Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next

Necrons 4.3

 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:28 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Moscovian @ Nov. 01 2007,05:51)
QUOTE
Nice model...

(back to my rant) Corey, you are ignoring the facts.  The data are conclusive both from playtesting and from a statistical analysis.  Compare the regular destroyers (which you have not changed) to any formation from any half-way reputable list and you will find them overpriced or overgunned or both.  Look at the playtests and read the descriptions of destroyers involved in the battles.  They wipe out everything they shoot at.  Shooting at them becomes nigh impossible when you have the bulk of the Necron army up in your grill not to mention a 12BP orb dropping a minimum of 4 BMs on you.

I loathe the LV change but I'd say it is better than doing nothing (which is what you've effectively done).

If that's a Tomb Complex I saw I am jealous... mine is just a big pyramid...


I'm not ignoring anything.

I'm just saying that you are getting into the realm of hyperbole.  Two destroyer formations making you unbeatable?  Please.

I've only ever seen one formation like that, which was the old Eldar Harlequins from the early list.

Further, you should pay attention when I say things about changing things slowly over time.  I want to see the results of each change, and harping about the things I haven't changed BEFORE EVER USING THEM with the changes that are there isn't doing anything other than irritating the hell out of me.

Try a game or 3, let me know how they turn out.  I ALWAYS have several possible changes to things lurking in the wings, and I like to try them out as things need adjustment.  But first I need actual test data to work with so that I can see WHAT needs to be tweaked where.


You guys need to remember something.  It isn't always important that a given model or formation is in line with others... what matters is that the LIST plays in balance with other lists.  

If you go out there playing people who have equal skill and win more or less half the time, it doesn't matter if the damn destroyers fire TK shots!  There are plenty of units/formations that are so good it's stupid, but the LIST itself is balanced against the others.

That's what I have to accomplish.  The purpose of making these lists is not to make carbon copy versions of other lists that just use different models.  It's to create an army list that overall is balanced in play with the existing lists, and the only way I can be sure of that is to see how the current version plays against other armies.

Go out and play some games and let me know what happens... and people:  give me DETAILS!!!

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I think its an Abbatoir, actually.  

Fine.  Playtest it shall be.  I hope I'm wrong and the dang list is balanced and done with but I am suspecting I'm gonna break it again.

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Moscovian @ Nov. 01 2007,09:35)
QUOTE
I think its an Abbatoir, actually.  

Fine.  Playtest it shall be.  I hope I'm wrong and the dang list is balanced and done with but I am suspecting I'm gonna break it again.

I don't mind if you break it man. :)

I WANT people to try to break it!

And if we get to the point where it wins about half the time amongst equal players, we know it's perfect :)

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am
Posts: 876
Location: Brest - France
Changing the subject... back to the good ol' Monolith rant. ?:D

A few players on the epic_fr forum (and a few players here as well, judging from the "4.2 comments" thread) have questioned the Monolith "brokenness".

The most common complaints seem to be:

- it's too cheap;
- +6 potential extra attacks per Monolith is too much (comparisons with Land Raiders abound... and shed a gloomy light indeed on poor LR);
- it gets to use its portal even when broken;
- it's actually a good thing for the Necron player when a Monolith is broken at the end of the turn.
- it allows for popcorn armies that may or may not be overpowered but are certainly no fun to play against.

I personnally don't think the Monolith is overpowered, but it's probably just a tad too powerful.

As has been pointed out somewhere else on this forum, raising the cost of the Monolith to 100 points would a. weaken the Necron army significantly by restricting the number of available portals and b. encourage the use of single-Monolith formation (leading to "semi-popcorn" armies, I guess).

So, after a solo brainstorming session, I came up with this:

Monolith formation - 3 Monoliths for 225 points + 0-3 Obelisks for 50 points each

Notice that the cost of a single Monolith stays the same (so no shortage of portals here). This would, however, reduce the number of activations of the Necron army (no more popcorn armies here) and, perhaps more importantly, make it harder to break Monoliths and make the somewhat abusive (or at least perceived as such) "teleport-break-teleport" tactic less viable.

Fluffwise, Apocalypse introduced Monoliths detachments, so this idea is actually representative of how Necrons fight on a bigger scale.

--------

Other 4.3 comments:

- Nightbringer should either get SC, or cost less. Its stats are on par with those of the Deceiver, but SC alone makes the latter much, much more useful.

- Pylons should be able to contest/claim objectives. They're easy to break anyway, so it's not a big deal.

- Destroyers/Heavy Destroyers : I agree with E&C, LV would tone them down a bit. And AT3+ on the Heavy Destroyer would perhaps compensate the loss of one shot compared to the Destroyer.

- Pariah could (should?) cost 75 points. I would certainly still take as many as I can.

These comments aside, I'll say again that I think you've done a great job for the Necron army, Corey. It feels Necron and I sure wish I could play more often to try some more tactics with them.






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 3:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Hojyn @ Nov. 08 2007,13:15)
QUOTE
- it's actually a good thing for the Necron player when a Monolith is broken at the end of the turn.

Well, with the new rules, 1/3 of broken Monoliths aren't coming back each turn, since they have to rally, even if in reserve, so it's *not* great to have them broken all the time.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Hojyn @ Nov. 08 2007,13:15)
QUOTE
Other 4.3 comments:

- Nightbringer should either get SC, or cost less. Its stats are on par with those of the Deceiver, but SC alone makes the latter much, much more useful.

