Hey, first time poster here.

Has noone seen Kutlakhs stats? I mean Lychguard are getting hella stick BUT this guy lets them move, advance and charge all in one turn if he's close enough to the unit. He can then give them +1 to advances and charges and +1 to hit. That's hitting on 2+. I know warscythes + kutlakh is then 500 points but 20 hits on 2+ and then most probably 3+ (for the majority of infantry) with -4AP is sick right? Plus he makes them moveable.

Let's then throw Anrakyr in giving them an extra attack plus another warsythe and the use of an enemy vehicle weapon for added memes. 33 warsythe attacks and kutlakhs obsidiax x3. You're probably looking at hitting 30 of these in total doing 2 wounds -4 AP for the scythes and D3 -3 for Kutlakh. This even eats hordes.

Expensive combo at >660 points but could be the new death star when you think that Kutlakh and Anrakyr can walk in front of the Lychguard and soak up fire. Especially Kutlakh with 2+ 4++. He regains D3 from living metal and if a wound goes through of >2 damage just let one of the Lychguard intercept it and simply take 1 mortal wound instead. If you add a cryptek here we are then also looking at 4+ reanimation making for ever more memes.

Surely this has to be one of the best combos we can see which is relatable to Lychguard+royal court from 7e?

Thoughts?

Try proxying your midfield DDA as tesseract arks. Have an invuln, big tesla cannons, fleshbane flamer for overwatch and a big cannon like the DDA. I feel these are better suited for scooting about as they don't lose the big profile after moving, it's just heavy so at -1. Their secondary profile is assault too so it has a lot more flexibility. Finally both assault and heavy profiles are D6 instead of D3, ensuring more damage done overall.

GhostRecon wrote:Remembering a comment made earlier in the thread about the ITC first turn rule; didn't see it mentioned but you can't use a CP to seize the initiative under the ITC format. Or in the first battle round. Far more balanced that way.

Oh okay yea I haven't seen the ruling from ITC, just what has been said piecemeal on the boards. That sounds much better then overall.

ski107 wrote:People that are playing Deathmarks - are you usually going for just the 5 or a full 10?

Depends, 10 is better for ensuring a HQ is dead, (5 couldn't kill a puny Guard HQ in two turns ><, but had bad rolling) and also reduces unit numbers, but2x 5 are better for DS retaliation on things like scions. Depends on what your vs'ing.



He is good, but you have to remember that that combo is incredibly slow. A cryptek would also be good in there so the lychguard can absorb the abuse, have a 5++ and a 4+ RP. Then you need some way of getting them where they need to be. Deceiver and HQ's in a GA is probably the cheapest but they have to absorb around of shooting before they can do anything. Or 3-4 night scythes, or monoliths etc. if the other army is coming to you this is less of a problem, but if you have to go to them then the combo easily starts hitting north of 1k


Yea I feel pylons are going to be in most comp necron list. Wether it's the big gun, which is awesome and will wreck a flyer a turn at minimum (puts out 3d6 tesla shots too) and buffs the rest of the army while also hard countering knight lists. Alternatively you could have a sentry pylon matrix for cheaper and blow them out of the sky very fast.

I agree that Pylons are going to be ubiquitous. I'm thinking 2 Pylons, 20 Flayed Ones, Imotekh, and a bunch of Scarabs is going to be the list I plan to build.

On the topic of sentry pylon loadout, heat cannons or gauss exterminators? I feel even against that BA flyer spam the heat cannon will be better, as it is only on a -1 vs the GE, but it's D6 shots vs 2. Both are at -4 ap, the gauss is wounding on 3's the heat on 4's but the cannon has the melta rule, so unless his flyers are sitting backfield all game the heat rays should come out on top in a firefight vs flyers compared to the GE. But in a competition they also perform much better against all other targets.

I think for the best lists you just want to spam the good stuff and the most efficient stuff.

Something along the lines of this . . .

Battalion - 3 CPs

HQ
Overlord w SoL - 119
Cryptek - 104

Troops
5x Tesla Immortals - 85
5x Tesla Immortals - 85
20x Warriors - 240

Elite
1 x Triarch Stalker w/HGC - 181

FA
1x Tomb Sentinel w/Gloom Prism - 185
1x Tomb Sentinel w/Gloom Prism - 185
6x Scarabs - 78

Heavy
1x Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246
1x Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246
1X Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246


2000 points exactly.

Marshal_Gus wrote:
I agree that Pylons are going to be ubiquitous. I'm thinking 2 Pylons, 20 Flayed Ones, Imotekh, and a bunch of Scarabs is going to be the list I plan to build.

Flayed ones seem sooooo overpriced for what they can do. They DS, soak shooting a turn, then charge and do their damage. Which is formidiable at full strength.

But compare them to scarabs.

For the same price you get 33 scarab bases, who also have 4 attacks, so scarabs put out more attacks. They have double the movement, so are more flexible with what they can do during the game. Have 99 wounds vs 20. Can threaten big stuff better than flayed ones. Also 33 scarabs is 4 units meaning they can tie up more stuff, grab more objectives etc.

FO have a higher S & T, and shred on their weapon and a better save. But I don't think a better save and higher toughness counteracts having 5x less wounds.

Imohtekh buffs the FO (he has to be aggressive and can't deepstrike so it's kinda hard for him to give the buff to them), but a spyder buffs scarabs exponentially more, for cheaper than Imotekh, and can repair vehicles, and can deny the witch.

I really love my flayed ones, but I don't think I can justify them when you compare them to scarabs in this edition. They're just waaaaay too expensive for what they bring.



I agree with this for the most part, however I don't think we need to stick to a battalion to be competitive. IMO I feel heat cannon sentry pylons are better than the sentinels. They have 1 less wound but for the most part do more damage than the sentinels, considering the sentinel will always be moving and hitting with a -1. Yes they're better in melee but if you get them there they ain't shooting again until the combat is over, while 36" melta means the pylons have a larger threat radius.

The gauss pylon's tesla arc is a pistol, so it can't shoot that and the gauss annihilator in the same turn, and horde spam lists will probably just stay 18+ inches away after it lands to make it near useless so you probably will never shoot the tesla arc.

I'm not 100% sold on sentry pylons. They don't have their big brother's macro typing so they get the -1 to hit the turn they come in from reserves. They also lack the 'immobile' special rule which means if you do whiff on making their points back in their alpha strike turn then they can be really easily shut down by an assault or high damage weapons. I am however tickled by the idea that sentry pylons are technically capable of making an advance move up to 9". Does it slowly hover like a monolith? No, the true headcannon is that there are dozens of tiny robot feet hidden under the platform.

 Actinium wrote:
The gauss pylon's tesla arc is a pistol, so it can't shoot that and the gauss annihilator in the same turn, and horde spam lists will probably just stay 18+ inches away after it lands to make it near useless so you probably will never shoot the tesla arc.

I'm not 100% sold on sentry pylons. They don't have their big brother's macro typing so they get the -1 to hit the turn they come in from reserves. They also lack the 'immobile' special rule which means if you do whiff on making their points back in their alpha strike turn then they can be really easily shut down by an assault or high damage weapons. I am however tickled by the idea that sentry pylons are technically capable of making an advance move up to 9". Does it slowly hover like a monolith? No, the true headcannon is that there are dozens of tiny robot feet hidden under the platform.

Yep I forgot about pistol rule. It's obviously for cc then as that is a nasty counter assault. I've found just deploying the pylons t1 is good. Still can threaten a lot of the board from our deployment zone

 Klowny wrote:

Try proxying your midfield DDA as tesseract arks. Have an invuln, big tesla cannons, fleshbane flamer for overwatch and a big cannon like the DDA. I feel these are better suited for scooting about as they don't lose the big profile after moving, it's just heavy so at -1. Their secondary profile is assault too so it has a lot more flexibility. Finally both assault and heavy profiles are D6 instead of D3, ensuring more damage done overall.

I am playing around with the TA in my next large game. I don't feel that it is quite the direct replacement for the mass flayer shots of the DDAs as I've been facing a lot of invulnerable saves lately (Tau shield generators, Harlequins, etc.) and when trying to bust through them, having guns with better AP is not nearly as useful as making them roll a ton of saves. I still like the TA as I think it's a better tank hunter and can do great as a mobile backfield guardian, but I think the DDAs will function better in the midfield role when used en masse, especially when you look at the points you save.

 Maelstrom808 wrote:

 Klowny wrote:

Try proxying your midfield DDA as tesseract arks. Have an invuln, big tesla cannons, fleshbane flamer for overwatch and a big cannon like the DDA. I feel these are better suited for scooting about as they don't lose the big profile after moving, it's just heavy so at -1. Their secondary profile is assault too so it has a lot more flexibility. Finally both assault and heavy profiles are D6 instead of D3, ensuring more damage done overall.

I am playing around with the TA in my next large game. I don't feel that it is quite the direct replacement for the mass flayer shots of the DDAs as I've been facing a lot of invulnerable saves lately (Tau shield generators, Harlequins, etc.) and when trying to bust through them, having guns with better AP is not nearly as useful as making them roll a ton of saves. I still like the TA as I think it's a better tank hunter and can do great as a mobile backfield guardian, but I think the DDAs will function better in the midfield role when used en masse, especially when you look at the points you save.

Wouldn't 20/40 warriors backed by a GA be a better option then? I suppose the durability coupled with the flayer and big gun that is better than a straight 100 gauss shots? If your looking for massed shots on a durable chassis have you tried the TV? I know it's expensive but it has a metric ton of wounds, puts out 20 tesla shots a turn as well as mortal wounds. It's comparable in points, firepower and wounds as DDA

Edit: nope just realised it's nowhere near comparable kek

What percent of our lists should we be devoting to certain jobs, now that we have a better idea of what the meta is like?

