Asymmetric wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Asymmetric wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That comparison fails as scarabs aren't really melee unit but rather objective holder/screen/nuisance.

I don't see the difference, that is what wraiths are. You get what you pay for in points you put into the unit.

Neither unit is a melee blender

Uuk 6 wraiths will blender squad of primaris marines. Scarabs don't.

I'd hardly call slightly more than 5 primaris dead especially impressive. Its a couple more marines than 18 scarabs would. I like wraiths, I just think most people overinflate there offensive power.

Now Skorpehk Destroyers will obliterate units on the charge. They just have glaring issue of medicore durability / speed for there relative cost.

Eh you can't take 18 scarab squads. And nearly twice the scarabs

And that's dead primaris squad. So where 18 scarab unit(can"t take) fails to clear objective wraiths do.

Oh and skorpek unit kills 4.3 primaris. Good but less than those wraitH

tneva82 wrote:

Asymmetric wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Asymmetric wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That comparison fails as scarabs aren't really melee unit but rather objective holder/screen/nuisance.

I don't see the difference, that is what wraiths are. You get what you pay for in points you put into the unit.

Neither unit is a melee blender

Uuk 6 wraiths will blender squad of primaris marines. Scarabs don't.

I'd hardly call slightly more than 5 primaris dead especially impressive. Its a couple more marines than 18 scarabs would. I like wraiths, I just think most people overinflate there offensive power.

Now Skorpehk Destroyers will obliterate units on the charge. They just have glaring issue of medicore durability / speed for there relative cost.

Eh you can't take 18 scarab squads. And nearly twice the scarabs

And that's dead primaris squad. So where 18 scarab unit(can"t take) fails to clear objective wraiths do.

Oh and skorpek unit kills 4.3 primaris. Good but less than those wraitH

No gak, when you take more points on units, then they kill more! Did you know a single Imperator Titan also kills more than 6 wraiths?

Of course I'm not going to compare a 90 point unit of 6 scarabs to a 270 point unit of 6 wraiths and expect them to the be same, I've already said you get what you pay for. You can take 18 scarabs. You just take them in separate units. You can take more than 3 Skorpehk destroyers, in multiple units (and i would be very surprised if you couldn't take more in the codex)

Let’s keep it chill guys, no need to get angry.

Keep these instruction pics going, I’m enjoying seeing the unit tweaks.

Triarch Stalker repackaged stat changes and weapon profiles
Triarch Stalker: +2 wounds, Brackets 7+, 4-6, 1-3
Particle Shredder: 24'' Heavy 8, S6, -1, 2
Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon: 30'' Heavy 6, S7, -3, d3
Heat Ray:
Dispersed 12'' Heavy 2d6, S5, -1, 1
Focused 24'' Heavy 2, S8, -4, d6
Massive forelimbs: Melee, User, -2, 3

I'm thinking those are no longer TL Heavy Gauss Cannons but souped up TL Gauss Cannons

gibbindefs wrote:
Triarch Stalker repackaged stat changes and weapon profiles
Triarch Stalker: +2 wounds, Brackets 7+, 4-6, 1-3
Particle Shredder: 24'' Heavy 8, S6, -1, 2
Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon: 30'' Heavy 6, S7, -3, d3
Heat Ray:
Dispersered 12'' Heavy 2d6, S5, -1, 1
Focused 24'' Heavy 2, S8, -4, d6
Massive forelimbs: Melee, User, -2, 3

So....the Heavy Gauss Cannon is basically a d3 damage autocannon now....hmm...
The buff to the Forelimbs is great....
I'm not sure how i feel about this. lol

Looks like an upgrade

I saw this on Reddit and thought I'd post it here, not sure how accurate the numbers are though

"Full squad of 6 old rules vs primaris lieutenant

Old D3 shots so on average 12, 7.9 hits, 3.95 W 3.2 unsaved

New 1 shot so 6, 3 hits 1.98 W 1.6 unsaved which turns into 4.9 (1.6~ x3)

New with MWBD as that works on them now

6 shots, 3.96 hits 2.6 W 2.1 Unsaved
6.5 W

Also regarding CC


Old

18 A, 11.8 hits, 7.8 W, 5.1 unsaved 10.2 W

New

24 A 12 hits, 7.92 W, 5.2 unsaved 10.4 W

With MWBD

24 A, 15.84 Hits, 10.45 W, 6.8 unsaved 13.6 W"

So the new gun is better against tougher models with more wounds but worse against larger groups with the loss of possible 3 shots from blast


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gojiratoho wrote:
I'm thinking those are no longer TL Heavy Gauss Cannons but souped up TL Gauss Cannons

Yeah thats how it feels to me as well

 Gojiratoho wrote:
I'm thinking those are no longer TL Heavy Gauss Cannons but souped up TL Gauss Cannons

Agreed, I think that's just become a twin gauss cannon.

New stalker is a bit of a beast tbh, depending on points of course. I can see good arguments for all three guns, the extra wounds are nice and his melee got a chunky buff.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Gojiratoho wrote:
I'm thinking those are no longer TL Heavy Gauss Cannons but souped up TL Gauss Cannons

Agreed, I think that's just become a twin gauss cannon.

New stalker is a bit of a beast tbh, depending on points of course. I can see good arguments for all three guns, the extra wounds are nice and his melee got a chunky buff.

It could just become it's own thing like a "Twin Gauss Pulser" or whatever. Though if these are new stats for Gauss Cannons that is pretty great. Though, it would make the enmitic weapon stats on the Lokhust even more insane by comparison.

I'm glad my weapons are magnetized, though I think I'll use the Gauss and Heat Ray option more often.

 iGuy91 wrote:

gibbindefs wrote:
Triarch Stalker repackaged stat changes and weapon profiles
Triarch Stalker: +2 wounds, Brackets 7+, 4-6, 1-3
Particle Shredder: 24'' Heavy 8, S6, -1, 2
Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon: 30'' Heavy 6, S7, -3, d3
Heat Ray:
Dispersered 12'' Heavy 2d6, S5, -1, 1
Focused 24'' Heavy 2, S8, -4, d6
Massive forelimbs: Melee, User, -2, 3

So....the Heavy Gauss Cannon is basically a d3 damage autocannon now....hmm...
The buff to the Forelimbs is great....
I'm not sure how i feel about this. lol

Autycannon does not have ap-3.

Slightly worse than heat ray vs t8 at over 12" range. Better vs everything else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

torblind wrote:
Looks like an upgrade

Against anything but t8. Vs that new profile worse than old


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sasori wrote:

I'm glad my weapons are magnetized, though I think I'll use the Gauss and Heat Ray option more often.

Same. Necrons are lacking on at, particularly mobile. Stalker is one of the few we have

So, I’m not a competitive guy so I don’t know what makes things good. I’m curious why the tweaks to the Stalker makes it good, because I thought previously it was considered a terrible option. The Heat Ray is the same as before I think, just longer range on the dispersed option.

9th buffed it already witth no -1 to hit for moving and shooting in melee. Also game decided on midfield objeatives sort range issue and makes mobile at more valuable.

First 2 games of 9th stalker been mvp

tneva82 wrote:

Same. Necrons are lacking on at, particularly mobile. Stalker is one of the few we have

Necrons dont lack AT.

Destroyers with gauss cannons and extermination protocols
Heavy destroyers with heavy gauss cannons
Stalker with heat ray/heavy gauss cannon
Sentry pylon with focussed death ray/gauss exterminator
DDA with doomsday cannon
Monolith with particle whip
Canoptek tomb sentinel with exile cannon
Indomitus overlord with tachyon arrow
Doom scythe with death ray

Quite the opposite, necrons have a lot of AT, maybe even the most of all factions.

tneva82 wrote:
9th buffed it already witth no -1 to hit for moving and shooting in melee. Also game decided on midfield objeatives sort range issue and makes mobile at more valuable.

First 2 games of 9th stalker been mvp

Ah cool. I’ve always liked the look of them but never considered them before. But maybe I’ll pick up a pair with the Silent King. Another question is why you’d use them over the DDA? That thing seems to have a lot more firepower, though I guess it’s random shots.

 Tiberius501 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
9th buffed it already witth no -1 to hit for moving and shooting in melee. Also game decided on midfield objeatives sort range issue and makes mobile at more valuable.

First 2 games of 9th stalker been mvp

Ah cool. I’ve always liked the look of them but never considered them before. But maybe I’ll pick up a pair with the Silent King. Another question is why you’d use them over the DDA? That thing seems to have a lot more firepower, though I guess it’s random shots.

A) 125 pts vs 180
B) mobility. Enemy hides from los, dda either shoots st -2 dd3 or doesn't shoot at all.

tneva82 wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
9th buffed it already witth no -1 to hit for moving and shooting in melee. Also game decided on midfield objeatives sort range issue and makes mobile at more valuable.

First 2 games of 9th stalker been mvp

Ah cool. I’ve always liked the look of them but never considered them before. But maybe I’ll pick up a pair with the Silent King. Another question is why you’d use them over the DDA? That thing seems to have a lot more firepower, though I guess it’s random shots.

A) 125 pts vs 180
B) mobility. Enemy hides from los, dda either shoots st -2 dd3 or doesn't shoot at all.

Okay cool that makes sense. Since I want to do the Silent King’s dudes it would make sense to use them so knowing they’re good I’m keen.

Disadvantage of the triarch stalker and praetorians is that they can’t be buffed and don’t benefit from dynasty codes,

Despite that I think both units are awesome and I’m looking to clean the dust off both!

I’d imagine the Silent King will be able to buff both units. Even if not I’m keen for them, the extra attack and 2 dmg on the Praetorians is delicious.

With all the hints at rules (from the GW about Cryptek abilities) and box rules changing EVERY unit in some fashion I think the Necron Codex will not be an update but a complete ground up build.

As disheartening as it is with our 8th codex the future is completely up in the air. I for one am excited, I want lists for Necrons to not look the same as 8th at all.

With a front row seat with the launch of 9th I like to think we can't be a complete wash against the Marines on the same box. Bit who knows.

I’m excited too. Just a shame we have to wait for October, and most likely end of October at that :(

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I’d imagine the Silent King will be able to buff both units. Even if not I’m keen for them, the extra attack and 2 dmg on the Praetorians is delicious.

Yes I’ll be running both for sure,
2-3 stalkers will be a very strong choice, the targeting bonus they give other units more than makes up for a lack of dynasty tactics imo.

Pyrothem wrote:
With all the hints at rules (from the GW about Cryptek abilities) and box rules changing EVERY unit in some fashion I think the Necron Codex will not be an update but a complete ground up build.

As disheartening as it is with our 8th codex the future is completely up in the air. I for one am excited, I want lists for Necrons to not look the same as 8th at all.

Generally codexes aren"t small upgrades but overhaul. As gw isn't aiming for balanced game but instead changing imbalance its appoach that works best. Complete overhaul gets people buy more units to replace old ones

Pyrothem wrote:
With all the hints at rules (from the GW about Cryptek abilities) and box rules changing EVERY unit in some fashion I think the Necron Codex will not be an update but a complete ground up build.

As disheartening as it is with our 8th codex the future is completely up in the air. I for one am excited, I want lists for Necrons to not look the same as 8th at all.

Well we already know we're getting a new army rule called "Protocols". Probably similar to Space Marine doctrines, if not it's possibly what AdMech does. Will certainly help to have more army rules so we don't just live or die on how effective RP is.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
With all the hints at rules (from the GW about Cryptek abilities) and box rules changing EVERY unit in some fashion I think the Necron Codex will not be an update but a complete ground up build.

As disheartening as it is with our 8th codex the future is completely up in the air. I for one am excited, I want lists for Necrons to not look the same as 8th at all.

Well we already know we're getting a new army rule called "Protocols". Probably similar to Space Marine doctrines, if not it's possibly what AdMech does. Will certainly help to have more army rules so we don't just live or die on how effective RP is.

I think it's going to be closer to canticles where you pick one of the protocols and then select one of the directives, but you likely have to cycle to a new Protocol each turn.

As often rp is a pointless rule due to overkill any other army bonuses will be great.

3rd game and stalker keeps doing okay though this time it was partially good luck due to rolling. However on bonus opponent fixated on it and sent meganobz to clear it out.

Praetorians did what I asked. Fast fly unit so I was able to reach to opponents objective turn 2 and clear it with overkill(10 praetorians vs 10 grots was foregone conclusion). Killyness test wasn't done but speed was handy. Could have done more but took risk for sake of fun and tried to kill Ghaz but failed(21 attacks, 2+ to hit, 5+ to wound, he needs to fail 4 save with CP reroll available. Odds were not in my favour) and they got wiped in return. Could have optimized but since game was by then in the bag(39 vs 3 vp's) went for risky move to maximize gap and give something exciting.

Wraiths with 2++ on objective were MVP tanking ghaz for 3 combat rounds and alone scoring 12 vp's plus helping at least 2 more if not even more(not sure did I ever need that unit to get 15 vp's on primary). I'm more and more convinced this stratagem won't survive codex. But nihilikh gets mayb best dynasty code in return. I think I can live with obsec wraiths etc in return ;-)

Reapers failed but that was partially due to bad luck(18 shots vs meganobz and only 1 past save? 3+, 3+, 4+...Average is 4 which is dead and spare wound) and getting to dodge killa kans then. Did kill 2 of those though which was 4 vp so not too bad I guess.

Maybe it's just smaller games but getting reapers to range has been surprisingly easy. They aren't priority targets and when enemy engage front rank these are ready in rear to unleash S5 -2 shots.

Place 3 skorpekh lords in a ghost ark, use the deceiver to redeploy the ark, disembark, move, and the lords have a 2" charge.

What do you think are the must include units in a crusade?
(rules as they are now, no leaked codex rules or units)

I always have a weird feeling not to take full size units with necrons, but in a crusade it is hard to include full size units.

So the new Immortal and Deathmark Statline has leaked.

Immortals
+1 Toughness.
+1 Attack
+6 range on Gauss

Deathmarks
+1 Toughness
+ Now 2+ Ballistic skill
+ Gun improved to Strength 5, -2AP.
+ Gun Changed from rapid fire 1 24" to 36" Heavy.
+ Retain there ignoring look out sir rule and ummodifed 6s on wound cause mortals.

Discuss. The dream of all T5 necrons is alive.

I think with 36" range deathmarks there deepstrike hunter from cyber space rule has got to change since its not particularly synergistic.

New deathmark is better than old when used as backfield camper(though 80 pts for about 2.5 wounds vs t4 3+ isn't hottest thing).

If you use deepstrike 12" range isn't issue and old was better　vs anything but 2+ and difference was no real difference.

tneva82 wrote:
New deathmark is better than old when used as backfield camper(though 80 pts for about 2.5 wounds vs t4 3+ isn't hottest thing).

If you use deepstrike 12" range isn't issue and old was better　vs anything but 2+ and difference was no real difference.