Both C'tan should have supreme commander, that's a cut-n-paste error I made when reformatting the list for Corey

- Pylons should be able to contest/claim objectives. They're easy to break anyway, so it's not a big deal.

I believe they can still contest them, just not claim them... though I'm not 100% on the intention.

Monolith formation - 3 Monoliths for 225 points + 0-3 Obelisks for 50 points each
That's, essentially, the Monolith formation in the "Necron Raiders" army list I submitted for the EPIC Army Competition... hasn't been playtest yet though.

Has anyone actually fielded a "Murder of Monoliths" popcorn army to see how they work "in real life"?  I don't think I've ever seen or heard of an actual report involving one.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
yeah, I saw the Apocalypse Necron Unit.

It would make the greatest assault formation in history.

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I still say that fixing Monoliths at a permenant +4 EA in a firefight would make them easier to balance & cost, even for 3x Monolith formations.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
If they have they never reported it on Tactical Command or Specialist Games.  It has been brought up on numerous occasions as a theoretical army list but as far as I know never been put into play.  

Hoyjn, how did the french folk feel about the 4.3 changes?  Were they discussed?

_________________
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: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Moscovian @ Nov. 08 2007,15:24)
QUOTE
If they have they never reported it on Tactical Command or Specialist Games. ?It has been brought up on numerous occasions as a theoretical army list but as far as I know never been put into play. ?

Well, I haven't and, while I'm not sure it's overpowered, I can't imagine it's fun to play against.

Win or lose, I'm quite sure both players would be bored to death with such an army.

Hoyjn, how did the french folk feel about the 4.3 changes? ?Were they discussed?


Well, I'm not sure they are aware of it yet. ?:D

I just noticed them myself a couple of days ago. I'll post a summary of the changes on epic_fr.

@Chroma
Well, with the new rules, 1/3 of broken Monoliths aren't coming back each turn, since they have to rally, even if in reserve, so it's *not* great to have them broken all the time.

You're right, I forgot about the changes to the Phase Out rule.

That said, I still think there would be a lot less complaints if Monoliths came in threes (or at least in twos) : sure it would be a deadly assault formation, but I think one formation of 3 Monoliths is a lot more manageable for the opponent than 3 formations of one Monolith.

That's, essentially, the Monolith formation in the "Necron Raiders" army list I submitted for the EPIC Army Competition...

Sorry about that, Chroma, I didn't mean to "steal" your idea. Actually, I didn't even see it, so I guess it must have been in the air... ?:p

I still say that fixing Monoliths at a permenant +4 EA in a firefight would make them easier to balance & cost.

I believe I've said that before, but I'll say it again : I agree with you. ?:)






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:43 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

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

(corey3750 @ Nov. 08 2007,15:21)
QUOTE
yeah, I saw the Apocalypse Necron Unit.

It would make the greatest assault formation in history.

If a unit is too powerful en masse, that usually means it's just plain too powerful (or cheap) and taking it in lesser numbers is just masking the problem.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
The greatest assault formation in history is a Warlord Titan with 4x Lasburners. :D

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:05 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

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

(Hojyn @ Nov. 08 2007,13:15)
QUOTE
As has been pointed out somewhere else on this forum, raising the cost of the Monolith to 100 points would... encourage the use of single-Monolith formation (leading to "semi-popcorn" armies, I guess).

Nah.  What encourages Monolith popcorn armies is that pairing them with Obelisks is pointless.

Obelisks linked to Monoliths lose their speed advantage because they can't run away from the Mono, and they lose their range advantage because the Monolith needs to be close to the enemy for both the portal and to use FF.

Supposedly, they gain value by functioning as a "meat shield" for the Monolith, but that doesn't make sense.  Obelisk costs 50 points to guard a 75 point unit.  That's not much "meat shield" value to begin with.  Then add in that the Obelisk has half the durability and it's just silly to think it gains any value from that role at all.  There is no benefit.

You pay 50 points per Obelisk in their own homogenous formation where all their abilities can be used to the max compared to 50 points per Obelisk with Monliths where their abilities are slashed and their value as a screen is highly dubious.

You pay 50 points for an Obelisk that is a poor ablative shield for a Monolith, compared to paying 75 points for an entirely new, separate Monolith.

Either way you look at it, there is an internal balance problem with Obelisks.  Using them with Monoliths is simply inferior.

Popcorn Monoliths happen because it's the only sensible choice.  You must have portals.  That means you either buy lots of portals or you guard them.  Guarding them is throwing points away.  That only leaves buying lots of them.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
From the couple of games I've played with destroyers in their new form, they've become pretty much useless. They still attract a lot of firepower, and now just can't deal out enough to be worth it anymore.

I am hugely in favour of the LV solution instead, and possibly a price increase.

I am opposed to mixed initiatives. It makes no sense at all.

Overall however, I am glad of the changes to the list. It's certainly becoming more balanced, and I am hugely glad that you have dealt with the phase out issue. That one change has done more than anything else ever to correct this list.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necrons 4.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Zombocom, care to post batreps for the two games you played?  They'd be helpful.

_________________
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  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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