Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I was thinking of an alternate form of warrior specialized more for assault. (that's nt flayed ones) with some sort of fear/template weapon, like a gauss flayer with a dilated beam. Thinking along the lines of template S3 ap5 assault 1 gauss-fear (fear as pinning except forces a moral check as shooting) having them in a standard warrior squad doesn't seem right saying how unimaginative necrons are about switching up the weapons they use.
Also consider that disruption fields should give units the "heavy combat weapon rule" (saves only count as 4+ unless worse)
On the whole "new troops idea" I have had a number of thoughts and opinions.
A part of me really wants there to be some sort of assaulty type unit that we could choose as an alternative to Warriors. It would be a toned-down version of Flayed Ones, perhaps not insane like FOs but having the same weaponry without their special rules. They would have a Warrior stat-line but would have a special rule that gives them a +2 to Initiative and Move Through Cover if the squad is within a certain proximity to FOs, kind of like a contagious/infectious flesh frenzy.
Then I think about the Warrior as the bulk of Necrons. I suppose there is a lot of truth to that and I really like the rules to reflect the fluff where possible.
Then something occurred to be in reading a rumor about IG having the Leman Russ as an auxillary to their Troops or some similar notion. This got me thinking, "what, if anything, would have the numbers within the Necron army to match Warriors?" Scarabs! Thus, my idea would be to allow a single unit of Scarab Swarms to be selected for every unit of Warriors. It doesn't seem too wild and I think it would fit with the fluff. It would also give Necrons some flexibility, I think, in filling in a need for a ubiquitous close combat unit.
Last edited by kore; July 30th, 2008 at 05:18.
Karmoon: "well.. any kore = good kore" 12:35pm PST 23 May 2007
Lol yeah I'm a strong believer in the "troop scarabs" holding because it's true they are extremely common. And how cranky would people be if we got 3 wound jetbikes that could grab objective? (well...yeah I KNOW they can't but if they could)
I ment more a just altered warrior with an assault type weapon and flayed one stats. That way they'd be close enough to the same, but twisted just enough to give us some variety. I was thinking sawed-off gauss flayers for a weapon. Maybe not even template maybe just an assault 1 GF, then give them a second attack.
This being said flayed ones would need a boost (I really think adding heavy cc weapon it's so underused and such a neat rule)
Neat idea, but to put it simply, the Flayed Ones and Warriors complement each others' weaknesses while still acting in a troop style of role, not to mention equal points values. Sounds like a good gun for Pariahs though.
My gaming group's new motto: That army you're using is overpowered because it hurts my guys, codex is broken and needs a rewrite.
Entertaining topic, I personally think we need a troop choice that represents the necrontyr slaves. Weak, feable with the stats of an imperial guardsmen with two attacks.
What Necrontyr slaves? Necrontyr are extinct.
Used on Pariahs...yeah that would be nice, never have to think "do I wanna run or shoot?" 'cause soon as yer shooting yer charging.
Karmoon: "well.. any kore = good kore" 12:35pm PST 23 May 2007
I don't think an army led by a Lord would allow for heretics or slaves as a lord would have no interest in dealing with any other species except to kill them. The lords are intelligent and no doubt can see that the C'Tan maybe favouring humans over necrons, with the creation of Pariahs that are more powerful than their old faithful necron servants. Hmm... maybe there's some fluff there.... A tomb world might rebel against the C'Tan if the lords think they are being cast aside in favour of a new race....
My blog - http://wingsofsanguinius.blogspot.com
Been here nearly 10 years and still haven't managed 500 posts.
I've also thought about this a fair bit. A new Necron unit to diversify our army would go a long way, but the problem is the Necrons are 'ancient and unchanging'. I'm guessing the addition of Pariahs would have been a tough decision for the designers, but they felt it necessary to give the Necrons a breath of fresh air; and I don't know about anyone else, but they don't seem to have made the effort to make them an easily used unit.
Whilst it would be great to see a totally new unit, I'm not sure it'd happen as I can't really see it making 'Necron' sense to have another CC unit that's just a little weaker than Flayed Ones. Or basically that it's just not logical. Why have something that performs the job not quite so well, just so there's diversity?
Anyway, I think a great addition would be something along the lines of what kore mentioned with the Scarabs. I myself love both Destroyers and Scarabs and find it quite annoying that I can only field 3 squads in total of both. And I would never choose Wraiths over either, even though having a Wraith or two on the board is a great way to just cause havoc, and give you that psychological edge.
Either working the Scarabs into a more limited troop choice (ie, unable to capture objectives), or having them as a independent part of a Warrior squad would make sense to me; hell, they even come in the same box set. Say, you can take 5 swarms per Warrior Squad at the same point cost with the same rules, but they can be fielded as a separate unit. It's just a thought, please enhance upon it if you've got any ideas.
I love to field Scarabs, as they give Necron armies the diversity that I think everyone here is trying to think towards, but they become a difficult choice to a lot of people when you've only got those 3 FA slots to work with. So I think this might be a decent solution.
Apologies, the above was double posted.
Last edited by MattJP; July 30th, 2008 at 11:36. Reason: Double post