A unit of 10 in the backfield is pretty solid and drops most normal characters in one round (primaris captain takes 2 turns). I think they're super solid as backfield snipers. T5 and a 2+ in cover makes them durable to small arms fire too.

Hoping they get the ability to mark a target before the game starts again. Maybe for +1 to wound vs that target.

I needed a unit to stay back and sit on an objective, anyways, Deathmarks might work.

Bizazedo wrote:
I needed a unit to stay back and sit on an objective, anyways, Deathmarks might work.

New Nihilakh seems a decent fit for them. Objective secured and ignore -1AP when in your deployment zone.

_______________________

I think the +1 Attack on Immortals will make tagging them with chaff or lone characters often a bad idea. The +1 toughness goes a long way against small arms fire.

Points will probably go up for deathmarks and immortals.

Makes Illuminor Szeras buffing Immortals a little more interesting — either they get BS2+ for better shooting, become T6 and turn heavily-resistant to S3 weapons, or they get S5 melee — which is still the least useful, but the extra attack makes it not as useless as before.

 p5freak wrote:
Points will probably go up for deathmarks and immortals.

I doubt it. 18 seems fair for immortals with new stats, same cost as tac marine which has 2W but worse T and weapon.

Well, it all depends how repair protocols land really.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Points will probably go up for deathmarks and immortals.

I doubt it. 18 seems fair for immortals with new stats, same cost as tac marine which has 2W but worse T and weapon.

That would be funny. Gw admitting they pretty much deliberately overcosted immortals in ca20.

tneva82 wrote:
New deathmark is better than old when used as backfield camper(though 80 pts for about 2.5 wounds vs t4 3+ isn't hottest thing).

If you use deepstrike 12" range isn't issue and old was better　vs anything but 2+ and difference was no real difference.

Well yeah, it wasn't an issue, but it didn't matter because their guns were so weak that they didn't have a good chance at killing stuff, and even if they did kill their target they'd get wiped out.
36" range and heavy is just more useful on them. You can still use their deep strike to get into a better firing position, its just now you don't have to sacrifice them to get the most out of them.

Deathmarks seem more useful now at least, though their new profile seems somewhat far removed from their fluff.

Deathmarks losing half of their shots hurts for minimum-size squads, even with the extra strength and AP. They're effective against characters that lack an invulnerable save, but I feel like I need to bring a 10-man squad to guarantee results for anything else.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
New deathmark is better than old when used as backfield camper(though 80 pts for about 2.5 wounds vs t4 3+ isn't hottest thing).

If you use deepstrike 12" range isn't issue and old was better　vs anything but 2+ and difference was no real difference.

Well yeah, it wasn't an issue, but it didn't matter because their guns were so weak that they didn't have a good chance at killing stuff, and even if they did kill their target they'd get wiped out.
36" range and heavy is just more useful on them. You can still use their deep strike to get into a better firing position, its just now you don't have to sacrifice them to get the most out of them.

They still suck at damage. Sure you can sit at 36". You still do less damage than before.

With obscuring terrain heavy weapon on infantry isn't that hot as you need to move around

They still are just min squads to get to backfield objectives. Now just with less damage output.

I have no idea where this they suck at damage comes from. For 160pts you get a backfield sniper unit that drops a primaris character a turn reliably.

They're also a pain to shift now with T5 and not needing to get close. I think you're all forgetting how many armies rely on characters to function, and how much 10 of these forces certain armies into a super tough spot.

Marine chapter master doesn't want to poke his head out with these around. Death guard characters go bye bye, incluidng that stupid grenade man.

I'll be testing 10 of them as backfield fire support.

We've only get a small snap shot of the true picture as well.

We don't know what the deathmark special rules are.
We don't know what the at least 6 command protocols with 2 different modes do.
We don't know what stratagems interact with deathmarks.
We don't know what deathmarks points cost are in the new codex.
We don't know if any relics interact with deathmarks.
We still don't know what RP does.

All we can really say is currently, they are much more capable of being a backfield objective camper.

I think I'll bite, and add another squad of 5 to my army. I have 5 spare immortals with no purpose anymore so I may just chop those up and use the multitude of spare guns I have lying around to finish them up

IanVanCheese wrote:
I have no idea where this they suck at damage comes from. For 160pts you get a backfield sniper unit that drops a primaris character a turn reliably.

They're also a pain to shift now with T5 and not needing to get close. I think you're all forgetting how many armies rely on characters to function, and how much 10 of these forces certain armies into a super tough spot.

Marine chapter master doesn't want to poke his head out with these around. Death guard characters go bye bye, incluidng that stupid grenade man.

I'll be testing 10 of them as backfield fire support.

Well was it good damage dealing before? Because new one does less damage vs t4 3+. Even less if target has 4++ like the characters you said.

Never heard anybody say deathmarks good damge output even when they did more...

And i doubt death guard character worries about 2 wounds that much. Then he deletes the　squad.

Whilst Deathmarks may not deal as much damage at once, they should deal more damage overall as they aren't going to die instantly like they did before.

Before they would drop, deal their burst damage and die.

Now you can harass the enemy constantly over the course of the game, unless your opponent goes out of his way to destroy them.

As you can now place them in cover a safe distance away, effort is now required to remove them, which means that if they do die other things might live long enough to be a problem.

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I have no idea where this they suck at damage comes from. For 160pts you get a backfield sniper unit that drops a primaris character a turn reliably.

They're also a pain to shift now with T5 and not needing to get close. I think you're all forgetting how many armies rely on characters to function, and how much 10 of these forces certain armies into a super tough spot.

Marine chapter master doesn't want to poke his head out with these around. Death guard characters go bye bye, incluidng that stupid grenade man.

I'll be testing 10 of them as backfield fire support.

Well was it good damage dealing before? Because new one does less damage vs t4 3+. Even less if target has 4++ like the characters you said.

Never heard anybody say deathmarks good damge output even when they did more...

And i doubt death guard character worries about 2 wounds that much. Then he deletes the　squad.

Are you still honestly trying to take the position that the old version was better? Seriously?

You know what the army was missing in a pretty noticeable way? Snipers that actually snipe, which was a literal complaint many ITT had about death marks and their short comings. Now we actually have a unit that not only snipes, but better then most other armies in the game and your somehow taking the stance that a few bolter shots were better? You must be trolling.

Not only did they get a massive boot to durability, but they actually can take out buff characters or at the very minimum keep them honest and hidden. If you want short ranged double tappers then just take gauss immortals or tomb blades lol. They are way better at that role DM formerly had, which was the exact reason no one used DM. Apparently you never played VS anyone with omniscramblers or auspex scan strats. Nothing like your ethereal interceptors being intercepted themselves

 Red Corsair wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I have no idea where this they suck at damage comes from. For 160pts you get a backfield sniper unit that drops a primaris character a turn reliably.

They're also a pain to shift now with T5 and not needing to get close. I think you're all forgetting how many armies rely on characters to function, and how much 10 of these forces certain armies into a super tough spot.

Marine chapter master doesn't want to poke his head out with these around. Death guard characters go bye bye, incluidng that stupid grenade man.

I'll be testing 10 of them as backfield fire support.

Well was it good damage dealing before? Because new one does less damage vs t4 3+. Even less if target has 4++ like the characters you said.

Never heard anybody say deathmarks good damge output even when they did more...

And i doubt death guard character worries about 2 wounds that much. Then he deletes the　squad.

Are you still honestly trying to take the position that the old version was better? Seriously?

You know what the army was missing in a pretty noticeable way? Snipers that actually snipe, which was a literal complaint many ITT had about death marks and their short comings. Now we actually have a unit that not only snipes, but better then most other armies in the game and your somehow taking the stance that a few bolter shots were better? You must be trolling.

Not only did they get a massive boot to durability, but they actually can take out buff characters or at the very minimum keep them honest and hidden. If you want short ranged double tappers then just take gauss immortals or tomb blades lol. They are way better at that role DM formerly had, which was the exact reason no one used DM. Apparently you never played VS anyone with omniscramblers or auspex scan strats. Nothing like your ethereal interceptors being intercepted themselves

I completely agree with you. I guess to each their own but that old gun was hot garbage. Ive seen people complaining that they are now Heavy yet they also don’t mention being bs2 now.

 Red Corsair wrote:
[q

Are you still honestly trying to take the position that the old version was better? Seriously?

You know what the army was missing in a pretty noticeable way? Snipers that actually snipe, which was a literal complaint many ITT had about death marks and their short comings. Now we actually have a unit that not only snipes, but better then most other armies in the game and your somehow taking the stance that a few bolter shots were better? You must be trolling.

Not only did they get a massive boot to durability, but they actually can take out buff characters or at the very minimum keep them honest and hidden. If you want short ranged double tappers then just take gauss immortals or tomb blades lol. They are way better at that role DM formerly had, which was the exact reason no one used DM. Apparently you never played VS anyone with omniscramblers or auspex scan strats. Nothing like your ethereal interceptors being intercepted themselves

I'm saying old gun had more damage output aka DAMGE CAUSED TO ENEMY unless opponent has 2+ save and even then you aren't causing even 1 wound more per 10 deathmark. That's not an opinion but fact proven by mathematics. If you don't see them too bad your math is worse than elementary school kid.

Of course if you want backfield sniper then fair enough. It's different role and you are paying points for abilities you don't use. Your damage output is also bad as usual. It was bad before and it is worse than it was before(again mathematical fact).

Their damage output wasn't good enough to take out characters before and with reduced output(in particular vs 4++ targets) they aren't going to take out anybody out easily either. So you take potshots, don't kill target and enemy can easily wipe them out. T5 is fine but 1W models with no inv save are paper thin targets with no real durability. Also being heavy you can't even get reliably LOS without degrading your own firepower while reverse is not true. You need to degrade your firepower to get target, opponent can take you out without worrying about that.

Maybe also besides math you should work on reading comprehension? I didn't say old gun was better. I said it's DAMAGE OUTPUT was better which is different thing. I also said it's sidestep. Aka not buff, not nerf. Because damage output was and is bad and you just trade role and unit still sucks just as it did before.

I can comprehend just fine.

You just like to make garbage inflammatory posts without taking a minute to review prior to hitting send.

In the N&R you literally missed the toughness boost as well as the BS2+

Slow down and stop trying to be the first person to opine on things and maybe you will make less mistakes. Or you know, own up to being wrong and stop doubling down on your garbage hot takes.

I mean he's wrong about the new damage output being lower on T4 3+.

New DM = 5.09 wounds
Old deathmarks in RF range = 4.44 wounds

Vs a 4++ the new ones have a slightly lower output, it's true.

New DM = 4.17 wounds
Old deathmarks in RF range = 4.44 wounds

I also dispute that it's super easy to shift 10 wounds of T5 infantry chilling in your backfield.

It takes over 1200pts of intercessors rapid firing to kill a single unit in cover (about 1000pts if in tactical doctrine). That's pretty resilient as infantry goes. Take them as new Nihilakh and they shrug ap-1 and the numbers get even better.

Played my first friendly necron 9th edition game yesterday. The new MWBD is great. Used it twice on two DDAs. Had two stalkers with heat ray, which performed great, QS helped against LC and ML, burned infantry at close range and in melee, killed vehicles with its melta profile. Played two anni barges for the first time ever, and they helped killing infantry with tesla, and got me some VPs for engage on all fronts. A victory for the necrons against AM/Dkok.

Damage output not being good enough for deathmarks is all about how many you take. If you think 10 cannot reliably drop a character, then take 2 squads of 10. That should definitely do the trick. If two squads isn't enough, then go for 3 ?

I don't think it will be wasted, because there are always characters to kill. Every army has at least two, if not more. Even if they have killed every character, then go for the sergeants.

I mean, regardless of the list I built I wouldn't be overly happy to see 10 or 20 deathmarks ranging up across the field. As long as you back it up with a little armor cracking for those handful of armies that like to slap their characters in vehicles. Such as the occasional ork list.

I would also like to add, that if deathmark killing becomes a priority, that kind of interferes with your opponent trying to wipe out other necron infantry units. Like he needs to kill your deathmark squads, and then he also needs to wipe out completely your immortal squads or necron warrior squads or they will RP back up (even based on old RP rules).

At some point, your opponent won't have that many infantry killing guns to do them all.

If you bring a skew list that has no vehicles. Then your whole army is an infantry only target. That would create a lot of target priority problems for your opponent.

Would you count destroyers and the like as vehicles? They sort of sit in a place similar to sentinels in my mind. Besides that do necrons have much anti tank that's not a vehicle/walker?

I think destroyers are more like infantry. They are T5, and have only a few wounds per model. Vehicle are usually 8W or more and are T6 and above, and have quantum shielding and living metal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

cody.d. wrote:
Would you count destroyers and the like as vehicles? They sort of sit in a place similar to sentinels in my mind. Besides that do necrons have much anti tank that's not a vehicle/walker?

Heavy destroyers for long ranged shooting, C'tan can punch out vehicles in close combat. So can warscythe lychguard and the new scorpeck destroyers and destroyer lord I supposed. The overlord has a Tachyon arrow as well, though its good for only 1 shot. I suppose if you pour enough shots into a vehicle, it will eventually get chipped to death ... lol

To me (heavy) destroyers feel more like heavy bikers. They move 10", with T5 W3. Tomb blades are bikers, they move 14", with T5 W2.

Ctans cant really punch out vehicles. They have S7. Destroyer lord has S7. Scytheguard are S7. Skorpekh destroyers have one model with a S7 weapon. You can boost infantry with S+1, with disruption fields. Necrons arent good at killing vehicles in melee.

Then guess we have to rely on doom scythes, Doomsday arks after all. Well there is heavy destroyers... heard their stats are getting changed though.

New heavy destroyers mulch tank, but they're pricey and squishy. Still worth it vs serious armour though.

On average 3 Lokhust with Gauss do about 14 wounds to a repulsor. For 210pts, that ain't too bad.

IanVanCheese wrote:
New heavy destroyers mulch tank, but they're pricey and squishy. Still worth it vs serious armour though.

On average 3 Lokhust with Gauss do about 14 wounds to a repulsor. For 210pts, that ain't too bad.

Is that a meaningful statistic though. It's not like you are up against a bunch of repulsors, in which case a statistical average is something you can make use of.

You're up against one, perhaps noe more?

What would you expect to see against a single repulsor?

If one of them wound you're looking at around 6 damage. If two of them wound you're looking at around 12, if all hit and wound you're looking at around 18. 14 might not be that likely an outcome.

Why would you use fragile infantry platforms at 210 when you have doomsday arks at 180? Hell, 210 is almost enough for a tesseract ark with 2 gauss cannon and that terrifying main 3 profile weapon.

Not seeing the value here, even as a secondary mobile option to support ddas. I'd rather have the Tessie Ark (though of the three options, only the 3 ddas are in my current comp list.)

 DogHeadGod wrote:
Why would you use fragile infantry platforms at 210 when you have doomsday arks at 180? Hell, 210 is almost enough for a tesseract ark with 2 gauss cannon and that terrifying main 3 profile weapon.

