PDA

View Full Version : Trying out Necron possible future rules



jspyd3rx
24-11-2010, 12:03
What do you guys think is down the pipe for us? What should we play test for fun that would seem plausible? I would imagine FNP where a res orb would allow the roll and maybe a reroll? Replace gauss rule with rending, though they wouldn't be able to glance a raider like they can now. Gauss weapons should be able to affect everything, so how would you make it deadly like it was in the past? It seems that GW is more than happy to pass around anti-mech with new books.

Thanatos_elNyx
24-11-2010, 12:34
Well Gauss could be effective if it it Glances on a 6 (as now); but with a +1 on the Vehicle Damage chart.

Mozzamanx
24-11-2010, 12:55
I would give Gauss a Rending-lite rule, where rolls to-wound of 6 mean the shot is at -1 AP. This means Warriors can potentially get AP4, Destroyers and Immortals to AP3, and the Staff to AP2. Maybe some funky glancing rule as well.

I'd also change Phase Out into a positive rule! Necrons do not 'break' from failed morale checks, rather they immediately phase out and are placed back into reserves.

Kulgur
24-11-2010, 14:54
Oh look, it's this thread again (http://www.warseer.com/forums/search.php?searchid=2426688)

Phaedron2
24-11-2010, 15:15
and here I was saying " a leaked playtest ehh?" but all I found was wishlisting.

Wishlisting Threads should be closed on the spot.

Cheers

Erwos
24-11-2010, 15:37
Well Gauss could be effective if it it Glances on a 6 (as now); but with a +1 on the Vehicle Damage chart.
Gauss is already effective right as it is. Glancing a vehicle to death is NOT HARD when you're rapid-firing into it with gauss guns. I lost a Land Raider like that a while back!

Lord Damocles
24-11-2010, 17:09
Gauss is already effective right as it is.
Are you sure that you're playing the same Gauss rules? :p

To wreck a Land Raider with no extra weapons will take ~135 shots.

To wreck a Rhino with no extra weapons using glancing hits alone will take ~81 shots.

Yeah.

jspyd3rx
24-11-2010, 17:37
Changed thread title. Never meant to fool anyone. Just wanting to try out what it might be like to play next version of codex. Based in part to popular rumors.

Bonzai
24-11-2010, 17:41
Are you sure that you're playing the same Gauss rules? :p

To wreck a Land Raider with no extra weapons will take ~135 shots.

To wreck a Rhino with no extra weapons using glancing hits alone will take ~81 shots.

Yeah.

I kind of agree that gauss is actually ok as is. It's usefull, but not over powering. However I wouldn't mind it being changed to rending.

As for rules to play test, we really can't say anything definitively. On one hand, you look at the Nid dex, and see the drastic changes that were made, and on the other you look at the Dark Eldar, and it seems like they kept their core the same, yet added a bunch and made it over all better. It is pretty wide open right now.

Flayed 0ne
24-11-2010, 17:42
FEARLESS!!!!....Necrons turning tail and running is the stupidest ***** thing in the world...

Inquisitor_Tolheim
24-11-2010, 18:06
I'd also change Phase Out into a positive rule! Necrons do not 'break' from failed morale checks, rather they immediately phase out and are placed back into reserves.

Interesting, I really like this idea! It makes monoliths even more valuable, and it emphasizes necrons eternal life, non-emotional state without giving ANOTHER army complete immunity to morale tests. I mean honestly some days it feels like morale tests are the exception instead of the rule.

Thanatos_elNyx
25-11-2010, 08:15
Agreed, failed Break Test means phasing out and having to come back from reserves seems like a cool and characterful system.
If Monoliths acted like teleport homers then it would be especially useful.

ehlijen
25-11-2010, 10:09
Needing 81 shots to take out a rhino isn't actually too much worse than a tac squad with a single lascannon. And mass gauss fire has better odds of shaking or stunning a fire support tank in any given turn than a single good AT weapon.

Chem-Dog
25-11-2010, 11:22
Replace gauss rule with rending, though they wouldn't be able to glance a raider like they can now. Gauss weapons should be able to affect everything, so how would you make it deadly like it was in the past? It seems that GW is more than happy to pass around anti-mech with new books.


I presume you mean Land Raider. Because a Gauss weapon with rending instead of Gauss won't be able to glance a Dark Eldar Raider, it'll always bounce off or penetrate.

Personally, I'd go for making Gauss a Rending gun, just to streamline the rules. From what scant rumours we're hearing I doubt any Necron army will have issues with AT weapons for heavier stuff, New units and re-jigged existing units sound like they'll be easily able to deal with Armour 13-14.

FNP is essentially what WBB is, it just happens at a slightly different time, it has the same advantages and weaknesses. The one advantage of FNP over WBB is that it's a save so it directly contributes to deciding who wins a combat.
I can see Res Orb being similar to it's current mode, allowing FNP against hits that would normally dissalow FNP is a big deal. 4+ saves against Ap 1 & 2 shooting and Powerweapon type attacks? Yes please, that's actually better than an Invulnerable save.

