Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Necron review

 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:48 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189

(Moscovian @ Oct. 21 2006,23:14)
QUOTE
Or we could make the WE's pay for their hits like everyone else. ?Sheesh! ? How much whining can there be in relation to the AMTL list?!

Titans DESERVE to be attacked more times under the +1 per unit rule. ?They benefit in so many ways that a regular formation of infantry or tanks cannot. ?One specific way is that they can fight at full strength even when they have 1/8th their original DC. ?There are a dozen other things that titans can do that other regular formations cannot.

Ilushia, you can't possibly think your suggestion really makes sense in light of all the benefits the AMTL (and WEs in general) have? ?I understand it is your favorite (only?) army, but come on now... ???

I'm all for dialing down the Necron, but not in this manner.

Well this is true, and kindof a low way of putting it though, but the reasoning for my suggestion is two-fold: One, it better follows teh way their weaponry works in 40K, and the second is a little more complicated.

In Epic normally a Monolith will only get a shot per enemy within 15cm of them and inside the assault, if they're teleported in say 10 cm from the enemy's line, incase the enemy gets first-move and decides to walk away or shoot at them or something similar, then they're likely to only get shots at 2-3 units, maybe 3-4 depending on how big the unit in question is. If, on the other hand, they're within 15cm of ANY part of a War Engine they get full attacks for it's DC. While fighting infantry they'll (Unless teleported in almost directly ontop of them, which is quite a bit of a gamble for the Necrons. Usually you'll want to avoid getting them in position where they're looking at risking a counter-assault or the like) it's unlikely they'll see more then a few hits from them. An 8 DC war engine, faced with a Necron Monolith and a basic Phalanx is looking at roughly 6 hits against it. An infantry company is probably likely to see only 4 against them. Even a tank company will see a fairly small number of hits. This isn't just about AMTL either, it's about ALL the war engines. Think Ork war engines: Orks get WEs inside their formations. If I teleport my monolith in so that I get a Battlewagon within it's range, it's total attacks go up by 3 just for having any part of that one model within range. That's an average of 1 extra hit for having the WE in range compared to not. You see it in other places too.

It just doesn't feel right to me, as it makes Monoliths rediculously good against war engines in general, especially mixed war-engine/infantry formations. It's also a departure from the style of the weapon. Necrons have plenty of things good against war engines already (Aeonic Orb, Nightbringer, combined assaults from 2-3 different infantry units through teleportation and similar means), do they really need another one? And does them having that one suit their style and abilities?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
While I agree the Monolith attacks are not without crontroversy, I don't believe tailoring them to meet WE combat is the way to go.  
WEs represent a small part of Epic, so the Monoliths IMO should be balanced against infantry and armor primarily, and let the chips fall where they may regarding WEs.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Lion in the Stars @ Oct. 23 2006,00:22)
QUOTE
As much as possible, I'd like to keep the various systems functioning similarly between the two games. ?This makes it easier to convert people to the real game. ?You'll get a lot of questions about this from 40k players, since right now Gauss Flux Arcs work completely differently in Epic than in 40k. ?My way they still work similarly (40k: ?every enemy unit gets d6 shots, Epic: ?every enemy unit gets 1 attack)

My experience about Warmaster is clear : it is always dangerous to try to import rules from one system (WFB for example) to another (Warmaster). The main danger is to forget the basic mechanism of the targeted system and to make it more complicated or unbalanced.
Two games, two different systems.  :laugh:

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
I'd like to add to this list a simplification (And better representation, IMHO) of Living Metal for opinions... I'm not sure how many people will like it, but here goes:

I noticed, while fielding my Imperator against an Aeonic Orb, that units which rely on TK weapons a lot really get hosed by Living Metal. Especially those with TK weapons above D3. Think Deathstrike Missiles. Also those with multiple TK D3 shots tended to get hurt a lot. Their potential damage drops from something like 3d3 to 3. So my suggestion's fairly simple: Let Living Metal take Reinforced Armor saves against TK weapons, but let TK weapons get their multiple hits off against Living Metal targets. For D3 shot weapons this doesn't average much better (Your average number of hits is 2, and the rate of failure is half what it is now for all Living Metal units....) Meanwhile TK1 weapons and TKD6 weapons will have their effectivenesses comparatively normalized. Deathstrike Missiles will have a very good chance of toasting a Monolith in a single shot (Shouldn't they? THey're essentially micro-nukes after all.) but an Aeonic Orb or Abattoir should just shrug off the attack, taking 2-3 DC but surviving it fairly handily.