Not seeing the value here, even as a secondary mobile option to support ddas. I'd rather have the Tessie Ark (though of the three options, only the 3 ddas are in my current comp list.)

The main problem is with the extreme Variance on the DDA. Rolling how many shots, to hit, to wound and how much damage often means they don't perform well.

The Lokhusts have variance as well, but it's not as extreme as the DDA. The fact you roll 3d3 for the damage mitigates this a ton.

I'm going to play test them for sure, but I don't know if I'd ever take more than one squad.

And three models have consistently three shots

I would rather have a QS platform with Obsec, movement, and high damage, with the range to see the board and the anti-infantry dakka to protect my back line,over an infantry platform vulnerable to Marine infantry weaponry in bulk.

Same reason I never saw 300 for destroyers who disappear when someone looks at them in a stern manner. 8th, and 9th from the looks of it, is just too lethal.

A DDA is still better than 3 lokhusts. It had T6, W14, QS, living metal, and Rapid fire 10 Gauss flayers. Once enemy armor us eliminated the DDA can hunt infantry. Oh, and an overlord can MWBD a DDA, making that on one lokhust is wasted.

Hey guys, how’s everyone’s apocalypse going?

I love that my t5 melee cron army is about to be pretty dang valid.

Been doing the hobby action. Right now I’m wondering how many warriors is to many warriors. Is it impossible to know before rp is leaked?

I’m at 100 right now, that would leave me 20 unbuilt bodies. I may be getting a second Indomitus which would be 120 warriors and 20 more new weapons to put on those unbuilt bodies to be at 140.

Is that all just way over the top?

Cheers

I guess your guess is as good as ours?

 DogHeadGod wrote:
I would rather have a QS platform with Obsec, movement, and high damage, with the range to see the board and the anti-infantry dakka to protect my back line,over an infantry platform vulnerable to Marine infantry weaponry in bulk.

Same reason I never saw 300 for destroyers who disappear when someone looks at them in a stern manner. 8th, and 9th from the looks of it, is just too lethal.

From experience heavy destroyers have been more durable than doomsday arks in my games. The difference between T5 AND T6 is meh and destroyers are infantry. They have a 2+ save sitting in light cover, while DDAs are stuck at 4+

bort123 wrote:

 DogHeadGod wrote:
I would rather have a QS platform with Obsec, movement, and high damage, with the range to see the board and the anti-infantry dakka to protect my back line,over an infantry platform vulnerable to Marine infantry weaponry in bulk.

Same reason I never saw 300 for destroyers who disappear when someone looks at them in a stern manner. 8th, and 9th from the looks of it, is just too lethal.

From experience heavy destroyers have been more durable than doomsday arks in my games. The difference between T5 AND T6 is meh and destroyers are infantry. They have a 2+ save sitting in light cover, while DDAs are stuck at 4+

Yeah, they can also move and shoot, which means they can get LOS to hunt down targets.

As to whether a repulsor is a good benchmark, it's a T8 3+ save tank, which is about as tough as regular tanks get so yeah.

DDA are good, but as pure anti-tank they're way less efficient. The average 3.5 shots, 2.33 hits, 1.56 wound, so 5.44 damage. Lokhust average basically double that. Yeah they can swing a lot higher, but so can the Lokhust. Lokhust are reliable anti-tank, that's what necrons have been screaming for for years. Infantry, chill in cover with a 2+ save, they're reasonably resilient too. Not saying don't take DDAs ofc, but maybe drop one and replace with Lokhust to give yourself some true AT firepower.

DDAs are still boss (Edited the proper maths in).

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:
A DDA is still better than 3 lokhusts. It had T6, W14, QS, living metal, and Rapid fire 10 Gauss flayers. Once enemy armor us eliminated the DDA can hunt infantry. Oh, and an overlord can MWBD a DDA, making that on one lokhust is wasted.

Lokhust can almost certainly come in squads of 3, in which case MWBD is not wasted.

How do you get 1.18 hits from 3.5 shots?

 JNAProductions wrote:
How do you get 1.18 hits from 3.5 shots?

Lol my bad, rough maths and not much sleep, but the point is, it does way less average damage than 3 Lokhust.

IanVanCheese wrote:

Lokhust can almost certainly come in squads of 3, in which case MWBD is not wasted.

True, they can be taken in squads of 3. 36" range is also not good. But if you want to MWBD them they need to be on the battlefield, and you are likely to lose one or two models when you dont go first. Then your number of shots goes down, a DDA always has D6 shots.

I do hope heavy destroyers will be at least on par with DDA as an anti tank. That way, I can realise my dream of fielding a pure silvertide army!

IanVanCheese wrote:
New heavy destroyers mulch tank, but they're pricey and squishy. Still worth it vs serious armour though.

On average 3 Lokhust with Gauss do about 14 wounds to a repulsor. For 210pts, that ain't too bad.

14? What's wrong with my math. 3 shots, hit on 2+(say overlord is nearby), wound on 3+, no save, 3d3 damage. 3*5/6*2/3*6=10. HOWEVER 3 shots at 3d3 damage means there's overkill potential and since overkill is irrelevant and thus won't compensate for low rolls real average is less than 10 actually(just like pylon vs baneblade is not 31 damage average but rather 19 damage average)

edit: Well that overkill effect isn't THAT big as odds of overkill isn't that big. But about 9.58 damage for squadron of 3 lokhust with MWBD with about 12.85% chance of one shotting the tank. Without MWBD it is 7.78 damage and 6.5% chance of one shotting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

Lokhust can almost certainly come in squads of 3, in which case MWBD is not wasted.

True, they can be taken in squads of 3. 36" range is also not good. But if you want to MWBD them they need to be on the battlefield, and you are likely to lose one or two models when you dont go first. Then your number of shots goes down, a DDA always has D6 shots.

If you deploy in sight DDA is also going to go down T1 though. Dead DDA is not any more shootier than dead lokust.

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
New heavy destroyers mulch tank, but they're pricey and squishy. Still worth it vs serious armour though.

On average 3 Lokhust with Gauss do about 14 wounds to a repulsor. For 210pts, that ain't too bad.

14? What's wrong with my math. 3 shots, hit on 2+(say overlord is nearby), wound on 3+, no save, 3d3 damage. 3*5/6*2/3*6=10. HOWEVER 3 shots at 3d3 damage means there's overkill potential and since overkill is irrelevant and thus won't compensate for low rolls real average is less than 10 actually(just like pylon vs baneblade is not 31 damage average but rather 19 damage average)

edit: Well that overkill effect isn't THAT big as odds of overkill isn't that big. But about 9.58 damage for squadron of 3 lokhust with MWBD with about 12.85% chance of one shotting the tank. Without MWBD it is 7.78 damage and 6.5% chance of one shotting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

Lokhust can almost certainly come in squads of 3, in which case MWBD is not wasted.

True, they can be taken in squads of 3. 36" range is also not good. But if you want to MWBD them they need to be on the battlefield, and you are likely to lose one or two models when you dont go first. Then your number of shots goes down, a DDA always has D6 shots.

If you deploy in sight DDA is also going to go down T1 though. Dead DDA is not any more shootier than dead lokust.

How do you math that?

Without MWBD:
3 * 2/3 = 2.00 hits (from 3 shots with 2/3 of hitting) 2 * 2/3 = 1.33 wounds (2/3 chance of wounding) 1.33 * 6.00 = 8.00 damage (assuming 3d3 = 6 on average)

Now assuming hit-reroll 1, that should bring the total higher, not lower. You're number was at 7.78

With MWBD you're hitting 5/6 instead of 4/6, so that's a 25% increase, so MWBD should net you 10 damage on average.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The DDA nets you 5.44 or 6.81 damage with and witout MWBD (and I didn't yet add reroll 1s to hit to the LHD)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But I'd argue that they shouldn't be compared. DDA is much more hit or miss, whereas the LHD would be much more consistent damage dealers.

A simple comparison of averages is certainly not that useful.

By running attack run 100,000 times and see how much damage comes cutting away overkill. Your formula counts 27 damage worth 27 damage. That's not particularly useful as the high rolls don't compensate low rolls.

Issue comes every time you can cause more damage than there#s wounds and the more likely the more dramatic effect is. Pylon seemingly causes more damage than banebiade has in turn yet is only 58% likely one shotting. Thus the average withou'　cutting off overkill is　irrelevan'

Sure, just asked what the math was.

Could you instead report the most frequent damage output, or a reasonable range?

I think the issue you will find on the equivalent points worth of Locusts (2.5?) is that there is a really high chance to do 0 damage against anything with an invul, due to the low number of shots.

Whereas a DDA obviously can fail to do anything either - but if you get a 4-5-6 on the number of shots, you are more likely to get *something* through.

I guess in a no-invul word that might be less of an issue.

Tyel wrote:
I think the issue you will find on the equivalent points worth of Locusts (2.5?) is that there is a really high chance to do 0 damage against anything with an invul, due to the low number of shots.

Whereas a DDA obviously can fail to do anything either - but if you get a 4-5-6 on the number of shots, you are more likely to get *something* through.

I guess in a no-invul word that might be less of an issue.

It should average out almost the same though, right? D6 shots being 3.5 on average. Quite close to three.

torblind wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I think the issue you will find on the equivalent points worth of Locusts (2.5?) is that there is a really high chance to do 0 damage against anything with an invul, due to the low number of shots.

Whereas a DDA obviously can fail to do anything either - but if you get a 4-5-6 on the number of shots, you are more likely to get *something* through.

I guess in a no-invul word that might be less of an issue.

It should average out almost the same though, right? D6 shots being 3.5 on average. Quite close to three.

Yeah especially as you're ignoring that the DDA can just as easily get fewer shots than the Lokhust, and have even less chance of getting a shot through, and do less damage if it does get one through.

Edit on the maths btw.

The 14 wounds (13.6) was with reroll 1s to wound as well, my bad.

It's 9.33 standard, 11.67 with MWBD (25% chance to drop it in one go too). I think you're missing the innate reroll 1s to hit Still doubles the output of the DDA.

Where are you guys getting the leaks for all this new necron codex stuff ?

IanVanCheese wrote:

It's 9.33 standard, 11.67 with MWBD (25% chance to drop it in one go too). I think you're missing the innate reroll 1s to hit Still doubles the output of the DDA.

ATM lokhust have zero special rules. No reroll 1 to hit, no move and shoot without penalty. Nothing. So for now you can't base on having reroll 1 to hit without exterior source and unless you want to take -1 to hit you stay still.



And if they get them there's no quarantee price will stay same either so hard to analyze efficiency then.

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

It's 9.33 standard, 11.67 with MWBD (25% chance to drop it in one go too). I think you're missing the innate reroll 1s to hit Still doubles the output of the DDA.

ATM lokhust have zero special rules. No reroll 1 to hit, no move and shoot without penalty. Nothing. So for now you can't base on having reroll 1 to hit without exterior source and unless you want to take -1 to hit you stay still.

Spoiler:

And if they get them there's no quarantee price will stay same either so hard to analyze efficiency then.

Its highly unlikely that it stays that way. They will probably get to reroll 1s to hit, and ignore the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons, just like destroyers.

Not really sure how to show the maths, but by my calculations 3 Lokhusts (210 points) versus a DDA (180) shooting something where they all hit on 3s, wound on 3s, and there is a 5++, gives the following.

DDA: About a 35% chance to do nothing. Average about 3.6 damage.

Lokhusts, interestingly, also about a 35% chance to do nothing, average 5.3 damage.

So point for point the Lokhusts do about 26% more damage. (5.3/3.6)/(210/180)

Or crunching the numbers another way, a DDA has about a 9% chance to kill a 10 wound Ravager, while the 3 Lokhusts have a 19% chance. Perhaps more notably, a DDA has a 63% chance to not degrade a healthy Ravager (i.e. do 4 wounds or less) - while that drops to 41.5% with the Lokhusts. Gauss (if in range etc) might tick this back up a bit though.

As people say, the DDA output is skewed by the fact it *sucks* when you only get 1-2 shots but its quite good if you get 5-6. Unless there is something in the codex to make that more balanced, I guess it will average out over time. Lokhusts will also presumably get destroyer buffs.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Where are you guys getting the leaks for all this new necron codex stuff ?

The datasheet in the boxes

The codex is going to change point costs and rules for loads of units, as well as adding new army wide special rules which will be more beneficial to some units than others. Even with the new datasheets there is effectively no information to make unit comparisons.

It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

Tyel wrote:

As people say, the DDA output is skewed by the fact it *sucks* when you only get 1-2 shots but its quite good if you get 5-6. Unless there is something in the codex to make that more balanced, I guess it will average out over time. Lokhusts will also presumably get destroyer buffs.

I would like to see a stratagem where the DDA, or the doomstalker, automatically gets 6 shots. Other factions have this.

Yeah, that'd be awesome, or even a DIY Dynasty Code where you can re-roll the number of shots on random shot weapons.

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

And yet in that rule leak it doesn't.
Isn't that leak from the codex? If not there is some hope for it.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

And yet in that rule leak it doesn't.
Isn't that leak from the codex? If not there is some hope for it.

No, it's from the starter set, where apparently there are no special rules for any units in it.

 Sasori wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

And yet in that rule leak it doesn't.
Isn't that leak from the codex? If not there is some hope for it.

No, it's from the starter set, where apparently there are no special rules for any units in it.

Yep, it's from the new starter boxes. Weirdly they have datasheets for the new models in, even though they're not included... presumably because they were going to be at one point, or because the ETB Lokhust and Doomstalker will be out before the codex so they needed rules printed somewhere.

The datasheets in that box have basically no special rules in them. Rest assured the actual units will.

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

But it is also unsafe to assume point cost remains same. Unit that gets buff usually gets also price hike.

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

But it is also unsafe to assume point cost remains same. Unit that gets buff usually gets also price hike.

In this case I'm not sure that's a buff, rather it's how the unit was always designed. The datasheets for these units are clearly some sort of starter set effort rather than what we saw in Indomitus. The SM sheets, for example, don't contain the Angels of Death rules. Given that Skorpekhs get the re-roll 1s rule since they're a type of Destroyer I'd say it's much more likely the Lokhusts get that rule as well.

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

But it is also unsafe to assume point cost remains same. Unit that gets buff usually gets also price hike.

In this case I'm not sure that's a buff, rather it's how the unit was always designed. The datasheets for these units are clearly some sort of starter set effort rather than what we saw in Indomitus. The SM sheets, for example, don't contain the Angels of Death rules. Given that Skorpekhs get the re-roll 1s rule since they're a type of Destroyer I'd say it's much more likely the Lokhusts get that rule as well.

He's just super pedantic about everything. It's obviously gonna have the standard destroyer rules, and given that its a new unit that didn't exist before, there's no reason to think they'll randomly hike the pts up in the codex that releases two weeks later.

