I did left the Pylons (every variant) out of my list because i think it had enough AA. Obelisks and aircrafts. And Pylons are to defensive for my taste.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Yeah I'd definetly think the obelisk should get an AA attack if we'd take away all the pylons (which I have been contemplating).

One problem I have with that though is that through the epic raiders list the pylon has become sort of iconic for necrons in epic. And secondly a lot of us have some very nice Pylon proxies from the otter days, I think it would be a shame for us not to get to use these.

Easy fix would be to take the Raiders Obelisk and give it an AA shot, and then get to work so that you can start on the second Newcron defensive list!

Easy fix: Leave the Obelisk to the Raiders list and use the"Dynastyname Obelisk" for the Ne(w)cron list.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I'd suggest that a "Sauthek Obelisk" still be an AV skimmer with speed 30cm and 5+RA. I got no problem with adding the bigger Obelisk from the new codex, but I think the name needs to be more distinct - Greater Obelisk? Obelisk Major(is), Obelisk Magnus, Obelisk Maximus, Obelisk Mega? (Roman or greek naming conventions isn't anything new for the 'crons!)

Just checked out various wiki entries about the Obelisk. They all describe it as a Tomb World defensive system - are we back were we started with the Pylon? Two types of DC2 Living Metal AA war engines that defend Tomb Worlds feels a bit redundant...

Thanks for the input guys, its great gets me thinking why things should or shouldn't be in the list.

I have been pondering this issue more tonight. I'd like to keep the old Raiders obelisk (ie a AV version and not a WE) for the list for the reasons I put forward in my previous posts. We could add an AA attack later on but I'm hesitant to add to add to much AA to the list. Lets see how it plays out for a few playtest. If the necrons gets abused a lot by aircraft now that they don't leave the board when broken, then the obelisk will be the prime candidate for added AA.



I'm not closed to the idea of greater obelisk AA vehicle but I agree with the above. Two WE AA would feel rather unnecessary. As for now I'll just let the possibility of adding another discount pylon to the formation be enough of a help. I you feel like adding more new units to the Tomb World list Ulrik, then I guess this would be a nice candidate.

I know you talked about "leader" for the pylon as an option in another thread Ulrik, have you decided on that? I will follow your lead...


Thanks, I thought about that, but it felt unfair towards Black Legion if he wants to continue to develop his list.

I have an idea Sautekh Legion or Legio Sautekh which sound best?

I keep going back and forth on that. I got these ideas that you can play around the Pylon's weaknesses (using to draw fire, use the Necron +1 to marshall to remove the blast marker while still getting the shot, not teleporting, then teleporting because there's no good place to deploy it, watching my Pylons rally and then immediatly get plinked with a BM before I get a chance to activate it or needing to activate something else at the start etc etc) and they mostly don't work out.

Needs more testing, but I'm a bit burned out on testing the Raiders list. Would prefer to work on the Tomb World list.

Saw a misstakes I've made. The ponderous rule has only been added to the monoliths, but was intended for all the WE with portals as well. Will update this with some spelling and other small stuff editing to a 0.2 version.

Ok I wanted to test the list again so I took it out for a second game. I played against a buddy in Stockholm.

I met a reaver based Codex Marine list. There report can be found here.

Of the new units, I tested Triarch praetorians, stalkers, ghost arks and the vault. I don't think anything with them tended to be over the top. The game felt even up until turn 3 were it turned fast downhill for the marines. I used the traditional tactic of ignoring the titan, not a single shot was fired against it.

The Tesseract Vault was killed before it could do anything so the game didn't really give any info on it.

One thing that I thought about post game is the ability of the monolith eternity gate-portal to be used to "suck up" a formation on the board and let it reenter directly.
This together with no phasing out really lessens the need for portals to relocate your troops. Freeing up points for other formations. I lost 3 portals very early in the game, but still didn't really have any problems throughout the game.

What it also does is it lets formations on the board relocate and engage directly more easily than before. One could relocate with the old portal as well, it's just that you needed a second portal close to the formations first position to exit the table. So I'm not sure if it's a bonus over the old portals.
It does underline my point above though that it lessens the need for portals.

I think it's probably ok, most rule changes have been nerfs to necron special rules. I clearly wouldn't have lost my Immortal BTS for instance if I would have played with phase out. A possibility I see is limiting the range to perhaps 60 cm. That way you can't at least relocate over the entire board. It might be to limiting. The list needs more testing, before I'd like to do any change.

Just wondering why you've changed the armour value on the warriors and flayed ones from the approved list. They are even more vulnerable now that the portals have been altered (I don't disagree with that change) but the nerf on armour and no change to the unit cost? Not bashing it just curious about the rational.

In the coming weeks I plan to test out a list heavy on large warrior formations and Night scythes for portals rather than monoliths.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

I'm very glad to hear that someones interested in the list! Cheers for that!

There were three of us that were discussing how to interpret the newcrons. The guy who was at first suppost to be the list head developer thought that their new fluff and also rules (lowered save) in 40k could not justify the previous 4+ save in Epic. I was kind of undecided at first but later agreed (and still do) that a 5+ save is a closer/better representation of the 40k newcron warrior in epic. I also like how it helps distinguish warriors from the more elite immortals now that they come in their own formations.

On the other hand consistancy between the old (epic) list and this newcron list is something I would really like to have. What I mean is I think it's preferable to have the basic units keep the same stats between the scarab list and this list. The differing stats between warriors is somewhat confusing.

If testing shows the new warriors/flayers to be to weak then I'm open to change it back to a 4+ save. Alternativly lower the price.

Thanks

Actually the change is kind of a blessing in disguise. The guys in my group really don't like facing the scarab conflict list, so I don't get to bring them out as much as I like. They seem to walk all over most astartes lists that I've played. In one game I actually completely annihilated the opponents entire army on turn 4. The change to the portals and the warrior armour will probably mean more enthusiastic opponents. At least until I find a new way to crush them. I think the ability for the fliers to get a ground strike in to prep the target, then slamming them with a horde of warriors will be a brutally effective combo. Going to give the night shroud bombers a try as well. 6 BP MW disrupt attacks will be devistating.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

Yeah them night shrouds really needs testing so please do. MW BP feels very strong but being fliers means they cannot sustain so usually they will only be hitting infantry on a 5+ anyway and vehicles the same. They might have to be toned down.

I'd be greatful for any and all feedback from your games (and of couse any battlereports would be very appreciated).

Well it has taken a lot longer than anticipated but my newcrons are finally ready for battle. I am planning a weekend of gaming coming up in 2 weeks. I'll take notes and pictures and post a battle report for you. Here is the list I will be fielding:

INFANTRY PHALANX [325] - Necron Lord, 8 Warriors, Tomb Spyders
INFANTRY PHALANX [250] - Necron Lord, 7 Warriors
IMMORTAL PHALANX [425] - Necron Overlord, 8 Immortals
EQUES MANIPLE [350] - 6 Destroyers, Necron Lord
MONOLITH PHALANX [275] - 3 Monoliths
MONOLITH PHALANX [275] - 3 Monoliths
VENATOR MANIPLE [200] - 6 Flayed Ones
PYLON [200]
NIGHT SCYTHES [175] - 2 Night Scythes
NIGHT SCYTHES [175] - 2 Night Scythes
NIGHT SHROUD BOMBERS [350] - 2 Night Shrouds

Usually don't put my supreme commander in my BTS but I feel if he dies he can just pick himself back up at the end of the turn.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

Ok great I'm looking forward to that! I'll be interested hear how the airplanes performance. Cheers