Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Necron review
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=7752		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Hojyn [ Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
Hi,

in light of the latest topics, it would probably be useful to do a brief summary of the remaining problems (real or perceived) in the Necron list.

That way Corey could issue a 4.2 version that much quicker (hint, hint ?:;): ).

Here's what I'd like to see modified:

- Tomb Spyders

Please make them Infantry. I don't understand why they are AV. If they were Inf instead of AV, they would be worth their 75 points. Right now, they are just easy targets only useful if your opponent insists on destroying the Necron Warriors instead of the Spyders.

- Monolith

The general consensus seems to indicate it's somewhat overpowered but that it would be difficult to raise its cost without weakening severely the Necron list.

I suggested a limit of 1 Monolith per Phalanx. OR you could make it an upgrade.

I also think the "+1 EA per enemy within range" is, perhaps not too powerful, but rather clunky. It has raised many questions (see this forum), which means that it is unclear. A fixed value would probably solve that problem. EA +4 or +5 ?

- Obelisk

As suggested by Moscovian, raising its cost to 65 and removing the Scout ability would probably be a good thing.

Additionnally, I would suggest to make it 5+ Living Metal instead of 5+ RA, just so all Necron vehicles have Living Metal. This would perhaps induce another points raise, though.

- Abattoir

If you're a regular reader of the Necron forum, you probably saw this one coming. ?:p

I'll just copy and paste two of my suggestions from another topic:
* give it 8 DC;
* give it some limited teleportation (example: "may teleport within 60 cm of the Tomb Complex").

Making one of these modifications would go a long way towards making the Abattoir worth its 750 points (which I don't think it is at the moment).

- And... that's it. I think the rest of the list is quite balanced and full of character. Necrons are fun to play with and against, and require tough tactical choices from both players. In my opinion, the list doesn't need much to be considered "done".

And now please add your suggestions so that Corey can (hopefully) give a shiny 4.2 version. ?:)
Author:  tv1013 [ Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
- Pariahs and Immortals
At the risk of toning down Pariahs, and making Immortals useless, should these be 50 points each to make for nice even numbers?  The stock Phalanx seems to include a Pariah, and 275 points is a nice amount for making lists.

- Necron Lord

Does he need "Small Arms" under the (15cm) option for the Staff of Light?

- Pylon and Nightbringer

Both these units have entries that contain both MW and TK (Particle Accelerator and Scythe, respectively).  I was under the impression that if something was TK, it was MW as well, making the MW entry redundant.  Am I missing something?
Author:  Moscovian [ Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
Corey and I have discussed many of these points so my suggestions should come as no surprise.

Obelisks. 4+RA is what was intended, not 5+.  Having them at 65 points with no scout ability (and 350 points for the Obelisk Recon) is still a bargain.

Monoliths.  They are fine with the Obelisk changes.

Tomb Spyders. I don't see a need to change them.  They add a tremendous amount of power to a formation, so having them targeted doesn't bug me (no pun intended). :D

Unit Costs.  Add-ons seem about right (with exception above).

Abbatoir. I used it once and it spent the game broken.  However, it took all the effort of my opponent to keep it broken, so as such it still seemed useful.  Perhaps 1-2 Particle Flails will give it a little 'oomph!' without making it too powerful.  But if it didn't change I'd be fine with it.

Marshal. +1 doesn't seem necessary and I could see it removed with a minor nerf to the army.  I understand it was done to counter the lack of marching, but really the tremendous number of fearless units and teleporting units does enough to counter the lack of movement.

There is one more change I'd like to see that Corey and I discussed, but -being it's his list- I'll let him bring it up. :;):
Author:  fbruntz [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:15 am ]
Post subject:  Necron review

(tv1013 @ Oct. 17 2006,17:19)
QUOTE
- Pariahs and Immortals
At the risk of toning down Pariahs, and making Immortals useless, should these be 50 points each to make for nice even numbers? ?The stock Phalanx seems to include a Pariah, and 275 points is a nice amount for making lists.

I don't agree on that point : their cost is good if you consider their stats. 40 points is very expensive for an infantery unit, no need to rise again this cost or they will not be deployed anymore...

Tomb Spyders. I don't see a need to change them.  They add a tremendous amount of power to a formation, so having them targeted doesn't bug me (no pun intended).  

I don't agree : they are expensive (even if their cost is good) and I don't think that someone is playing them. This is a problem...
Author:  thurse [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:56 am ]
Post subject:  Necron review
-Obelisks : 65 points is a minimum, and scout is not needed
-No +1 to marshall
-I don't know if a list maximizing monolith would be overpowered, it should be worth a test IMHO. Perhaps will I try it if I have time
-Appart from that, I'm ok with other units and would not increase the power of scarabs


In fact I agree with Moscovian...
Author:  Moscovian [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review

(fbruntz @ Oct. 18 2006,08:15)
QUOTE
I don't agree : they are expensive (even if their cost is good) and I don't think that someone is playing them. This is a problem...

You don't have to agree, but you can't say that NOBODY is playing them since
a) The number of people posting here + Corey is probably two-thirds of the number of Necron armies in the world.  :O
b) Corey and I play the Spyders in our games, so there goes the 'nobody'. :;):

You do realize the AV status gives your adjacent infantry units cover, right?
Author:  fbruntz [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
[quote="Moscovian,Oct. 18 2006,13:52"][/quote]
You don't have to agree, but you can't say that NOBODY is playing them since
a) The number of people posting here + Corey is probably two-thirds of the number of Necron armies in the world. ?:O
b) Corey and I play the Spyders in our games, so there goes the 'nobody'. :;):

I'm sorry. My poor english prevent me to be subtle (no irony there) ?and sometimes I could even seem to be agressive ?when I don't want to be... :'(

Anyway, I do understand that these units give adjacent cover for infantry but this is little interest as our necrons can appear directly from portals and don't need covers.