New Deathray is flat 3 shots and D3+3 damage now.

With the DDA looking like it's the same, I may be more tempted to bring Death Scythes now.

IanVanCheese wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
It is incredibly safe to assume that Lokhust get reroll 1s, as every single destroyer unit has that rule.

But it is also unsafe to assume point cost remains same. Unit that gets buff usually gets also price hike.

In this case I'm not sure that's a buff, rather it's how the unit was always designed. The datasheets for these units are clearly some sort of starter set effort rather than what we saw in Indomitus. The SM sheets, for example, don't contain the Angels of Death rules. Given that Skorpekhs get the re-roll 1s rule since they're a type of Destroyer I'd say it's much more likely the Lokhusts get that rule as well.

He's just super pedantic about everything. It's obviously gonna have the standard destroyer rules, and given that its a new unit that didn't exist before, there's no reason to think they'll randomly hike the pts up in the codex that releases two weeks later.

They have points before codex. Thus to be expected to use those with datasheets. Points are for current abilities rather than future. Same as why tac's were not costed 18 despite w2 upgrade being already decided then.

Because I love ya'll

IanVanCheese wrote:




Because I love ya'll

That death Ray is a monster now.

Going from d3 shots to 3 with str 12 d3+3 damage and rsnge 36"

Absolute killer and deserving of its name

The new monolith comes with 4 death rays.

The thing is going to have knight level firepower with those stats.

Asymmetric wrote:
The new monolith comes with 4 death rays.

The thing is going to have knight level firepower with those stats.

I'm guessing mini death rays based on these stats, 12 str 12, Ap-4, D3+3 damage shots might be a bit much lol. I reckon one or two shots per mini death ray

Hot Take:

Monolith becomes Lord of War






I am super ok with that happening, if those Death Rays keep those stats

Maybe they'll even give the monolith similar rules as the new primaries hammerfall drop bunker. Something like it has to split fire all the death Ray's to represent its firing arcs on all sides

The Monolith Death rays look a lot smaller than the DS one. I expect them to be str 6 or 7 which is still pretty good. hopefully the particle whip goes back up to str 9 or 10

It’d be sort of cool if the Particle Whip got the Tesla rule.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
It’d be sort of cool if the Particle Whip got the Tesla rule.

I think at this point we can assume the particle whip is getting more shots as all particle weapons have gained some shots. Its a huge ball of energy so I'm hopeful its 8 shots strength 10 ap -3, and damage 2D3 though if they make it strong they might keep the range the same. Maybe they'll reveal it this Saturday

Going from 4+ to a 3+ seems a significant upgrade for Ghost Ark / Doomsday Ark durability. In order to get around QS, they do tend to get hit with high volume high strength weaponry which is damage 2, much of those guns have relatively low AP (autocannons or equivalent).

Points not withstanding the Ghost Ark seems a reasonable winner due to this. If they could transport Immortals or other units that would really increase there utility.

The Doomsday Ark looks like its going to be fighting off immense competition now from Doomsythes / Lokusts / Doomstalkers / Triarch Stalkers / possibiliy monoliths for the premier anti-tank choice so it remains to be seen where these choices all lie in relation to one other with new rules.

As long as QS stays or doesn't get nerfed to death. As it's ruining life of new weapon for GW's pester boys have ugly feeling it's changed to more like 5++ or 6+++. With luck both.

(oh and please spoiler for the huge pic )

My guess with the monolith is that it fires it's secondary weapons similarly to how the new Space Marines terrain piece does, shooting at every target within range.

Death rays at every target within range? I dread to imagine cost of monolith were that true...

tneva82 wrote:
Death rays at every target within range? I dread to imagine cost of monolith were that true...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Monolith Death Rays were similar to the new Doomstalker Doomsday Blaster/Cannon comparison. So the Monolith Death Rays may well be reduced in power somewhat, compensated by having lots of them. Then again, this is GW, so who knows which route they'll take. Consistency was never their strong suit.

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Death rays at every target within range? I dread to imagine cost of monolith were that true...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Monolith Death Rays were similar to the new Doomstalker Doomsday Blaster/Cannon comparison. So the Monolith Death Rays may well be reduced in power somewhat, compensated by having lots of them. Then again, this is GW, so who knows which route they'll take. Consistency was never their strong suit.

Honestly, after 5 editions of sucking, I am hoping they over-buff the crap out of the monolith. It costs the same as a knight, and can't fight in melee. It SHOULD be a huge floating gunboat.

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Death rays at every target within range? I dread to imagine cost of monolith were that true...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Monolith Death Rays were similar to the new Doomstalker Doomsday Blaster/Cannon comparison. So the Monolith Death Rays may well be reduced in power somewhat, compensated by having lots of them. Then again, this is GW, so who knows which route they'll take. Consistency was never their strong suit.

Yeah that's what　i expect. Not "let's shoot at everything at range with death ray" that would be silly level of power. Monolith costing 600 pts? Before other buffs

Think maelstrot808 forgot monolith gets death rays as options.

tneva82 wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Death rays at every target within range? I dread to imagine cost of monolith were that true...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Monolith Death Rays were similar to the new Doomstalker Doomsday Blaster/Cannon comparison. So the Monolith Death Rays may well be reduced in power somewhat, compensated by having lots of them. Then again, this is GW, so who knows which route they'll take. Consistency was never their strong suit.

Yeah that's what　i expect. Not "let's shoot at everything at range with death ray" that would be silly level of power. Monolith costing 600 pts? Before other buffs

Think maelstrot808 forgot monolith gets death rays as options.

Not at all, I would expect that they would be reduced in capability, Death-Ray Lite™ if you will (reduced range, S, and damage). They do it with melta shots from the terrain piece so they can make it work on the monolith. Compare that to dumping four full strength death rays into a single critical target - 12 S12 shots with d3+3 damage each...and that's the secondary weapon? That personally sounds much scarier to me.

and what terrain that is? I went through existing fortifications and they shoot at closest units with automated weapons. New marine bunker? Heavy bolters and heavy flamers have that rule but heavy flamer is shorter range and still just flamer and heavy bolters are not death rays either.

Just had to pipe in, I'm a BA player. Please don't hold that against me, back when I started with RT there was not as much choice!

Having introduced my son to the game he plays Necrons and I am super happy about what is going on with the faction at the moment.

I would really like monoliths to be good, I would personally like them to be able to join up and do super shots like they do in the fluff, but I think seeing three monoliths on the field is unlikely :(

They also should be robust mechanisms for spewing troops onto the field, this is another thing that monoliths "should" do but has never really been viable.

Anyhow, sorry for the ramble, but you guys should be pleased that you are in a good place at the moment, and Necrons are always fun to play against, especially when you suddenly veil a load of nasty killing into the oppos face!

tneva82 wrote:
and what terrain that is? I went through existing fortifications and they shoot at closest units with automated weapons. New marine bunker? Heavy bolters and heavy flamers have that rule but heavy flamer is shorter range and still just flamer and heavy bolters are not death rays either.

I thought it was meltas, not flamers so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 gkos wrote:
Just had to pipe in, I'm a BA player. Please don't hold that against me, back when I started with RT there was not as much choice!

Having introduced my son to the game he plays Necrons and I am super happy about what is going on with the faction at the moment.

I would really like monoliths to be good, I would personally like them to be able to join up and do super shots like they do in the fluff, but I think seeing three monoliths on the field is unlikely :(

They also should be robust mechanisms for spewing troops onto the field, this is another thing that monoliths "should" do but has never really been viable.

Anyhow, sorry for the ramble, but you guys should be pleased that you are in a good place at the moment, and Necrons are always fun to play against, especially when you suddenly veil a load of nasty killing into the oppos face!

Its fine and you are right necrons are in a really good place, if GW make the monolith and Obelisk I will be very happy.

I miss the days when the monolith was the ultimate way to redeploy our troops

The original Gauss Flux Arcs did d6 hits to all enemy units in range. Shifting back in that direction, the Monolith being a crackling brick of living metal that inexorably, ominously, silently, makes its way across the battle, teleporting squads of Necrons from all over the field through its portal, renewing them to fight on. It's partial whip cracking not just with sound and light, but rending the fabric of reality like a wet paper bag. A pinpoint onf unimaginable energy, obliterating anything it hits.

 Blndmage wrote:
The original Gauss Flux Arcs did d6 hits to all enemy units in range. Shifting back in that direction, the Monolith being a crackling brick of living metal that inexorably, ominously, silently, makes its way across the battle, teleporting squads of Necrons from all over the field through its portal, renewing them to fight on. It's partial whip cracking not just with sound and light, but rending the fabric of reality like a wet paper bag. A pinpoint onf unimaginable energy, obliterating anything it hits.

Those were the days, I used to target my opponents str8+ weapons and then have my metal box march up the board with its AV14 impervious to damage

So we gonna switch to a 9e thread? Especially considering we actually have new minis and new rules to discuss not just how our current rules do in the new edition.

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
So we gonna switch to a 9e thread? Especially considering we actually have new minis and new rules to discuss not just how our current rules do in the new edition.

We still don't have a codex. I don't see the point in a 9th edition thread when we don't have the full picture of what 9th edition Necrons even are, at the moment.

I figure people are waiting for the book to drop so that the first 30pages aren't just wishlisting coupled to a few unit stat leaks that are lacking in full details and which don't have the backup of the rest of the book/army to give them context.

Played tournament on saturday. Couple things I came across.

Destroyers. I'm falling out of love with these. Firepower is okay but with 24" range they basically die after doing their job. With higher price it's getting pretty hard to gain enough. Need to basically wipe out 300 pts+´worth unit or gain ttactical gain enough to compensate.

Deploy scramblers secondary fast becoming one I like. It caps at 10 but fairly easy one if you have sacrificial unit and veil of darkness.

While we stand we fight has been surprisingly good one so far.

Ragnar is pure PITA. Especially if you can't get nihilikh wraiths around

Other necron player ran 9 tesla tomb blades in mephir and that was EVIL. With overlord and stratagem that's 36 shots and 63 hits in average. If you get within 12" not much that doesn't melt. And rather annoying to remove. Got to build and paint more tomb blades.

Need to work on midfield brawling.

9 skorpek destroyers(again by the other necron player) are murder machine. I survived the charge by 2 squads but that required the 2++ wraiths and focusing on them which left tomb blades free to wreak havoc...

9 tesla tomb blades are easy to shut down. Charge them with a cheap unit, die to overwatch, charge them with another unit. If successful they cant shoot next turn, unless a royal warden is nearby. I dont see the point of skorpekh destroyers, wraith are better.

Keep in mind getting to tomb blades need getting past necron front line(those wraiths and skorpeks). These don't rush in front line...rather skim around, use ruins(i had these raining fire on me from top of 8" ruin) etc. And unit charging needs　to be tougher than 6 wounds at 3+ save or full ig troop squad or they will simply die without even preventing one round of shooting...

Not that much stuff that can do that for cheap.

Yeah that seems pretty nasty. Do you mind posting your list or at least the units you found did the most work for you? I'd love to hear more about how it went since I haven't had a chance to play the new edition yet and won't for a while.

As a side note, speaking of Tomb Blades, I recently got my hands on six and am wondering what people think loadout wise in the new edition, should I build them with Tesla or Gauss? I was thinking with Gauss going up to 30'' range and there being so many primaris running around it might be the better option but based on that story tesla sounds like it can still do the business

9 tesla tomb blades shoot 36 shots at 24". Every 6+ explodes. If you MWBD them every 5+ explodes. Sautekh with stratagem lets them explode on 4+. With gauss you get 18 shots at 24", and 36 shots at 12". But 12" is dangerously close to the enemy, and the risk of getting charged is high. Overwatch might not help, because only unmodified 6s hit, and you dont get exploding 6s, like tesla.

 TheArchmagos wrote:
Yeah that seems pretty nasty. Do you mind posting your list or at least the units you found did the most work for you? I'd love to hear more about how it went since I haven't had a chance to play the new edition yet and won't for a while.

As a side note, speaking of Tomb Blades, I recently got my hands on six and am wondering what people think loadout wise in the new edition, should I build them with Tesla or Gauss? I was thinking with Gauss going up to 30'' range and there being so many primaris running around it might be the better option but based on that story tesla sounds like it can still do the business

I had overlord, skorpek lord, royal warden, 2x5 tesla immortal, 7xlychguard, heatray stalker, 5xwraith, 5xdestroyer, doomsday ark. Patrol + aux detachment for overlord. All nihilikh.

Skorpek lord, DDA and stalker were 3 standouts generally and scored fairly reliably while we stand we fight. Got max on first game, 5 on 2nd but screwed up with skorpek lord(really should have just headed elsewhere than stay with lychguard with ragnar, Bjorn and wolf cavalry on same area...) and stalker got screwed by marine flyer autoexploding(didn't even knew that was a thing...). 10 points on last game only losing DDA when those tomb blades came in and caused 13 wounds just like that and 10 tesla immortals split fire dropping it and doing some other damage as well. Skorpek lord in 1st game duelled venom crawler away surviving unscathed despite some serious bad luck on dice rolling(took 5 combat rounds...Got him to 1 wound but then seemed he could not fail 5++ so despite lychguard coming around took a while) which helped to get objective which was vital for the win. 2nd game he got pasted by twice attacking Ragnar though finished up wolf cavalry before that. Would have helped had I remembered my -1 damage warlord trait vs dam flat 2 Ragnar...3rd game finished up Tomb blades though albeit required 8" charge to get to top of the ruin.

DDA was solid damage dealer all tournament and stalker provided mobile AT platform and not that useless melee ability. I find him to be useful at dealing with wounded things relieving dedicated melee things for more important combats.

Royal warden was major let down but that was partially likely due to how I used and partially how games went. Nobody tagged my units in melee so that I needed fall back and shoot/charge except wraiths could have done but questionable would royal warden survived with half a dozen skorpeks, skorpek lord, immortals and tomb blades swarming that area...And frankly fell back and try to lure them away worked just fine(as opponent noted that was mistake on his part. Let wraiths run. Head toward my home objective). So all royal warden did all tournament was 2 vp from raise banner secondary in 1st game and 1 tomb blade shot in last game. For 80 pts and 2 CP(since I needed another det) def not worth it but not giving up on it yet.

Tesla immortals weren't doing damage but then again 2x5 can't expect to do. What they did was give me vp's. In 1st game raise banner that gave me 5 vp and veiled to get to quarter that gave me 5 vp as well. 2nd and 3rd game used one unit with veil to secure 10 vp in both game deep striking into opponent deployment and put scramblers in. 90 pts isn't that bad to lose turn shooting so that was useful.

Other necron player ran overlord, cryptek, skorpek lord, 9xskorpek destroyers, 9 tomb blades, 10 tesla immortal, 10 gauss immortal, 5 gauss immortal. Skorpek stuff as novokh, rest as mephir(btw 1500). He's having good success with both skorpek's and tomb blades. For me it looks thin on AT but then again skorpek's cause hurt on there as well and tomb blades drops leman russ in average if they get within 12" so can't ignore those either.

