Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 329 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 22  Next

Necrons v4.4 thoughts

 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20886
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I too would like to see multi-monolith formations, potentially replacing obelisks (Although obelisks are cool).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Moscovian: what would be your suggestions to ballance the destroyers? I agree they are currently slightly underpriced, except heavy destroyers which currently suck.


Zombocom, I'd be happy if anything changed on them to diminish their power. :p

To answer your question fairly, however, I would take away one of their shots and reduce them to 275-300 points.  Their roll would certainly change on the battlefield once you did that.  No longer could they be the fast moving massive battery of fire that compliments the rest of the slow moving assault forces.  It is that relationship that currently allows the Necron player to 'herd' their opponents into virtual corrals to be finished off by the teleporting / portal using forces.  

Destroyers with a 1 x AP4+/AT6+ (or Hvy Destroyers with 1 x AT4+) would be fast attack units akin to Eldar Jetbikes that would support larger formation, help claim objectives, small assaults, etc.  Right now they can do all that plus wipe out enitre formations in a single volley.

Once you did this the Necron player would surely suffer, but not suffer unduly.  With the limited playtesting of the auto-rally removal and variable SR it seems that Corey has done a tremendous amount to get the list close to balanced.  This change to the Destroyers would IMO take care of things enough.

Sure, I see things that could be changed but this is the big one.  

The alternative that has been proposed is the LV status.  I think this would be better than Corey's current proposal but there are some fundamental flaws with it:
1. It doesn't address the firepower issue which is really THE big problem.
2. The ability to kill the Destroyers has never been the sticking point.  They regenerate.
3. They can still move from the ultimate cover (off board via a portal) and dish out a massive amount of firepower, only to support the very formation they crushed to finish it off.  Even if they die completely on the next volley of fire they've made up for it in points killed.  The damage is already done.
4. It makes the manner in which you base your units subject to change (2-3 models changes to 1 model).  It is a minor annoyance but still worth pointing out.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Moscovian: To be honest, I like the role destroyers play on the battlefield. Certainly they should be more expensive for what they can do, but I think the negative reaction to the heavy destroyer change makes it clear that just downgunning them is not the right way to go. I think a points increase is probably the best solution.

Other options could include a speed decrease to 25cm, LV or even losing the necron ability. There are a lot of options other than downgunning.

The necrons need at least one formation with good ranged shooting, in order to stop this list becoming a total assault horde.





_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
a couple of things:

1.)  If you and the people you play with aren't willing to play an army, or play against it to test, you are unable to add any useful, objective data. Opinions that are based on theory are neither useful or objective, though they may be insightful.  I'm not going to make changes based on Theory.  If you think something is wrong, play it out over a few games and give me data!!!!!!!

2.)  Living Metal rules were placed in by Jervis.  They are currently VASTLY weaker than they were origionally.  Origionally Living Metal units treated ALL shots as if they were normal AT (no TK, MW or Lance), and only ever took 1 damage from anything.  Additionally Living Metal units regenerated 1 damage at the end of every turn (like void shields).  Living Metal is one of the core features of the Necron and it's not going away.

3.)  This list represents an "awakened" Necron ARMY.  Not a little raiding force as is portrayed by 40k, but a full out, planet crushing army out to re-conquer the galaxy.  And FYI, I was recently contacted by a fellow who works at Games Workshop who wanted my information on the Obelisk, with how to translate it into 40k stats.  He wants to make a model of it, and it sounds like it's one of the situations where they are getting their employees to develop new ideas for them gratis.  A great many things in 40k came from Epic first. (firestorms, Autarchs, etc).

4.)  The Pylon is the only air defense, or air interation that the Necrons have, or will ever have.  This is a dictate from GW's Necron people, and it's not going to change.  If you think it's so broken, try to field a heavy air/air cav army against a foe with 2 pylons.  Play a game or two and THEN what you have to say will have some facts to back it up.  I think you'll find, as everyone does, that baring a great deal of luck, the Plyon isn't much of an actual danger.

