to a space marine. Back when they were stronger, there were far fewer options.

Each "layer" of infantry is weaker.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
The point would be for that +1 attack and +1 leadership. If you're making a melee unit then the extra attack is a big deal, and Night Lords will take all the leadership we can get for the maximum opportunity to use Prey On the Weak. An all chainswords and pistols Chosen squad will look just like an all chainswords and pistols CSM squad. It isn't how I run my Chosen but some might.

The most obvious example of two units in the same army that are virtually indistinguishable from each other is intercessors and Veteran intercessors. Exact same weapons, just +1 attack and +1 leadership, not even the additional options Chosen have compared to CSM. If those are allowed I don't see how Insectum's ideas for Warriors would be a problem.

But we're also talking better weapons, better armor, and more Wounds as well, if not more stats, but still with the same model? Again, it is using Scout models to be Intercessors is the equivalence we're talking here.

^Sternguard are just PA armored Marines, but have a two Stat difference and a better gun that looks identical to a normal Boltgun. A Havoc model in a CSM squad becomes T4. Guard Conscripts have different stats and use the same model as Infantry Squads.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Sternguard are just PA armored Marines, but have a two Stat difference and a better gun that looks identical to a normal Boltgun. A Havoc model in a CSM squad becomes T4. Guard Conscripts have different stats and use the same model as Infantry Squads.

We're not talking about skill sets here that come from experience and veterancy. We're talking about two units which are called the same thing, have the same model, but have as vastly different stats as Scouts and Intercessors, if not more. Keep in mind this was the standard you were seeking:

 Insectum7 wrote:
That way people could have their "undead" Crons, and some of us could have their "hyper-terminator" Crons.

Having stats change that much on a unit hasn't happened in a supplement or a codex just by simply choosing a Dynasty or Chapter Tactic. Different units are made. They are given different boxes and options to use to differentiate them from the others. We're not talking about the difference of Conscript and a Guardsman, but a Conscript and a Scion, if not a Conscript and an Ogryn.

Who said they'd be called the same thing?

There could easily be "Bound Necron Warriors" and "Unbound Necron Warriors".

Moreover, what's the difference visually between an Ultramarines Assault Intercessor and a White Scars Veteran Intercessor with Chainsword and Pistol? Let's assume they're painted in a custom scheme-say, mostly gold, with some red accents.
Because one of them gets 4 attacks at S4 AP-1 D1 on the charge, cannot advance and charge or fall back and charge, but can fall back and shoot at -1. The other gets an additional attack, an additional point of damage on the charge starting T3, and can be much, MUCH faster.

I also remember someone suggesting that you cannot take the two different types of Warriors in the same list-which seems reasonable to me. At that point, it's no different from remembering what Chapter Tactic your opponent is using.

Yeah I think this part of the discussion is done at this point. Totally doable, despite Charistophs strange obstinance. I might take a stab at an oldcron C'tan Ascendent mod.

Quasistellar wrote:
I still don't understand what the attachment to specifically the warrior unit is.

Mayhaps some people have an investment in the [earlier] background of the faction, and find their army's core being reduced from elite to chod, while Marines go in the opposite direction rather narratively unsatisfying.

Meh. Purely a fluff thing then. Really, warriors are pretty great basic infantry--pretty much as good or better than almost every other faction's basic troop except marines and custodes.

I think a lot of folks are just going to have to accept the (not even recent) change or quit playing and move on :/

I would love Tau to be more than just ranged shooting but I don't get all angry about it. I would love if Inquisition acolytes weren't just overpriced 10 point guardsmen but I'm not throwing a fit. My repulsor straight up blows goats right now but I'm fine because I like the model. I can't take the relic Iron Hands axe on any Primaris characters so I'm converting a captain instead of using an ugly squat Marine.

There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor. Like, warriors are actually REALLY GOOD right now. Save the righteous indignation for units that actually suck, lol.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Who said they'd be called the same thing?

There could easily be "Bound Necron Warriors" and "Unbound Necron Warriors".

