Re: [NetEpic ML] necron names

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:51:54 -0400

Jarreas Underwood wrote:

>>well we could always have the slanns take them over and possibly add their
>>own modifications to them. That could explain any differences.. such as trhe
>>disruptor fields (which 40K necrons no longer have)
>>
>>
>
>Perhaps the Slaan origionally developed them, and one of the prototype models malfunctioned and ended up in the C'tan system. That'd stick with the existing NetEpic Slaan/Necron history and allow both types of Necrons.
>
>Divergent idea: Create a baseline Necron army, then allow players to customize it to their preference - it's not like Necrons need new technology to bolt on a different weapon of construct a different hull. It'd be on the oder of the current IG Custom Doctrines, and things like the 40K Necrons and NetEpic special weapons (e.g. the disrupter field) as custom additions. That way we wouldn't have to make two completely different lists.
>-Yar
>
Hi!

I like that "divergent idea" Jar. We can sort of have a generalized pool
of necron and "tweaks" that would be applied to represent Slann necron
allies and those under the C'tan.

Peter
Received on Mon Jan 12 2004 - 20:51:54 UTC