Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 7 of 17
  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 17  Next

Necron 4.2 - comments
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
We should be careful with changes as the Necrons army list works pretty well.


The list works so well, I've never seen it lose. :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
fbruntz
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 232
Location: Lyon, France

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 15 2007,09:47)
QUOTE
We should be careful with changes as the Necrons army list works pretty well.


The list works so well, I've never seen it lose. :)

I did. So?  :cool:

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
What did it lose against?

In my experience, the Necron list has some serious advantages versus horde-type armies.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 3:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
It is easy - but it contradicts the portal functions from the Eldar and the Necrons would never recover from it.

What about formations that use a 'broken' portal picking up an extra BM?  Of course, that flies in the face of the Eldar too, but it seems like an interesting idea for both lists IMO and would certainly affect the Necrons more than the Eldar (with only one unit affected from their list).

Keep in mind the 4.2 changes corrected the Necrons quite well, so we should be looking for something that will nudge them a little further, not break the list in the other direction.  Removing the portal function when broken or taking away the teleport function strikes me as too radical of a change.

Fbruntz, can explain why you think the Necrons need a cheaper SC in light of them getting a nerf on their initiative?  I don't disagree necessarily, it is just I don't follow the logic.  Personally, I like the pricing on the C'tan and the Warbarque and they should remain as is.  The C'tan are a great combination of vulnerable and deadly, while the Warbarque is more defensive but less effective.

Probably the most effective idea is the initiative change.
If you give the Warriors, Destroyers, and Flayed Ones an initiative of 2+, the Necron player would not always get his way on the Turn 2 'Circle the Wagons' move.  An inexperienced player would suffer the consequences while an experienced player would be inclined to make more limited, conservative attacks.
You would see the Necron player using the +1 Marshall ability because now he risks activating on a 3+ with a BM. This in turn would encourage more defensive play for the Necrons and reduce their flexibility slightly.  The Destroyers get a nerf which they need.  The Flayed Ones.... Well, I threw them in there just because they are infantry and it would make things consistent, but they really don't need the nerf.

_________________
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  
 
corey3750
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:18 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
ok, just to get it out of the way real quick.

Gaze of Death:  Capped at +6 attacks.

I wave my magic wand and it is so!


Ok.

Now the problem with a lot of people who play against the Necron is a simple refusual to acknowledge that it requires a fundemental reassesment of your army deployment and early game strategy.

If you have a crappy Strategy rating:  Your best option is to hunker down.  You deploy your Formations tightly together, with overlapping support.  Garrison everything your can and slap it on overwatch.  Make sure that any Scout units you have are deployed on the outer edge of your army to act as a screen.  Basically, you force whoever comes in to assault you face most if not all of your army at once.

You are just going to have to acknowledge that you will probably lose the first roll off, and you'll just have to be patient.

It's a really scary thing to see the Imperial guard do.  Could you imagine the Necron charging in from a Monolith, only to get nailed from the Overwatch fire of a Manticore Detatchement?  That would end most assaults before they even start.


But anyway, let me get back to the real reason I'm posting.  I'm heading off on Vacation today (first in 3 years), and so I thought I'd hand off a few items for you guys to ponder while I'm gone.  These are ideas I've been kicking around for a while now, but I wanted to resolve some more pressing issues first.

1.)  Necron Strategy Rating: 1 (Supreme Commander unit makes Strategy rating 3).

What does this mean?  I guess it's in everyone's best intrest to get a Supreme Commander isn't it?  It also means that if you lose that Supreme Commander your army begins to suffer.

My Reasoning:  The vast majority of Necrons aren't really all that bright.  Mostly because they were forcibly transformed.  Only those who went willingly, or the C'tan themselves are really intelligent enough to grasp "the big picture" strategically speaking.

2.)  Initiative 2+ on Phalanx, Obelisk, Monolith, and Pylons.

My reasoning:  Not the most self motivated bunch I think.


3.)  Pylons cannot claim Objectives.

My reasoning:  They can't move!  How do you expect them to secure anything?


Let me know what you think.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Although playtesting is in order, I think the ideas are worthy.  The variable Strategy Rating is clever and really forces you to be careful with your SC (which I like since the C'tan are downright wicked).  I wish I had thought of that... :;):

The initiative change is different from what I proposed in the specifics, but certainly similar enough for me to swallow.  My only concern is fluffwise: what is more likely to follow orders properly, a Monolith/Obelisk or a group of Destroyers/Flayed Ones?  The higher the number of individuals, the higher the chance for disorganization, but maybe there is something in the fiction I don't know about it would make sense.  I'll leave that up to you folks.