The only other rule that I can think of that needs neatening up is Living Metal especially if what we're hearing about new vehicles is true.
I could see them effectively getting a FNP save, can be taken in conjunction with cover saves, it can be voided by high power shots and can be boosted by the Orb. It could just be an inherrent Cover save though.

Thanatos_elNyx
25-11-2010, 11:30
Yeah Living Metal needs simplification.
A simple 4++ save would be cool, though that doesn't represent its repairing powers.

Some other ideas that would be nice (though not all at once)
Make it immune to Stunned and Shaken as it doesn't have a crew.

Maybe give it an additional -1 on the Vehicle Damage Chart

Perhaps it can repair 'Weapon Destroyed' and 'Immobilised' on the roll of a 6 at the start of any of its turns.

Chem-Dog
25-11-2010, 12:03
Yeah Living Metal needs simplification.
A simple 4++ save would be cool, though that doesn't represent its repairing powers.

Rhinos can repair, apply the same/similar principal to Living Metal.

RobPro
26-11-2010, 05:02
Anybody who thinks Gauss is fine now doesn't remember how it used to work. I wish it was as effective now as back in 3rd/4th edition.

ehlijen
26-11-2010, 10:11
Anybody who thinks Gauss is fine now doesn't remember how it used to work. I wish it was as effective now as back in 3rd/4th edition.

That's what you say. I say that those who say Gauss was nerfed since then aren't taking into account that vehicles were supposed to get tougher from 4th to 5th, against everything, including gauss. Nor do they remember that there are several other AT options are available which gauss is meant to support, not replace.

Vehicles exploding left, right centre at the slightest pinprick was the norm in 4th ed. If it wasn't a falcon-eq or hammerhead (ie could move fast enough for glancings only and still shoot everything) it wouldn't live to see turn 3 75% of the time.

Gauss is not meant to easily destroy vehicles anymore. Little else is either.

Thanatos_elNyx
26-11-2010, 11:13
Nor do they remember that there are several other AT options are available...
There really isn't.

The H. Gauss Cannon is a Lascannon that is overcosted; almost as much as an obliterator without the versatility nor the Inv Save (though does have speed).

The Monolith should be beaming dudes about the place.

And that is it for shooting.

ehlijen
26-11-2010, 11:31
The Heavy cannon is a move and shoot lascannon of speed few armies can rival. Most weapons of that caliber have been going up in price lately, so it doesn't compare that badly anymore.

If the monolith wasn't meant to shoot it's nice big pie plate, why does it have it?

Regular gauss cannon are good for anything up to AV11, and then gauss decent against the AV13+.

You also have wraiths strking back armour with S6 after moving really fast, scarabs with disruption fields (which can be given to other units too, but yes, they're best on scarabs) and you have warscythes with 2d6 to armour penetration as well as tomb spyders in combat.

stonehorse
26-11-2010, 11:57
Gauss needs rending, not for AT, which we already have enough of, what we need it for is for the AP, as it is we struggle to get through anything with an Armour save of 3+ or 2+. Other armies can take things such as Plasma, melta, etc to give their troops a slight punch against heavily armoured models.

I can see Feel no Pain being given, which is both good and bad. Good as it is easier to explain and quicker to play, bad as it means we are now not as tough as we are to shooting.

I can also see Necrons getting Night Vision, after all they aren't organic, they would see things in a very different way to how organic creatures see. I'd also like to see some sort of buffer against poison... again, being made out of all metal with no frail organic parts means that poison is the least of our worries.

Either way the Codex is old and showing its age, the one thing we can do to scare opponents is Destroyer Spam lists. 2 Destroyer Lords, 15 Destroyers, and 9 Heavy Destroyers... I've fielded these lists before and they do work, very well I may add.

RobPro
26-11-2010, 16:00
Who is this "we" that has enough AT? For an army with no transports and only one vehicle, it is incredibly hard to deal with opponent transports/vehicles. Vehicles being tougher in general should not reduce Gauss weaponry's capability of killing vehicles, which was designed to be able to destroy tanks. Read the gauss rule, the benefit in shooting to units with a toughness value is nothing compare to what it does to vehicles. Giving it rending is completely changing the role the Gauss rule was designed to fill, and I don't like that idea.

The entire army is pointed with "vehicle destroyed" in mind on the glance table, without it you are pretty much paying 25% more points than the troops are worth. Same thing with disruption fields.

Kamenwati
27-11-2010, 00:57
Rending might work but has anyone actually tried playing with them like that in friendly games? Just curious to see if they found the change particularly game changing or how they think it should affect the points cost.

I have seen some suggest an increase in toughness and a decrease in armor save would be a good fix for the Necrons and I whole heartedly disagree. There are too many high strength weapons in the game that the severe loss of being able to take saves vs. the minor increase in difficulty to wound them wound not be a good trade off. Necrons should not be skulking through terrain to avoid getting blasted by high volumes of ap4 fire.

Rather I would see a decrease in toughness and an increase in armor save being both fluffy and still a step in making them not Space Marine stats. This would allow them to stride across the field absorbing the kinds of hideous firepower they are supposed to while still making them vulnerable to massed attacks both melee and ranged. Remember their armored shell is supposed to be nigh indestructible but the components underneath are much more fragile.