I'm sure I posted this once or twice before. But I figure I'll put it out here in the necron review thread... This also has the handy feature of making Living Metal a bit easier to understand (Given how many posts I've seen on here of "How does LIving Metal actually work with regards to TK weapons" this seems good to me). And it seems to fit the 'style' of living metal better, IMHO. Living Metal doesn't make attacks any less powerful, it's just much better at surviving what DOES hit it. It's essentially immune to most of the best armor-penetration effects, but a weapon capable of puting out huge amounts of fire is still going to have a very good chance of penetrating it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:55 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
The solution to the Necron shouldn't be an Uber-weapon, but lots of shots. :p

Besides, changing Living Metal that was is overly complicated.  Bumping weapon types down one step is easier and faster.

and let's face it... it's a LOT better than it used to be.

Back in the origional list Jervis had it ignore EVERYTHING.  MW, TK, LANCE.. all of it took the full RA save.

At least this way TK weapons only have to get through one save, and one is all you need.


I'm fine with caping the extra attacks for the monolith.

The question is:  What should the cap be?

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:36 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(corey3750 @ Oct. 24 2006,03:55)
QUOTE
I'm fine with caping the extra attacks for the monolith.

The question is: ?What should the cap be?

Hum... Sorry but what is "caping"? Restricting?

I think that the main problem could be against WE : a way to restrict the Monolith extra-attacks is to consider WE as DC/2 units (round up) and not DC units.

Support from Monoliths is very important for Necrons during assaults where they are not numerous and can't launch a joint assault with several formations at once.
In addition, Monoliths are easily demoralized...
So I would not fix the number of attacks.

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(fbruntz @ Oct. 24 2006,07:36)
QUOTE
So I would not fix the number of attacks.

I definitely would.

If the Monolith stays at 75 points, I think +4 extra attacks would be nice (alternatively, we could also try +3 attacks at FF4+).

As I said in a previous thread, it would actually make it a bit better against small formations but would prevent them from getting 10+ attacks against horde formations (Orks, Tyranids, Guard).

This also makes it easier to set a cost on the Monolith, as it now has a fixed number of attacks in every situation.






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:00 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Hena @ Oct. 24 2006,10:03)
QUOTE

(Hojyn @ Oct. 24 2006,10:12)
QUOTE
As I said in a previous thread, it would actually make it a bit better against small formations but would prevent them from getting 10+ attacks against horde formations (Orks, Tyranids, Guard).


I still fail to see the problem in this (especially on bolded bit).

Doesn't it strike you as a bit too much? Should a 75 points AV be able to get as many attacks as, say, a Gargant ?

If you think it should, fair enough (after all barrages work better against hordes as well), but are you OK with the 75 points, then ?

Personally, it think a fixed number of attacks would be less open to abuse and avoid confusing situations in intermingled/combined assaults.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Here is my take: fixing the monoliths at a set number of extra attacks is a mistake.  As it stands you can clip monoliths quite easily with virtually no retribution possible.  
A cap on the extra attacks I think would work fine, although it may make things a bit hinky.  Write it as +1 extra attacks per unit in range (max 6 units).  This means that 2 units in an assault won't be attacked back 3 times over.  

But -once again- the removal of scout from the obelisk changes things significantly for fighting the Necron.  No longer can a Monolith formation force an assault by 'circling the wagons'.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:15 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

If the Monoliths don't represent a great danger, opponents will not try to demoralize them and it will be impossible to redeploy them.

Let's try a limit (+8 units max should be fine) or a fixed number of attacks (+5 attacks perhaps) but we should not forget that the Mononiths must stay a great danger for the enemy.

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
I'd be in favor of capping it at +6. Which seems about the right number to me. Giving them a fixed +5 makes them better against elite units (Which really isn't what they're in the list for), giving them an unlimited cap seems to make them too good against huge hordes. +6 seems large enough to make it a big difference against most enemies. The only places you're likely to see that cap actually come into effect is when you're dead-center of a very large formation, or fighting a very high-DC war engine (Like a Great Gargant or a Warlord). Well at least when it denies a lot of attacks, theoretically even a Space Marine Tactical Formation could do it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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