??% horde control
??% anti vehicle (including flyers)
??% objective capture/control
etc.

And what units accomplish what jobs best?


Also, was the Skyshield Landing Pad worth considering for a weapons platform?
Stick a bunch of DDAs or Sentry Pylons on top of that thing and they'll have a clear shot to most of the table with extra added protection.
Or would a Void Shield Generator be better? (4++ but no elevated position for better line of sight)

 skoffs wrote:
What percent of our lists should we be devoting to certain jobs, now that we have a better idea of what the meta is like?

??% horde control
??% anti vehicle (including flyers)
??% objective capture/control
etc.

And what units accomplish what jobs best?


Also, was the Skyshield Landing Pad worth considering for a weapons platform?
Stick a bunch of DDAs or Sentry Pylons on top of that thing and they'll have a clear shot to most of the table with extra added protection.
Or would a Void Shield Generator be better? (4++ but no elevated position for better line of sight)

Perhaps amount of firepower would be a better measure, eg:

Horde control: equivalent of 40 BS3+ S5 tesla shots

anti vehicle: equivalent of 6 HGC shots

objecive control: at least 2 units with 4+ models that have 8" or more in move

The DDA would then be able to contribute in multiple slots, even HDs could be in reserve for objective duty.

 skoffs wrote:
What percent of our lists should we be devoting to certain jobs, now that we have a better idea of what the meta is like?

??% horde control
??% anti vehicle (including flyers)
??% objective capture/control
etc.

And what units accomplish what jobs best?


Also, was the Skyshield Landing Pad worth considering for a weapons platform?
Stick a bunch of DDAs or Sentry Pylons on top of that thing and they'll have a clear shot to most of the table with extra added protection.
Or would a Void Shield Generator be better? (4++ but no elevated position for better line of sight)

Yeah it's a bit hard to quantify as most things will fill multiple roles. There's not many dedicated anything units that I can think of straight away.

Sky shield and void shield take up a whole detachment slot, and arks are very durable as is. If a detachment is free a sky shield would be good for DDA to give LOS.
The unfurled regen the pad gives is actually really good, keep it up initially for the invuln, then drop it down to regen back up. It's cheap too! In fact, it's better in every way than a VSG, the invuln is better on the generator when it's above half wounds, but it doesn't have a regen option and is more expensive.

[Nevermind]

 Klowny wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
What percent of our lists should we be devoting to certain jobs, now that we have a better idea of what the meta is like?

??% horde control
??% anti vehicle (including flyers)
??% objective capture/control
etc.

And what units accomplish what jobs best?


Also, was the Skyshield Landing Pad worth considering for a weapons platform?
Stick a bunch of DDAs or Sentry Pylons on top of that thing and they'll have a clear shot to most of the table with extra added protection.
Or would a Void Shield Generator be better? (4++ but no elevated position for better line of sight)

Yeah it's a bit hard to quantify as most things will fill multiple roles. There's not many dedicated anything units that I can think of straight away.

Sky shield and void shield take up a whole detachment slot, and arks are very durable as is. If a detachment is free a sky shield would be good for DDA to give LOS.
The unfurled regen the pad gives is actually really good, keep it up initially for the invuln, then drop it down to regen back up. It's cheap too! In fact, it's better in every way than a VSG, the invuln is better on the generator when it's above half wounds, but it doesn't have a regen option and is more expensive.

Well wound healing is for flyer battlefield roles only, and our fliers cant stay still for a turn, so that part of the plan probably wouldn't work. But the invul is nice, though QS already helps in that department


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What about a bunker for our heavy destroyers?

torblind wrote:
What about a bunker for our heavy destroyers?

I'd thought about that, too, but they typically want to be pretty mobile to get line of sight on their targets (going after/sitting on objectives).

Also, yeah, Sky Shield regens things that are flyers, not just things with <flying>. Still a decent way to give DDAs an invuln as well as a better vantage point on the table.

Any other fortifications worth considering?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I can't remember what we concluded:
Was it more effective to take a HGC Stalker + DDA or just pay 22 extra points to take 2x DDAs?
(I have a feeling it was the latter, but can't be certain)

I don't think you can go wrong with either one. Stalker would be more helpful for hordes because you can buff shooting against them, but when you're facing heavier targets you're simply better off with the second Ark.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Klowny wrote:

Marshal_Gus wrote:
I agree that Pylons are going to be ubiquitous. I'm thinking 2 Pylons, 20 Flayed Ones, Imotekh, and a bunch of Scarabs is going to be the list I plan to build.

Flayed ones seem sooooo overpriced for what they can do. They DS, soak shooting a turn, then charge and do their damage. Which is formidiable at full strength.

But compare them to scarabs.

For the same price you get 33 scarab bases, who also have 4 attacks, so scarabs put out more attacks. They have double the movement, so are more flexible with what they can do during the game. Have 99 wounds vs 20. Can threaten big stuff better than flayed ones. Also 33 scarabs is 4 units meaning they can tie up more stuff, grab more objectives etc.

FO have a higher S & T, and shred on their weapon and a better save. But I don't think a better save and higher toughness counteracts having 5x less wounds.

Imohtekh buffs the FO (he has to be aggressive and can't deepstrike so it's kinda hard for him to give the buff to them), but a spyder buffs scarabs exponentially more, for cheaper than Imotekh, and can repair vehicles, and can deny the witch.

I really love my flayed ones, but I don't think I can justify them when you compare them to scarabs in this edition. They're just waaaaay too expensive for what they bring.

Spoiler:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:
I think for the best lists you just want to spam the good stuff and the most efficient stuff.

Something along the lines of this . . .

Battalion - 3 CPs

HQ
Overlord w SoL - 119
Cryptek - 104

Troops
5x Tesla Immortals - 85
5x Tesla Immortals - 85
20x Warriors - 240

Elite
1 x Triarch Stalker w/HGC - 181

FA
1x Tomb Sentinel w/Gloom Prism - 185
1x Tomb Sentinel w/Gloom Prism - 185
6x Scarabs - 78

Heavy
1x Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246
1x Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246
1X Tesseract Ark w/Tesla - 246


2000 points exactly.

I agree with this for the most part, however I don't think we need to stick to a battalion to be competitive. IMO I feel heat cannon sentry pylons are better than the sentinels. They have 1 less wound but for the most part do more damage than the sentinels, considering the sentinel will always be moving and hitting with a -1. Yes they're better in melee but if you get them there they ain't shooting again until the combat is over, while 36" melta means the pylons have a larger threat radius.

Yeah, Flayed Ones are one of the few units I think are super bizarrely priced. They're maybe worth 15 total.

Good news everyone, CCBs are now characters as per the new FAQ

How much better are they now?

Well, you can't focus them down now, so they got a bit more survivable.

So what is the ideal thing to accompany the CCB, now?
Ideally something fast to keep up with them.
They can still only give out its MWBD ("Command Wave") to <DYNASTY> INFANTRY units, so Tomb Blades and Praetorians aren't benefiting from it. The Canopteks, too.
Destroyers, maybe?


Actually, it kinda looks like the CCB and the Destroyer Lord are pretty close.

CCB: M12" WS2+ BS2+ S5 T6 W8 A3 Ld10 Sv 3+/0++ Points 162 (WS, Tesla), Command Wave, QS
D.L. : M10" WS3+ BS3+ S5 T6 W6 A4 Ld10 Sv 3+/4++ Points 135 (WS), Reroll 1s to hit

What do you think, worth the 27 point difference now?

FAQ and Errata are out.

- RP reanimated models have to be placed in coherence with models that did not reanimate this turn. I guess that limits its effectiveness a bit.
- RP reanimated models return with full wounds!
- CCB have the Character keyword.
- Imotekh has Ld 10.
- Quantum Shielding cannot save Mortal Wounds since they are single damage wounds (duh!)
- C'Tan's Time's Arrow looks at the highest Wounds characteristic in the target unit.

The minor differences in their stat line probably don't matter. I think there might be something to be said for bringing a gauss cannon on the CCB, even if it is 34 more points than a d.lord and doesn't re-roll 1s that's still almost half the cost of a whole destroyer for the same gun.
I think a CCB is better for 1 unit of destroyers but the destroyer lord is probably better for 2 or more, because Command Wave still only effects 1 unit a turn while United in Hatred is an aura.

 Actinium wrote:
The minor differences in their stat line probably don't matter. I think there might be something to be said for bringing a gauss cannon on the CCB, even if it is 34 more points than a d.lord and doesn't re-roll 1s that's still almost half the cost of a whole destroyer for the same gun

The difference there being that Destroyers don't get the -1 to hit for firing their Heavy weapons, where as the CCB does, reducing its effectiveness (same reason why the Assault Tesla Cannon tends to be the better choice on Annihilation Barges).

Well, there is the added flexibility in that it can move 12" to buff any unit that needs buffing.

Furthermore it brings a nice underslung gun that hits on 2+, and a very nice CC weapon that hits on 2+, and he can move to add some bang where needed. I'd say its a relevant choice.

And it offers variety, which eventually makes possible more fun! (don't forget the fun!)

Does this FAQ change mean that the Tesseract Vault can not shoot the same power three times?

(I was planning on using it to decimate hordes with 3x Seismic Assault)

T.

The barge is bs2+ so moving and shooting the gauss cannon is a 3+ same as destroyers. You could take a 2+ tesla but if its job is to follow destroyers around i figure having the same ideal shooting targets is a boon.