IMHO, the main problem is that 75 points is too expensive for a fragile unit. You can't hide it in the formation and it has only a 4+ save.
A way to decrease the cost :
- no scarabs (could be included in FF/CC valuee that could become 4+ instead of 5+)
- not antigrav (only Walker)
- not vehicle but infantry

Why is the Spider "fearless"? We could perhaps also get ride of that.

The idea is to decrease the cost to 50 or 40 points.

EDIT:
I would add a point from the v4.1.1 : why giving only a 4+ FF value to the heavy destroyers? Don't They become too expensive compared to destroyers? Especially as they are less polyvalent (only AT4+ against AP4+/AT6+).
Author:  Moscovian [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
No offense was taken.   :D I was just pointing out the absurdity that two of us playing Spyders actually equates out to 'many' in the scheme of things.

I believe the cost of Spyders is directly associated to two factors: fearless and leader.  The ability to buy a leader for the necron is monstrous.  If they were 50 points each, you would probably have too many Spyders in play at any given time.  Every infantry unit would have one and rallying would mean hell for your opponent and not too much fun.

I don't see Corey getting rid of the leader function (or fearless) for fluff reasons.

As for classifying them as infantry, I suppose that goes to the matter of playing style.  I personally like them as Armored Vehicles.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
a) The number of people posting here + Corey is probably two-thirds of the number of Necron armies in the world.  

I've come across two players in my own experience who have played with the ancient Vault list, entirely without knowlege of this place and its updated list.

I recomend that the updated list be Vaulted ASAP!
Author:  Hojyn [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review

(Moscovian @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)
QUOTE
I believe the cost of Spyders is directly associated to two factors: fearless and leader. ?The ability to buy a leader for the necron is monstrous. ?If they were 50 points each, you would probably have too many Spyders in play at any given time. ?Every infantry unit would have one and rallying would mean hell for your opponent and not too much fun.

That's quite true.

While I agree with fruntz that Spyders are too expensive, I have come to a different conclusion, i.e. that they are too expensive not because of what they DO (Leader is indeed very powerful for Necrons), but because of what they ARE: big juicy AV targets in an all-infantry formation.

I can live with it... but I'd rather not.  :D

Obelisks. 4+RA is what was intended, not 5+.  Having them at 65 points with no scout ability (and 350 points for the Obelisk Recon) is still a bargain.


But doesn't that 4+RA strike you as a bit too much, though? Even with 5+RA (or 5+ Living Metal) and without Scout, they would be worth 65 points.

8 DC raises its close combat (and firefight) ability to too high. And that kind of teleport makes it way too good as then it doesn't need to spend time closing in on the enemy.

It only raises it by two, but makes it more resilient and less easy too break. Teleport would probably be too powerful, but then you need to give the Abattoir something so that it's able to cross the battlefield.

It's already a monster in assault, +2 DC wouldn't make it that much more terrifying, but would perhaps be enough to make it more resilient. Don't forget it costs 750 points and has no shields of any sort and must move towards the enemy.
Author:  Moscovian [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
Well, that +2DC means two more attacks at 2+!!  It's close combat ability is insanely good.  And it's an infiltrator, which equates to it doing anything it wants on a double move.

The more I think about it the more I think it is built right.

As for the Obelisk, my take on them are that they are giant flying stones, so a 4+RA and fearless don't strike me as unreasonable.

Try playtesting them at 4+RA 65 points no scout and see what you think before trying to nerf them more.  I watched my Obelisks die beautifully and quickly in my last game. :cool:
Author:  fbruntz [ Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review

(Hojyn @ Oct. 18 2006,17:04)
QUOTE

(Moscovian @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)
QUOTE
The ability to buy a leader for the necron is monstrous. ?If they were 50 points each, you would probably have too many Spyders in play at any given time. ?Every infantry unit would have one and rallying would mean hell for your opponent and not too much fun.

That's quite true.

I don't understand that point. Why does a leader so monstrous? Because of the "We'll be back" rule? But it is limited up to the BMs of the formation...
Author:  Moscovian [ Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review
fbruntz,

The reason why it is so powerful is because it is NOT limited by the blast markers (see the entire thread).  Hena and others are making this assumption which I believe to be incorrect.  I've discussed this point with Corey IN PERSON, so unless my fatigue factor was higher than I thought and I misunderstood, the number of BMs are not a factor on how many can regenerate.

Here is why I think it is not a factor.
1. There is nothing in the rules to indicate a BM is needed.
2. IF you play where a BM is needed, the formation regenerates better under heavy fire than it does when it is left alone, which makes NO sense at all.  It becomes back asswards and not in the spirit of the rule.

Once again, I emailed Corey to let him know we needed his clarification, but he has been busy with work / life and said he would jump on when he could (probably this week).

So taking the BM-needed idea out, the Spyder becomes a very powerful addition to any formation.
Author:  fbruntz [ Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Necron review

(Moscovian @ Oct. 19 2006,14:10)
QUOTE
The reason why it is so powerful is because it is NOT limited by the blast markers (see the entire thread). ?Hena and others are making this assumption which I believe to be incorrect. ?I've discussed this point with Corey IN PERSON, so unless my fatigue factor was higher than I thought and I misunderstood, the number of BMs are not a factor on how many can regenerate.

Raaaah!!!!!!!!! So we'll have to wait for Corey... I hope that we will have an answer to that question before the Lyon tournament... ;)

Edit : Anyway, I underline again the point about Heavy Destroyers in v4.1.1 : why are they FF4+ for the same price than regular destroyers? They have "only" AT4+ (against AP4+/AT6+) and FF4+ (against FF3+), they should be less expensive, shouldn't they?
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/