Moscovian wrote:
The Necrons can be played successfully in a fresh way, but to do so requires a lot of thinking outside the box, a robust model collection, and a level of play that most Necron players don't bring to their game. Am I saying that Necron players are bad Epic players? No. However, I do believe most players get used to the relative safety that certain tactics bring (in and out of the portals, for instance) and tend to fight the same way every game.
I think this might go back to how Necrons stomp all over new opponents. I think that's an even bigger issue, to be honest - I'd much prefer a design the the Necron player was the one who had to figure out his army, not his opponents. As it is now you can get complacent because you figure out how to play them and win a lot (maybe enough to feel a bit bad about it) and at some point you stop winning. This could create a weird start-stop-start dynamic to learning how to play necrons.
Quote:
However, I think you are trying to solve something that may not need solving. You have a wide variety of results and experiences with the army that averages out to be rather even when viewed from afar. How is this a bad thing?
Because the swings are so extreme. The goal isn't for the Necrons to win 50% of all games, it's for each individual game to be as exciting and tactically challenging as possible. Around a 50% win rate is a necessary condition for this, but not a sufficient one - as it stands quite a few of the victories are blowouts vs new opponents, which are no fun for them and shouldn't be fun for you. (What, you enjoy pwning n00bs? Go play on xbox live! Then they can't punch you for being obnoxious.)
If necrons are underpowered or balanced between two veteran players is actually a bit immaterial for this. The way to fix it is to nerf some aspect of the army, but that would have negative consequences for games where both players know the necrons. Like Kyrt says, the advantages are obvious, but the weaknesses are subtle. I'm a bit stumped on how to address this.
GlynG wrote:
I suggested Ulrik try getting some online games in with us to help get a better picture and understanding. There's not a Necron army in Tabletop yet but I plan on doing an army pack for them in around a couple of weeks.
I'll definetly play a bit (not too much, though - i hate reserving an entire evening for internet stuff. Did enough of that when I raided in WoW, if I'm making plans I want to meet people face to face.)
On to different stuff: Apart from more high-level issues like the overall balance issues, I think Pylons are a bit of a problem - vulnerable to suppression, sole source of AA and taking up both a support slot AND war engine points allowance. Quick fix is to give them Leader and move them out of the support slots (letting Necrons rely less on the Warrior phalanxes who specialize in portal assaults). Is it worth testing this and changing it, or should the list be left alone?