Page 1 of 1

[ 15 posts ]

Harvester Engines II
Hojyn	Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:22 am
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am Posts: 876 Location: Brest - France	Ok, I like the new and improved versions of the Orb and Abattoir, but I still think they lack something. To quote Corey from another thread: It may seem artifical, but I really think they need a way to survive the first turn. And how about doing something to make them harder to break or easier to rally ? ? Really, at the moment I think the Orb and Abattoir (the only 2 non-teleporting Necron War Engines) need just a little something for them to become competitive. * They are very powerful, each in its own category. * They are tough as nuts, thanks to Living Metal. Destroying one of them in the first two turns requires a lot of shooting and some bad luck on the part of the Necron player. * BUT they are huge targets (especially the Abattoir, which has to to go forwards) and break a bit too easily in my opinion. Here are a few suggestions: - make Living Metal units ignore BM received from being shot at (probably to strong); - make Living Metal units ignore the "enemy within 30cm" -1 modifier to rallying (I like this one as it would not make Monolith stronger, since broken Monolith automatically disappear); - make Living Metal units ignore the "being broken" -2 modifier to rallying (I *really* like this one, but I'm afraid it may be a bit too strong); - make the Orb and Abattoir 8DC each (I like it, but it has the additionnal "problem" of making both WE much more efficient in assaults); - make the Abattoir 8DC and leave the Orb at 6DC (probably better, as the Abattoir needs the help more than the Orb); - er... that's all I can think of right now, really. ? What do you think?

Top

Ilushia	Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:59 am
Brood Brother Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am Posts: 1189	How about 'a formation comprised entirely of units with Living Metal ignore additional blast-markers for being fired on by BP weapons, and any weapon fired on them lose Disrupt'? Necron vehicles seem like they'd be far less worried about a bunch of big missiles which plink off their hull then most other war-engines or the like. It's short, it's easy, it rarely affects Monoliths at all, unless they have no Obelisks, in which case they break just by coming under fire. And frankly if the enemy points enough stuff at you to break you from weight of fire or from DC delt, he probably deserves to break you! He'd have to point, most likely, at least 2 very good AT formations at a harvester engine to have any real chance of breaking it. Something like two Russ formations, or two Falcon formations or the like. Something with very very good AT fire, to be able to place 6 blast markers in 2 activations, on average. Which would require doing 4 DC worth of damage to one of these things, which sucks no matter what kind of war engine you are. Dunno if that'd be sufficient, what do you people think?
Top

Chroma	Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:09 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm Posts: 9684 Location: Montréal, QC, Canada	I'd say just have living metal ignore disrupt should be fine.  Having the ability to ignore the various rally modifiers would be way too powerful with 1+ initiative. With the ability to ignore disrupt would mean that only Tau could rapidly break a Harvester Engine through just shooting BMs... by using *6* of their formations in two sequential Co-ordinated Fire attacks. The thing is, why is this seen as such a huge problem?  All war engines can suffer from this and, I've found, is often a good way to deal with them if one doesn't have a lot of TK weapons. _________________ "EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top

Hojyn	Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:44 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am Posts: 876 Location: Brest - France	Quote (Chroma @ 17 June 2006 (13:09)) The thing is, why is this seen as such a huge problem? ?All war engines can suffer from this and, I've found, is often a good way to deal with them if one doesn't have a lot of TK weapons. Well, I see this as a problem for Necrons because the Orb and Abattoir are the only units in the Necron army that must start the game on the table, meaning one of two things happen: - you deploy your Orb/Abattoir and keep the rest of the army in reserve, not wanting to attack the whole of the opponent's army at once and preferring to let him scatter his troops around. The Orb/Abattoir being the only target for this turn, it is invariably broken and you then have 1 chance in 2 not to rally it. This is worse for the Abattoir because it can't even fire at something before breaking. - you deploy most/all of your army on the table in order to give more targets to your opponent, thus sacrifying the Necrons' main strength: teleported and coordinated assaults. Now you can use your 750 points toy, but the rest of the army is too slow to help it (even portal synchronisation won't help you that much, since you need 2 portals for each formation you teleport). Hence my proposal for more resilient Harvester engines.
Top

Ilushia	Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:02 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am Posts: 1189	I'd just go for ignoring Disrupt weapons then... It seems the primary complaint, though, is that there's nowhere for you to hide your war-engines. which may itself be partly a result of you using drastically larger ones then they're supposed to be. Corey's Aeonic Orb for instance is only about as tall as a Reaver (Maybe slightly taller due to the flying base it sits on). So he hid it behind a hill for the first turn and didn't come out for me to shoot at until the second (Admittedly I had no Indirect Fire weapons!). Really, though, breaking them via damage is kinda rare... You need to deal quite a lot of damage to them. The Abottoir is a legitimate concern, since it has to close with the enemy. Personally I'd set up 1-2 'cheap' formations of Necron Warriors out there, phalanx formations, on turn 1 to tempt my enemy into attacking them. Garrison them with the Tomb Complex. Give the enemy a few things to shoot at. At 225 points that's not a huge investment to field 2 of them. and give the enemy better targets. Shoot the in-cover war-engine or the not-in-cover infantry formations?
Top

Hojyn

Post subject: Harvester Engines II Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:15 pm

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

Quote (Ilushia @ 17 June 2006 (15:02)) I'd just go for ignoring Disrupt weapons then... It seems the primary complaint, though, is that there's nowhere for you to hide your war-engines. which may itself be partly a result of you using drastically larger ones then they're supposed to be. Admittedly, my Orb and Abattoir are quite big, but that's not reallly a problem since we always consider terrain to block LOS, not matter the size of the unit. So a Titan behind a hill can't be seen, even if the actual model is much taller than the hill. So he hid it behind a hill for the first turn and didn't come out for me to shoot at until the second (Admittedly I had no Indirect Fire weapons!). Well, the Orb does have the advantage of being able to stay behind a hill all game. Really, though, breaking them via damage is kinda rare... You need to deal quite a lot of damage to them.

Yes, but breaking them by simply firing at them is relatively easy and they're the only unit on the table. Disrupt or not, shooting with 6 formations at the only opposing formation is not that hard... or perhaps I play against Imperial Guard too much.

Personally I'd set up 1-2 'cheap' formations of Necron Warriors out there, phalanx formations, on turn 1 to tempt my enemy into attacking them. Garrison them with the Tomb Complex.

I tried that, but Phalanxes are really no threat at all outside of assaults (firing at 15cm max doesn't help ), so my opponent just ignored them and concentrated on breaking my Abattoir.

I don't know, perhaps I haven't been using the good tactics, but both Harverster engines seem to lack a little something.