I actually like both the CCB and Destroyer lord now. Probably going to run both in my lists. CCB with immortals and D.L with destroyers seems like a strong core to a list.

I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

 Punisher wrote:
I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

That didin't change though?

So I guess our Prets, Stalker and The Traveler stay Dynestyless. Sigh, poor Traveler stuck at a sad 5" move and no spider rep love for the Stalker. So now a year+ wait for our codex.

Pyrothem wrote:
So I guess our Prets, Stalker and The Traveler stay Dynestyless. Sigh, poor Traveler stuck at a sad 5" move and no spider rep love for the Stalker. So now a year+ wait for our codex.

It seems obvious that those units are intentionally excluded from Dynasty buffs. It's in the fluff. I would definitely not expect it to change with the new codex.

torblind wrote:


That didin't change though?

Ah ya my bad, just assumed there was a change since they included it. They just fixed the grammar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think it's better to go with the tesla under-slung for the CCB, it's cheaper and the only time the gauss is better is against multi wound units and even then it's not much better. So I'd just save the points, the extra shot and ability to fire at full BS make the tesla function fine on a unit that is going to be realistically moving every turn.

 Actinium wrote:
The barge is bs2+ so moving and shooting the gauss cannon is a 3+ same as destroyers. You could take a 2+ tesla but if its job is to follow destroyers around i figure having the same ideal shooting targets is a boon.

Fair point.
A CCB w/ GC & WS is practically the same cost as a D.Lord w/ WS & RO.
2 CCBs + 1 D.L is just over 500 points.
Those three HQs working with a couple of full strength Destroyer units would be pretty decimating.

torblind wrote:

 Punisher wrote:
I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

That didin't change though?

It did change: reanimated models have to be placed in coherence with models that did not reanimate this turn.

Are you sure you're comparing the CCB to the right unit?

Instead of comparing it to the Destroyer Lord, should we perhaps compare it instead to the regular Overlord?

Aenar wrote:

torblind wrote:

 Punisher wrote:
I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

That didin't change though?

It did change: reanimated models have to be placed in coherence with models that did not reanimate this turn.

Isn't that how it was originally? I think it was clear before that you can't reanimate a model and place it next to another reanimated model.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Aenar wrote:

torblind wrote:

 Punisher wrote:
I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

That didin't change though?

It did change: reanimated models have to be placed in coherence with models that did not reanimate this turn.

Isn't that how it was originally? I think it was clear before that you can't reanimate a model and place it next to another reanimated model.

You cannot place next to another reanimated model, but within 2" of a model that was on the table at the start of the turn. For example: you have 1 Warrior alive in a 20-men unit. You roll for RP but you cannot place all the 19 of them (given you roll accordingly) if you can't place all 19 of them within 2" of the remaining Warrior. I don't know how many Warriors you can fit within 2" of a single one, and enemy units / obstacles will reduce that amount for sure.

 vipoid wrote:
Are you sure you're comparing the CCB to the right unit?

Instead of comparing it to the Destroyer Lord, should we perhaps compare it instead to the regular Overlord?

You could, but I was just thinking of HQ that go fast.
Though reconsidering it, they complement each other rather than compete.

Aenar wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Aenar wrote:

torblind wrote:

 Punisher wrote:
I'm interested to see if the change to RP makes 20man blobs of warriors worse. Since it'll be harder to reanimate now if you have to remain in coherency with existing models.

That didin't change though?

It did change: reanimated models have to be placed in coherence with models that did not reanimate this turn.

Isn't that how it was originally? I think it was clear before that you can't reanimate a model and place it next to another reanimated model.

You cannot place next to another reanimated model, but within 2" of a model that was on the table at the start of the turn. For example: you have 1 Warrior alive in a 20-men unit. You roll for RP but you cannot place all the 19 of them (given you roll accordingly) if you can't place all 19 of them within 2" of the remaining Warrior. I don't know how many Warriors you can fit within 2" of a single one, and enemy units / obstacles will reduce that amount for sure.

I understand that, and that's how it was before, wasn't it? Were people really playing it so that you can put reanimated models together? I understood that was forbidden from the get go.

 skoffs wrote:
You could, but I was just thinking of HQ that go fast.
Though reconsidering it, they complement each other rather than compete.

Yeah, I think they serve different roles - the Destroyer Lord is still the best one for buffing Destroyers (unless you only have one unit of them), whilst the CCB is going to be better for most other units.

I think I'll definitely pick the CCB over an Overlord if I can afford it though.

Old

When a model’s reanimation protocols activate, set it up model in unit coherency with any model from this unit that has not returned to the unit as a result of reanimation protocols this turn, and more than 1" from enemy models.

FAQ

When a model’s reanimation protocols activate, set it up in unit coherency with any model from this unit that has not returned to the unit as a result of reanimation protocols this turn, and more than 1" from enemy models.’

They really just fixed a typo.

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
You could, but I was just thinking of HQ that go fast.
Though reconsidering it, they complement each other rather than compete.

Yeah, I think they serve different roles - the Destroyer Lord is still the best one for buffing Destroyers (unless you only have one unit of them), whilst the CCB is going to be better for most other units.

I think I'll definitely pick the CCB over an Overlord if I can afford it though.

I keep my char close to front (2") to use his heroic intervention. Its big advantage of all char.
I dont like CCB becouse he was so big and waste point for shooting weapon when i want cc hq.
For immo hq you dont need his mobility.
He can be good for qs spam army. Mobility help him ride with AB, stalkers or arks.
He also can be good for prets if they get dynasty.

 vipoid wrote:
I think I'll definitely pick the CCB over an Overlord if I can afford it though.

Main pros for Overlord: 4++, can take RO, benefits from cover.
Main pros for CCB: QS, faster, +3W, +1T, gun.
Worth the 50 point difference? Probably.
Just wish it could give TBs MWBD...

Kuguar6 wrote:

I keep my char close to front (2") to use his heroic intervention. Its big advantage of all char.

I don't understand why you can't do this with a CCB.

Kuguar6 wrote:

I dont like CCB becouse he was so big and waste point for shooting weapon when i want cc hq.

Fair enough. Personally I think our HQs need all the shooting they can get.

Kuguar6 wrote:

For immo hq you dont need his mobility.

That's debatable, I think. Especially if you're using multiple units of Immortals in your army.

 skoffs wrote:

Main pros for Overlord: 4++, can take RO, benefits from cover.
Main pros for CCB: QS, faster, +3W, +1T, gun.
Worth the 50 point difference? Probably.

Just a point but the CCB can take a RO as well. Might actually be the best character for it - since he can hang out with more expensive units, whilst still buffing an Immortal unit 12" away.

 skoffs wrote:
Just wish it could give TBs MWBD...

Or Praetorians.

Other pros to consider for the CCB.

Has Fly keyword which means he can leave assaults and still shoot. The D Lord is the only other HQ that can do this.

Having Fly keyword also means he can assault flyers, which is possibly a huge asset if flyer spam becomes a thing in the meta (which is almost a sure thing)

Having Fly keyword also means he can perch on top of buildings and avoid nearly all CC if he wants to.


Also the CCB is a vehicle.

He can be repaired with Spyders or Toholk. Spyders just got a big boost to their overall viability. Not only can Spyders repopulate the Scarab swarms that seem to be in everyone's list but they can also repair your Warlord and protect him from Psychic attacks. That's a lot of value.

Malygon wrote:
Old

When a model’s reanimation protocols activate, set it up model in unit coherency with any model from this unit that has not returned to the unit as a result of reanimation protocols this turn, and more than 1" from enemy models.

FAQ

When a model’s reanimation protocols activate, set it up in unit coherency with any model from this unit that has not returned to the unit as a result of reanimation protocols this turn, and more than 1" from enemy models.’

They really just fixed a typo.

You are right, I didn't go back to read the original rule.

Well, I guess that the CCB could be revised in the OP tier list... It is quite solid now.

Cheap overlord and 10 immortals cause 30 hits for 274 points where 16 immortals cause 32 hits for 272 points.

Cheap CCB and 10 immortals cause 33 hits (30 carbine + 3 cannon) for 324 points and 19 immortals cause 38 hits for 323 points.

It's pretty close between pure troops or overlord support or CCB support, it's just kind of a sliding scale on shooting efficiency vs how much beef you want hiding in your troops.

 Actinium wrote:
Cheap overlord and 10 immortals cause 30 hits for 274 points where 16 immortals cause 32 hits for 272 points.

Cheap CCB and 10 immortals cause 33 hits (30 carbine + 3 cannon) for 324 points and 19 immortals cause 38 hits for 323 points.

It's pretty close between pure troops or overlord support or CCB support, it's just kind of a sliding scale on shooting efficiency vs how much beef you want hiding in your troops.

I think I'd come at it the other way. I'd take an Overlord and Destroyer Lord first, then add in the core units for my army. After that, I'll see if I have any points left over to upgrade the Overlord to a CCB.

FAQ on Understrength Units


Does this officially endorse the practice of putting 9 warriors + HQ in a Ghost Ark?

Don't forget the first part of that paragraph, though.

Each unit’s datasheet will describe how many models make up that unit. Sometimes you may find that you do not have enough models to field a minimum-sized unit; if this is the case, you can still include one unit of that type in your army with as many models as you have available.

I am still not entirely sure if that means you can only field a single, understrength warrior unit or if you can have multiple warrior units but only one of them may be understrength.

It does, but it's still clear that you can't field an understrength unit if you own enough models to make it the minimum size, so I'm not sure a ghost ark is a good use of points for an army that only has 9 warriors total. The rule really benefits something like eldar though who can do something like take 3 wraithguard and 4 fire dragons in 1 wave serpent.

