Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Necron review

 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Baltimore MD
ok, a few quick points here.  I'll gather my thoughts together for a more complete sharing. :)

The WBB rule isn't capped by the number of BM.

The Spyder is a beast, both in combat and as a leader unit.  Fear the Spyder.

I WANT the Spyder to be legally sniped out of infantry formations for several reasons.  But here are the big two.

1.)  It's a balancing factor, right along with they're points cost
2.)  it forces choices, both on the Necron player AND his Opponent.

You might notice that not a lot of formations have the ability to effectivly engage both Infantry and vehicles, unless they are really close up.  So, are you going to shoot those AT weapons at the little Tomb Spyders? Or are you going to try to kill the Monoliths... maybe the Harvester Engine?  Or the Obelisk formation. :)

I've rarely had anyone bother to try to pick off the Spyders.. they've always had MUCH more important things to worry about.

As to the Obelisks... well, I've been thking about the idea Hoyjin posted.

So what about keeping them as they are, BUT the costs will change dependant upon their task.

Monolith formation: May add 0-3 Obelisk for +50 points each.

Obelisk Recon formation:  4 Obelisks - 300 points

this cuts the size of the formation, AND increases it's cost.

The Destroyer/Heavy Destroyer setup is the way it is due to specialization.  Heavy Destroyers are meant to kill tanks, so they aren't at all effective against infantry... except in assault.  Regular Destroyers are designed to kill infantry, and so are not very effecitive against tanks.... except in assault.

I still have stuff to think about, but please continue to discuss!

_________________
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: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:51 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(corey3750 @ Oct. 20 2006,00:50)
QUOTE
The WBB rule isn't capped by the number of BM.

I'm fine with that. But I guess other won't be.  :;):

I WANT the Spyder to be legally sniped out of infantry formations for several reasons.  But here are the big two.

1.)  It's a balancing factor, right along with they're points cost
2.)  it forces choices, both on the Necron player AND his Opponent.


OK, then. It sounds reasonable and makes perfect sense. I'm a believer now.  :D

Monolith formation: May add 0-3 Obelisk for +50 points each.

Obelisk Recon formation:  4 Obelisks - 300 points

Sounds good too. I'd be willing to try it.

The Destroyer/Heavy Destroyer setup is the way it is due to specialization.  Heavy Destroyers are meant to kill tanks, so they aren't at all effective against infantry... except in assault.  Regular Destroyers are designed to kill infantry, and so are not very effecitive against tanks.... except in assault.

This one I don't understand. I think fbruntz has a point here. Let's compare:

Destroyer

Armour 4+
CC 6+
FF 3+

2x AP4+/AT6+

Heavy Destroyer

Armour 4+
CC 6+
FF 4+

2x AT4+

Both are equally specialized, either vs. infantry or vs. tanks, but the Destroyer is more versatile (AT6+) AND has a better FF value, all for the same price. Is there a reason for that?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I like your ideas, but I think the Obelisk formation will need some clarification...
4 at 300 with what statistics?
Would the 0-3 Monoliths have any upgrades?  
How would multiple Monoliths work in an assault when they are part of the same formation?  Wouldn't that unbalance them severely? (Imagine getting 33 attacks at 5+ with three Monoliths!)
Any more thought on including the Warbarque? :D

_________________
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: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Moscovian @ Oct. 20 2006,14:15)
QUOTE
Would the 0-3 Monoliths have any upgrades? ?
How would multiple Monoliths work in an assault when they are part of the same formation? ?Wouldn't that unbalance them severely? (Imagine getting 33 attacks at 5+ with three Monoliths!)

I think you mis-read this Moscovian, it's "Monolith formation: May add 0-3 Obelisk for +50 points each.", so, I assume 1 Monolith, with optional 0-3 Obelisks... not 0-3 Monoliths!  *laugh*

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I am a dope.  :p

_________________
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: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Moscovian @ Oct. 20 2006,14:15)
QUOTE
Wouldn't that unbalance them severely? (Imagine getting 33 attacks at 5+ with three Monoliths!)

Although you misread Corey, I'd like to point out that, under current Monoliths rules and stats, you can still get 33 attacks at 5+ from supporting Monoliths.