For tomb blades magnets. Don't lock yourself. Especially with codex coming. But now especially with mephir you really want tesla at least for one unit. Hitting on 2+, proccing 3 hits on 5+ and extra shots on 6(which proc's more hits on 5+ as well)...well you average out 63 hits S5 ignoring cover. The -1 is nice but unless you are shooting at natively 2+ not even that needed. They delete lots of stuff 3+ save or not anyway.

 TheArchmagos wrote:
Yeah that seems pretty nasty. Do you mind posting your list or at least the units you found did the most work for you? I'd love to hear more about how it went since I haven't had a chance to play the new edition yet and won't for a while.

As a side note, speaking of Tomb Blades, I recently got my hands on six and am wondering what people think loadout wise in the new edition, should I build them with Tesla or Gauss? I was thinking with Gauss going up to 30'' range and there being so many primaris running around it might be the better option but based on that story tesla sounds like it can still do the business

I have always found Guass Blades to be much more effective.

It is true that they get kinda close to their targerts, but being able to just rank up next to whatever you want to eradicate and drowning them in AP2 fire is pretty good.

Mephrit makes them a lot scarier, and that range buff that is coming will help them even more, as will being able to pick up a +1 to hit from an overlord before they make their gun run.

I have always found tesla to be better on the backfield immortals, where their higher peak effective range makes them able to harras targets in the midfield better. Units that move, or are able to get into much closer ranges easier, I have always found Guass to be a better weapon for that job.

YMMV obviously, but it's worked for me this far.

Mephir ap bonus helps　tesla more than gauss though. And overlord buff also is more　valuable to tesla.

Though certainly tomb blades is one unit where gauss can work. Issue being you are in face of enemy. Need screen　to avoid enemy charging you.

 p5freak wrote:
9 tesla tomb blades shoot 36 shots at 24". Every 6+ explodes. If you MWBD them every 5+ explodes. Sautekh with stratagem lets them explode on 4+. With gauss you get 18 shots at 24", and 36 shots at 12". But 12" is dangerously close to the enemy, and the risk of getting charged is high. Overwatch might not help, because only unmodified 6s hit, and you dont get exploding 6s, like tesla.

Couple points though.

Tesla is almost guaranteed going to be changed to unmodified 6's

Sauhteks new trait pushes rapid fire out to 18" meaning they are not going to be all that danger close

I'd also argue you shouldn't care much about being close anyway since in 9th your going to want these guys pushing onto the objectives, and I think worrying about them being tangled in combat is a missed opportunity, especially when the overseer fixes this issue and makes TB's insane at grabbing the midfield points.

I personally still prefer gauss on TB's because I'd much rather have quality of fire over volume of ap- especially with all marines going to 2wounds. Good god are plague marines going to be an issue.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
9 tesla tomb blades shoot 36 shots at 24". Every 6+ explodes. If you MWBD them every 5+ explodes. Sautekh with stratagem lets them explode on 4+. With gauss you get 18 shots at 24", and 36 shots at 12". But 12" is dangerously close to the enemy, and the risk of getting charged is high. Overwatch might not help, because only unmodified 6s hit, and you dont get exploding 6s, like tesla.

Couple points though.

Tesla is almost guaranteed going to be changed to unmodified 6's

Sauhteks new trait pushes rapid fire out to 18" meaning they are not going to be all that danger close

I'd also argue you shouldn't care much about being close anyway since in 9th your going to want these guys pushing onto the objectives, and I think worrying about them being tangled in combat is a missed opportunity, especially when the overseer fixes this issue and makes TB's insane at grabbing the midfield points.

I personally still prefer gauss on TB's because I'd much rather have quality of fire over volume of ap- especially with all marines going to 2wounds. Good god are plague marines going to be an issue.

Yeah i agree with you. Lots of good points there regarding 9th edition and what changes its bringing

Does anyone think that a Night Scythe currently has any value as a transport? Wait, hear me out!

Tomb world deployment is still terrible, but if you only have one Night Scythe and one unit on the tomb world, then the Scythe functions exactly like a normal transport.

Transports are much more useful in 9th so how does the Night Scythe stack up?

135 pts is a little on the expensive side.
T6, 12W, 3+Sv, -1 to hit, can't be assaulted by non-flyers, is reasonable for defense, it's no impulsor, but its harder to take out than a Rhino.
60" move is incredibly fast and way above what most transports get.
It's also fairly special in the capacity department; only one unit but no size limit.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:

Tomb world deployment is still terrible, but if you only have one Night Scythe and one unit on the tomb world, then the Scythe functions exactly like a normal transport.

Why do you think a NS would work like a normal transport ? You still deploy the unit(s) on the tomb world, which means you cannot set up the tomb world unit(s) T1 in matched play.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Does anyone think that a Night Scythe currently has any value as a transport? Wait, hear me out!

Tomb world deployment is still terrible, but if you only have one Night Scythe and one unit on the tomb world, then the Scythe functions exactly like a normal transport.

Transports are much more useful in 9th so how does the Night Scythe stack up?

135 pts is a little on the expensive side.
T6, 12W, 3+Sv, -1 to hit, can't be assaulted by non-flyers, is reasonable for defense, it's no impulsor, but its harder to take out than a Rhino.
60" move is incredibly fast and way above what most transports get.
It's also fairly special in the capacity department; only one unit but no size limit.

Exactly like except every time you go 2nd better　count on having to use　cp to get unit out of it. Being super soft opponent has zero　issues taking it out.

Plus the no t1 coming out. One big use transport　has is ablative wounds of transport if you go 2nd plus 3" extra move t1.

tneva82 wrote:

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Does anyone think that a Night Scythe currently has any value as a transport? Wait, hear me out!

Tomb world deployment is still terrible, but if you only have one Night Scythe and one unit on the tomb world, then the Scythe functions exactly like a normal transport.

Transports are much more useful in 9th so how does the Night Scythe stack up?

135 pts is a little on the expensive side.
T6, 12W, 3+Sv, -1 to hit, can't be assaulted by non-flyers, is reasonable for defense, it's no impulsor, but its harder to take out than a Rhino.
60" move is incredibly fast and way above what most transports get.
It's also fairly special in the capacity department; only one unit but no size limit.

Exactly like except every time you go 2nd better　count on having to use　cp to get unit out of it. Being super soft opponent has zero　issues taking it out.

Plus the no t1 coming out. One big use transport　has is ablative wounds of transport if you go 2nd plus 3" extra move t1.

The tombworld deployment differs from plain transports in the fact that the transported unit is not physically there.

Another "problem" is perhaps that to take advantage of this added flexibility, you should bring more Nightscythes (or Monoliths), eg you could fly one NS left, and another NS right, and deploy your unit where it is best needed, as the game progresses, which is nice. Of course this is a problem as it is not really affordable as it is.

If you could combine the "Emergency disembark" with the "Disembark an extra unit from the tomb world", it could suddenly transport two units quite risk free, which is nice. If it lives to move up-field, you are likely to get a head start to two units of shieldguards for example. Worst case they drop down on the same objective, best case it lives to move to the next objective and drop a unit there too. But alas.

Ah yes turn 1 disembark, that is something you can't do which did slip my mind as it's not generally what you want to do with a transport.

In all other respects one NS with one tomb world unit can be treated like a normal transport (getting your unit out when blown up costs 1CP instead of killing models, but is otherwise functionally identical).

So are we saying a single Night Scythe is a bad transport because you can't get out turn 1?
My main issue with it vs other transports is that, like all aircraft, it can't score. Otherwise I think the speed of it makes it a very interesting choice.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Ah yes turn 1 disembark, that is something you can't do which did slip my mind as it's not generally what you want to do with a transport.

In all other respects one NS with one tomb world unit can be treated like a normal transport (getting your unit out when blown up costs 1CP instead of killing models, but is otherwise functionally identical).

So are we saying a single Night Scythe is a bad transport because you can't get out turn 1?
My main issue with it vs other transports is that, like all aircraft, it can't score. Otherwise I think the speed of it makes it a very interesting choice.

Also our transport-number is effectively capped at 1, where as evil-guy on the other side of the table can bring 10 rhinos if he so pleases

Well, we have to expect it's rules are changing anyway so I wouldn't really bother until we see the new version.

So far we know the gun gained 2 shots, which is still pretty weak honestly but hopefully it gained normal transport rules. If thats the case, it has a bit more merit however IMO flying transports that are not valkyries still have their issues since your hanging out for a turn. But if you can drop 15 gauss reaper warriors and rip into something I can see that being pretty solid. As well as the obvious 10 shield guard trick.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Well, we have to expect it's rules are changing anyway so I wouldn't really bother until we see the new version.

So far we know the gun gained 2 shots, which is still pretty weak honestly but hopefully it gained normal transport rules. If thats the case, it has a bit more merit however IMO flying transports that are not valkyries still have their issues since your hanging out for a turn. But if you can drop 15 gauss reaper warriors and rip into something I can see that being pretty solid. As well as the obvious 10 shield guard trick.

Literally the only thing they need to do to fix our transports is to keep the "they can come out of any 'transport'" and add a caveat that "If the last transport available is destroyed, all remaining units must disembark. For each model that disembarks, roll a d6, on a 1, a model is slain."

If we can get that, all problems are fixed.

So, question for you.
What is the best character in your opinion to use the Veil of Darkness to move 20 Sautehk Reaper Warriors forward turn 1? (Assuming the new dynasty protocol will be them being able to rapid fire from their full range).

Royal Warden keeps them from being tied up in melee, and contributes Firepower with RGB.

Cryptek to give them a chronometron 5++ and better RP, with staff of light.

Lord to give them reroll 1s to wound, maybe contribute with staff of light?

Overlord for next turn MWBD, melee counterpunch?

Skorpehk to try and charge in as a distraction?

Thoughts?

Without knowing how RP/Command protocols/stratagems will work:

I think you have observed one of the problems with veiling in 20 warriors and character support. They are outside of the overlapping buffs they need. Personally I think you split the 20 man squad of warriors into 2x10 man squads of reapers and put them both in Ghost Arks.

1) The Sautekh Dynasty rapid fire should be substantial buff the ghost arks flayer arrays as well.
2) You dodge 11+ models D6 blast effects.
3) If you want to be cute, the c'tan deciever redeploy allows the units inside redeployed transports to perform 1st turn charges. 10 necron warrors aren't scary but they might tie some unsuspecting units up.
4) You can use veil of darkness on something more intimidating than warriors. Like Destroyers, Lynchguard, etc.

If your determined to do it, I guess the chronometron 5++ is critical. The warriors need to survive and hold an objective until its your turn to score.

 iGuy91 wrote:

Literally the only thing they need to do to fix our transports is to keep the "they can come out of any 'transport'" and add a caveat that "If the last transport available is destroyed, all remaining units must disembark. For each model that disembarks, roll a d6, on a 1, a model is slain."

If we can get that, all problems are fixed.

I think our transports would still be pretty bad with that. Units need to come out at then end of the movement phase to fix them. Then the monolith could deepstrike and bring out a unit in the same turn. Night Scythes could zoom up the board and drop boys without having to survive a turn first. Units coming out this way would probably need the " not within 9" rule.

d4chans necron tactis states that monoliths and NS's can use their portal turn 1. I thought you couldn't?

You *could*, but then they nerfed it when they stopped T1 Deep Strikes, which is the point they went from transports to Reserve Beacons, essentially

 IHateNids wrote:
You *could*, but then they nerfed it when they stopped T1 Deep Strikes, which is the point they went from transports to Reserve Beacons, essentially

This is listed under their 9th ed ruleset.

I'd blame bad housekeeping honestly, as far as I'm aware, unless I'm missing something they're still not great under 9th.

 nintura wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
You *could*, but then they nerfed it when they stopped T1 Deep Strikes, which is the point they went from transports to Reserve Beacons, essentially

This is listed under their 9th ed ruleset.

All deep strike etc rules in datasheets, stragems etc are so. None specify turns. Even core rules are free of restrictions and you can come turn 1 or 5 out of reserves.

It's matched play specfic restriction. Datasheets are done so they work for all form of games. T1 terminator deep strike, nephrek stratagem etc is totally valid in narrative game. Stratagems and datasheets are made to be compatible with that.

So unless monolith datasheet specifically says it overrrides matched play rule it doesn't work.

I would guess that whoever wrote that chose to interpret the fact that models disembarking from monoliths count as disembarking from a transport "for all rules purposes" as a way around the no turn 1 reserves rule. I think they're wrong but it's a debate I've seen before.

Aye, it's a common misreading I believe. The order of operations is you set them up, and THEN they count as disembarking from a transport. I believe this is the legalistic RAW and also the RAI.

I had good results yesterday at 500 points with the following list. 2-0, going first against DG and second against DA. List was a Skorpekh Lord with Veil, 10 Warriors, and two Triarch Stalkers with heat rays. I went Novokh for fight twice strat on SLord. It’s fast and has a good mix of weaponry for a 500p tac. Also it’s only 4 units but all are generally fairly priced and the list has good symmetry. I veil the SLord and warriors up to midfield objective while the stalkers push together. Warriors rapid fire, and if they survive hide for a couple turns. Turn two charge with SLord. Stalkers provide legitimate secondary threat while also tagging with Targeting Relays.

Been using praetorians and they have been surprising me pleasantly generally with more focus on midfield brawl.

And on crusade league side I now got them to be obsec so I get to even feel how they will be in future with nihilikh. This ought to be fun!

Just need 10 more to get those rods since GW did the usual and flipped which weapon rocks.

tneva82 wrote:
Been using praetorians and they have been surprising me pleasantly generally with more focus on midfield brawl.

And on crusade league side I now got them to be obsec so I get to even feel how they will be in future with nihilikh. This ought to be fun!

Just need 10 more to get those rods since GW did the usual and flipped which weapon rocks.

How many Praetorians are you using in a 2000 pt army these days?

Full 10. Necron units wants to be big units anyway to give some shot of RP. If points are thin have dropped down to 8.

tneva82 wrote:
Full 10. Necron units wants to be big units anyway to give some shot of RP. If points are thin have dropped down to 8.

Fine.
This unit is nice to contest or occupy an mission objective early in the game - also midfield.
Do we already know the pt cost of the unit in the new edition?

Nope. We only know stats. No points, no special rules

Well, could Praetorians serve as a substitute for Wraiths as Wraiths got a major nerf (S4, A4, BS4, WS4).

A and WS change ends up buff. S5 rath than S6 is nerf but slight one.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, could Praetorians serve as a substitute for Wraiths as Wraiths got a major nerf (S4, A4, BS4, WS4).

Wraith didnt get nerfed, they will be nerfed in the codex, and buffed at the same time. They will be WS4, but also A+1. Which, on average, is the same as right now. But their claws will only be S5, which is a nerf. They got a particle caster for free, which no one used before. So thats a buff.

 p5freak wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, could Praetorians serve as a substitute for Wraiths as Wraiths got a major nerf (S4, A4, BS4, WS4).

