Armour is actually the same (4+), but I see the rest of your points.


I wanted them in twos so they wouldn't be spamable, but they certainly don't have to. It's not common in epic, but I can't really see a reason why they couldn't be done as singles. If they were to be costed at 200 pts each, then they wouldn't be all that spamable.

I will have to think about that.

Played a 3000pt game of Steel Legion vs Necron Sautekh.
Posted results here:
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=28041

I really like how the necrons played in our game. Like the changes to the infantry saves, monoliths and gates.
We played with the necron flyers (2 units of Night Scythes and 1 unit of Shroud Bombers), they are a very cool addition to the Necron list.

The infantry seem good where they are (although there may need to be some point cost tweaking). The monoliths are toned down and seemed more reasonable but I still have a beef with Living Metal as it relates to ignoring Macro and Titan Killer. My fix would be to have Living Metal read something like this so it doesn't totally nerf Macro and Titan Killer:
Living Metal
Units made of living metal receive a Reinforced Armor saving throw against normal weapons, lance weapons, and even Macro and Titan Killer weapons. In addition, their save is not reduced by sniper abilities. Any Titan Killer attacks are automatically reduced to Titan Killer (1) when resolving hits against Living Metal units. Living Metal units are permitted a Reinforced Armor saving throw against Macro and Titan Killer but the reinforced armor roll is modified (-1 for Macro weapons and -2 for Titan Killer weapons).

My current beef with the list relates to the flyers abilities which seem overpowered when compared to other lists air units. In our game in which I had 2 Thunderbolts on CAP and 5 Hydra spread across 3 units I was able to damage only marginally his air assets. This is due to two factors in my opinion:
1) the Pylon unit provides excellent anti air coverage and allows the necron flyers a very large zone of defense against CAP and Interception.
2) the range on the necron flyers main weapon is excellent and in many cases superior to most aircrafts (30cm range on 2X AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA). These guns are more versatile and longer ranged then any of there contemporaries (Thunderbolts, Fighter Bommerz, Nightwing Interceptor, Swiftdeath) and they have the added benefit of Initiative 1 and being cheaper.

My suggestion is that the Twin Tesla Destructor be reduced in range to 15cm. I realize this would force those units to brave AA more often and as such I think that the armor could be beefed up a notch. Ultimately the necrons play in two camps, heavier armor/regeneration and short range/assault in epic. I believe this change would be in line with how they play. It would also make the Night Scythes portal ability less broken with it's ability to prep a unit from 30cm and then retain for the assault with very little chance of initiative failure or retaliation via engagement or anti air. This would also go a long way to mitigating the point costs of these units.

My suggested stats for the Night Scythe unit: 200pts 2 Night Scythes
AC Fighter Armor 5+ CC - FF 6+ Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA and portal ability as currently described

My suggestion for Doom Scythe units: 200 2 Doom Scythes
AC Fighter Armor 5+ CC - FF - Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA
Death Ray 15cm MW3+ TK(1) FFA

My suggestion for the Night Shroud Bomber unit: 350pts 2 Night Shroud Bombers
AC Bomber Armor 5+ Living Metal Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA
Death Spheres 15cm 3BP Macro FFA

My thoughts on the Night Shroud Bomber is that the Death Spheres don't really need the benefit of the Disrupt (as they will kill most things that they hit with the macro ability) and it is a little redundant as well as makes the weapon look over powered. Remove it and it is still just about as powerful. Change the armor to 5+ living metal which is slightly better then the 4+ normal save and make the range change to 15cm for the Twin Tesla Destructors and you have a more balanced bomber.

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts. Ultimately you want to keep the point values down so these things get used and you still want to keep the flavor of the unit. I think the range is probably the easiest thing to change and keep everything else relatively intact at a low point value.

I don't think I agree with the cost increase to 200pts for the night scythes especially if the range on is dropped to 15cm. I see what you mean about initiate 1+ I also forgot about that. Eldar Nightwings have 30cm range and better weapons and better armour at the same price. Hmm it's hard to say what the value of the portal should be worth. I mean yes it's fantastic to be able to drop a portal where ever you like but you have to remember they need to brave all the flak, and are unbelievably vulnerable after they land. I'll try them at 200 same stats and see how my opponent tomorrow feels about them.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

I hear what you are saying but I still feel that my solution is a good one, otherwise the point cost should be even more then 200pts. Here is why:
- There are some very significant synergies with the 90cm range AA4+ TK(1) Pylon as it relates to AA against interceptors and CAP.
- The 1+ initiative is extremely good and incredibly powerful when combined with the portals

The comparison 2 of the eldar Nightwing to 2 Night Scythes, it is a good one as it is considered the best dog fighter around for 100pts.