From the presentation of it, it didn't sound like they were until the Dynasty's rules came in to affect, and those affects would provide considerable stat changes before any Special Rules were coming in to play. Again, this wasn't coming across as the difference between Ultramarines and White Scar, but Scout and Intercessor, as if you took Space Wolves your Scouts suddenly statted like Intercessors, and your Intercessors were Custodes, just because you were Space Wolves.

It's possible I misread it, but considering I kept presenting the case against such and I was not corrected on it, and in fact it kept being doubled down on, it makes it hard not to keep considering it in that vein.

Even though I hate to suggest it, what if there was a stratagem, can only be used if your Warlord is a C'tan, and it will change Warriors, akin to the Ork strats or something, this it totally off the top of my head.lll

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then. Really, warriors are pretty great basic infantry--pretty much as good or better than almost every other faction's basic troop except marines and custodes.

I think a lot of folks are just going to have to accept the (not even recent) change or quit playing and move on :/

I would love Tau to be more than just ranged shooting but I don't get all angry about it. I would love if Inquisition acolytes weren't just overpriced 10 point guardsmen but I'm not throwing a fit. My repulsor straight up blows goats right now but I'm fine because I like the model. I can't take the relic Iron Hands axe on any Primaris characters so I'm converting a captain instead of using an ugly squat Marine.

There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor. Like, warriors are actually REALLY GOOD right now. Save the righteous indignation for units that actually suck, lol.

Hmmm. . . Would you sing the same tune if Marines were 10 points per model and lost out to Eldar Guardians, model-to-model, but they were still a "REALLY GOOD" unit on the tabletop because they were so cheap?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:
Even though I hate to suggest it, what if there was a stratagem, can only be used if your Warlord is a C'tan, and it will change Warriors, akin to the Ork strats or something, this it totally off the top of my head.lll

I was looking at that too, thats how Orks get Skarboyz who are S5.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then. Really, warriors are pretty great basic infantry--pretty much as good or better than almost every other faction's basic troop except marines and custodes.

I think a lot of folks are just going to have to accept the (not even recent) change or quit playing and move on :/

I would love Tau to be more than just ranged shooting but I don't get all angry about it. I would love if Inquisition acolytes weren't just overpriced 10 point guardsmen but I'm not throwing a fit. My repulsor straight up blows goats right now but I'm fine because I like the model. I can't take the relic Iron Hands axe on any Primaris characters so I'm converting a captain instead of using an ugly squat Marine.

There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor. Like, warriors are actually REALLY GOOD right now. Save the righteous indignation for units that actually suck, lol.

Hmmm. . . Would you sing the same tune if Marines were 10 points per model and lost out to Eldar Guardians, model-to-model, but they were still a "REALLY GOOD" unit on the tabletop because they were so cheap?

Um, no, but necrons aren't 10ppm, and don't lose to guardians model to model. Remember: I LIKE necrons. I own necrons. I like the way they are now more than the way you guys describe that they used to be. That old fluff sounds like a dead end in regards to model support.

Quasistellar wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then. Really, warriors are pretty great basic infantry--pretty much as good or better than almost every other faction's basic troop except marines and custodes.

I think a lot of folks are just going to have to accept the (not even recent) change or quit playing and move on :/

I would love Tau to be more than just ranged shooting but I don't get all angry about it. I would love if Inquisition acolytes weren't just overpriced 10 point guardsmen but I'm not throwing a fit. My repulsor straight up blows goats right now but I'm fine because I like the model. I can't take the relic Iron Hands axe on any Primaris characters so I'm converting a captain instead of using an ugly squat Marine.

There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor. Like, warriors are actually REALLY GOOD right now. Save the righteous indignation for units that actually suck, lol.

Hmmm. . . Would you sing the same tune if Marines were 10 points per model and lost out to Eldar Guardians, model-to-model, but they were still a "REALLY GOOD" unit on the tabletop because they were so cheap?

Um, no, . . .

Suspiscions confirmed then?

So how about this, what did you think of firstborn at 1W?

Quasistellar wrote:
There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor.

Minor things kind of add up over time. Much like price increases.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then. Really, warriors are pretty great basic infantry--pretty much as good or better than almost every other faction's basic troop except marines and custodes.