Sure, it requires careful planning, but it very feasible. That's why I think (and I believe I'm not the only one) that a fixed number of attacks would be easier to balance.






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 10:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
From where I stand, as someone who's only seriously played Titans in Epic, but who's watched some of the other races fight Necrons... I'd honestly say that the one bit I'd most like to see changed about the Monolith is making War Engines count as only one enemy for purposes of it's number of attacks. Considering that I've seen a Monolith wind up stuck in against an Ork Mob where in it killed like 3 orks, but got inside range of the Great Gargant (I think it was a Great Gargant anyway) and ended up getting a ton of extra attacks off the gargant which turned the tide, even though it's attack rate against the Orks themselves wasn't enough to seriously damage them. This really doesn't feel right to me. The basis for the +1 per unit in range is that the Monolith has a bunch of small gauss-flayer style weapons set around it which can lash out at all surrounding infantry/tanks effectively laying down massive fire-power. But isn't very good at firing a lot of shots into just one target as much as rapid-firing shots across many targets at once. Effectively it can fire a lot of shots not because it's weapons fire really fast or it has tons of them, but because they have a full 360 field of fire and can effectively bring full-strength shots against EVERY unit in range. Hence, a chance to kill each unit individually.

I'd like to see them restricted to just +1 attack when fighting war engines. But that's just me. I think over all the fact that they're 5+ to hit makes them OK against most enemies... A 'uge Ork formation only has 30 ork bases in it at start... Even if you got all 30 in range you're looking at 10 hits, and that's about the best formation you're likely to find to do that with... Having multiple monoliths supporting you is fine and dandy and hurtful, but you're essentially stranding your monoliths at least for a little while when you do this (Personally I've not seen more then one, occasionally two, monoliths involved in a single fight ever... And it really doesn't strike me as a good way to use the army. Sure there's a good chance to totally obliterate whatever you hit... But what's the point when it takes 3/4 of the mobility of your army to do it?)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 3:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:24 am
Posts: 233
Location: Albany, NY

(Ilushia @ Oct. 21 2006,05:41)
QUOTE
From where I stand, as someone who's only seriously played Titans in Epic, but who's watched some of the other races fight Necrons... I'd honestly say that the one bit I'd most like to see changed about the Monolith is making War Engines count as only one enemy for purposes of it's number of attacks. Considering that I've seen a Monolith wind up stuck in against an Ork Mob where in it killed like 3 orks, but got inside range of the Great Gargant (I think it was a Great Gargant anyway) and ended up getting a ton of extra attacks off the gargant which turned the tide, even though it's attack rate against the Orks themselves wasn't enough to seriously damage them. This really doesn't feel right to me. The basis for the +1 per unit in range is that the Monolith has a bunch of small gauss-flayer style weapons set around it which can lash out at all surrounding infantry/tanks effectively laying down massive fire-power. But isn't very good at firing a lot of shots into just one target as much as rapid-firing shots across many targets at once. Effectively it can fire a lot of shots not because it's weapons fire really fast or it has tons of them, but because they have a full 360 field of fire and can effectively bring full-strength shots against EVERY unit in range. Hence, a chance to kill each unit individually.

I'd like to see them restricted to just +1 attack when fighting war engines. But that's just me. I think over all the fact that they're 5+ to hit makes them OK against most enemies... A 'uge Ork formation only has 30 ork bases in it at start... Even if you got all 30 in range you're looking at 10 hits, and that's about the best formation you're likely to find to do that with... Having multiple monoliths supporting you is fine and dandy and hurtful, but you're essentially stranding your monoliths at least for a little while when you do this (Personally I've not seen more then one, occasionally two, monoliths involved in a single fight ever... And it really doesn't strike me as a good way to use the army. Sure there's a good chance to totally obliterate whatever you hit... But what's the point when it takes 3/4 of the mobility of your army to do it?)

I think I was the Ork player in question, and I have no problem with starting DCs being used for WEs. ?While I'm against an uncapped "+1 per unit in range", I think that, if the rule is kept, each WE's starting DC should count as a unit in range. ?After all, the WE gets an attack for every starting DC, why wouldn't the Necron?