We could take something like a single wraith now though as a viable alternative to 3 scarabs as an objective squatter or 1 man shooting screen for a c'tan.

Another plus for the CCB is that his MWBD has a huge 12" range.

He can support remote drops of Deathmarks and Flayed Ones.

col_impact wrote:
Another plus for the CCB is that his MWBD has a huge 12" range.

He can support remote drops of Deathmarks and Flayed Ones.

and you could also (risk) moving 12" the turn before to help get to within 12" of them for next turn

The CCB change is huge, a lot of our tactics were based on having a slow HQ or a worthless HQ, or both in the case of taking a single Lord in point conscious lists. now that we can have an HQ that is tough, fast, buffs well, and has decent offense a lot of new options are open to us.

CCB + DLord + 2 x Destroyers w/heavy + DDA + gauss pylon might be the big new thing.

Make the CCB your Warlord and give him the Tenacious Survivor trait for a 6+ FNP for additional tankiness.

So hyped about CCB. They're not that amazing still, but it's nice for them to be a real option.

It's pretty comparative between them and the DLord imo. Better gun + Warscythe makes CCB better for doing damage but the 4++ is a huge boon for the DLord. One of each might be the coolest thing tho.

First thought for CCB is that he just needs a screen of scarabs and he makes DS'ing FO a lot more terrifying once he is positioned right.

Now we just need a point adjustment for FO.....

Also the idea that a CCB can't be targeted because it's behind tiny scarab bases is a bit silly. It's RAW and I intend to play it that way but it won't look right :p

 Klowny wrote:
First thought for CCB is that he just needs a screen of scarabs and he makes DS'ing FO a lot more terrifying once he is positioned right.

Now we just need a point adjustment for FO.....

Soyders with fabricator claws and a gloom prism start to look really good if you are running scarabs as a screen for a CCB.

col_impact wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
First thought for CCB is that he just needs a screen of scarabs and he makes DS'ing FO a lot more terrifying once he is positioned right.

Now we just need a point adjustment for FO.....

Soyders with fabricator claws and a gloom prism start to look really good if you are running scarabs as a screen for a CCB.

Yes they do, but I just realised scarabs are only 10" move and spyders are only 6", severely limiting the CCB's movement. A wraith screen on the other hand.....

 Klowny wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
First thought for CCB is that he just needs a screen of scarabs and he makes DS'ing FO a lot more terrifying once he is positioned right.

Now we just need a point adjustment for FO.....

Soyders with fabricator claws and a gloom prism start to look really good if you are running scarabs as a screen for a CCB.

Yes they do, but I just realised scarabs are only 10" move and spyders are only 6", severely limiting the CCB's movement. A wraith screen on the other hand.....

Wondering if it's worth the extra points for some Acanthrites. They are VERY hurty with their guns and blades... but at 60 points each with no way to buff them or keep them alive, I'm not sure.

CCB also havent got infrantry key word so cant be buff by other hq aura - like anrakyr +1A.
Also harder to get cover bonus.

Kuguar6 wrote:
CCB also havent got infrantry key word so cant be buff by other hq aura - like anrakyr +1A.
Also harder to get cover bonus.

Running one around with a footslogging buff guy would be a waste of the mobility of the CCB though, so that's not really a big deal

If he needs to, he can give his MWBD (really Command Wave, but it's the same thing) to the Destroyer Lord accompanying him if there are no other legal targets nearby. Kind of a waste compared to what it would normally want to give it to, but at least it's not a complete waste.


Want to try this build out-
It's basically just anti-MEQ but it looks fun (melt two units a turn).

 Klowny wrote:
First thought for CCB is that he just needs a screen of scarabs and he makes DS'ing FO a lot more terrifying once he is positioned right.

Now we just need a point adjustment for FO.....

Also the idea that a CCB can't be targeted because it's behind tiny scarab bases is a bit silly. It's RAW and I intend to play it that way but it won't look right :p

Scarabs float though, so you can imagine a solid wall of scarabs flying in front of the CCB, instead of just crawling on the ground.
They may not have the fly keyword, but Scarabs were always capable of going several feet off the ground since 3rd ed.

I feel like we were just starting to get into the topic of DDAs vs Tesseract Arks before the FAQ dropped. In what situations should we be bringing one or the other? Do they fill different roles? Should we consider bringing one or two of each? Why do we have the TA rated as A+ and the DDA rated as A?

I feel like the added toughness and invul save is pretty beneficial for the TA, but the extra wounds on the DDA are crucial as well. The gun flexibility of the TA is really what your paying the premium for, being able to move and shoot your heavy weapon, even at -1bs, is really what I take TAs over DDAs for. I really think the DDA should be rated the same or higher than the TA, the points saved makes a huge difference when making lists.

On a more personal note, I can't stand the model for DDA and ghost arks... I almost always end up taking the TA because of this.

Actually, thinking about it, now that we have the FW stuff figured out and the CCB isn't garbage anymore, how viable would a pure QS Wall list be at the moment?
Like no troops, no nothing but vehicles.
The only major downside I can see would be, with no infantry, the CCB's Command Wave (which you are paying for) would be going to waste. That and you'd have no choice but to clear enemies off of objectives to claim them.

 skoffs wrote:
Actually, thinking about it, now that we have the FW stuff figured out and the CCB isn't garbage anymore, how viable would a pure QS Wall list be at the moment?
Like no troops, no nothing but vehicles.
The only major downside I can see would be, with no infantry, the CCB's Command Wave (which you are paying for) would be going to waste. That and you'd have no choice but to clear enemies off of objectives to claim them.

Yeah, Idk if the CCB is for the full QS list. Maybe something like this?



Can replace a stalker or immortals for the CCB if you really want one. Or all the scarabs, immortals, and toholk for a CCB and something else if you really want the theme. Maybe warriors and a ghost ark?

neenj wrote:
I feel like we were just starting to get into the topic of DDAs vs Tesseract Arks before the FAQ dropped. In what situations should we be bringing one or the other? Do they fill different roles? Should we consider bringing one or two of each? Why do we have the TA rated as A+ and the DDA rated as A?

I feel like the added toughness and invul save is pretty beneficial for the TA, but the extra wounds on the DDA are crucial as well. The gun flexibility of the TA is really what your paying the premium for, being able to move and shoot your heavy weapon, even at -1bs, is really what I take TAs over DDAs for. I really think the DDA should be rated the same or higher than the TA, the points saved makes a huge difference when making lists.

On a more personal note, I can't stand the model for DDA and ghost arks... I almost always end up taking the TA because of this.

We had a bit of a talk yesterday about it, TA are better at killing the big stuff, putting out d6 shots means on average more than a DDA, and it's tesla/gauss also is more effective on big stuff, but the DDA are good at both big targets, and the chaff, with the flayer arrays capable of putting out lots of hurt onto them.

Personally I favour the TA, it's more versatile, it's flamer is brutal, and it feels better, due to not being gimped if it's forced to move, allowing for more use of the fly keyword.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skoffs wrote:
Actually, thinking about it, now that we have the FW stuff figured out and the CCB isn't garbage anymore, how viable would a pure QS Wall list be at the moment?
Like no troops, no nothing but vehicles.
The only major downside I can see would be, with no infantry, the CCB's Command Wave (which you are paying for) would be going to waste. That and you'd have no choice but to clear enemies off of objectives to claim them.

Eeeeh I feel toholk (and a spyder) are better worth the points investment over a CCB, he doesn't offer much compared to toholk in a QS spam list

Yeah, but Toholk can only do a single vehicle. In a QS Wall list, which vehicle should get the buff? You should be spamming them, after all.


Different subject,
Destroyers.
If you've got 12 models, is it best to split them 6 & 6? (for maximum RP reliability)
Or 3 & 3 & 3 & 3? (to get more HDs in your army)
Or 4 & 4 & 4? (mix of both)

 skoffs wrote:
Yeah, but Toholk can only do a single vehicle. In a QS Wall list, which vehicle should get the buff? You should be spamming them, after all.


Different subject,
Destroyers.
If you've got 12 models, is it best to split them 6 & 6? (for maximum RP reliability)
Or 3 & 3 & 3 & 3? (to get more HDs in your army)
Or 4 & 4 & 4? (mix of both)

Mayby 1 unit of 5D with 1HD and 2 unit of 3HD?
Or 6D and 2 x 3HD?

 skoffs wrote:
Yeah, but Toholk can only do a single vehicle. In a QS Wall list, which vehicle should get the buff? You should be spamming them, after all.


Different subject,
Destroyers.
If you've got 12 models, is it best to split them 6 & 6? (for maximum RP reliability)
Or 3 & 3 & 3 & 3? (to get more HDs in your army)
Or 4 & 4 & 4? (mix of both)

Yeah it's hard, not many HQ's work well with a QS list, but there won't be anything protecting the CCB, and while it is a good CC threat it's easily giving up slay the warlord, whereas toholk at least can buff a vehicle and help with seize. I'd say the stalker, as it's pretty important and doesn't have quantum shielding for some reason


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm going to try a destroyer list in the future, but they look pretty underwhelming for how expensive they are. I really hope I'm wrong and they're good, but I just can't see it atm compared to other, better units

Bit of fun, guys - how would you go about building a list around Trazyn?

 skoffs wrote:
Y
Different subject,
Destroyers.
If you've got 12 models, is it best to split them 6 & 6? (for maximum RP reliability)
Or 3 & 3 & 3 & 3? (to get more HDs in your army)
Or 4 & 4 & 4? (mix of both)

That's really hard. My instinct would be to go 6 & 6, as it's the most durable of the options and with the split fire rule there's far less danger of overkilling enemies.