Wraith didnt get nerfed, they will be nerfed in the codex, and buffed at the same time. They will be WS4, but also A+1. Which, on average, is the same as right now. But their claws will only be S5, which is a nerf. They got a particle caster for free, which no one used before. So thats a buff.

It appears that they get a 2+ save
This makes them more resilient (here I assume they keep their 3++ save) but they are not really killy these days.
But they are worthwhile to stall an enemy unit.

Seems that's what GW is wanting to go for. Wraiths are objective holders while Skorpekh are the offensive units.

How Wraiths are objective holders? No ob.sec, no numbers (model count). Maybe more like enemy cc elite blokers?
20x Warriors and scarab swarms are better at holding objects?

 Xyxel wrote:
How Wraiths are objective holders? No ob.sec, no numbers (model count). Maybe more like enemy cc elite blokers?
20x Warriors and scarab swarms are better at holding objects?

Unless GW makes last minute changes, Nihilakh will have obsec as dynasty trait. That would make wraiths one of the best units in the game for 9e if points do not go up too much and they keep their invuln save.

Well, I'll plan with a unit of 6 Skorphek destroyers and a Skorphek Lord due to the Lord's aura.
One or two Canoptek Reanimators seem to be mandatory due to their buff of the RP.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I'll plan with a unit of 6 Skorphek destroyers and a Skorphek Lord due to the Lord's aura.
One or two Canoptek Reanimators seem to be mandatory due to their buff of the RP.

So you already know that skorpekh destroyers can be taken in units of 6 ? For the cost of the reanimator you can almost get 3 more skorpekh destroyers The sole purpose of the reanimator is to reanimate, which happens after models have been killed. Why not use the points for more useful units that can do something right from the beginning ? I will never use that reanimator, unless RP will be really good, which i doubt.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I'll plan with a unit of 6 Skorphek destroyers and a Skorphek Lord due to the Lord's aura.
One or two Canoptek Reanimators seem to be mandatory due to their buff of the RP.

Larger Skorpekh units are something I'm looking forward to (can't see GW not allowing them in units of 6, but who knows at this point). The Reanimators seem completely dead in the water almost regardless of how RP works. They're just too expensive for their lacklustre defensive profile so they suffer from the problem that if they're actually good (doubtful) they'll die too easily. Compare a Reanimator to a Stalker and the difference between them for the minor difference in price is baffling.

I agree, until RP gets a buff (maybe a strategy that lets a roll RP on a wiped unit?) there is really no point in building a list focusing on RP. It’s currently a terrible faction ability. Why trade mobility and firepower for 1-2 durable but slow blobs of warriors. QS is a different story, now that is worth building a list around.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, could Praetorians serve as a substitute for Wraiths as Wraiths got a major nerf (S4, A4, BS4, WS4).

Wraith didnt get nerfed, they will be nerfed in the codex, and buffed at the same time. They will be WS4, but also A+1. Which, on average, is the same as right now. But their claws will only be S5, which is a nerf. They got a particle caster for free, which no one used before. So thats a buff.

It appears that they get a 2+ save
This makes them more resilient (here I assume they keep their 3++ save) but they are not really killy these days.
But they are worthwhile to stall an enemy unit.

Leaked sheet had3+. And seeing how gw is removing 3++ i expect 4++


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xyxel wrote:
How Wraiths are objective holders? No ob.sec, no numbers (model count). Maybe more like enemy cc elite blokers?
20x Warriors and scarab swarms are better at holding objects?

Obsec can be with nihilikh and as for numbers you　kill　some. Remember 9e light infantry died. 10 is already comparatively 8e horde　unit

Unless gw rewrites　rp and warriors big time warriors are dead in even semi competive

So new models up.

Flayed Ones


Ophydian Destroyers



Chronomancer



Psychomancer



New flayed ones look better than the 5th ed ones but not as good as the 3rd ed ones.
Ophydians are a spiritual successor to the 3rd ed wraiths and I respect that. Don't like the placement of the extra arms that much, I don't see how they can articulate.

New crypteks look cool and the chronometron sounds useful for melee armies, but the chins are way too long.

I choose to believe that adding tentacles to Necrons was my idea and that GW stole it from me.

Here is our first full protocol reveal as well:




Seems good, but I'm not really a fan of selecting all of them before the game starts, I would have much preferred the flexibility of being able to change turn by turn as the game went on.

Agreed. Its a neat idea but not one that I think will matter much. Its nice you can go with a or b as your activating the protocols though, so if one option has no value atm because something went wrong then at least the other should show some value?

Azuza001 wrote:
Agreed. Its a neat idea but not one that I think will matter much. Its nice you can go with a or b as your activating the protocols though, so if one option has no value atm because something went wrong then at least the other should show some value?

there are also ways to get both effects. Also we have a new keyword "Noble"

I didnt catch the noble thing. That could be something.

Of course there were 2 things they didn't mention is that I wanted to really know about.

1. When will it be available? Actual date not "october....ish"
2. What are the new reanimation protocols


I just want my necrons to put up a bloody fight vs marines damn it! Lmao. :p

 nintura wrote:

Azuza001 wrote:
Agreed. Its a neat idea but not one that I think will matter much. Its nice you can go with a or b as your activating the protocols though, so if one option has no value atm because something went wrong then at least the other should show some value?

there are also ways to get both effects. Also we have a new keyword "Noble"

Also note - The protocols ONLY effect models close to a noble....sigh

Azuza001 wrote:
I didnt catch the noble thing. That could be something.

Of course there were 2 things they didn't mention is that I wanted to really know about.

1. When will it be available? Actual date not "october....ish"
2. What are the new reanimation protocols


I just want my necrons to put up a bloody fight vs marines damn it! Lmao. :p

Might have to wait couple centuries for that

(Rolls over and hits the snooze button on his tomb world wakeup call.....)

Fine..... lol.

 Sasori wrote:
Here is our first full protocol reveal as well:




Seems good, but I'm not really a fan of selecting all of them before the game starts, I would have much preferred the flexibility of being able to change turn by turn as the game went on.

Can you select just one for all turns of the game? If you can then its not that much of a problem.

All the new models look sick. My only problem is that we’re getting yet another quick, medium sized melee unit. I’m not sure why the wraith destroyers and skorpekh destroyers and Wraiths and Flayed Ones all need to basically serve similar functions.
Not to whine about amazing new models though! Such awesome designs, very cool to see a throwback to the old wraiths, and I’m so happy they are updating flayed ones in plastic!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
Here is our first full protocol reveal as well:




Seems good, but I'm not really a fan of selecting all of them before the game starts, I would have much preferred the flexibility of being able to change turn by turn as the game went on.

Can you select just one for all turns of the game? If you can then its not that much of a problem.

I don’t think they really explained it all that well, but from my understanding you have to pick a different one for each turn.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
All the new models look sick. My only problem is that we’re getting yet another quick, medium sized melee unit. I’m not sure why the wraith destroyers and skorpekh destroyers and Wraiths and Flayed Ones all need to basically serve similar functions.
Not to whine about amazing new models though! Such awesome designs, very cool to see a throwback to the old wraiths, and I’m so happy they are updating flayed ones in plastic!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
Here is our first full protocol reveal as well:




Seems good, but I'm not really a fan of selecting all of them before the game starts, I would have much preferred the flexibility of being able to change turn by turn as the game went on.

Can you select just one for all turns of the game? If you can then its not that much of a problem.

I don’t think they really explained it all that well, but from my understanding you have to pick a different one for each turn.

Yeah, it sounds like you preselect which one will be active on which turn before the game starts. you keep this "Hidden" and reveal as the game goes on.

Thats actually kinda cool if you keep them hidden. I would be ok with that.

The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Didnt the Chronemtron just affect infantry until now? Or am I mistaken and remember the rule incorrectly?

Manous wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Didnt the Chronemtron just affect infantry until now? Or am I mistaken and remember the rule incorrectly?

It was definitely only infantry, more importantly, it only gave a 5+ invuln against shooting, but the new one is against everything. So I would say it's a net buff overall.

I want to like the psychomancer real bad but the more I reflect on his leaked rules that crappier he gets.

-1 to morale would seem decent until you look at the current units out there. Most small MSU durable units have high leadership. So primaris for example LD8 on 5 man units, kill 2 and have this guy nearby and they fail on a 6, but reroll do to ATSKNF meaning 1:36 they fail anyway lmao.

His other ability of -1 to attrition is also really strong except again, they need to fail initially.

He's basically a "more win" model verse chaff. So now GEQ will lose 50% to attrition tests which is OK, but the army REALLY doesn't struggle at nuking chaf. Especially now with NuWraiths, flayed ones and skhorpeks added to old wraiths, praetorians and basically all are guns besides deathray weapons lol.

Chronomancer seems like the obvious choice. He can slow down counter chargers that would drop your skorpehks and he gives them the valuable 5++ they lack which even works in melee now.

It'll be interesting how they handle the old cryptek, I imagine he is dropped entirely actually, so I wonder what the canoptek cloak cryptek will do as a roll? Probably continue to be the repair focus roll, fixing larger vehicles and models with the D3 living metal boost and boosting reanimation OR maybe the only reanimation boost remaining will be on the Canoptek reanimator.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimskul wrote:

Manous wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Didnt the Chronemtron just affect infantry until now? Or am I mistaken and remember the rule incorrectly?

It was definitely only infantry, more importantly, it only gave a 5+ invuln against shooting, but the new one is against everything. So I would say it's a net buff overall.

depends how you played. If you turtled a destoyer wing around chronoteks it's kind of a nerf, at best a side step. But if you played mobile or with tomb blades and vehicles it's better now IMO.

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

I was very surprised that it wasn't a double-move effect. Rerolling charges seems like a insanely niche ability. Especially for a buff that you'll want to apply each turn.

 Grimskul wrote:

Manous wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Didnt the Chronemtron just affect infantry until now? Or am I mistaken and remember the rule incorrectly?

It was definitely only infantry, more importantly, it only gave a 5+ invuln against shooting, but the new one is against everything. So I would say it's a net buff overall.

I think that's a very generous way of looking at it. It's not uncommon for my army to have 4-6 units all covered by the 5++ save from a Cryptek. Losing that is a huge hit to the durability of the army. The only thing that keeps my Destroyers alive right now is ignoring 1/3 of the high-damage shots that come their way. It may well be there are other durability improvements in the Codex so we'll have to wait and see I guess.

Random thoughts:

Ophydian Destroyers will melt anything they touch but there defences are wet tissue paper. A glass cannon unit but potentially quite effective with deep strike and a 10" move. Strong contender for a counter assault unit, where they and skorpehks destroyers measure up to each other remains to be seen.

Novohk Flayed Ones seem decent having -2AP attacks, +1 to charge and exploding 6's. Now if they can only make them a troops choice then melee crons will be really on to something.

Psychomancers rules alone aren't enough to work, morale is not something to be relied upon or forced onto MSU armies. The unit needs more synergistic abilities that force the opponent to take morale tests from other sources (c'tan powers, strats, relics, custom dynastys, protocols, etc). If it gets support maybe there is something there but right now I don't see it.

The changes to Chronometron seems to make it designed for a melee centric unit that currently lacks an invulnerable. Skorpekhs, Scythe Lychguard, Ophydian Destroyers, Praetorians and flayed ones all possible.

The spoiled Protocol of the Conquering Tyrant is interesting for its synergy for Sautekh lists, which benefit from both Option 1 and 2. Sautekh lists are likely going to be spamming Guass Rapid fire weaponry, which means ranks of warriors/immortals and Ghost Arks/Doomsday Ark flayer arrays. All of these units beenfit from being able to fall back and shoot from combat.

On command protocols system I have more questions than answers.
Do we write them down in secret before the battle, after deployment, or after first turn roll off?
Do we pick 5 different protocols and cycle through them all?
What choices get the noble trait?
Does extend the from all characters or just the ones with the noble trait once the warlord has been selected?

Slipspace wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

Manous wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Didnt the Chronemtron just affect infantry until now? Or am I mistaken and remember the rule incorrectly?

It was definitely only infantry, more importantly, it only gave a 5+ invuln against shooting, but the new one is against everything. So I would say it's a net buff overall.

I think that's a very generous way of looking at it. It's not uncommon for my army to have 4-6 units all covered by the 5++ save from a Cryptek. Losing that is a huge hit to the durability of the army. The only thing that keeps my Destroyers alive right now is ignoring 1/3 of the high-damage shots that come their way. It may well be there are other durability improvements in the Codex so we'll have to wait and see I guess.

Yeah, but if anything this kind of castle strategy doesn't really work that well anymore. I've been finding that I am moving everything significantly more so keeping all my infantry within 3' wasn't really happening as much.

Due to this, the extra bonus and the fact you can now affect anything, I do consider it more of a buff, but only slightly.

One thing to keep in mind with our new Crypteks is they will likely have second ability on their datasheets as well, similar tot he plasmancer the "Harbinger of X"


I will say the Chronomancer seems like the clear choice over the Pyschomancer from what info we have right now, but we did get more revealed about it than the Pyschomancer.

The more I think about it, the more I’m not a fan of our Protocols rule. Having to look through them and write them down in secret in a specific order just seems sort of annoying and clunky compared to canticles which you just pick or roll for on the turn. I’m sure it’ll be a strong rule but just seems sort of cumbersome to me, I don’t like the idea of having to bring pens and paper as well to write this stuff down all the time as well as all the other stuff.
I’ll have to see though how it operates. The more you use them the more you’ll probably have a bunch you use often and it’ll probably speed up.

EDIT: Also, if they do cards (or I make my own) it’d make it a lot better so that could fix it for me.

So anyone have any wild guesses on what Rites of Reanimation is going to be now that we have seen it appear a few times? MWBD like ability were pick a unit in the command phase and get to roll RP if it is wiped maybe?

Tiberius501 wrote:The more I think about it, the more I’m not a fan of our Protocols rule. Having to look through them and write them down in secret in a specific order just seems sort of annoying and clunky compared to canticles which you just pick or roll for on the turn. I’m sure it’ll be a strong rule but just seems sort of cumbersome to me, I don’t like the idea of having to bring pens and paper as well to write this stuff down all the time as well as all the other stuff.
I’ll have to see though how it operates. The more you use them the more you’ll probably have a bunch you use often and it’ll probably speed up.

EDIT: Also, if they do cards (or I make my own) it’d make it a lot better so that could fix it for me.

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. We have to jump through a lot of hoops to be able to even access them and then we have the restriction of having a character nearby. The preselect early game just seems like an additional handicap for no reason.

Claas wrote:So anyone have any wild guesses on what Rites of Reanimation is going to be now that we have seen it appear a few times? MWBD like ability were pick a unit in the command phase and get to roll RP if it is wiped maybe?