If the fluff problem is that it is possible to overload the close support weapons, then a cap to the number of attacks is the way to go. ?A Gargant is a bit enough target that it's like an armored company all by itself.

_________________
Happy to have survived to being a Grognard!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:19 pm
Posts: 96
Wouldn't it be easier to just note that all the +1 atacks from infantry targets must be applied to the infantry and all the +1 attacks from the WE must be applied to the WE? That way the Necron player still gets to count all his attacks/kills for combat resolution but would prevent the wholesale destruction of an infantry uit who happened to be too close to a friendly WE.

_________________
"Then it belches, farts, feels sick to its many stomachs and just sits down and fires half-heartedly at them, placing a single Blast marker." - Chroma


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Pipboy @ Oct. 21 2006,17:01)
QUOTE
Wouldn't it be easier to just note that all the +1 atacks from infantry targets must be applied to the infantry and all the +1 attacks from the WE must be applied to the WE? That way the Necron player still gets to count all his attacks/kills for combat resolution but would prevent the wholesale destruction of an infantry uit who happened to be too close to a friendly WE.

Just a reminder:

People realize that the only way the Monoliths would be getting extra attacks for both the infantry and nearby war engine is if those two formations were declared inter-mingled (or performing a combined assault). ?

A Monolith, surrounded by multiple enemy formations, assaulting or supporting against a single target formation only gets extra attacks for in-range units in the target formation, not for all enemy units that happen to be within 15cm, but not directly involved in the engagement.





_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 232
Location: Lyon, France

(Pipboy @ Oct. 21 2006,17:01)
QUOTE
Wouldn't it be easier to just note that all the +1 atacks from infantry targets must be applied to the infantry and all the +1 attacks from the WE must be applied to the WE? That way the Necron player still gets to count all his attacks/kills for combat resolution but would prevent the wholesale destruction of an infantry uit who happened to be too close to a friendly WE.

Well, a medious way would be to count each WE as its DC/2 units.

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Or we could make the WE's pay for their hits like everyone else.  Sheesh!   How much whining can there be in relation to the AMTL list?!

Titans DESERVE to be attacked more times under the +1 per unit rule.  They benefit in so many ways that a regular formation of infantry or tanks cannot.  One specific way is that they can fight at full strength even when they have 1/8th their original DC.  There are a dozen other things that titans can do that other regular formations cannot.

Ilushia, you can't possibly think your suggestion really makes sense in light of all the benefits the AMTL (and WEs in general) have?  I understand it is your favorite (only?) army, but come on now... ???

I'm all for dialing down the Necron, but not in this manner.

_________________
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: Necron review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Well, in 40k, the Gauss Flux Arc gets d6 shots per unit in range.  Vehicles get d6 shots at them, a unit of infantry gets d6 shots at them.  While there's no specific mention of how WEs are affected by the Flux arc, superheavy vehicles are still vehicles, they get d6 shots like every other vehicle.

Therefore, a WE would only get one attack directed at it in Epic.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 232
Location: Lyon, France

(Lion in the Stars @ Oct. 22 2006,04:58)
QUOTE
Well, in 40k, the Gauss Flux Arc gets d6 shots per unit in range. ?Vehicles get d6 shots at them, a unit of infantry gets d6 shots at them. ?While there's no specific mention of how WEs are affected by the Flux arc, superheavy vehicles are still vehicles, they get d6 shots like every other vehicle.

Yep but W40k is not Epic. Let's find a way to balance the list for Epic. :)

_________________
François Bruntz,
La Tribune de Laïtus Prime


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Necron review
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:22 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
As much as possible, I'd like to keep the various systems functioning similarly between the two games.  This makes it easier to convert people to the real game.  You'll get a lot of questions about this from 40k players, since right now Gauss Flux Arcs work completely differently in Epic than in 40k.  My way they still work similarly (40k:  every enemy unit gets d6 shots, Epic:  every enemy unit gets 1 attack)

If WE's drawing DC or  1/2*DC Extra Attacks is needed for balance, then it's needed, and I won't argue the point (well, not much anyway), but if there's another way to make it work, I'd prefer that.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 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