However, the other methods give you more Heavy Destroyers - which seem quite valuable in this edition.

The honest answer is that I really don't know.

 Klowny wrote:
I'd say the stalker, as it's pretty important and doesn't have quantum shielding for some reason

Stalker have QS.

 Klowny wrote:
toholk at least can buff a vehicle and help with seize. I'd say the stalker, as it's pretty important and doesn't have quantum shielding for some reason

???

A CCB would be able to support Flayed Ones or Deathmarks on a flank.

So now that we've got the new FAQ and updated rules, has anyone noticed any new strategies? I haven't stopped by the thread since those came out. I suppose since they added CHARACTER to the CCB, that's made it much more viable.

The main one so far, I think, is potentially using a CCB in place of an Overlord. In addition to doing all the stuff an Overlord does, he also has a 24" gun and has the mobility and range to buff a backfield unit of FOs, Deathmarks or such, should the need arise.

I jumped for joy when I saw the change in the CCB but then I sat down to list build and I came to the same conclusion that it does an overlord's job for more points and less survivability.

The CCB strength is it's movement, gun, and extended range MWBD. So other than supporting praetorians those are qualities unneeded for supporting warriors or immortals.

I think people see QS and say yay but I'd rather have the standard 4+ invul. What are other players thoughts?

4+ Invuln versus QS as compared to some typical weapons:

Power Fist, -3 AP, d3 Damage
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is d3 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.67 unsaved wounds, is 1.38 (times d3) damage.

Lascannon, -3 AP, d6 damage
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is d6 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.67 unsaved wounds, is .97 (times d6) damage.

Thunder Hammer
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is 3 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.67 unsaved wounds, is 3.36 damage.

Krak Missile
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is d6 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.33 unsaved wounds, is .89 (times d6) damage.

What about plasma though? Players who know what they are doing will not use high damage weapons against QS, and instead use low damage - high rend - high strength weapons, like plasma, autocannons, starcannons, etc.

 buddha wrote:
The CCB strength is it's movement, gun, and extended range MWBD. So other than supporting praetorians

Still can't buff Praets (only <DYNASTY> INFANTRY. Praets lack Dynasty. Only Anrakyr and Imotekh can give them MWBD).

I see CCB's main buff buddies being Destroyers. Similar speeds, so they can keep up. Destroyers can always use a +1 to hit, giving them borderline auto-hit status. Anything gets close to threaten the Ds and the CCB can run them down (and then FLY back to shoot, which is premium).


This is what I'm currently toying with -

 buddha wrote:
I jumped for joy when I saw the change in the CCB but then I sat down to list build and I came to the same conclusion that it does an overlord's job for more points and less survivability.

The CCB strength is it's movement, gun, and extended range MWBD. So other than supporting praetorians those are qualities unneeded for supporting warriors or immortals.

Well, surely it depends how you position your stuff? I mean, if all you've got is a big block of guys in the middle of the table who never spread out under any circumstances, sure.

However, if your Immortals are more spaced out, then the CCB can allow you to buff whichever squad you need each turn. It can also hang out with one squad (e.g. Destroyers) for Resurrection Orb purposes whilst still buffing a unit of Immortals or Warriors 12" away. What's more, it gives you options if you want to start using it more actively - in that you can suddenly zoom out 12" and then charge another 6-7".

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
What about plasma though? Players who know what they are doing will not use high damage weapons against QS, and instead use low damage - high rend - high strength weapons, like plasma, autocannons, starcannons, etc.

Surely that's the advantage of it being a character though - they can't just fire whatever weapons they like at it. Instead, unless you've practically been tabled, you get to position it and pick your fights if and when you choose. I mean, if you leave it exposed, sure, but it's not like an Overlord would fare any better in that situation.

Actually, since its a character the only type of weapon that would be able to hurt it normally is a sniper type weapon, which have a damage value of 1 and can inflict mortal wounds. But the CCB and the overlord would get their armor save though (against basic rifles, anyway.)

 vipoid wrote:

 buddha wrote:
I jumped for joy when I saw the change in the CCB but then I sat down to list build and I came to the same conclusion that it does an overlord's job for more points and less survivability.

The CCB strength is it's movement, gun, and extended range MWBD. So other than supporting praetorians those are qualities unneeded for supporting warriors or immortals.

Well, surely it depends how you position your stuff? I mean, if all you've got is a big block of guys in the middle of the table who never spread out under any circumstances, sure.

However, if your Immortals are more spaced out, then the CCB can allow you to buff whichever squad you need each turn. It can also hang out with one squad (e.g. Destroyers) for Resurrection Orb purposes whilst still buffing a unit of Immortals or Warriors 12" away. What's more, it gives you options if you want to start using it more actively - in that you can suddenly zoom out 12" and then charge another 6-7".

Not really, the Wave of Command still happens at the start of the turn, so you can't zip to one and buff it if it's out of range. If your squads are 24" or less apart, then yes, sure.

I think it's good if you're going mechanized Warriors. 3 Ghost Arks with Warriors inside backed by a CCB can put and buff Warriors anywhere on the table (since Disembarking is at the start of the move phase and so is WoC, you can buff them as soon as they disembark). A fast, mechanized force is worth considering, though GArks are still pretty overcosted. Still, that's 42 Wounds + Warriors up the field with a CCB or two buffing them while they block for the Characters. Pretty decent midfield power.

Requizen wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 buddha wrote:
I jumped for joy when I saw the change in the CCB but then I sat down to list build and I came to the same conclusion that it does an overlord's job for more points and less survivability.

The CCB strength is it's movement, gun, and extended range MWBD. So other than supporting praetorians those are qualities unneeded for supporting warriors or immortals.

Well, surely it depends how you position your stuff? I mean, if all you've got is a big block of guys in the middle of the table who never spread out under any circumstances, sure.

However, if your Immortals are more spaced out, then the CCB can allow you to buff whichever squad you need each turn. It can also hang out with one squad (e.g. Destroyers) for Resurrection Orb purposes whilst still buffing a unit of Immortals or Warriors 12" away. What's more, it gives you options if you want to start using it more actively - in that you can suddenly zoom out 12" and then charge another 6-7".

Not really, the Wave of Command still happens at the start of the turn, so you can't zip to one and buff it if it's out of range. If your squads are 24" or less apart, then yes, sure.

I think it's good if you're going mechanized Warriors. 3 Ghost Arks with Warriors inside backed by a CCB can put and buff Warriors anywhere on the table (since Disembarking is at the start of the move phase and so is WoC, you can buff them as soon as they disembark). A fast, mechanized force is worth considering, though GArks are still pretty overcosted. Still, that's 42 Wounds + Warriors up the field with a CCB or two buffing them while they block for the Characters. Pretty decent midfield power.

WoC and MVBD are at the beggin of your turn. Its before start of the movement phase...

Kuguar6 wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
I'd say the stalker, as it's pretty important and doesn't have quantum shielding for some reason

Stalker have QS.

skoffs wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
toholk at least can buff a vehicle and help with seize. I'd say the stalker, as it's pretty important and doesn't have quantum shielding for some reason

???

Spoiler:

My bad! Haha I don't know what's gotten into my head, must be all the street food over here, been having too much fun!

Still should give the stalker the D3, arks are either backfield, or have an invuln. And the +1 means the TA is has no penalty to moving and shooting.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Actually, since its a character the only type of weapon that would be able to hurt it normally is a sniper type weapon, which have a damage value of 1 and can inflict mortal wounds. But the CCB and the overlord would get their armor save though (against basic rifles, anyway.)

The difference between an o/lord and CCB is that there is a much higher chance of a CCB being the closest thing to the enemies guns than an o/lord sat in some immortals for example. The only thing that can keep up with a CCB is wraiths, and they are kinda expensive bodyguards, which will die to focused firepower, leaving your warlord high and dry.

Thinking about it now, the CCB doesn't really add much for what you pay for him. An anni barge is better spent on points. He adds a good CC threat but his command wave is wasted on anything mobile enough to stay with him as none of them can benefit from it.

Maybe t3 he can buff midfield warriors/immortals getting out of transports, but it feels a waste imo. Two whole turns of not doing much, and if he gets engaged in combat it's not hard for him to get overwhelmed. A single warscythe isn't going to stand up to masses attacks.

Requizen wrote:

Not really, the Wave of Command still happens at the start of the turn, so you can't zip to one and buff it if it's out of range.

I didn't think I'd mentioned zipping before buffing.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
What about plasma though? Players who know what they are doing will not use high damage weapons against QS, and instead use low damage - high rend - high strength weapons, like plasma, autocannons, starcannons, etc.

Plasma, -3 AP, 1 Damage
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is 1 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.67 unsaved wounds, is 1.67 damage.

Overcharged Plasma, -3 AP, 2 Damage
3 hits are 2 wounds against an OLord, is 1 unsaved wound, is 2 damage.
3 hits are 2 wounds against a CCB, is 1.67 unsaved wounds, is 2.78 damage.

I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

 Klowny wrote:
I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

If you don't mind me asking, why not use a Destroyer Lord for this instead?

 vipoid wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

If you don't mind me asking, why not use a Destroyer Lord for this instead?

I don't know if you'd need Wraiths to accompany a Destroyer Lord.
The old Wraith Wing build is dead, now that D.Lords only convey buffs to other Destroyers.
A Destroyer Lord accompanied by screening Scarabs would be a more cost effective way to deliver a Warscythe to their front lines quickly.

Hey All

Quick question on the TA, i notice that people have been rating the point value at 240 (+20 for the gauss cannon) but in the rules it states that it has two gauss cannon so should the value of the TA be 260?

 skoffs wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

If you don't mind me asking, why not use a Destroyer Lord for this instead?