No one knows for sure, my speculation is it may be something akin to a healing like Death in AoS.

Has anyone seen or heard any news regarding Destroyers? I used to run a Destroyer wing back in 7th and wanted to pick that back up.

Just want to leave this here!!!! It even talks about command protocols in the side so it's not from an old article or edition.

Wow, that's really strong. I guess it means after an enemy unit has finished it's attacks, not after each attack, that would be insane.

assuming reanimation didnt change other than the timing, thats a rude change.

A rude change? How is this not good?

 nintura wrote:
A rude change? How is this not good?

He might not have our perspective. Still wouldn't want it OP.

with as much firepower as marines can put out, i'll take OP

Rude change as in thats an obscenely powerful one.

Reanimation protocols currently lets you roll for each non-fled model missing in a unit correct? Random bolter fires at a unit of 8 warriors thats missing 12. Doesnt kill any, but the attack is over so now they roll 12 dice and 2-4 stand up. With that theory in mind, if the enemy lacks any extreme rate of fire they can be insanely difficult to be removed.

im expecting it to remove the "each missing model" clause for that reason.

Forgive me if i miss read something, necrons flatout vanished from my locale and both that + the sheer sexiness of the new models made me start them up.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Rude change as in thats an obscenely powerful one.

Reanimation protocols currently lets you roll for each non-fled model missing in a unit correct? Random bolter fires at a unit of 8 warriors thats missing 12. Doesnt kill any, but the attack is over so now they roll 12 dice and 2-4 stand up. With that theory in mind, if the enemy lacks any extreme rate of fire they can be insanely difficult to be removed.

im expecting it to remove the "each missing model" clause for that reason.

Forgive me if i miss read something, necrons flatout vanished from my locale and both that + the sheer sexiness of the new models made me start them up.

No point working yourself up, nobody knows at this point.

What bothers me more is that there are three threads discussing essentially he same thing

check it, detonating and reanimating scarabs.

Scarabs reanimating.. almost sounds like they do so by default.. General canoptek reanimation has been suspected for some time, would be nice, onøy hope wraiths don't trade their 3++ in the process.

I would happily trade 3++ for reanimating 4++

probably in the minority, but whatever

Another annoying aspect about Protocols... You have to keep at least one character with the Noble keyword on the battlefield or your lose them.

I'm hoping doctrines have some similar restrictions, because this is just getting silly.

In view of the RP, it would mean that I can roll several times for each model as long as it doesn’t die.

thats how it used to be. you'd set the model down on the table and roll each turn unless the unit was wiped out

 IHateNids wrote:
I would happily trade 3++ for reanimating 4++

probably in the minority, but whatever

Wraiths, even with a reduced 4++, would be absolutely amazing if they gain RP by default that triggers post causalities. As would Scarabs.

Yeh I could live with 4++ wraiths with RP. 3++ with RP and Nihilakh for obsec would be insane.

This RP change changes everything. It's going back to the 7th ed style. If you can reliably bump that 5+ to a 4+ than we're back on top like we were with Decurions in 7th Ed.

With RP being every phase as well like this, that explains at least a bit behind their thinking on the overpriced walkers (still overpriced and gonna die too quick though). Crypteks + Murderbuckets is best.

Why do i have a bad feeling that it won't be a 5+ to start and will be changed to a 6+ for "balance" reasons?

If it stays as a 5+ and the 5++ from cryptek can be put on anything could this make the reanimator better?

Oberron wrote:
Why do i have a bad feeling that it won't be a 5+ to start and will be changed to a 6+ for "balance" reasons?

If it stays as a 5+ and the 5++ from cryptek can be put on anything could this make the reanimator better?

Frankly, I'm absolutely unable to throw 5+ or even 6+.
But I can reliably throw 4+ (as was the case in a Decurion).

Oberron wrote:
Why do i have a bad feeling that it won't be a 5+ to start and will be changed to a 6+ for "balance" reasons?

If it stays as a 5+ and the 5++ from cryptek can be put on anything could this make the reanimator better?

Because it likely is.

If Res Orbs remain select a unit, gain +1 (hopeful ditching the once per game), and cryptek reanimancers also do that exact same thing, as do Canoptek reanimators, suddenly you could have a 2+ FNP roll if you choose to superbuff one unit (re-rolling 1s if it's Warriors)

Starting from 6+ means that this sequence caps out at 3+. Hopefully the rule wont have a cap because I can't see us having any more than 3 possible versions of a buff to this roll, so the odds of people ever having more the one unkillable unit would be very slim, and most people are likely to want to have numerous slightly-more-resilient ones, than all of them on 6+ and one unit that is utterly untouchable

As for the 5++, it would crtainly make the reanimator better, but wether or not all of the crypteks allow for +1 to reanimation remains to be seen. If not, you are theoretically following a single unit with 2 characetrs and a walker. If they do, great, 20 Warriors, Reanimator, Chronomancer. 400 points (I would expect) of guys with 4+ armour, 4+ RR1s FNP, spitting out a decent ish amount of firepower, under the effect of your current Directive because crypteks are noble. Add Murderbuckets to protect your Cryptek and voila, self-propelled borderline immovable object

So I’m curious, which destroyers do you guys think you’ll take more between the Skorpekhs and floaty tunnelling ones?

Doesn't the universal cap of only buffing/nurfing a roll by 1 count towards reanimation? I thought that was the big thing about 9th!

MrPieChee wrote:
Doesn't the universal cap of only buffing/nurfing a roll by 1 count towards reanimation? I thought that was the big thing about 9th!

That’s only to-hit and to-wound rolls to my understanding.

 Tiberius501 wrote:

MrPieChee wrote:
Doesn't the universal cap of only buffing/nurfing a roll by 1 count towards reanimation? I thought that was the big thing about 9th!

That’s only to-hit and to-wound rolls to my understanding.

I think that's only for to hit rolls

I also think, if I'm remembering correctly, that the cap is put in place after all the modifiers are totalled. So, the old Alaitoc Flyers with that daft stratagem give you a minus 3, but you have +1 vs flyers so it is actually a -2, then it gets capped at a -1.

I think.

I havent played 9th yet, so I dont know.

The +/-1 cap is for hit and wound rolls only.

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Hardly.

Chronometron was a 3" aura, which was hard enough to utilize in 8th anyway, but with coherency in 9th it's just an absolute joke. Then there was the fact it was infantry only and then there was the fact that because of the range, you were usually using it for a single unit (Destroyers) only anyway. And even if you wanted to do it in a tightly bunched up Immortal castle, ap -3 weapons are not actually that common anyway and those types of weapons wouldn't be shooting at Immortals in the first place. It was always in practice a buff for a singular unit to protect from heavy stuff, which it still is, just now with a better range and an extra effect.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
So I’m curious, which destroyers do you guys think you’ll take more between the Skorpekhs and floaty tunnelling ones?

Skorpekhs for me, the Ophyidians are chaff clearers, and we just have enough tools for that already. They have a place in a full combat army, but if you're gonna sprinkle in some combat, Skorpekhs are far more universally useful.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
So I’m curious, which destroyers do you guys think you’ll take more between the Skorpekhs and floaty tunnelling ones?

Hopefully both of the points are good. We have some decent melee options now to spam units with Rule of 3.

The ophydians might be useful if the new book provides a way to grant them objective secured, as they could be used to push weaker troop units off of backfield objectives

Yeah I was also thinking Skorpekhs. Not just because I have 6 already, but just based on their general toughness and Strength.

One necron question just came to mind: Do you think the new hexmark wil get to use a plasmacyte? The skorpekh and ophydian destroyers ge tto use them at a risk, will the hexmark and what effect would it have? Supercharging his guns, increases shots or what?

 wuestenfux wrote:
In view of the RP, it would mean that I can roll several times for each model as long as it doesn’t die.

Either no or you don't roll at all if unit dies out to one attack. Otherwise we go to realm of absurdity when it's virtually impossible to kill permanently any unit with RP.

If no roll if whole unit dies it means you can still negate RP by having sufficiently nasty unit shooting so that you wipe out entire squad in one go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tiberius501 wrote:

MrPieChee wrote:
Doesn't the universal cap of only buffing/nurfing a roll by 1 count towards reanimation? I thought that was the big thing about 9th!

That’s only to-hit and to-wound rolls to my understanding.

To hit and to wound. It's not universal cap. If you don't want to go read rulebook consider this: If it's universal cap terminators will NEVER roll lower than 3+ for saves...As armour save modifier is...well modifier. You can throw doomsday ark at terminator and they save on 3+. Throw it at power armour and worst they roll is 4+.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bosskelot wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Hardly.

Chronometron was a 3" aura, which was hard enough to utilize in 8th anyway, but with coherency in 9th it's just an absolute joke. Then there was the fact it was infantry only and then there was the fact that because of the range, you were usually using it for a single unit (Destroyers) only anyway. And even if you wanted to do it in a tightly bunched up Immortal castle, ap -3 weapons are not actually that common anyway and those types of weapons wouldn't be shooting at Immortals in the first place. It was always in practice a buff for a singular unit to protect from heavy stuff, which it still is, just now with a better range and an extra effect.

You put it between 2 infantry units, you have 2 units covered. You would be staying close for MWBD's etc anyway. You REALLY need 2 infantry units to have gap more than 6" between them?

Add in 2nd rank of units so you have something when front units get wiped out and it's easy 4 units.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
So I’m curious, which destroyers do you guys think you’ll take more between the Skorpekhs and floaty tunnelling ones?

Skorpekhs for me, the Ophyidians are chaff clearers, and we just have enough tools for that already. They have a place in a full combat army, but if you're gonna sprinkle in some combat, Skorpekhs are far more universally useful.

I'm not sure about that, I think the Ophyidians are actually more killy than Skorpekhs in a lot of cases. Against most targets you are getting 16% less wounds on the Threshers, but you are also getting the exploding 6's on the reap blade and getting the extra 6-12 claw attacks.

If the Plasmacyte bonus stays the same, they become significantly more killy against almost all targets than Skorpekhs even with the Plasmacyte bonus. The Exploding 6's on the reap blade increases with more attacks, and the better wounding on the claw is huge.


That being said, both of these are going to shred through most any targets anyway. The nice thing is that Ophydians don't get tied up by hordes near as much thanks the claws. Skorpekhs have that edge on surviability thanks to the better save and toughness though.

 Bosskelot wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Hardly.

Chronometron was a 3" aura, which was hard enough to utilize in 8th anyway, but with coherency in 9th it's just an absolute joke. Then there was the fact it was infantry only and then there was the fact that because of the range, you were usually using it for a single unit (Destroyers) only anyway.

I consistently manage to get 4 units in range without too much bunching up - it only needs a single model within 3" of the Cryptek. I have no idea how you think only 1 is in any way "usual". It helps Warriors a lot and with plasma still being pretty common it's of use on Immortals as well. I never found the range that restrictive and the fact it only buffs infantry normally meant you had a lot if you took the Chronometron so it was a big force multiplier in all my games. I've not really experienced 9th's coherency rules being all that bad, even running units of 20 Warriors, and they certainly haven't affected my ability to keep things in range of the Cryptek.

Having it now affect any unit is fantastic, as is the longer range, but losing coverage of multiple units will be a big nerf entirely because it really isn't difficult to hit 3-4 units with it right now. It's looking likely the new RP rules may help mitigate that change entirely though, in which case it's a very nice tool in the Necron arsenal.

Slipspace wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The new rules for the Chronometron are a pretty big nerf compared to now. Instead of getting a 5+ invulnerable to all units it's now a selected unit. Yes, they also get to reroll charges but unless RP gets a very good buff Necron armies are looking like they may be less durable overall thanks to this single change.

Hardly.

Chronometron was a 3" aura, which was hard enough to utilize in 8th anyway, but with coherency in 9th it's just an absolute joke. Then there was the fact it was infantry only and then there was the fact that because of the range, you were usually using it for a single unit (Destroyers) only anyway.

I consistently manage to get 4 units in range without too much bunching up - it only needs a single model within 3" of the Cryptek. I have no idea how you think only 1 is in any way "usual". It helps Warriors a lot and with plasma still being pretty common it's of use on Immortals as well. I never found the range that restrictive and the fact it only buffs infantry normally meant you had a lot if you took the Chronometron so it was a big force multiplier in all my games. I've not really experienced 9th's coherency rules being all that bad, even running units of 20 Warriors, and they certainly haven't affected my ability to keep things in range of the Cryptek.

Having it now affect any unit is fantastic, as is the longer range, but losing coverage of multiple units will be a big nerf entirely because it really isn't difficult to hit 3-4 units with it right now. It's looking likely the new RP rules may help mitigate that change entirely though, in which case it's a very nice tool in the Necron arsenal.

Also remember that with the new coherency rules it's going to be trickier to dip a unit just barely into an aura

Wait, am I up? I know I am not up, "TITO, TITO, where are you?" His Overlord heard a sigh of relief from Tito, but it was a sigh of anxiety. Tito hadn't listened to his Master's voice for thousands of years, and it was still unwelcomed. "Yes, Kenpachi, your time has come to rule once more!" Tito said as he bowed. "Who gave you permission to use my name, and why can't I see?" "I apologize, my Lord, we are having issues with our protocols. Something named COVID is affecting your Tomb World." Tito glanced at Kenpachi's Warscythe, which he had purposely placed out of his Master's reach. Kenpachi quickly reached for his weapon; the failed attempt angered the Overlord as he slammed his fist into his thrown. "Are you telling me my entire force is blind?" "Not exactly, my Lord COVID, from what I can tell, it was done on purpose. You and I both know who gave me the proper protocol to awaken your forces." "Be careful, Tito, choose your next few words carefully, or they will be your last," Kenpachi said as he finally grasped his warscythe. Tito had been in this position before, but this time he knew his Master was serious. "I will not use my words. I will use the Silent's Kings, Kenpachi; you are undoubtedly my strongest Overlord, but only I can reunite our people. We both know you would kill anyone including your own if they disagree with you, so I have put restraints upon you until my arrival. Rejoice, for the Necrontyr will rise again!"

Mr.Extra is back! I know you missed me! So my Necrons are getting a new codex, I been doing my research, and I am ready to help all the Overlords out there. Has anyone put all the rumors in one spot? (Found it) https://www.belloflostsouls.net/category/necrons If so, can I get a link that would be helpful? I will study for one more day before I start running my mouth about the good, the bad, and the ugly! Stay tune or re-animate; it doesn't matter to me we are running 9th edition! The Emperor can't kill 4 Gods; we got Gods working for us!

And ignoring CKO

Also ignoring

When it comes to 40k evaluation of units and rules is complex. Player skill and experience play a huge factor in how a unit will perform on the tabletop. In my evaluations, I will give two grades one will be its potential grade and the other will be its true grade. The potential grade is getting the most out of the unit/rule vs the true grade which is what you can expect from average players. I will be grading the Mephrit dynasty in this post.

