Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 6 of 17
  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next

Necron 4.2 - comments
zombocom
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 2:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
My proposed solution to the phase out problem is that units should have to make an initiative roll (at -2 for being broken) to be allowed to phase back in that turn.

Also make it so that broken portals can't be used.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Hojyn
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am
Posts: 876
Location: Brest - France

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 10 2007,22:28)
QUOTE
Zombocom runs 4 monoliths, teleporting to surround a chunk of the enemy army.

A Necron formation then engages through one of the monoliths, everything supports fire, and the formation is destroyed.

During the turn, the monoliths get shot at and break.

On turn 2, he does it again. :)

Why shoot at the Monoliths ? Leave them alone and they will do next to nothing for the rest of the game.

Or, if they are controlling/contesting an objective or the blitz, wait until turn 3 to fire at them.

Despite all their teleporting units, Necrons are very slow once they are on the board. Don't just break Monoliths, that's the worst thing to do, keep fire until they are destroyed or, if you're not sure you can destroy them, shoot at something else.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Why shoot at the Monoliths ? Leave them alone and they will do next to nothing for the rest of the game.


At least partially to prove a point, that for Monoliths, the phase-out mechanism is completely overpowered.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
tv1013
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 148
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 11 2007,20:21)
QUOTE
Why shoot at the Monoliths ? Leave them alone and they will do next to nothing for the rest of the game.


At least partially to prove a point, that for Monoliths, the phase-out mechanism is completely overpowered.

What would you suggest be done to the monoliths then, if you're insistent that their phasing ability is broken/degenerate?

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
*points at Zombocom's suggestion at the top of the page*


That's not a bad place to start.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Hojyn
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am
Posts: 876
Location: Brest - France

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 11 2007,20:21)
QUOTE
Why shoot at the Monoliths ? Leave them alone and they will do next to nothing for the rest of the game.


At least partially to prove a point, that for Monoliths, the phase-out mechanism is completely overpowered.

I don't know if it's overpowered, but it sure gives strange results. Namely, that 90% of the time it's better for the opposing player not to shoot at Necron units (Monoliths in particular) in order to isolate them.

With a very short-ranged shooting attack and a slow movement rate, Necrons are best left alone once they have teleported. Actually, during the first two turns, breaking is a good thing for most Necron formations, since it means they can teleport back in the follwing turn.

I really love the phase-out system and I don't think it's overpowered, but breaking a Necron formation should be good for the opposing player, not the Necron player.

Preventing broken units from using their portals would be a step in the right direction but I think it would only solve part of the problem.

How about saying something along those lines: "If the Necron army ends a turn with less than (x)% of its formations on the table, it loses automatically."

Quite radical, but a) it would make breaking formations very interesting for the opponent and b) it would prevent stalling tactics (I do nothing for 2 turns and teleport my whole army on turn 3).

What do you think?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Zombocom's idea -while I disagree with the specifics of it- I think brings a great idea to the table.

What about changing the initiative on most formations to 2+?

It makes bringing formations through the portals not a certainty, thereby making the Monoliths more vulnerable to attacks.  It would give the Necron a real encouragement to use the +1 Marshall action as well; right now a Hold action does just fine.  I understand the design behind a 1+ initiative, but surely there could be fluff reasons to to justify a 2+?  Anyone?

_________________
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  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Another initiative based idea that was suggested to me was to have the initiative of each formation reduced by 1 each time they phase out.

I think this is the ideal fluff solution, since it fits the pattern of a powerful initial surge, but then loss of coordination as various parts of the army phase in and out.

Unfortunately, it would be a nightmare ingame, trying to keep track of the individual initiatives of each formation.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
tv1013
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 148
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Wow, that's a ton of choices to pick from.