I think a lot of folks are just going to have to accept the (not even recent) change or quit playing and move on :/

I would love Tau to be more than just ranged shooting but I don't get all angry about it. I would love if Inquisition acolytes weren't just overpriced 10 point guardsmen but I'm not throwing a fit. My repulsor straight up blows goats right now but I'm fine because I like the model. I can't take the relic Iron Hands axe on any Primaris characters so I'm converting a captain instead of using an ugly squat Marine.

There's just so much anger over stuff that's so. . . minor. Like, warriors are actually REALLY GOOD right now. Save the righteous indignation for units that actually suck, lol.

Hmmm. . . Would you sing the same tune if Marines were 10 points per model and lost out to Eldar Guardians, model-to-model, but they were still a "REALLY GOOD" unit on the tabletop because they were so cheap?

Um, no, . . .

Suspiscions confirmed then?

So how about this, what did you think of firstborn at 1W?

They could have been fine, but they stunk for their points. I never liked old mini marines though because the standard mkvii armor models are pretty poopy looking.

Can you point me to some fluff from let's say after 2010
that indicates a standard necrons warrior should be better than a tactical Marine? I'm being serious here. I genuinely want to know if they are being grossly misrepresented on the tabletop.

I really don't get hung up on exactly where different units are statted compared to other armies, as long as they're kinda close to what I envision from reading fluff.

You mean since the great turnaround, where the IoM went from a decaying "Rome" of space, beset on all sides by superior foes, to the Tech-genius superpower?

In theory, the IoM is still behind Necrons and Eldar in tech. But the rules don't show it.

In the fluff, Necron living metal is much more advanced, and should be much more durable than, the Black Carapace or the Power Armor.

The Necron general-purpose firearm should be much more advanced than the Marine general-purpose firearm. And, as it's produced as a weapon-of-the-line, it should therefore be more powerful (note: the Shuriken should be more advanced, but powerful is questionable - it's not the same class of weapon).

There was a time where this was visible in the tech. Skimmers were readily available to the most advanced factions (Necrons, Eldar). The only other faction with a lot of them was tech-acendant and likely supported by the Eldar (Tau). The Imperium had few skimmers. It wasn't a tech they could reliably and easily produce. But now, Primaris.

Same goes for Plasma weaponry. IoM could produce Plasma weaponry, but not as well as Eldar/Tau. So it was unstable (and stronger, too). That's been retconned, and now IoM Plasma is the same as Xenos plasma, except where it's better (safe to fire at the same strength, but can overcharge to stronger).

Further, pre-Primaris, each faction's vehicles really sang to their culture and strengths.
Necron's were the most advanced but artless. Their vehicles were durable workhorses.
T'au's, the tech-ascendant race, were entry-level "tanks with skimming".
Dark Eldar's, the race of excess and usually speed, were super fast, exceptional, but frail.
Craftworlders were advanced, fit-for-purpose. Not as advanced as Necrons, not as fast as Dark Eldar's. As the only advanced race that cared about their grunts, the Wave Serpent was the only vehicle in the game with a 5+ crash raiting. Their transports were built to protect their people, and their gunboats were bulit to deliver specific guns.

Marine vehicles were mostly Metal Bawkses. Designed for getting Marine armor into place - the Marines themselves. They had heavier vehicles (Land Raiders) for when the need arises, as Marines usually have the tools to get things done. But they were tracked vehicles.

The Necrons should have the best workhorses. The Marines should have the best Metal Bawkses. The Dark Eldar should have the fastest. The Orks should have the most expendable. Should.

But Wave Serpents. No end of the complains. So Marines must have the same. So Repulsor. Basically a Wave Serpent, but better.

Since Primaris, the rule of design has been "Marines do it better". Better Dakka. Better specialization. Better durability. Better everything. Gone are the days when Marines had threats in the galaxy that could measure up to them. The game is designed to be Bolter Porn now. So fluff will be ignored until it's rewritten. Those super-advanced unkillable robot aliens are now just "slightly better guardsmen". Those advanced unknowable alien specialists are just Marine-wannabes. Those eldrich unmatchable horrors are just target practice for Marines. Because Marines.

