| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Death Machines http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=11214 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Ilushia [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Okay, I think this may be a wording mistake more then a genuine intent, but I'll bring it up as a proposition. Essentially, the list as written says you can have up to 1/3 of the list as war engines. War engines include both C'tan, the Pylon and all the Death Machines. This makes it impossible, at present, to field both a Harvester Engine and a Supreme Commander, at all. Or a Harvester Engine and more then one Pylon. So, I would propose a change to 'Up to 1/3 of the army's point value may be spent on Death Machines'. That way if someone really wanted to spend 1050 points they could field both a harvester engine and a C'tan, but you still couldn't field a Harvester Engine and anything else from that part of the list other then the Tomb Complex (Which could perhaps get moved somewhere else like the Eldar Webway Portal and Avatar, if you wanted to). |
|
| Author: | hiddenevil [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
it would be much better for most of us, lets us be able to actually take anything in the list while still having an effective army. so my vote is for this idea, given that most of us have pylons in their armies for anti-air not much else gets chosen other than 2 pylons, a supreme commander and a tomb complex. wouldn't want the necron army to become to predictable. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
It is absolutely deliberate that you cannot take a Harvester and a C'tan. I play necrons without a supreme commander, and with a harvester, and I find them ballanced at strategy rating 1, but still overpowered at SR 3. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Why not play a game with 3150pts each? |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
(Evil and Chaos @ Dec. 14 2007,13:26) QUOTE Why not play a game with 3150pts each? Or 4000 points... |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Or 5000... I've done that and it was scary to behold that much Necron on the board. Ilushia, do you really think the Necron need to be bumped in power by increasing their flexibility? I've seen three reported losses out of DOZENS of games. I think if we are seeing them lose now we should do everything we can to stay the course. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Moscovian: Actually, since the Strategy Rating review I've got about an even win loss ratio with the Necrons. With a supreme commander I think they're still overpowered. |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Zombocom, all the more reason not to make the modification mentioned by Ilushia. Corey even mentioned that the Necrons were designed in such a way that you couldn't bring a C'tan and a Harvester in a 3000 point list. I am curious though about your games that had the SC in them. Was it the C'tan itself that was overpowered or the SR that had the biggest effect? Personally I think the Deceiver could use a downward tweak (which I made mention in a separate thread and gave an idea how to do it) but not by much. The mere fact that the army counts on them for their SR may be enough of a nerf. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
It's the SR 3 that makes them overpowered. If Necrons can regularly get the first activation they have a massive advantage. I've been deliberately playing without a supreme commander to limit myself in that regard. Plus I like the abbatoir. But yes, I agree that a change is not needed in regard to war engines. It's right and correct that you should have to chose between a Harvester and a Supreme Commander. |
|
| Author: | Ilushia [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Death Machines |
Actually what concerns me more then Harvester vs SC is Harvester vs AA. As things stand if you have a harvester you can have at best one Pylon in the army as Pylons -are- War Engines. This potentially opens you up to seeing a lot of ground-attacks against your harvester, especially if it ends up being one of the only formations on the ground on turn 1. Even worse if the enemy can somehow break your pylon before starting their air-attacks against your harvester... Perhaps move the Supreme Commander into the Death Machines section instead? That'd have the same restrictions on SC vs HE, but allow for more potential AA in the list to avoid seeing your harvester engines get shot up by flights of bombers and suchlike so much >.> Or maybe I'm just spinning my wheels. Every time I've seen the Aeonic Orb fielded (Which is like twice I think) it resisted virtually everything thrown at it... Then some TLD shot got through and caused a rolling-crit which blew it away in a single point of damage. >.> |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|