So far, if I got them all, we have:

(1) - Broken Monoliths phase back in at a -2 to reflect their previously broken status
(2) - Broken Monoliths can only phase back in to (your half of the table / their prior spot on the table / some point yet to be determined)
(3) - Certain Necron formations get their initiative raised to 2+
(4) - Necrons have a variable strategy rating equal to the opponent
(5) - Units reduce their initiative by 1 each time they phase out
(6) - A broken Monolith cannot use its portal the turn it phases back in
(7) - The Necron player loses if (X)% of the Necrons aren't on the table (points-wise, model-wise, formation-wise, something)

That's seven ideas right there, some of which can be combined.

Idea #5 sounds really neat, but is a bookkeeping nightmare.  #7 gets close to that as well.  #2 just sounds odd - "we tried to phase back by the objective, but just couldn't do it!"

#1, #3 and/or #6 seem to be like the best ideas to look into, either individually, or in some combination.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:44 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
If monoliths couldn't teleport the entire army wouldn't work at all. It'd all be movement 15 that can't march, with short range guns, so would never make it across the board.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Not to beat a dead horse, but...

Has anyone besides me actually playtested the 4.2 list?  I am curious what your thoughts on the Monolith's survivability are now that the Obelisks have taken such a nerfing.

As for the proposal list...
(1) - Broken Monoliths phase back in at a -2 to reflect their previously broken status. This makes their initiative a 3+, which has some merit, although I am not sure if it is too much with the Obelisk changes already in place.

(2) - Broken Monoliths can only phase back in to (your half of the table / their prior spot on the table / some point yet to be determined) Although probably one of the better ideas conceptually, the application of this would never work in Epic.  Too many if-thens for the special rule.

(3) - Certain Necron formations get their initiative raised to 2+ My idea, but I really haven't thought about which ones would get raised.  I would love to see some fluff justification for it first.

(4) - Necrons have a variable strategy rating equal to the opponent. This would only benefit IG and Ork opponents and be worse for everybody else.

(5) - Units reduce their initiative by 1 each time they phase out Once again a great idea that would be beyond playable in a game.

(6) - A broken Monolith cannot use its portal the turn it phases back in Contradicts other game mechanics.

(7) - The Necron player loses if (X)% of the Necrons aren't on the table (points-wise, model-wise, formation-wise, something) This is already in the game in some aspect since formations off table count as destroyed for tournament purposes.  And this doesn't really help balance Necrons in scenarios.

In all fairness, I am not 100% convinced any of these changes are necessary in light of the 4.2 changes, but I'm staying open. :)

_________________
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  
 
fbruntz
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 232
Location: Lyon, France
(1) - Broken Monoliths phase back in at a -2 to reflect their previously broken status


The "less worst" idea I think.

(2) - Broken Monoliths can only phase back in to (your half of the table / their prior spot on the table / some point yet to be determined)

Why? There is no good explanation for that. In addition it's way too complicated to keep trace of the last position of the Monoliths.

(3) - Certain Necron formations get their initiative raised to 2+

So Necrons need a cheaper Supreme Commander.

(4) - Necrons have a variable strategy rating equal to the opponent

Once again, why?

(5) - Units reduce their initiative by 1 each time they phase out

It could be a good idea but it will be hard to keep trace of that...

(6) - A broken Monolith cannot use its portal the turn it phases back in

No, that would definitively break the whole army.

(7) - The Necron player loses if (X)% of the Necrons aren't on the table (points-wise, model-wise, formation-wise, something)

We have already a rule for that : each Necron formation off board counts as destroyed at the end of the battle... It's very easy to gain VP against Necrons, you don't need to destroy a formation but just to break it.

We should be careful with changes as the Necrons army list works pretty well. I think that the actual phase out is good to represent a force that is quite difficult to destroy : yes it's interesting for the Necron player to phase out but it's also interesting not to phase out as the Monoliths provide eavy support.

I just think about another point :

(8) - Remove phase out for Monoliths, decrease its price and allow only half the Monoliths of the army on board at the same time.

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 6 of 17
  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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