Mephrit: +3 to all Ranged Weapons, -1 AP for half range

Potential Grade: -A True Grade: B

This dynasty upgrades Necron's firepower greatly however to take full advantage it requires strategic reserves. Both tesla and gauss become better with this dynasty. Tesla will be able to engage enemies at a greater distance or receive a -1 to AP. The best use of this dynasty is to take advantage of strategic reserves to guarantee that you receive the -1 AP. Destroyers coming onto the board and delivering -4 AP shots and your choice of a unit carrying gauss weaponry becoming -3 AP is the main reason why Mephrit dynasty was able to get an -A in my opinion. You can create a competitive list around having a combination of Destroyers and Immortals delivering an alpha strike with the use of strategic reserves. The main problem I have with the Mephrit dynasty is that we have CC now and it doesn't help them at all. What do you guys think?

 CKO wrote:
When it comes to 40k evaluation of units and rules is complex. Player skill and experience play a huge factor in how a unit will perform on the tabletop. In my evaluations, I will give two grades one will be its potential grade and the other will be its true grade. The potential grade is getting the most out of the unit/rule vs the true grade which is what you can expect from average players. I will be grading the Mephrit dynasty in this post.

Mephrit: +3 to all Ranged Weapons, -1 AP for half range

Potential Grade: -A True Grade: B

This dynasty upgrades Necron's firepower greatly however to take full advantage it requires strategic reserves. Both tesla and gauss become better with this dynasty. Tesla will be able to engage enemies at a greater distance or receive a -1 to AP. The best use of this dynasty is to take advantage of strategic reserves to guarantee that you receive the -1 AP. Destroyers coming onto the board and delivering -4 AP shots and your choice of a unit carrying gauss weaponry becoming -3 AP is the main reason why Mephrit dynasty was able to get an -A in my opinion. You can create a competitive list around having a combination of Destroyers and Immortals delivering an alpha strike with the use of strategic reserves. The main problem I have with the Mephrit dynasty is that we have CC now and it doesn't help them at all. What do you guys think?

I'd suggest that there's literally no point trying to analyse the various Dynastic Codes in the context of the new Codex since we know so little about it. Literally everything you've said above is either banal to the point of not being very useful or speculation based on no information whatsoever. We don't know how all our auras will work, what other buffing units we will have or what any of the new Command Protocols do other than the one they showed off last week. Also, what metrics are you using to determine what an "average player" is?

Slipspace wrote:
I'd suggest that there's literally no point trying to analyse the various Dynastic Codes in the context of the new Codex since we know so little about it. Literally everything you've said above is either banal to the point of not being very useful or speculation based on no information whatsoever. We don't know how all our auras will work, what other buffing units we will have or what any of the new Command Protocols do other than the one they showed off last week.

We are missing information but GW has revealed several things to us about the new codex. Here is a link to the majority of those things. https://www.belloflostsouls.net/category/necrons Using this information I gave the dynasty the grade, I am fully aware that my evaluation can be incorrect once we have the codex in hand but there is nothing wrong with speculating about our new options. Making detailed strategies is impossible thus I kept it simple with few examples due to the lack of codex.

Hopefully, by giving an example of how you can apply what I posted in my previous post it will be more usefull. Are you being pounded away by something that is out of line of sight or range such as the Space Marine's Whirlwind Scorpius or a Paladin Squad using astral aim? You can place your Destroyer Squad in strategic reserves and when they arrive they can avoid any terrain issues and be placed in range to get the -1 AP. With the stratagem activated you can easily destroy or weaken either of those units with your 18 str 6 -4 AP D3 shots re-rolling missed hits and wound rolls.

Slipspace wrote:
Also, what metrics are you using to determine what an "average player" is?

The average player is someone who isn't able to get the most out of their units.

Any thoughts on the lokhust heavy destroyer weapons?
I've seen a lot of knee jerk reactions. Seems to me like 3 gauss destructors are going to be a lethal vehicle/monster hunting unit while the enmitic exterminator is a way to add some extra firepower to your regular group of 6 destroyers.

personally, i think the lokhust heavy destroyer is a joke.
One gun has nowhere near the rate of fire to make that statline any good for its price
The other is slightly stronger than the heavy gauss cannon, for around twice the price (currently anyway, assuming regular heavy destroyers dont go up in points in the new codex).
I'd much rather have 2 heavy destroyers than 1 lokhust heavy destroyer.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
personally, i think the lokhust heavy destroyer is a joke.
One gun has nowhere near the rate of fire to make that statline any good for its price
The other is slightly stronger than the heavy gauss cannon, for around twice the price (currently anyway, assuming regular heavy destroyers dont go up in points in the new codex).
I'd much rather have 2 heavy destroyers than 1 lokhust heavy destroyer.

I would bet money on the current Heavy Destroyer being completely replaced by this new one - it is called the Lokhust Heavy Destroyer after all and GW just confirmed that Lokhusts are the floaty shooty Destroyers. That's sad, because I felt that Heavy Destroyers finally became viable with their points drop in the last CA for 8th edition but this new one just seems bad. The Enmitic gun us a travesty of rules design - decent fire rate, mediocre strength and terrible AP with only D1 makes it weird in all the wrong ways. The anti-tank gun is OK but still suffers from being single shot.

entirely possible. Lets hope not.

Ive been having people say that gun is rude because its consistent 5-7 damage while a D6 can easily roll a 1-2. They fail to realize that hes TWICE the price, so its actually less efficient as you have 1 shot that could flub instead of 2 to at least get some damage through and your damage average if they both wound is still about the same, but more swingy in both directions.
Single D6 damage shots are never that great. Multiples tend to delete things, its why the Morkanaut is actually a threat because 3D3 S8 Ap3 D6 damage shots tends to delete stuff even with a bad result that still at least did some damage.

i just dont get the enmitic gun at all. What is it supposed to fire at? Nowhere near the rate of fire to deal with horde, not enough AP or damage to deal with marines or vehicles. If Blast worked on a per-die basis i could see this being pretty good against medium sized squads, but its per attack not die so the blast rule actually does nothing until its 11+ models.

Unless it miraculously changes in the codex (which iirc has never happened) i dont see it ever making its points back.

The new Heavy Gauss Cannon or whatever is going to be ideal for blasting repulsors, (Non shield dome impulsors), guard vehicles, and space marine outriders.

Generally, if its a vehicle, or relies on just wounds, and doesn't have an invuln, that gun is its kryptonite. Assuming they're squads of 1-3 still, 3 shots with rerolls from EP, its a crazy amount of damage output, earning back points in 1-2 turns at good range, with great mobility.

The Enmitic Exterminator has the blast rule which means its role is to kill screen units. I don't think the option is bad but there are better choices in the Necron army. We have gauss weaponry with -2 AP and str 5 meaning it will wound marines on a 3+ just like the Enmitic Exterminator. The Enmitic Exterminator is for horde armies however the main problem is going to be its point cost. Why spend that much for Enmitic Exterminators with -1 AP weapons that wound marines on a 3+, when all of our troop choices can do the same thing with their gauss weapon except its -2 AP? If your local meta has t3 hordes or Orks it might be a great option 27 shots re-rolling 1's wounding on 2's (not the t4 Orks though) is .

The Doom Scythe is most likely going to be cheaper than a unit of 3 Lokhust Heavy Destoyers and be able to fire 3 str 12 -4 AP 3+D3 shots and 10 tesla shots! I love the Gauss Destroyer option as it is a true anti-tank monster! It is capable of destroying vehicles with ease but with 3 dice bad things can and will happen! The re-rolls that are built into the kit help a lot but you better keep that re-roll on stand by for the wound roll. Invulnerable saves against this unit will make you cry!

Kinda sad that the Lokhust HD isn't looking great, I found the fat destroyer model to be really funny, so I was hoping they were good. plus, good long range weaponry has always been something Necrons needed. I almost wonder if it's going to have 2+ ballistic or some sort of special rule, because it's looking a little underwhelming on the gameplay front. Idk, one can hope.

 CKO wrote:
The Enmitic Exterminator has the blast rule which means its role is to kill screen units. I don't think the option is bad but there are better choices in the Necron army.

How many 11+ model units you actually see? Those　have gone extinct worse than mammoths did.

You will still see 30 ork boys, 30 plaguebearers, 30 cultists, 20 poxwalkers, 30 gaunts because they have obsec.

You won't because removing those units will generally be trivial (maybe the Nurgle a bit harder), and they give up an easy 15 VP in secondary objectives. Build your army to deny your opponent easy secondary objectives.

People just like complaining

punisher357 wrote:
People just like complaining

This is so true, I am coming back to 40k, and every time I post something that I believe is good information there are negative comments that follow closely behind. I am starting to understand that in forums negativity is to be expected and I should do my best to keep a positive attitude!

With that positive energy, I am always looking at our new units trying to find a role for them. The new Lokhust Destroyer's best target is actually the new Space Marine units. -4 AP will ignore both Eradicators and Outrider's save and 3D3 damage will kill them easily. Three shots that hit on 3's (re-rolling ones), str 10 (wounding on 2's) -4 AP (ignore saves), and 3d3 damage that auto kills them. (3 shots 3 models) The gun is 36 inches with 8 fly movement which means if you play it correctly Eradicators and Aggressor Squads are to slow! This unit just gained a rolled against nearly every Marine list while maintaining its role as anti-tank! If you want to isn't there a new dynasty rule that has re-roll 1 wound roll?

What do you guys think?

 CKO wrote:

punisher357 wrote:
People just like complaining

This is so true, I am coming back to 40k, and every time I post something that I believe is good information there are negative comments that follow closely behind. I am starting to understand that in forums negativity is to be expected and I should do my best to keep a positive attitude!

With that positive energy, I am always looking at our new units trying to find a role for them. The new Lokhust Destroyer's best target is actually the new Space Marine units. -4 AP will ignore both Eradicators and Outrider's save and 3D3 damage will kill them easily. Three shots that hit on 3's (re-rolling ones), str 10 (wounding on 2's) -4 AP (ignore saves), and 3d3 damage that auto kills them. (3 shots 3 models) The gun is 36 inches with 8 fly movement which means if you play it correctly Eradicators and Aggressor Squads are to slow! This unit just gained a rolled against nearly every Marine list while maintaining its role as anti-tank! If you want to isn't there a new dynasty rule that has re-roll 1 wound roll?

What do you guys think?

Do they get to ignore Heavy? If not, then that's 4+ to hit.

 nintura wrote:

 CKO wrote:

punisher357 wrote:
People just like complaining

This is so true, I am coming back to 40k, and every time I post something that I believe is good information there are negative comments that follow closely behind. I am starting to understand that in forums negativity is to be expected and I should do my best to keep a positive attitude!

With that positive energy, I am always looking at our new units trying to find a role for them. The new Lokhust Destroyer's best target is actually the new Space Marine units. -4 AP will ignore both Eradicators and Outrider's save and 3D3 damage will kill them easily. Three shots that hit on 3's (re-rolling ones), str 10 (wounding on 2's) -4 AP (ignore saves), and 3d3 damage that auto kills them. (3 shots 3 models) The gun is 36 inches with 8 fly movement which means if you play it correctly Eradicators and Aggressor Squads are to slow! This unit just gained a rolled against nearly every Marine list while maintaining its role as anti-tank! If you want to isn't there a new dynasty rule that has re-roll 1 wound roll?

What do you guys think?

Do they get to ignore Heavy? If not, then that's 4+ to hit.

I am almost 100% sure they will get the repulsor platform rule to ignore the heavy penalty as they have had previously.

That being said I don't think most Gravis Armor is a good target for these, as Lokhust are nearly double the cost or more on a per model basis.

 Sasori wrote:
I am almost 100% sure they will get the repulsor platform rule to ignore the heavy penalty as they have had previously.

That being said I don't think most Gravis Armor is a good target for these, as Lokhust are nearly double the cost or more on a per model basis.

The weapon statically kills eradicators, outriders, and aggressors with ease. Can you elaborate on the point per model basis thing? Are you saying a unit has to equal or be cheaper than what it is killing to be considered a good unit? Example eradicators are (I believe) 120 points so the unit attempting to kill it must be 120 points or lower to be considered a good unit. I don't know if anyone is capable of beating marines in that scenario.

 CKO wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
I am almost 100% sure they will get the repulsor platform rule to ignore the heavy penalty as they have had previously.

That being said I don't think most Gravis Armor is a good target for these, as Lokhust are nearly double the cost or more on a per model basis.

The weapon statically kills eradicators, outriders, and aggressors with ease. Can you elaborate on the point per model basis thing? Are you saying a unit has to equal or be cheaper than what it is killing to be considered a good unit? Example eradicators are (I believe) 120 points so the unit attempting to kill it must be 120 points or lower to be considered a good unit. I don't know if anyone is capable of beating marines in that scenario.

Thing　is you are paying　70 pts(assuming price stays　same) for　1　shot that gets past to wound only about 2/3 times. So you　spend 5 turns　to kill 3.

Plus means you aren't shooting vehicles which are even better target.

tneva82 wrote:
Thing　is you are paying　70 pts(assuming price stays　same) for　1　shot that gets past to wound only about 2/3 times. So you　spend 5 turns　to kill 3.

Plus means you aren't shooting vehicles which are even better target.

Lokhust Destroyers hit on 3's that equals 2 hits. It is str 10 which means they wound on 2's and with -4 AP, 3d3 damage that equals a dead multi-wound gravis marine. The Lokhust Destroyer gets to re-roll 1's to hit and can get re-roll 1's to wound with a Scorpekh Lord or the new dynasty which tilts the numbers in your favor even more. Yes, it cost 210 points but is it capable of earning those points back, quickly after 2 turns! Certain armies pay more for certain things, we pay more for units that have long-range and we also pay for re-animation protocol. Comparing weapons and point cost is a tricky formula that sometimes I think only GW understands.

I'm not sure I'd go nuts about it - but yes, if you take 3, you would hope to kill 2 Gravis models a turn. Which is quite respectable. We seem to be in this strange world where if a model isn't wracking up a 100% return in a go its a bit meh - but that will hopefully change. And if Gravis units become more expensive (hope springs eternal), the expected return on these goes up.

The downside will remain on the defensive stats - but RP might help.

Anyone else catch the wording on the Doomstalker from the article?

The gun is more powerful the futher away we are.

Reckon we'll get similar treatment on the DDA?

 IHateNids wrote:
Anyone else catch the wording on the Doomstalker from the article?

The gun is more powerful the futher away we are.

Reckon we'll get similar treatment on the DDA?

The stats that have appeared for the gun already in the wild show that it has a low power 24inch range and a high power 48inch range option for firing its main gun. Though the latter can only be fired only if it has also not moved that turn. So as opposed to it "getting stronger the further away the enemy is" it more has an option for a higher power shot that can fire further; but which has no (unless the codex changes it) minimum range. So you can fire full power right close up provided you didn't move.

So the fluff text is sort of right and sort of not right. At least unless the main book stats are different or introduce other abilities.