Comparison : 2 Nightwing 2 Night Scythes
Unit Size x cost : 3 x100 2 x 100 Advantage Necron with more potential activations
Initiative : 2+ 1+ Advantage Necron
Armor : 4+ 5+ Advantage Eldar
AA : 4x AA5+ 4x AA5+ Equal
AT : 2x AT4+ lance 4x AT5+ Advantage Eldar though lance is situational
AP : 2x AP4+ 4x AP4+ Advantage Necron

From a straight comparison I would say that Night Scythes are equal or better then Nightwings without even factoring in the portal at 100pt per model. I would say that the portal is at least 50 points by itself (similar in cost to the webway portals of the eldar) so in my opinion they should be between 100-125pts each.

Braving the flak is only necessary if you want to deploy the portal very close to the target, otherwise you have a 30cm engage range (15cm move and 15cm ff) from the portal from your infantry units in reserve. What the 15cm weapon range does do is make it a gamble if you want to prep a unit with AA coverage. Instead of a sure thing it becomes a bit of a gamble getting close enough to prep the unit with a ground attack. That being said, with the mobility of being able to deploy a portal anywhere on the table, the ability to avoid AA cover is much easier.
I agree with you on the vulnerability of the unit once landed but again the unit gets to pick and choose its location on the board thereby keeping retaliation to a minimum. It can also come in at a much later point in the turn and then fly off at the end of the turn to avoid reprisals. Also, with an army that has a strategy rating of 2, it becomes very important to be able to place your portals where you want them when you want them versus the predictability of the Monolith deployment.

Anyway, those are my 2 cents. Again, these opinions are based off of one game, IG (strategy 2, AA heavy) versus the Sautekh. More playtesting is needed to figure out the right balance of stats and synergies for the units and then point costs can be optimized for tournament play.

This makes me a happy camper as it comes from someone who played against the list!


Living metal has been discussed a lot back and forth. I'm affraid I have no power over this rule as I'm "just" a sublist champion. It's something Ulrik has the final say in.


I have feared like outlined by earlier discussion that the ariplanes might be to good/to cheap. I must say your suggestion on reducing the range of the destructor really spoke to me. It's a very neat yet quite important nerf to the different airplanes. I like it and will implement in the next list.

Like you say it makes the land-shot-to-BM-prep-retain-portalassault a lot more risky, which limits it's effectivness somewhat. This might be a good thing.

It also of course makes the two types of figthers a lot less capable of intercepting. Which I also think is a good thing. I don't think intercepting should be their mane focus anyway based on the fluff after rereading the necrons rule book. I would be hesitant of intercepting for instance marauder bombers, fighta bombas and landas to name a few.

With such a change though I think they can stay at current cost of 175 pts for two night scythes or pehaps go to 200. It's better to start high and lower cost. So lets start with 200.

The Doom scythes though are probably undercosted and will be raised to 125 pts a piece. They have a TK attack after all.


I don't know if you followed my discussion above in this thread over the last two days with Kyrt and Antesion. I've outlined my reasoning for the current shroud stats during it. There is basically strong arguments for disrupt based on fluff and 40k rules.
I agree totaly that disrupt actually doesn't really add any great substance to the attack on part of most units dying anyway to MW. But that's is also why I think it's ok to keep it. It doesn't really make the attack more powerful. But it does make the death spheres more in line with the background, which I think is nice.

I'm inclined to raise their cost. I'm undecided as of yet though. I think Kurt made a good argument for them being equally good or even better than the AX-1-0.

Interesting, the compendium has the tiger sharks as 5+ armour

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I'm sorry to say that if you nerf the fliers to 15cm range and keep the increase to 200 points I won't be using them. I think paradox and Kyrt might agree. I may use them at 175 but at 200 they are incredibly risky to use. They should be dropped to 150 if you want to keep the 15cm range, as the range nerf is quite potent decrease to their versatility. I really disagree with this decision to both increase points and heavily nerf them.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

Upon further reflection, I really do like how the 15cm range on the weapons would play out. Some minor tweaks to the armor (make all the flyers reinforced) should bring things into line and make for a unique style of play.

