Tactical Command | View topic

Page 3 of 9

[ 128 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 9 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Necron 4.4.1

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 3:06 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

My opponent had an interesting idea during the game about changing the Necron infantry speed to 10cm and allow them to be able to March. I think this would actually make quite an interesting difference. Would influence Assaults (one of the Necron strengths).

You know this isn't a bad idea, folks. Getting rid of a special rule is always nice and you can nerf the Necrons across the board if need be.

I know I'm giving overlapping opinions (changing a list before its even been changed) but hear me out. There are many things the Necrons are known for; speed isn't one of them even on the fast units.

Warriors/Immortals, etc to 10cm
Destroyers/Hvy Destroyers to 20cm
Tomb Spyders to 10cm
Obelisks to 20cm
Monoliths to 10cm
Wraiths to 20cm

Remove the marching restriction.

It means Necrons will get the same or -in some cases- better positioning on the board while reducing their overall assault abilities. Portals no doubt negate most of this disadvantage but the nerf would be felt on the board more readily as Necron formations will struggle to give chase during the game.
-----
Wraith formation size should be 4 or more to avoid popcorn formations (as pointed out above).

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

zombocom

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:07 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569

I'm not 100% sold on the wraith formation. It's very situational in use, and as has been said, all fearless formations are annoying.

I like the idea of losing an attack and gaining first strike on them though.

As for the marching/slow down issue, it will make close combat specialists in the list worse, which is not neccesarily a bad thing. I'm not against it in principle, but I'm not hugely for it either.

If the no marching rule was to go then the +1 to marshall might as well be abandoned too, since it rarely comes up anyway.

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

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:14 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Crabowl made a similar comment in his batrep and his concerns are valid. ?With that said, I think the formation would be fun, look good on the board, and can be priced appropriately if you stick with a fixed size formation (perhaps 4?). ?At 4 Wraith stands I'd make them 250 points. ?Making them larger than that and they might have too much staying power and be difficult to price.

EDIT: I've been for removing the marshall bonus from the beginning. They do just fine without it. Having those two gone would certainly streamline the list.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

zombocom

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:20 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569

It's also a further fairly significant nerf for destroyers, making them not very fast at all. Would they really be much use with only 20cm movement? I've been playtesting them at 25 and it's already a significant difference.

Also, reducing the basic infantry and monolith speed to 10cm does tactically limit the necrons, but not in a good way for the opponent. The necron player will be FORCED to place his monoliths as close to the enemy as possible for the assault of doom tactic, as the other tactic of sitting back and then moving monoliths into position during the turn will be no longer viable.

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

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:37 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

With a 30cm range on their weapons I think they would do fine at 20cm. Keep in mind they use portals too and can maximize their use of the synchronization. They can double and still have an effective range of 70cm with a 20cm move. So if you are deploying them 15cm off your table edge they won't be able to engage the enemy on turn 1 (which they could do with a 30cm speed).

If this seems too much change too quick, a watered down version could be instituted like decreasing the speed of Warriors, Immortals, Pariahs, and Flayed Ones to 10cm, keep the special rules, keep the Destroyers at 25cm. Now you've affected the core assaulting formations only.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

zombocom

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:41 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569

Hmm. 10cm AND cannot march? That'd really suck.

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

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:59 pm

Brood Brother

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

(zombocom @ Feb. 11 2008,15:41)

QUOTE

Hmm. 10cm AND cannot march? That'd really suck.

I think Marching would be back in if the movement reduction was implemented; it's *instead* of the "No Marching".

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:07 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Well, I'm trying to come up with something that would satisfy everyone and it isn't working. Oh well.

My original movement post would probably have to stay as is then. The problem I see is with Destroyers getting 25cm and a march order. If they can do that they can move 75cm which means that they can claim/contest an objective 90cm away (compared to 65cm away at 25cm with no march). Reducing them to 20cm plus marching means they can claim an objective 75cm away which is a slight bump in their utility but a slight decrease in their assaulting abilities.