I don't know if you'd need Wraiths to accompany a Destroyer Lord.
The old Wraith Wing build is dead, now that D.Lords only convey buffs to other Destroyers.
A Destroyer Lord accompanied by screening Scarabs would be a more cost effective way to deliver a Warscythe to their front lines quickly.

But you can do the same thing with Scarabs + CCB? 2" is not a lot of movement to lose when you're already going 10", and with Advances you might not even lose any movement. Scarabs are cheaper, more efficient for both units. And for killing power, the only thing the Overlord has over the DLord is the better shooting weapon, so if you want a "CC threat", why not use the DLord, or even a C'tan who can do the same thing but also scream out MWs?

Barge is looking just as unappealing even with the buff, unless you really want that +1 to hit buff over a wider area.

 skoffs wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

If you don't mind me asking, why not use a Destroyer Lord for this instead?

I don't know if you'd need Wraiths to accompany a Destroyer Lord.
The old Wraith Wing build is dead, now that D.Lords only convey buffs to other Destroyers.
A Destroyer Lord accompanied by screening Scarabs would be a more cost effective way to deliver a Warscythe to their front lines quickly.

Well, the Wraiths would probably last a bit longer and would hopefully be more effective in combat.

In any case, would scarabs also be a better escort for a CCB?

 vipoid wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
I plan to run him as a CC threat on his own, surrounded by 6 wraiths with pistols. It's very mobile, quite survivable and has formidable punch against most non-horde targets.

If you don't mind me asking, why not use a Destroyer Lord for this instead?

I just posted a list in the army builder page that is entirely necron CC, has both a D/lord screened by scarabs (same M stat) and a CCB screened by wraiths (same M stat), as well as some fun tricks with kutlakh, Anrakyr, scytheguard and flayed ones.

In response to your question, I'm really torn as to which is actually better. The CCB has more wounds and QS (which probably won't actually help that much in CC, unless fighting knights ) while the d/lord has an invuln and phlactery.

The d/lord has an extra attack and rerolls 1's, but the CCB has a shooting attack and hits on 2's for both that and CC.

I paired wraiths with a CCB because he won't slow them down so the screen will be effective the whole game, same goes with d/lord and scarabs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I agree though, even with his buff he's underwhelming, and a d/lord screened by scarabs is a lot cheaper and efficient way of getting a scythe to the front lines.

Just wanted to try him out is all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But just realised we have a second hard counter to knight lists (besides the pylon), run 2-3 CCB's screen them with wraiths, and watch as the knights damage bounce off the QS for eternity while the warscythes slowly whittle them down into being pointless.

Man. I really want Praetorians to either get a <DYNASTY> keyword, or a drop in points. As of now, I'm having a really hard time justifying them over other units. I have 10 Praets that I really want to field... but man it is quite the internal dilemma.

I mean, a squad of 10 with RoC is 350 points... I mean I can take two squads of 10 Immortals for 170 each (340pts), or a squad of 9 base Gauss Tomb Blades for 378 points (42 each), or 6 Canoptek Wraiths w/ Particle Casters for 252 points (42 each). It's just hard.

Maybe if Praetorians drop 5 base points per model, meaning you'd get 10 for 300 points, it would be an easier choice. I basically compare them to Immortals. Either 10 Praets, or 20 Immortals.

Same amount of overall wounds

More chances on reanimate with Immortals, but a single reanimate for Praets brings more wounds

More shots from Immortals

Stronger shots from Praets

Much stronger melee from Praets

Unable to buff Praets, while MWBD greatly benefits tesla Immortals

Faster movement on Praets

Greater firing range on Immortals

Overall... right now I just really think the 20 Immortals brings more to the table. 20 Tesla Immortals bring 40 S6 AP0 shots, which can proc for 3 additional hits per shot. 20 gauss Immortals offer 20 shots at 24", but 40 at 12" (same distance as Praets). Difference is that Immortals offer AP-2 while Praets are AP-3. I'd take the extra 30 shots over one higher AP. So basically the Praets only shining moment is in Melee range where their S5 AP-3 comes into play. The trouble is getting a unit of 10 within that range so they become effective, however at that point we'd have to compare them to Wraiths. On top of all this, we have to take into consideration that Praetorians can't be buffed aside from Szeras (barely) and Anrakyr. It just breaks my little Necron heart.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blueguy203 wrote:
Hey All

Quick question on the TA, i notice that people have been rating the point value at 240 (+20 for the gauss cannon) but in the rules it states that it has two gauss cannon so should the value of the TA be 260?

Well, as per the Forgeworld Index, the Tesseract Arc is a base 220 points (no wargear). It's rules state it is equipped with a singularity chamber and two tesla cannons (which may be replaced with two gauss cannons). Thus we refer to the wargear and see that the chamber is 0 points, and each gauss cannon is 20 points.

Thus, 220 + (20 x 2) = 260 points.

So,
CCB + Wraiths
vs
D.Lord + Scarabs

Basically premium vs budget CC HQ.
...
Thing is, neither pairing is all that amazing.
The HQ don't do anything for the screening units. The Canopteks are literally there just to get the HQ into combat at full strength, hopefully providing some assistance in the fight as well.
It's just... okay.

 SHADOWSTRIKE1 wrote:
Man. I really want Praetorians to either get a <DYNASTY> keyword, or a drop in points. As of now, I'm having a really hard time justifying them over other units. I have 10 Praets that I really want to field... but man it is quite the internal dilemma.

I mean, a squad of 10 with RoC is 350 points... I mean I can take two squads of 10 Immortals for 170 each (340pts), or a squad of 9 base Gauss Tomb Blades for 378 points (42 each), or 6 Canoptek Wraiths w/ Particle Casters for 252 points (42 each). It's just hard.

Maybe if Praetorians drop 5 base points per model, meaning you'd get 10 for 300 points, it would be an easier choice. I basically compare them to Immortals. Either 10 Praets, or 20 Immortals.

Same amount of overall wounds

More chances on reanimate with Immortals, but a single reanimate for Praets brings more wounds

More shots from Immortals

Stronger shots from Praets

Much stronger melee from Praets

Unable to buff Praets, while MWBD greatly benefits tesla Immortals

Faster movement on Praets

Greater firing range on Immortals

Overall... right now I just really think the 20 Immortals brings more to the table. 20 Tesla Immortals bring 40 S6 AP0 shots, which can proc for 3 additional hits per shot. 20 gauss Immortals offer 20 shots at 24", but 40 at 12" (same distance as Praets). Difference is that Immortals offer AP-2 while Praets are AP-3. I'd take the extra 30 shots over one higher AP. So basically the Praets only shining moment is in Melee range where their S5 AP-3 comes into play. The trouble is getting a unit of 10 within that range so they become effective, however at that point we'd have to compare them to Wraiths. On top of all this, we have to take into consideration that Praetorians can't be buffed aside from Szeras (barely) and Anrakyr. It just breaks my little Necron heart.

I really like Praetorians too, I always feel 5 of them with the Stalker, just for fluff reasons.

I also think that they are going to get a good treatment in the codex or in a new book, if the Silent King appears.

 SHADOWSTRIKE1 wrote:


Well, as per the Forgeworld Index, the Tesseract Arc is a base 220 points (no wargear). It's rules state it is equipped with a singularity chamber and two tesla cannons (which may be replaced with two gauss cannons). Thus we refer to the wargear and see that the chamber is 0 points, and each gauss cannon is 20 points.

Thus, 220 + (20 x 2) = 260 points.

Ahh, it would help if i read the points were for Tesla cannon and not gauss. thanks for the clear up.

 Klowny wrote:

But just realised we have a second hard counter to knight lists (besides the pylon), run 2-3 CCB's screen them with wraiths, and watch as the knights damage bounce off the QS for eternity while the warscythes slowly whittle them down into being pointless.

Except not really. If a Knight punches a vehicle with QS in melee, he's going to use the feet which only deal d3 damage, so at best you only save on a 1-2. The Gatling cannon only deals 2 damage, and the Battle Cannon is only d3 as well. So QS really isn't a hard counter, a Knight will crush through a CCB if it can shoot it or charge it.

Blueguy203 wrote:

 SHADOWSTRIKE1 wrote:


Well, as per the Forgeworld Index, the Tesseract Arc is a base 220 points (no wargear). It's rules state it is equipped with a singularity chamber and two tesla cannons (which may be replaced with two gauss cannons). Thus we refer to the wargear and see that the chamber is 0 points, and each gauss cannon is 20 points.

Thus, 220 + (20 x 2) = 260 points.

Ahh, it would help if i read the points were for Tesla cannon and not gauss. thanks for the clear up.

Well just keep in mind that even if it were to use Tesla Cannons, you'd still have to add 13 points for each Tesla Cannon (26 total) on top of the 220 base points. The 220 points includes the base model without any wargear or weapons. So either the TA is going to cost 246 points if equipped with Tesla Cannons (220+13+13), 260 points if equipped with Gauss Cannons (220+20+20), or 240 points if equipped with Particle Beamers (220+10+10).

 skoffs wrote:
So,
CCB + Wraiths
vs
D.Lord + Scarabs

Basically premium vs budget CC HQ.

I still don't understand why you'd use Scarabs for one and Wraiths for the other.

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
So,
CCB + Wraiths
vs
D.Lord + Scarabs

Basically premium vs budget CC HQ.

I still don't understand why you'd use Scarabs for one and Wraiths for the other.

Basically just same movement.

 skoffs wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
So,
CCB + Wraiths
vs
D.Lord + Scarabs

Basically premium vs budget CC HQ.

