 Editor in Chief Bill   | 15 Feb 2012 12:19 p.m. PST |
Do old Necron and third-generation Necron models look good in the same army? |
| ochoin deach | 15 Feb 2012 12:47 p.m. PST |
Do old & new necrons mix? Yes, if you use a blender. |
| ochoin deach | 15 Feb 2012 12:48 p.m. PST |
Do old & new necrons mix? Not socially. |
| ttauri | 15 Feb 2012 12:50 p.m. PST |
Yes. But the newly released ones are third generation…. It depends on your personal aesthetic. Generally I think they work okay as separate units, not so good mixed together. |
| Thomas Whitten | 15 Feb 2012 12:54 p.m. PST |
I have a large number of both old and new styles. I now have them coming from separate tomb worlds. (In the prior version of the background, I had them separate as well. Each was under the influence of a different C'Tan.) Outside of large Apoc. games, I would not use the different styles in the same army. |
| captainquirk | 15 Feb 2012 2:00 p.m. PST |
Only at the more dubious kinds of party |
| AndrewGPaul | 15 Feb 2012 3:41 p.m. PST |
Since the Warriors, Lords, Destroyers and Monoliths are the older models, I would have to say yes.  . The 1st-gen, metal models? not so much. One of them is still available (although now in Finecast: tinyurl.com/7oc3kl5 ), so you can make your own mind up. |
| Karpathian | 15 Feb 2012 3:45 p.m. PST |
The old metal ones have a charm. As ttauri says, don't mix them in the same unit. I tweak the stats for the metals to make them slightly more powerful (I also have Cadian Home Guard units which have downward tweaked sats). |
| Pictors Studio | 15 Feb 2012 3:51 p.m. PST |
I use the old immortals exclusively with the newer figs. now that there are 3rd generation immortal out and they are a troop choice they might be replaced. i just didn]t like the 2nd generation immortals. |
| Rubber Suit Theatre | 15 Feb 2012 4:45 p.m. PST |
Sort of – turns out the old ones weren't in metric, so the replacement parts are always off by a fraction of a millimeter. You end up going through a huge amount of bondo and gasket sealant… |
| Ratbone | 15 Feb 2012 6:29 p.m. PST |
Seems to me the classic issue. Some folks love every figure in a unit to look exactly the same, fewer folks like them to have variety. Many folks get overly worried if one figure looks different from the unit. Too much focus on the WYSIWYG rule. "I'll TELL you what you get, just ask." When did the idea that I have to sit back and figure out what your capabilities are from looking become so important? I don't WANT to memorize every option and rule. |
| Thomas Whitten | 16 Feb 2012 7:03 a.m. PST |
I consider the 1st generation ones the old ones. If the model appears in the latest codex, I don't consider it old. Still, it really isn't about how old they are, it is about style. I don't like the look of the metal warriors mixed with the plastic warriors. Same goes with the destroyers and the immortals. And I have enough of both 'old' and 'new' that I can make separate armies with them. That wasn't really hard given the in game cost of warriors. Of course having separate armies was easy using the previous codex. The monolith fit just fine with the 1st gen necrons and converting destroyers to heavy destroyers was quite easy. And that is how I started, I was happy using my 1st gen necrons + monolith for a long time. I didn't have two necron armies until I picked up a bunch of the plastic warriors in a trade. Then I decide it would be a good idea to have two necron armies (don't ask me why.) Things are now more complicated with the new codex and I think my 1st generation necrons will just move to the back of the self. They will only be taken out for really large games. |
| Thomas Whitten | 16 Feb 2012 7:10 a.m. PST |
Many folks get overly worried if one figure looks different from the unit. I want my units to look good. If a model doesn't fit the rest of the unit, it doesn't become part of the unit. WYSIWYG has nothing to do with that. |
 etotheipi  | 18 Feb 2012 6:51 p.m. PST |
The real question is to does either set mix well with chibi necrons?
|