So it'll be hard to find good fluff since 2010.

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then.

The title of the thread starts with 'thematically'. What else was anyone talking about? If you're invested in lore that paints your army as individually powerful, it's disappointing to see them reduced to hordes that can't compete with the poster boys anymore and need overwhelming numbers to win.

Same for Tyranid players and our Genestealers.

Same for Sisters players and their formerly almost-a-Marine troops.

Same for Eldar players and their Aspect Warriors.

YMMV on how much it actually matters because, yes, it is a fluff thing. If you can understand why Marine players enjoyed their troops being buffed to better match the fluff, you should understand why players of other armies mind their troops no longer being able to stand up to Marines, despite their fluff.

If you can understand why Marine players enjoyed their troops being buffed to better match the fluff

I actually find this aspect weird, because the fluff _doesn't_ support 'Marine faceroll everything.' Marines are necessary because the setting is so bloody dangerous, and even then they aren't enough- they just help slow the Imperium's gradual, grinding loss to attrition.

The switch from 'overwhelming odds to trivial victory' should feel hollow, not good.

Orkz are the "Dakka" faction...you know, since Dakka is LITERALLY an ork word.

It was a running joke for decades that ork players would bring buckets of dice because of how many shots they got, An example, A pair of SM used to get 2 shot at 24' and 4 shots at 12, but only if they didn't move, if they moved they got 2 shot at 12. 5 Orkz for the same price on the other hand got 10 at 18.

Now that math is a bit flipped, those Marines get 4 shots at 24 and 4 at 12 for 36pts (6pt increase since 4th edition, and free grenades now(2-4pt saved)) while the 5 orkz get 10 shots still but now cost 40pts (10pt increase since 4th edition)

Of course, that doesn't even include ridiculous things like Aggressors (even after their "nerf") which put out 12 shots per model against "hordes" for 45pts. One of them is actually out gunning a similar points value of Orkz. And ALL of this is with the fact that orkz hit on 5s and Marines hit on 3s.

Orkz also used to be known for the sheer ridiculous number of close combat attacks they got in CC, in 4th a Boy on the charge had 2 attacks base, +1 for 2CCWs, +1 for charging for a grand total of 4. Now they get 2 attacks base +1 for CCW for a grand total of 3, if you purchase 20+ boyz for a squad they get +1 attacks but only when they have 20 or more models.

So our basic guys were hitting with 4 attacks are now hitting with 3. Not to mention the recent changes to CC which means that you will likely NEVER get a full boyz squad into CC thanks to the new combat range rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

If you can understand why Marine players enjoyed their troops being buffed to better match the fluff

I actually find this aspect weird, because the fluff _doesn't_ support 'Marine faceroll everything.' Marines are necessary because the setting is so bloody dangerous, and even then they aren't enough- they just help slow the Imperium's gradual, grinding loss to attrition.

The switch from 'overwhelming odds to trivial victory' should feel hollow, not good.

Remember the fluff when Space Marines would get torn to shreds by Genestealers. Hows that fluff holding up in the game?

 catbarf wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
Meh. Purely a fluff thing then.

The title of the thread starts with 'thematically'. What else was anyone talking about? If you're invested in lore that paints your army as individually powerful, it's disappointing to see them reduced to hordes that can't compete with the poster boys anymore and need overwhelming numbers to win.

Same for Tyranid players and our Genestealers.

Same for Sisters players and their formerly almost-a-Marine troops.

Same for Eldar players and their Aspect Warriors.

YMMV on how much it actually matters because, yes, it is a fluff thing. If you can understand why Marine players enjoyed their troops being buffed to better match the fluff, you should understand why players of other armies mind their troops no longer being able to stand up to Marines, despite their fluff.

Everyone keeps saying all this stuff as if I'm all about my space marines. . . nevermind I also have Necrons. Based on any recent "theme" I can find or read about necrons, then warriors should, indeed, be a little "less impressive" than basic astartes. Yes, I understand that there's probably 30x the fluff support for space marines. If you want to change that, then start writing novels and apply to be a black library writer.