I still don't understand why you'd use Scarabs for one and Wraiths for the other.

Basically just same movement.

Ah. I think I'd still run the D. Lord with Wraiths and just have them move at his speed.

Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Requizen wrote:
Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Slower, though...

 skoffs wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Slower, though...

2" isn't huge when they can still run and do powers and shoot.

Requizen wrote:

 Klowny wrote:

But just realised we have a second hard counter to knight lists (besides the pylon), run 2-3 CCB's screen them with wraiths, and watch as the knights damage bounce off the QS for eternity while the warscythes slowly whittle them down into being pointless.

Except not really. If a Knight punches a vehicle with QS in melee, he's going to use the feet which only deal d3 damage, so at best you only save on a 1-2. The Gatling cannon only deals 2 damage, and the Battle Cannon is only d3 as well. So QS really isn't a hard counter, a Knight will crush through a CCB if it can shoot it or charge it.

Oh yeah, forgot the feet, haven't actually looked at them this properly. Jumped the gun on that one.

Requizen wrote:Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Yeah, the night bringer is quite a tempting option, was just trying to make the HQ's work. I'm not really feeling our CC is that great this edition, feels a bit worse than last edition. I agree that the mightbringer flanked by scarabs is the cheapest and most effective 'canoptek deathstar'

My only problem with bringing the NightBringer is its inability to be effective against vehicles. Which a smart player might bring in a transport and hold the c'tan up while the rest of the troops go to work.

Requizen wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Slower, though...

2" isn't huge when they can still run and do powers and shoot.

...
CCB M 12"
N.B. M 8"

Blueguy203 wrote:
My only problem with bringing the NightBringer is its inability to be effective against vehicles. Which a smart player might bring in a transport and hold the c'tan up while the rest of the troops go to work.

Melee is till S7 against vehicles, which is the same as Warscythe, and higher damage against those vehicles. And you can't hold up the C'tan, since he'll be bubble wrapped and has Fly, so he can fall back and shoot. Plus his powers don't care if he's in melee.

 skoffs wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Also if you're going to talk about "Canoptek Deathstars", the C'tan are still valid options. For 50 points more than the CCB, you get the same wounds, but a 4++, higher toughness, MWs, in the case of Nightbringer, a good shooting attack, and better melee weapons.

Slower, though...

2" isn't huge when they can still run and do powers and shoot.

...
CCB M 12"
N.B. M 8"

Oops yeah. I was comparing the speed of the C'tan to the DLord, who is only 10".

Blueguy203 wrote:
My only problem with bringing the NightBringer is its inability to be effective against vehicles. Which a smart player might bring in a transport and hold the c'tan up while the rest of the troops go to work.

But we have other things in our army that is effective against vehicles. Right tool for the right job and all that

The Powers of the C'tan don't count as shooting attacks, right?
(they don't roll to hit or wound or anything like that, they're just abilities that happen in the shooting phase)
So there's nothing stopping you from advancing and then using them in the shooting phase, yes?

 skoffs wrote:
The Powers of the C'tan don't count as shooting attacks, right?
(they don't roll to hit or wound or anything like that, they're just abilities that happen in the shooting phase)
So there's nothing stopping you from advancing and then using them in the shooting phase, yes?

Yep. AMM and TA are both extremely good powers that you can reach out and use with their range and his speed. While I think they're a bit overcosted, both types of C'tan are quite good in the long run. Lists containing both are fun and actually not terrible.

 skoffs wrote:
The Powers of the C'tan don't count as shooting attacks, right?
(they don't roll to hit or wound or anything like that, they're just abilities that happen in the shooting phase)
So there's nothing stopping you from advancing and then using them in the shooting phase, yes?

Yeah Only the nightbringers gaze is a shooting attack, the powers as you said are abilities that happen in the shooting phase, so can't see anything stopping them being used after advancing

Well, if you wanted to go really crazy, you could take a T.C'tan with the Deceiver and Nightbringer, Grand Illusion them all up and kamikaze them into the enemy back field.

 skoffs wrote:
Well, if you wanted to go really crazy, you could take a T.C'tan with the Deceiver and Nightbringer, Grand Illusion them all up and kamikaze them into the enemy back field.

And when they die cross your fingers for mortal wound explosions

Dew wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
Well, if you wanted to go really crazy, you could take a T.C'tan with the Deceiver and Nightbringer, Grand Illusion them all up and kamikaze them into the enemy back field.

And when they die cross your fingers for mortal wound explosions

... hence "kamikaze"

Hello all

So i decided to write up a list that i think can be really competitive and would like get your opinion on it. Its meant to be very high in AP damage.

Cheers

Cryptek will be imo useless as You have small units of infantry. Killing 5 Immortals in one turn won't be difficult so no Reanimation Protocols for them.

 Xyxel wrote:
Cryptek will be imo useless as You have small units of infantry. Killing 5 Immortals in one turn won't be difficult so no Reanimation Protocols for them.

You bring up a good point, so should i use the cryptek points to make another unit of 10 immortals and up the other 5 man squad to 6? Or would you have a better recommendation?

Having a 2000 point match against a Nid's player, anyone got tactical advice against them in 8th? I have yet to face them and i'm sure he will spare no mercy. I was thinking probably mass tesla and deceiver bomb with either 2 squads of tesla immortals and an overlord for MWBD to alpha strike an important or large mob down. Backed up with a TA and Tomb stalker to threaten other CC problems and a Triarch stalker with twin guass for those rerolls of 1. Any ideas for what unit's work best against nids?

I don't think you'll need/want to get in his face with Deceiver bomb.

Bubble wrapping is key for swarms.

Volume of fire will be useful.

Fly units will be handy.

Tesla immortals or annihilation barges will be big for horde control, while destroyers can cause havoc with monsters. Praetorians are another option for monster hunting. I think DDarks will cause problems for most units in their army also. Targeting synapse is going to be important because it makes them immune to morale. Their psykers will be big problems, dishing out mortal wounds

Meant to mention this before but forgot, but seeing the discussion last page on C'Tan reminded me. There was some discussion much earlier in the thread on the C'Tan power Times Arrow and whether it could snipe out characters due to it not being a shooting attack - it cant.

If you look at page 179 of the rulebook under the characters heading "A character can only be chosen as a target in the shooting phase if they are the closest visible enemy unit to the model that is shooting".

The stipulation is on attacks made in the shooting phase, not that they are a shooting attack. Of which Times Arrow is definitely the former.

cheesedupree wrote:
Meant to mention this before but forgot, but seeing the discussion last page on C'Tan reminded me. There was some discussion much earlier in the thread on the C'Tan power Times Arrow and whether it could snipe out characters due to it not being a shooting attack - it cant.

If you look at page 179 of the rulebook under the characters heading "A character can only be chosen as a target in the shooting phase if they are the closest visible enemy unit to the model that is shooting".

The stipulation is on attacks made in the shooting phase, not that they are a shooting attack. Of which Times Arrow is definitely the former.

What about the

... that is shooting

part? He isn't shooting after all

I can see that you could focus on that part instead - but the first part of that sentence seems way more prevalent. If you are attacking in the shooting phase then you are in some manner of speaking "shooting". So that last bit can be read either way. Cannot target characters with attacks made in shooting phase (unless blah blah) is very clear language imo.

wombis wrote:
Having a 2000 point match against a Nid's player, anyone got tactical advice against them in 8th? I have yet to face them and i'm sure he will spare no mercy. I was thinking probably mass tesla and deceiver bomb with either 2 squads of tesla immortals and an overlord for MWBD to alpha strike an important or large mob down. Backed up with a TA and Tomb stalker to threaten other CC problems and a Triarch stalker with twin guass for those rerolls of 1. Any ideas for what unit's work best against nids?

I tabled nids with QS spam.

Tesseract vault, monolith, anni barge, DDA, stalker, spyder, 2x3 scarabs, tesseract ark and heat cannon sentry pylon. Lost 3 scarabs. He had two flyrants, 100 odd guants, 3x lictors and death leaped, OOE, 2x carnifex, trygpn prime and the other tunnelling one and 3 zoanthroaps.

 Klowny wrote:

wombis wrote:
Having a 2000 point match against a Nid's player, anyone got tactical advice against them in 8th? I have yet to face them and i'm sure he will spare no mercy. I was thinking probably mass tesla and deceiver bomb with either 2 squads of tesla immortals and an overlord for MWBD to alpha strike an important or large mob down. Backed up with a TA and Tomb stalker to threaten other CC problems and a Triarch stalker with twin guass for those rerolls of 1. Any ideas for what unit's work best against nids?

I tabled nids with QS spam.

Tesseract vault, monolith, anni barge, DDA, stalker, spyder, 2x3 scarabs, tesseract ark and heat cannon sentry pylon. Lost 3 scarabs. He had two flyrants, 100 odd guants, 3x lictors and death leaped, OOE, 2x carnifex, trygpn prime and the other tunnelling one and 3 zoanthroaps.

What HQ were you running?

Toholk. I misinterpreted his regen ability, camped very back corner of table behind DDA and screened by scarabs. Baited a trygon prime (or whatever one does the mortal wounds on arrival) and deathleaper to DS near, and subsequently got tied up/blown up. His overwatch killed deathleaper.

He didn't have anywhere near enough high damage weapons to deal with everything. Nids don't seem to have much outside biovores, everything else is in CC, and our guns are strong enough to blow up multiple big bugs a turn

cheesedupree wrote:
If you are attacking in the shooting phase then you are in some manner of speaking "shooting".