Here are my suggestions for consideration:

My suggested stats for the Night Scythe unit: 200pts 2 Night Scythes
AC Fighter Armor 5+Reinforced CC - FF 6+ Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA Fearless and portal ability as currently described

Added Reinforced Armor and Fearless, to make it more survivable when going in close and being able to potentially survive an assault or being destroyed when broken while landed.

My suggestion for Doom Scythe units: 200 2 Doom Scythes
AC Fighter Armor 5+Reinforced CC - FF - Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA
Death Ray 15cm MW3+ TK(1) and 15cm AA5+ TK(1) FFA

Added Reinforced Armor and 15mm AA5+ TK(1) to make it more of an interceptor and more survivable at the 15cm range bracket.

My suggestion for the Night Shroud Bomber unit: 225pts 1 Night Shroud Bombers
AC Bomber Armor 4+ Reinforced Twin Tesla Destructors 15cm x2 AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ FFA
Death Spheres 15cm 3BP Macro FFA

Upgraded armor to 4+ Reinforced to make it one tough customer. Increased unit cost but decreased unit size.

Some thoughts on Marco plus either Disrupt or Ignore Cover
Comparison 3BP MACRO vs 3BP Macro & Disrupt vs 3BP Macro & Ignore Cover
AP vs not in cover 4+ 4+ 4+ equal number of casualties and blast markers
AP vs in cover 5+ 5+ 4+ more casualties and blast markers with Ignore Cover
AT not in cover 5+ 5+ 5+ equal number of casualties and blast markers
AT in cover 6+ 6+ 5+ more casualties and blast markers with Ignore Cover
WE not in cover 5+ 5+ 5+ equal number of casualties and blast markers
WE in cover 6+ 6+ 5+ more casualties and blast markers with Ignore Cover
any of the above with reinforced armor results in potentially more blast markers with Disrupt
note that only infantry are really going to get cover saves (as they are in terrain) as the aircraft ignore terrain that might block LOS which is what most vehicles and WE would get (unless they entered terrain and made there difficult terrain test). I feel that the Disrupt or Ignore Cover would be redundant and makes the weapon very unique and appear to be very powerful.

I would say that the Ignore Cover would be a better bet to represent what you are trying to get at if you feel it is needed, but this make it a infantry destroyer beyond compare and some might feel it to good.

Again, my goal is to preserve the integrity of the units and the feel of the army while keeping the costs down and avoid army list power creep. I have not read any of the new Necron flyer fluff nor have I played more then one game against the Sautekh flyers.

Cheers.

Whoa, hang on, an AA5+ (becomes 4+ on intercept) TK shot? In addition to the two regular shots? This formation averages 2 regular hits and 1 TK hit. Making it about the best air assault interception formation in the game, for 200 points. Better than 3 nightwings for 300 points in fact. And that's in isolation of the fact that there's also a teleporting Living Metal Fearless war engine with a 90cm TK flak shot in the army.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Thanks for your continued input paradox.

I never ment for the combination of macroweapon and ignore cover, that's to good. What I earlier suggested was that the death spheres could perhaps be represented by IC + Disrupt instead of MW + disrupt.

I will not give the Death Ray of the doom scythes AA. It is clearly a ground attack weapon when reading the description. Secondly and more importantly, like Kyrt says, it would be way to good.

On the saves of the planes.
I dont think we should give them a reinforced armour save. I think they would be to good with that. Secondly I don't think the 40k rules warrant it. If we compair the scythes to the 40k stats (going by the imperial armour aeronautica of 2012) of most other fighters in epic (which have a 6+ save in epic) like the thunderbolt, barracuda, fighta bomba, hell blade. Then they have 1 point more of armour in some directions, 1 hull point more than most and living metal.

Another comparision would be the new necrons vehicles, which have the same armour value as the Scythes in 40k + living metal and quantom shielding. 5+ reinforced would be equally good as the new vehicles. The airplanes lack quantom shielding and has less hull points than for instance the necron arks.

