Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 12
  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 12  Next

Necrons 4.3
tv1013
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 148
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Not a problem, this thread is a flurry of activity  :)

#2 was what I was leaning towards, also.  Thanks!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Attack Bikes have a standard statline in 40k yet are Light Vehicles.

Likewise, Wraithlords have a standard statline in 40k yet are Armoured Vehicles.


So there is room for interpretation here, and I think it would fix the problem without having to touch the firepower (Which is about right).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
E&C, If you're the editor then you have a deadline that is up in 24 hours.  Better get crackin'. :D

Corey, I echo E&C's comments about clarifying the regneration.  People who have been religiously playing the Necrons mentioned completely different views on the 4.2 thread.  We're not talking newbies here.  If the so-called experts are misinterpreting it then it needs to be cleared up.

For the record I don't like the LV destroyer change.  Changing the armament makes more sense for a few reasons:
1. They aren't LVs.  Those of you who advocate the 'feel' of the list being a prominent part of the list should appreciate this.

2. The ability to regenerate means the Destroyer having a higher vulnerability with the LV status means they aren't nearly as vulnerable.

3. Changing them to LVs means people with existing models will have to change their models to one per base instead of the 2-4 per base.  I am NOT pleased with this prospect at all.

4.  The problem isn't them dying.  The problem is that anything that they shoot at dies.   There is so much firepower coming out of these fast moving skimmers that they annihilate their targets.

Fast attack pieces like these should not be the heaviest hitting non-WE in the list.

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(Evil and Chaos @ Oct. 31 2007,11:09)
QUOTE
Attack Bikes have a standard statline in 40k yet are Light Vehicles.

Likewise, Wraithlords have a standard statline in 40k yet are Armoured Vehicles.


So there is room for interpretation here, and I think it would fix the problem without having to touch the firepower (Which is about right).

Wraithlords are also considered a Monstrous creature, and those are all Vehicles or WE.

Marine attack bikes shouldn't be LV.

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
By the way, I disagree chancing the initiatives will increase lone monoliths.  People won't want them because they will break on teleportation, so people will tend to bring reinforced Monolith formations regardless of initiative.

Initiative changes to ANYTHING will help balance this list with the auto-rally removed now.  I made some suggestions on the infantry getting the change above (sheesh, three people posted in the time I wrote up my last post!).

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Marine attack bikes shouldn't be LV.


Yes they should.

Specifically, they have to be because SG only sells one per pack.


Destroyers should be LV's too, I hope you consider it for 4.3.1... if you want an editor that is! Mwahahahah!!!




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Hey genius editor, it would be 4.3.1 if you're keeping track.

When pride cometh, then cometh shame. But with the lowly there is wisdom. :)




_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I edited my post. :D

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
corey3750
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(Moscovian @ Oct. 31 2007,11:29)
QUOTE
By the way, I disagree chancing the initiatives will increase lone monoliths.  People won't want them because they will break on teleportation, so people will tend to bring reinforced Monolith formations regardless of initiative.

Initiative changes to ANYTHING will help balance this list with the auto-rally removed now.  I made some suggestions on the infantry getting the change above (sheesh, three people posted in the time I wrote up my last post!).

ah, but it will.

A lone Monolith has a 1 in 6 chance of breaking.  If it breaks, it still works the turn it appears as a portal.

you can have 4 lone Monoliths for the cost of a fully upgraded monolith formation.  If that bigger unit gets broken, you only have a 50% chance of getting a portal back on the table, with 4 you are virtually certain to get at least 1 portal back into play.  

I know that I'd take virtual certainty over a 50% chance every time.  Especially with a formation as important to the Necron Army as a portal.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:00 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
It works just like the void shield rule... and unless I'm mistaken it's in there.


As has been pointed out previously, you are mistaken.  It does not work just like the void shield rule.

Regrouping and rallying are separate methods for removing BMs.  The Void Shield rules cannot use a normal end-phase rally to regenerate.  Void shields only regenerate when a titan regroups.  Emphasis added:

Void shields that have been knocked down can
be repaired. Each Titan can repair one downed
void shield in the end phase of each turn. In
addition, if a Titan regroups it can use the dice
roll to either repair the void shield or remove
Blast markers (eg, if you rolled a 2 you could
repair 2 shields, remove 2 Blast markers or
repair 1 shield and remove 1 Blast marker).

There is no precedent for using a normal rally to regenerate.  That "normal rally" regeneration is the source of confusion in the Necron rule.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
corey3750
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD

(nealhunt @ Oct. 31 2007,13:00)
QUOTE
As has been pointed out previously (and repeatedly), you are mistaken.  It does not work just like the void shield rule.

and as I have been repeatedly trying explain to you the MECHANIC is what is identical, not the entirety of the rule.  In fact I was reading the paragraph as I was typing it out so that it was almost verbatim.

Though I should just put it as "when it regroups".  Honestly though I thought if I didn't spell it out that it meant both in taking a Marshall or Hold action there'd be confusion.

the ONLY difference between the two rules is what happens in the end phase.  Void shields get one for free, the Necron have to make a rally roll to get any.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:14 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Synchronized portals:  Can a Necron force use this in a consolidation move?  As the rule is written, the answer would be "yes" as long as the formation is within 15cm of the exit portal.  You might make the case that "part of any activation that allows movement" would mean that it only applies if the Necron formation is activated but it could still be used after an offensive attack.  Obviously, it would only be a 5cm exit, but it could be useful.

Teleport 2 Monoliths near one target and another near a second target.  Activation 1:  Assault out of one Monolith portal with a Phalanx (or whatever), consolidate into the second portal, exit the third.  Activation 2:  Assault with the third Monolith, with the Phalanx/whatever in support.

On a less offense-oriented note, it could also be used as a simple withdrawal technique to keep the Phalanx from being vulnerable to a counterstrike.  Only the Fearless/LM/Gaus Flux Monoliths would be left.


Destroyer LV:  This could work.  It would, however, require changing the Portal rules to accomodate LVs.


Pylon:  Not claiming objectives would be okay.  No ZoC opens up the door for some weirdness.  Any formation, no matter the size, could pull the old Scout/ZoC trick against a Pylon and prevent it from attacking.  I can think of lots of cases where that would be more than worth it, even at the risk of the Pylon's Flux Arc attack.  For a formation down to just 1-2 units, that Guass Flux Arc is not a big deal.


C'Tan:  Is the critical really supposed to be an automatic MW hit with a 3d6 radius?  That is a big, honking radius of damage.  In fact, it's so much damage that I think I'd be rooting for the enemy to get a critical so I could go all "death blossom" on them.  That's not quite as good as the former Baneblade rampage critical, but it's not exactly a poor result for the C'Tan.  If you were reasonably close to the enemy, a critical would more than compensate for the 300 point loss of the C'Tan.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:41 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

(corey3750 @ Oct. 30 2007,18:46)
QUOTE
the ONLY difference between the two rules is what happens in the end phase.

That "ONLY difference" in the end phase is the source of the entire problem.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I've had the C'tans go critical on me twice.  Once it took out about 500 points of Space Marines.  Another time it took out two Monoliths and 1 1/2 Phalanx and one Lemun Russ.
While it was crazy to see the equivalent of a nuclear explosion in the middle of an assault it was still kinda fun.... Even when it was my stuff going up in smoke.

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 12
  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 12  Next


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