Keep in mind they can use portals! Getting around the board shouldn't be a problem for the Necrons until they experience Monolith losses. Besides the idea of making the Necrons more challenging to play has tremendous appeal to me.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

zombocom

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:24 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569

Another issue comes with the abbatior. If it's reduced to 15cm with marching it will become even more useless. It's already a sub-par choice, and with only a 30cm engagement range it'll become even more difficult to get it into base contact, and I simply couldn't see it being useful.

If the speed were kept at 20cm it would probably become overpowered, with a 60cm first turn march making it a much bigger turn 2 threat.

RE the destroyers, one of their main uses at the moment is to bring them out of portals further away from the main battle line, which becomes a lot harder, again forcing the necron player to put all monoliths nearer to the enemy, which is something we don't want to encourage.

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

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:39 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Notice I didn't say anything about changing the speed of the Abattoir and with good reason. ?Most people don't field it simply because it doesn't compare with the Orb. ?The fact that it has to get into CC to be really useful is a problem even with infiltrator. ?Adding march to it IMO would make it better but not unreasonably so. ?If it turns out to be too much of a bump after some playtesting then change the price by 50 points but I honestly don't see that happening. ?

As for the Destroyers, you still aren't relying on a front line Monolith deployment with a reduction of the Destroyer speed. ?They still have an effective shooting range of 50cm on a single and 70cm on a double. ?Their assault range is still 35cm compared to a Phalanx assault range of 25cm. ?The Destroyers can still deploy from the back of the board, from mid-board Monoliths, the Abbatoir, the Warbarque. ?In fact they probably would deploy from these things since there will be less Monoliths on the front lines. ?Why do I know that? ?Because we changed the price!

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

rpr

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:25 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:32 pm
Posts: 516

I like the idea of dropping 'no march' and 'marshal +1' rules. Especially if they still have initiative 1+.... The "dramatic" dropping of speed (10/20cm) would make the list again a bit different than others and that would be nice to see, but cannot comment it more without playtesting. At least it would make them even more dependant on Monoliths, but well that could add more tactical aspect.

Top

zombocom

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:21 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569

After considering the issue, I'm with hena on this one. It's a non-starter as far as I'm concerned.

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

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:33 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Hmmm... I don't think the idea should be killed but perhaps shelved for another day if some further changes are needed.

I think the formation would be fun, look good on the board, and can be priced appropriately if you stick with a fixed size formation (perhaps 4?). At 4 Wraith stands I'd make them 250 points. Making them larger than that and they might have too much staying power and be difficult to price.

What do y'all think about this price for the Wraith formation?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

Magarch

Post subject: Necron 4.4.1

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:30 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:16 pm
Posts: 81
Location: Belgium

Hello there. I follow this topic for quite a long time and finally decided to give my humble point of view. I hope my english won't be too bad for you to understand since my mother language is french.

I think the idea to drop the "no march" rule can be a good one to allow the necrons to be played without the monolith. Though this vehicle is quite a key in the necron player's tactics, I feel the list shouldn't just be reduced to only it.

On the other side, I believe the speed of necron units don't have to be dramaticaly reduced. 15 cm for the infantry is fine enough like this. Just dropping the 30 cm units to 25 cm would be a good thing to be tested.

The main trouble in the list stays the monolith, though. In fact, I don't understand why the army allows to take a formation of one armored vehicle. I understand that in the beginning, it was designed to be a war engine but now that its category has changed, wouldn't it be more logical to force the player to take at least two units in this formation ?

There are quite some suggestions already ;

- Two monoliths
- Three monoliths
- One monolith and one obelisk
- One monolith and two obelisks

Doing so, you have a real formation of armored vehicle, and not a false war engine formation. Forcing the player to take more than one unit is also a good way to increase the cost in points rather than doing it artificially like it is suggested on the first post of this topic.

And, after all, this is Epic ; we talk about large armies when the individual disappears in front of the crowd. Formations are composed of several units of infantry and vehicles, not just one.

That, or you make the monolith a war engine again. Then that would make sense to take a formation of one.

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 3 of 9

[ 128 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 9 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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

Jump to:

Necron 4.4.1

Who is online