5.) As for phase out:  an entire game of 40k is only the time equivilent of one single assault in Epic.  So like 40k, when the Necron lose that assault and get broken (they are 'defeated') they phase out, returning to the Tomb Complex on some Tomb World to be re-organized and sent out once more.  And sometimes those units are too badly disorganized to be sent back quickly, and may never be ready until the battle is over... i.e. they don't rally.

It thrills me to see new people joining into the Necron discussion, but if you want to be really helpful and get this list ready, PLAY them.  Play against them.  If you won't play them, and people won't play against them you have absolutely no room to complain about how the rules are working out because you are refusing to get involved in the process of development.


On a personal note:  When I volunteered to be the Necron champion, it was under the premise that I would be keeping an eye on the playtesting, and acting as an interface with Jervis for suggested/requested changes.  What wound up happening is the whole design process was dropped into my lap (mind you without compensation).  I continue to do this because I want to see a GOOD, fairly balanced, functional army that remains true to the spirit and feel of the Necron.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Corey: I think you're doing an excellent job with the list, and I feel that particularly the last few revisions have done a lot to bring the necron list back into line.

In general I agree with the direction you are going with the list, but with a few reservations.

I think dropping the price on basic destroyers is a very bad idea. They are already very very good, and dropping them to 300 makes them only 75 more points than a basic phalanx. For that 75 points, (ok 100 including a lord) they gain 15cm of movement, twice as many shots (increased to AP4+), skimmer and a point of firefight.

Destroyers would cost 50 points each compared to a necron warrior's 33 points. They're worth a lot more than that.

The other worrying factor to me is the obelisk reliance. Frankly, I'm not keen on the idea of obelisks at all, and I really dislike the idea of them becoming a mainstay formation. I understand the arguments of  the list representing a whole army rather than a raiding force, but I'm still not keen on making a fanmade unit into a mainstay of the list.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Zombocom, I wouldn't oppose any of the suggestions, although to be honest you would need to do all of them to balance them. ?I am sure you read my breakdown on the Destroyers (and not just the Heavy Destroyers but both types) and there is no way anyone can convince me either one is remotely balanced.

If you wanted to keep them as heavy gunners then LV status, cost increase (375 or 400), and a speed decrease (which I think is a great idea, 25cm?) would be the way to do it.
------
Corey, in my mind the Destroyers are the only important thing left on the list. ?I obviously am not a big fan of what you are proposing with them simply because it doesn't match what the playtesting says. ?Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers kill things exceedingly well. ?The people who are playing the Necrons are speaking up with good solid suggestions (mine, Zombo's, etc.) on how to adjust them and now I am curious what you are going to do with that data. ?No offense meant but the last two suggest changes you've made for the Destroyers haven't been remotely close to anyone's feedback.
----
FYI I like the Obelisks and don't see them as a problem.  Although I think they should remain a support formation just for balance purposes.  It keeps the focus of the list on the infantry which is where it should be.





_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(zombocom @ Jan. 30 2008,13:08)
QUOTE
I think dropping the price on basic destroyers is a very bad idea. They are already very very good, and dropping them to 300 makes them only 75 more points than a basic phalanx. For that 75 points, (ok 100 including a lord) they gain 15cm of movement, twice as many shots (increased to AP4+), skimmer and a point of firefight.

Destroyers would cost 50 points each compared to a necron warrior's 33 points. They're worth a lot more than that.

The other worrying factor to me is the obelisk reliance. Frankly, I'm not keen on the idea of obelisks at all, and I really dislike the idea of them becoming a mainstay formation. I understand the arguments of ?the list representing a whole army rather than a raiding force, but I'm still not keen on making a fanmade unit into a mainstay of the list.

I'm not at all set on the reduced destroyer cost.  I just did that to try to not make the heavy destroyers TOO expensive.

As for Obelisks, they, the Abbatoir, the Orb... these things are in there because I was specifically instructed to create these types of units when I got this project handed to me.  I was told they needed War Engines/Titans (which were NOT to be walkers), and an Armored Vehicle.  I was initially told to make an aircraft for them, but the word came down from on high about that (as mentioned in my above post).

