Plus with the currently ruling for dismounting you can stretch an extra 3.5cm out of that with strip bases.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

That's a stupid ruling >:(

In other cases bases hardly matter at all, but suddenly you get extra assault range out of it...

As others have said, the Necron 'slingshot assault' is comperable with similar transport-assaults from other armies (though rather inferior to the Eldar 'slingshot'). Now if the Necrons had the Eldar hit-and-run rule for consolidation this might be a problem. As it is, Portals are limited to one use per turn (so a single Monolith cannot be used to assault and retire etc), so it is not a huge problem for the reasons stated.

The only potential problem here is the ability of the Necrons to make a significant assault with the intention of losing. Doing this potentially allows them to inflict considerable losses to an enemy formation, and then withdraw 30cms to a convenient portal and escape off-table. This tactic relies on the Necron resurrection ability to fight an attrition battle intending to recover the losses for later in the game. However, even this tactic requires significant fore-thought and planning (and luck) to pull off, and also has major flaws that can be exploited (like timing, the now isolated Monolith near opposing troops, recovering the broken formation etc)

Except Rhinos don't have the option of starting 5cm away turn one, the space marine formations can't pick which ever rhino is most advantageous to come out of at the time, and space marines can't go in one rhino and come out somewhere a metre away. You'd probably agree that Necrons are at least potentially a very fast moving army with a high probability of turn 1 assaults - if they want them.

Buty I definitely agree with you on where you said 'The biggest stumblingblock to players fighting against Necrons is understanding how they operate.' That's why I made this thread

That does allow a formation to be redeployed (or even assault) elsewhere, but requires two portals to achieve (three if you are going to consolidate / withdraw), and the Necron player rapidly runs out of viable portals to do this.

Necrons are both the fastest and slowest army in the gamer, and their ability to drop in your face on turn one is countered by a lot of weaknesses; kill the portals and they're trapped offboard, break them and they count as destroyed, very little ranged shooting etc.

You forgot to mention no marching, no garrisons past the tomb, and limited painting schemes.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Point of order... it's not a final ruling. It's still open for discussion.

I agree . We normally treat disembarks as movement. That and you have to be in half-in terrain to claim its benefits.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

This is now delving into the off-topic, so mebee splitting it off, by a mod, would be good?

The problem with the above, and most similar issues*, is that one system, or another, is going to favour certain builds. I've got my own issues with 12mmx40mm being used sideways for advantage, either to concentrate more heavily in close combat, or to string a greater distance between objectives, neither of which a square base can really accomplish (sure, it can turn diagonal for the latter, but that's adding a relatively small increase (~8mm), and doesn't aid in the CC advantage.

* This has been a point of contention in the past with regards significantly sized Objective Markers.

It also becomes apparent, when dealing with significantly different scaled miniatures. This was most apparent when I was watching two Marine armies, one with an official metal Thunderhawk, and the other with a pair of FW Thunderhawk Transporters. The comparison is huge, and it gave the TT player the potential for a much larger deployment frontage, a lot more than using two similar to original sized metal ones.

The only real solution, is to measure center of transport/portal to center of base, or center of base to center of base, for coherency. But that falls apart when you take base contact into account. I once suggested locally of making "base contact" range some small number (1-3cm?), because of conceptual issues with the "conga line contact" Close Combat rules, but I recognised the problem of making CC armies a bit more potent.

And without any real form of base uniformity (I want my Warlock Titan on a 40mm base, my opponent wants his on a 80-120mm base, arguments ensue), this is really a matter of making the rules be least intrusive. I'm not sure there's a "good" solution.

Morgan Vening

I like the fact that epic's relaxed basing rules mean that people have to act like reasonable adults and come up with a fair solution.

Just so as i.am.completely. Understanding things here when zombo says break them and they count as destroyed
we are talking about victory points for formations that have teleported off the table yes?

Otherwise my main annoyance with necRons is their constant redeployment via teleporting and large number o ffearless living metal models

_________________
MoK's Painting Blog
Now Showing:
Mok's Modular Modern Messy Guard Army

Yes I mean for VP purposes.

Necrons have a very different play-style to the other armies out there, but once you get used to it you learn to adapt new strategies to beat them.

The FAQ thread is here for the dismount discussion. If you want to discuss basing as a whole, it probably needs a dedicated thread.

WHAT!!! Look Moscovian, you've got the first two right but I really have to call you out on the third.

Limited Painting Schemes? What planet's inhabitants wouldn't run screaming from necrons in pink or green who rise from tombs proclaiming 'We come in Peace' before administering the hug of death?







Paint schemes are only limited by the imagination or insanity of the artist