Tactical Command

Sautekh changes
Page 1 of 1

Author:  atension [ Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:21 am ]
Post subject:  Sautekh changes

Some excellent debate on the Sautekh list. Need some more input from.the community before finalizing revision V1.2.


Author:  Norto [ Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

Voted for
Remove monoliths from the list
Remove monoliths and warbarques from the list.
Night scythes need to land to use their portals, cannot contest or claim objectives.

I think removing the ground portals would tone down the list and create a new focus on writing lists from it with the transports in mind but still keeping the fun of necron portals from the night scythes. Also allows night scythes to be fluffy and keep their portal.

Voted for them to land to deploy the portal, the main problem i saw in the past was the ability to be a portal, great interceptor and be able to land and contest late game. Removing the contesting/claiming fixes that.

Author:  Geep [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

I posted this over in the battle report area already:

I can agree with dropping Warbarques, but Monoliths are one of the Necron icons- both in the old list and the new list. It seems kind of weird to hamstring the options of those who like the new-style Necrons just because of the preferences of the stick-in-the-mud older players. (Just as some background I played Necrons since they first appeared in 40k, but have only played 'newcrons' in Epic)

I don't see a problem with having 'Newcrons' able to play in a similar style to 'Oldcrons'. The troop, support and phase-out differences make for pretty significant changes. Additionally I've never seen people arguing to delete various Guard or Marine units just because most of those variant lists can also be built to be near identical to each other- why is this such a big issue here?

Author:  mordoten [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

So what would you suggest for changes to make the list less OP then? Whats your sollution?

Author:  Mard [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

Voted for only two

Remove monoliths from the list.
Night scythes need to land to use their portals, cannot contest or claim objectives.

WaBBQ's can still be fun in the list and removing the monoliths should be enough in my opinion

Author:  Geep [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

I went with-
Monoliths to a size of 3 (reduces spam)
Increase the formation size of Night Scythes (same reason)
Night scythes need to land (It's just simpler over all, with engagement rules etc.)
Also, as mentioned above, I'm not against the 'removing Warbarques' part- to me they were added at a time when the Necrons were excessively restricted in 40k, now the list has more variety.

An option Norto mentioned elsewhere which I like is to increase Warriors to a formation size of 8.

In short, do various tweaks to increase points and reduce spammability.

Simply throwing Monoliths out is a lazy option, loses an iconic unit, and not true to the 40k list (which is usually the goal of Epic list emulation).

Author:  Norto [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2017 7:18 pm
atension wrote:
Looking for some more players for the list. In need of some more battle reports. Let's get this list approved!

Next post was from me Sat Jun 09, 2018

I wouldn't call it the lazy option if it gets the list moving and closer to approval. Not sure if i missed anything but almost a year has past without any posts.

Dosnt this feel like a kitchen sink list for Necrons with a few rule differences and stat differences to confuse a already confused opponent?

Author:  Geep [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

Why should it not be an accurate reflection of the new 40k Necrons? (The Necron variant which has now probably been around the longest)
Things outside of that (eg. Warbarque, many WE's) are fine to remove IMO, though most view them as set in stone for no good reason.

I don't see how this Necron list vs the Scarab list is really any different to Astartes Marines vs Blood Angels- They gain things* but options aren't severely limited for them (other than Titans, which are 'allies' by fluff), and things get special rules (extra movement, activation bonuses, etc.). It's similar for the 1001 Guard variations.

*Sure the current Necron list gains a lot more, but of course it does- the old Necron book it is based off was one of the flimsiest pamphlets around- barely able to be called an army (1 HQ, 3 Elites, 1 Troops, 3 FA, 3 HS iirc).

Yes it's frustrating that the list hasn't moved on to approval, but from an outside perspective that's mainly been due to apathy than actual playtesting issues. In general activity here has been pretty down, and battle reports aren't as frequent as they used to be.

It's a big step to simply cut a very important unit, mostly eliminating one style of play- that should be a last resort for when other options have been tried and found to fail.

Author:  Dave [ Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sautekh changes

Removing the Monolith would be like removing the Rhino from a Marine list. It's iconic, and I'd prefer it stay just with the same stats and formations size as the Raiders list.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group