And while the Pylon objective restriction makes sense, I would say it isn't needed.  The Pylon isn't difficult to break, still exerts a level of control because of its firepower and assault abilities, and it just adds another rule.  Besides, has this really been the problem people have with Pylons?

Good ideas, Corey.  Enjoy the (well deserved) vacation.

_________________
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: Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 232
Location: Lyon, France

(Moscovian @ Jun. 15 2007,15:02)
QUOTE
Fbruntz, can explain why you think the Necrons need a cheaper SC in light of them getting a nerf on their initiative? ?I don't disagree necessarily, it is just I don't follow the logic. ?Personally, I like the pricing on the C'tan and the Warbarque and they should remain as is. ?The C'tan are a great combination of vulnerable and deadly, while the Warbarque is more defensive but less effective.

Well, that's simple.

To be effective, Necrons must retain (?) initiative :

1- Deploy 2 Monoliths next to the target
2- First activation : a phalanx gets out of one Monolith in order to fire and to move on support position
3- Second activation : a second phalanx launches an assault against the target with support of the first phalanx and the two monoliths (if they are not broken).

The point 3. is on a 2+ activation, if it's a failure the whole assault is a down and the Necron player leaves one of his precious phalanxes in trouble.
If the initiative of the phalanxes become 2+, the point 3. is on a 3+ activation. The risk is high and a SC is needed. But Necron SC are very expensive : you can't deploy a Orb/Abattoir and a C'Tan in a 3000 points army...
Of course the Warbarque changes this but I don't know if the unit will survive very long in the army list ;) (and don't forget to mail me a picture of yours for the Codex N?crons  :D ).

Evil and Chaos wrote :
What did it lose against?


Many times against Eldars. One lose against Tyranids and one draw against Lost & Damned.

In my experience, the Necron list has some serious advantages versus horde-type armies.

With the +6 cap, the advantage is down.

Corey has well explained the problem of many players against Necrons.

Corey wrote :
1.)  Necron Strategy Rating: 1 (Supreme Commander unit makes Strategy rating 3).
What does this mean?  I guess it's in everyone's best intrest to get a Supreme Commander isn't it?  It also means that if you lose that Supreme Commander your army begins to suffer.
My Reasoning:  The vast majority of Necrons aren't really all that bright.  Mostly because they were forcibly transformed.  Only those who went willingly, or the C'tan themselves are really intelligent enough to grasp "the big picture" strategically speaking.

Why not.

2.)  Initiative 2+ on Phalanx, Obelisk, Monolith, and Pylons.
My reasoning:  Not the most self motivated bunch I think.

I dislike that but I can test of course.

3.)  Pylons cannot claim Objectives.
My reasoning:  They can't move!  How do you expect them to secure anything?

Good point. That's good for me.

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
corey3750
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
has there been much testing on this with the proposed changes?

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
tv1013
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 148
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
I've been playing a game with the Monolith capped at +6 attacks, and Obelisks at 5+ RA and no scout.

So far, there's no complaints from my opponent, but due to the real world getting in the way, we've only played 2 1/2 turns in the past three weeks.

The initial shock of "Oh my gosh, the Monolith gets six shots?" from good deployment on my part quickly changed to "Hey, with a FF of 5+, they're not that scary".

I'm only running four Monolith/Obelisk pairs, I plan on testing it with 5 pairs, and maybe 8 pairs.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
None here since the one game with the Warbarque, but I anticipate another game in the next few weeks.  Did you want us to playtest it with the variable strategyt rating and initiative changes?   Personally I think the initiative changes should be on infantry.  It will have the desired effect with the army IMO.

_________________
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  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
My bro really liked the idea of variable strategy ratings, but he's busy on my group's normal Epic night, unfortunately.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:25 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Out of curiosity, has anyone tried a Monolith popcorn army in a playtest?

A Phalanx and 3 Monoliths is 450 points for 4 formations.  You could have 20 formations plus a Warbarque SC, plus some points left over at 2700 points.  You could easily shift that to come in at 20 formations (Warbarque, 5 Phalanx, 14 Monoliths) and make sure your SC was not your BTS goal.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I don't think anyone wants to spend the time making that many Monoliths. :)

I think somebody awhile ago tried it and slaughtered their opponent, but it was probably around version 4.1 or even before (no cap on the attacks).  If it is that worrisome you can always cap the number of monoliths to match the number of Phalanx formations or something to that effect.

_________________
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  
 
corey3750
 Post subject: Necron 4.2 - comments
PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:10 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
I tried a popcorn army before.  I shattered it with IG, Eldar and Marine armies, one after the other
:)

_________________
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  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 7 of 17
  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 17  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 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