Could a regular 4+ save for the scythes be argued on the part of +1 hull point and living metal? What do you guys think (or anyone else)?
I don't think so. I find a regular 5+ save is enough to represent the Scythes. (A 4+ would also require an increase for the night shroud bombers save as well. I can't see it having the same as the scythes)

Ok, hopefully you can respond in time. What stats and points would you like me to test on the night scythes. I am meeting up for a game in about an hour.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

Kyrt, point taken about the TK AA on interceptions/CAPs. Overlooked that little bit. May want to just make it a Macro hit instead of TK. Would reduce the point value and not make it so nasty.

Improving the save would be my vote on the aircrafts in order to encourage them to weather the AA umbrellas if they feel brave enough.

I like the Shroud without the Macro and just Disrupt and Ignore Cover. Would make it cheaper and not such an uber unit. Great infantry killer. Would be about 200 for one i would guess.

I still think you want to keep the 2 Scythes (either config) at ~200 and a single Shroud at ~200 if you can by fiddling with the configurations.

If it's not to late try them at 175 with 5+ save and destructor with 15 cm range.

If you bring bombers try them at 375pts, disrupt + MW, 4+ save. 15 cm range on destructor.

Basicaly I'd like to see/hear about your next game before making bigger changes

Ok here is the army tested.

Warriors (10) + overlord - 375
Warriors (9) + TS - 350
Immortals (8)+ TS - 425
Venator maniple - 200
Deathmarks - 200
Monoliths - 275
Monoliths - 275
Night Scythes - 200
Night Scythes - 200
Warbargue - 300
Pylon - 200

Opponent (standard marines):
Terminators with Chaplin
Thunderhawk
Tactical squad with supreme, Hunter and razorback.
Bikes
Devastators with 2 dreads
Thunderhawk
Land speeders
Whirlwinds
Landraiders
Thunderbolts
Scouts with razorback

We didn't end up having enough time to capture a full report but I'll post the highlights with a few picture soon.

The 15 cm range on the fighters made then really vulnerable when trying to cap. Thunderhawk took one down first turn. Cap thunderbolts dropped the other one first turn. They did nothing except get me a portal second turn to get my group of 10 warriors in excellent position to wipe out his Thunderhawk terminators that took out my pylon the previous activation.
Once again the warrior groups came on to the board and performed well in combat but just got annihilated subsuqently. He mostly focus fired on my infantry and just kept my monoliths and warbarque broken. I had a bunch of bad rally rolls on my monoliths so they did almost nothing other than spit out troops. The warbarque provided a much needed exit for my warrior unit but the warriors didn't rally in time to make it back on the board.
I was unimpressed with the deathmarks. They did their job and managed to finish off his supreme commander but subsequently died in combat to the bikes extremely easily. I found my biggest issue this game was blast markers my small unit sizes ment I lost activation after activation to my units being broken and others not rallying. Pylon, monoliths, warbarque, dearhmarks, flayed ones.
My opponent played well and I did have some bad luck. I tried to play less aggressively and didn't make any serious tactical mistakes like against my last game against paradox. I did have some bad luck with the dice. All in all still enjoyable though at times slightly frustrating. Got decimated 4:1 at the end of turn three as litterally all my formations remaining on the board were broken.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

I was atension's opponent in the game last night.
I have played against his Necron's (using the approved list) once before and got slaughtered. The toned down list he used last night seemed more reasonable, however bad dice rolls meant he was always on the back-foot from an activation count and that snowballed as the game progressed.
I focused on breaking units, rather than trying to kill them, and then making sure they stayed broken by winning initiative and retaining/sustaining early in every turn.
One of the flyers got taken out with a lucky shot from the T'hawk, and i took one down with CAP T'bolt, but that meant both fomations had 2 blast markers which has a good risk of failing at least one activation (especially with the way the dice were rolling).
Some of the Necron formations did seem a little fragile to being broken but i think some of that is also just the specific characteristics of the game and the way the dice fell. (for example portalling the deathmarks right into the middle of my line to kill my SC are unlikely to survive in good shape with the activation advantage I had)
Living Metal is still very very tough to kill and I only lightly damaged the War-barque and killed 2 of 6 Monoliths despite a lot of fire going their way.
It was a fun game with a couple epic assaults including both BTS practically wiping each other out in a 3-4 round assault.
Thanks!