It's just weird that this is coming up *now*. As I understand it, this change was like over a decade ago, and now that after quite some time of warriors being not very good, they're finally good, but certain people are upset because suddenly marines were buffed from also being terrible to actually good.

I mean, are people still upset and making threads about space marines not being convicts anymore? At some point you just have to move on. Iron Hands have recent novel fluff that makes them seem as tough as Death Guard, and have robot/cyborg dual assault cannon wielding terminators, but that's definitely not reflected in the rules. I'm not upset about it because I understand it's a tabletop game with limited design space.

Everyone keeps saying all this stuff as if I'm all about my space marines. . . nevermind I also have Necrons.

When arguing on the internet, no one else cares what you play. They're reacting to your arguments.

"But I also play XX" doesn't matter to anyone.

Quasistellar wrote:
Everyone keeps saying all this stuff as if I'm all about my space marines. . . nevermind I also have Necrons.

My dude, I had no idea what you play. Read my post; I talk about Marines assuming you don't play them. I'm responding to your arguments, not your faction.

And you're right, basic Necrons becoming less powerful than Marines isn't a recent thing. But it's only recently that there's been a big shift to exacerbate it and further reinforce Necron Warriors as cannon fodder next to Marines. What might have been a minor grumble for the grognards is now a big ol' point of contention.

Part of the dissatisfaction could be expressed as 'My super-advanced Necron Warriors are barely any tougher than Guardsmen in carapace armor', but it isn't because Guardsmen are not the metric by which everything in this setting is judged, it's Marines. The other part is 'if Marines can have a buff to better represent their fluff, why can't I?'. It's not that Marines became good in gameplay terms that's intrinsically the issue, it's the idea that one faction gets to be as individually powerful and scary as their fluff suggests, while others don't.

Voss wrote:
I actually find this aspect weird, because the fluff _doesn't_ support 'Marine faceroll everything.' Marines are necessary because the setting is so bloody dangerous, and even then they aren't enough- they just help slow the Imperium's gradual, grinding loss to attrition.

I agree completely and wholeheartedly, but evidently the Marines-win-everything fiction is popular enough that the #1 reason I've heard for why Marines going to W2 is good is 'because it fits their fluff better'.

Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

 Tyran wrote:
Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

That's like saying a conscripted Guardsman driving a LRBT is chaff.

Bharring wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

That's like saying a conscripted Guardsman driving a LRBT is chaff.

Not quite for two reason, we never see a Conscript LRBT, and we're talking about a completely different culture and starting standard. Necron Conscripts are to start at the same rough tier as Tactical Marines, and the rest of the army progresses from there.

 Tyran wrote:
Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

Depending on how good that technology is, they could out fight Custodes. The argument is basically irrelevant.

Bharring wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

That's like saying a conscripted Guardsman driving a LRBT is chaff.

Well, there is the issue that a tank requires a crew of multiple members, at least 4 (tank commander, gunner, driver and loader), and with all the extra guns a LRBT can have, up to 7.

And the tank commander is usually a veteran officer, because they don't let any idiot commander a tank.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

Depending on how good that technology is, they could out fight Custodes. The argument is basically irrelevant.

Imperial Guard conscripts can outfight primitives who have yet to discover fire, but their status as chaff is defined for the role they play in relation to the rest of the Imperial Guard.

Necron Warriors are chaff because that is the role they fulfill in the Necron military.

 Tyran wrote:
Necron Warriors are chaff because that is the role they fulfill in the Necron military.

Careful, there are a few people who cannot comprehend this paradigm and think you're talking about their tier in the game.

 Tyran wrote:

Fluff wise, Necron Warriors used to be Necrontyr civilians who had their souls, personality and bodies stripped from them. That is as close as the definition of chaff as you can get, they are basically more technologically advanced conscripts.

Depending on how good that technology is, they could out fight Custodes. The argument is basically irrelevant.

Imperial Guard conscripts can outfight primitives who have yet to discover fire, but their status as chaff is defined for the role they play in relation to the rest of the Imperial Guard.

Necron Warriors are chaff because that is the role they fulfill in the Necron military.

Understood, but that doesn't mean they have to be worse than Marines on the tabletop.