Tiny-Tim wrote:
First Question - Living metal is now only used on War Engines. Is it worth keeping the rule or just giving them all Inv Save?
An invulnerable save (assuming you mean a 6+) is quite a downgrade from LM. LM is still on Monoliths as well as the 6 War engines (Pylons, C'tan, Warbarque and Harvester engines). If you mean a 5+ or even 4+ invulnerable then that will drastically increase the save chances for units against non MW/TK shots. I tried a couple games using LM as normal RA with a 5+ inv (when it was suggested to Borka last year) and in many cases it was better particularly against marines who don't have much MW outside of CC (which is generally moot anyways against Necrons).
Unless you are proposing adopting the UK version of LM with a 4+ invulnerable and no RA. This would make LM only slightly better than plain RA, the real difference being how it changes with regards to MWs. This change would make the War engines very vulnerable and over costed.
My opponents always disliked phase-out and portaling to reserves more than LM , which was pretty cheesy. I think LM is fine how it is, its the Necron Equivalent of holofields.
_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group