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
Destroyers don't fit into the LV mold.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Bump the price and reduce the speed then.  Heck, it will help another pet peeve of many which is to reduce activations by way of cost increase.  Besides, a Necron ANYTHING shouldn't move more than 25cm.  :)

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(Moscovian @ Jan. 30 2008,13:43)
QUOTE
Bump the price and reduce the speed then. ?Heck, it will help another pet peeve of many which is to reduce activations by way of cost increase. ?Besides, a Necron ANYTHING shouldn't move more than 25cm. ?:)

Ok, how about this.

Destroyers are Fast Attack units, so leave their speed the same.

Heavy Destroyers are Heavy Support units, so how about dropping THEIR speed to 25.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:06 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
It's your list.  Personally I see 25cm as pretty fast (it certainly is faster than the average Necron warrior).  I like the idea of the Destroyer and the Heavy Destroyer having the same speed and cost and just a different armament.  It makes the list easy to pick up and play.  Zombo's suggestions of a cost increase and speed decrease would undoubtedly help.  Personally I'd say 400 for the formation but 375 might be better combined with the speed decrease.  This was one of ePilgrim's suggestions when he played with them for the first time, so there is some consensus here.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Some notes:
Living Metal from Wh40k doesen't protect in the slightestagainst "Destroyer" strength weapons (= Titankiller in Epic). So in Epic unts with Living Metal should tread all incoming AT and MW hits as AT hits insteadt. But they should NOT offer any protection against TK hits.

For the Pylon: In Wh40k the Pylon has no AA-Mount. Yes it shoots 120" but it decreases its range by 12" against flyers andonlyhits on a D6 roll of 6.
As with the Hydra it is able to shoot at aircraft and ground units.
The Hydras Longbarelled Autocannons have a range of 72"(same as a Leman Russ BattleCannon), substract 12" against aircrafts but hits with its Balistik Skill (4+ on a D6). In Epic the Hydra has a range of 45cm (15cm less than it should).

Somy proposal: The Plyons range should be 105cm (or a round 100cm, or the next used range increment: 90cm) and only hit with AA6+ TK(D3 or a plain 2).

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons v4.4 thoughts
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(BlackLegion @ Jan. 30 2008,14:11)
QUOTE
Some notes:
Living Metal from Wh40k doesen't protect in the slightestagainst "Destroyer" strength weapons (= Titankiller in Epic). So in Epic unts with Living Metal should tread all incoming AT and MW hits as AT hits insteadt. But they should NOT offer any protection against TK hits.

For the Pylon: In Wh40k the Pylon has no AA-Mount. Yes it shoots 120" but it decreases its range by 12" against flyers andonlyhits on a D6 roll of 6.
As with the Hydra it is able to shoot at aircraft and ground units.
The Hydras Longbarelled Autocannons have a range of 72"(same as a Leman Russ BattleCannon), substract 12" against aircrafts but hits with its Balistik Skill (4+ on a D6). In Epic the Hydra has a range of 45cm (15cm less than it should).

Somy proposal: The Plyons range should be 105cm (or a round 100cm, or the next used range increment: 90cm) and only hit with AA6+ TK(D3 or a plain 2).

when I started this project, there weren't any "Destroyer" weapons.

If everyone likes, I can revert it back to what Jervis had it as when he did the list.


As for the pylon.  When this started, I thought the Pylon had to have been done wrong.  So I walked over to the shelves in the Battle Bunker I was at, and pulled down the rules for the Pylon.

What I saw there was essentially identical to what the epic stats are, as long as you replace cm with inches.

120" range.  Hitting EVERYTHING (including air) on a 4+, and doing d3 damage when it hit with no way to save on the Particle Cannon.

Attacks every enemy model within 12 inches on the Gauss Flux Arc.

That's why I've never changed any of the base-line abilities.  I've not seen a stat sheet since that has anything different on it.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 329 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 22  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net