False. Abilities that happen during the shooting phase are not automatically "shooting attacks".
Are you rolling to hit or wound?
No, it's just an ability that goes off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blueguy203 wrote:

 Xyxel wrote:
Cryptek will be imo useless as You have small units of infantry. Killing 5 Immortals in one turn won't be difficult so no Reanimation Protocols for them.

You bring up a good point, so should i use the cryptek points to make another unit of 10 immortals and up the other 5 man squad to 6? Or would you have a better recommendation?

If you are making a Battalion you need a minimum two HQ.
You may be able to get away with fitting everything into one of the smaller detachments, but you'll lose out on Command Points.

Also, if you have those 5 man squads going after objectives they should really have Tesla.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Klowny wrote:
I tabled nids with QS spam.

Tesseract vault, monolith, anni barge, DDA, stalker, spyder, 2x3 scarabs, tesseract ark and heat cannon sentry pylon.

Heh, I don't know if I'd call that QS "spam". There's only four things there with QS.

You are picking the part of the rule that best benefits your army. Look at the rule objectively - the rule starts by saying you cannot targets characters with attacks that happen in the shooting phase. Which times arrow absolutely is.

Also look at the game. Abilities that can circumvent that rule explicitly state so. The faqs have had examples where people have tried to "interpret" their way around that rule and have been ruled against. It's clear that TA is not meant to snipe characters.

You're not targeting a character with a shooting attack. You're picking a unit in range. Characters are units. There is nothing vague or inconclusive about this.

How about somebody quote both rules?

Characters are units of 1 yes. When you select a unit to target, that's when the character keyword is prevalent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In any case, rather than getting into it further in here I'll put up a post in the rules question forum. Keep this place for actual Necron discussion.

So I added a list to the Army list section.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/731533.page#9471529

Spearhead supremacy consisting only of Vehicles and 2 monsters.

I will try this out as soon as I have time to play and if anyone in my gaming group wants to play against it
Will have to proxy 2 Tomb Stalkers and one Tesseract Ark or at least one Tomb Stalker since I'm probably going to order one of each today.

As a fairly new Necron player, I have a question regarding the subject:

Doomsday Ark vs. Destroyers (incl. HDestroyers)

I would like to ask which one was the better option to buy.

- Do they fullfill the same role in an army? (preferably shooting vehicles and big things)

- Which one gives you more bang for your points?

In DDAs vs HDs, I believe for equal points it came down to DDAs for survivability but HDs won out for putting out better damage (against vehicles/big things).
Though it's worth restating that HDs can easily get cover, giving them a 2+. The problem is they're obvious bait for multi damage weapons (which would ironically be somewhat wasted on DDAs, because of QS).

JohnnyRotten wrote:
As a fairly new Necron player, I have a question regarding the subject:

Doomsday Ark vs. Destroyers (incl. HDestroyers)

I would like to ask which one was the better option to buy.

- Do they fullfill the same role in an army? (preferably shooting vehicles and big things)

- Which one gives you more bang for your points?

As a fairly new player too, I would love a second Chart in the first post listing the roles for units.

- Anti-Infantry
- Anti-Vehicle
- Anti-Horde
- Screener
- Objective-Grabber / Holder
- CC
- ...

Of course some units would have multiple entries, but maybe different ratings as that role.
It would be really great if we could go there into more details, for example which weapon of the Triarch Stalker is best for which purpose.

nEcrol0rd wrote:

JohnnyRotten wrote:
As a fairly new Necron player, I have a question regarding the subject:

Doomsday Ark vs. Destroyers (incl. HDestroyers)

I would like to ask which one was the better option to buy.

- Do they fullfill the same role in an army? (preferably shooting vehicles and big things)

- Which one gives you more bang for your points?

As a fairly new player too, I would love a second Chart in the first post listing the roles for units.

- Anti-Infantry
- Anti-Vehicle
- Anti-Horde
- Screener
- Objective-Grabber / Holder
- CC
- ...

Of course some units would have multiple entries, but maybe different ratings as that role.
It would be really great if we could go there into more details, for example which weapon of the Triarch Stalker is best for which purpose.

We could probably work that out for new players, but it's going to need community input (just like the report card).

In analyzing the below linked article, it seems to suggest a critical weakness in QS against a potential major (and inexpensive) player in the shaping meta.

Further, doing the math as described, it would be just as effective against our Silver Tide style lists posted so far.

Thoughts?

https://www.warhammer-tactics.com/single-post/2017/07/03/How-much-wood-could-a-wood-chuck-chuck-if-wood-chuck-was-a-Stormraven

sieGermans wrote:
Thoughts?

If you see someone put down Girlyman and a bunch of Stormravens, just pack your stuff back up.
There's no point in even trying to play against a list that broken.

 skoffs wrote:
In DDAs vs HDs, I believe for equal points it came down to DDAs for survivability but HDs won out for putting out better damage (against vehicles/big things).
Though it's worth restating that HDs can easily get cover, giving them a 2+. The problem is they're obvious bait for multi damage weapons (which would ironically be somewhat wasted on DDAs, because of QS).

Do you mathammer this or its just your wishes?
DDA have better firepower if you include his arrays. Especialy for 12" range. Against evrything. Even if he move and can shoot only low power with dc.

sieGermans wrote:
In analyzing the below linked article, it seems to suggest a critical weakness in QS against a potential major (and inexpensive) player in the shaping meta.

Further, doing the math as described, it would be just as effective against our Silver Tide style lists posted so far.

Thoughts?

https://www.warhammer-tactics.com/single-post/2017/07/03/How-much-wood-could-a-wood-chuck-chuck-if-wood-chuck-was-a-Stormraven

Our best lists against flyer spam will involve a Gauss pylon, and lots of two plus wound infantry. Gauss pylon is pretty obvious because it eats flyers for breakfast, but the two wound infantry might need a little more elaboration. Storm ravens have two types of weapons, las cannons/meltas and heavy bolters/assault cannons, none of which work well against prats or destroyers. Destroyers can have a hidden heavy Gauss so I think they are the best choice. I'll put together that list a bit later.

 skoffs wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
Thoughts?

If you see someone put down Girlyman and a bunch of Stormravens, just pack your stuff back up.
There's no point in even trying to play against a list that broken.

Yup our supposed race speciality of beeing hard to kill is a joke to that kind of Dakka.

Seeing these kind of lists top the last few bashes makes me a little angry with the play testers (Frontline and such) they have been harping that spam is just a phase, that balanced lists are the way to go.... well any 'balanced' list will get tabled by this kind of spam without question.

 Grimgold wrote:
Storm ravens have two types of weapons, las cannons/meltas and heavy bolters/assault cannons, none of which work well against prats or destroyers.

Why wouldn't those work well against Praets and Destroyers, etc?

Also, did you mean Gauss Sentry Pylons or LoW Gauss Pylons?

Problem with Low Guss Pylons it that d6 for number of shots, but you probably can count to kill one per round. How many of them are in the spam list? Can they destroy pylon in one shooting phase?

If opponent starts the game, you put pylon in reserves, so you have at least one round of shooting.

 Pepe96 wrote:
If opponent starts the game, you put pylon in reserves, so you have at least one round of shooting.

Okay, but what do you deploy to ensure you don't get tabled turn one?
(or is this still part of the "Don't even bother setting up against lists like this" tactic?)

By the way, given the answers so far, this thread may be of interest to you:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/731474.page

How are people running their Tomb Blades? I just picked up two boxes and can't wait to get them on the table. It seems like you want the armour save and cover ignoring upgrades, but which way to go with weapons? Do people ever run a unit with a mix of both weapons?

 skoffs wrote:

 Pepe96 wrote:
If opponent starts the game, you put pylon in reserves, so you have at least one round of shooting.

Okay, but what do you deploy to ensure you don't get tabled turn one?
(or is this still part of the "Don't even bother setting up against lists like this" tactic?)

You can run 10 in a double spearhead with a spyder, so deploy all t1 and they can't kill them all kek

I want to teach my friend 40k with his necrons.
The list is 12 warriors, 3 scarabs, 5 tesla immortals, overlord, stalker.
What's the tl;dr on overlord upgrades(weapons, orb) and stalker weapons.

I heard tesla immortals are usually the best choice now, right?

Tesla Immortals are best at a distance, Gauss ones are better up close... so it really just depends on how you want to run them.

For Overlord, Warscythe is never a bad choice.
The Staff is actually decent this edition.
The Sword is taken if you just want to have the cheapest HQ to fill a requirement (in which case you're normally better off just taking a Lord).
Don't even bother with the Blade.
The Orb is only ever good when taken with expensive infantry... which he does not currently have access to, so don't bother for now.

You could probably play a test game of 35 PL / 550 points with just what he's got there.

Will this work? What should I change?
The plan is going in blob to center - than spread after turn 3.

Anyone got any thoughts regarding Silver Tide lists in this edition?

 skoffs wrote:

The Sword is taken if you just want to have the cheapest HQ to fill a requirement (in which case you're normally better off just taking a Lord).
Don't even bother with the Blade.

Just a point but I think the Sword/Blade can work if you want an Overlord (for MWBD) but don't have the points for a Warscythe for him.

e.g. I recently made this list:
- Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe, Phylactery
- Overlord w/ Voidblade, Resurrection Orb
- 10 Immortals w/ Tesla
- 10 Immortals w/ Gauss
- 10 Immortals w/ Gauss
- 10 Immortals w/ Gauss
- 3 Destroyers + Heavy Destroyer
- 3 Destroyers + Heavy Destroyer
1500pts

Taking a Warscythe on the Overlord would have pushed the list over the limit, and replacing him with a Lord would mean losing MWBD for the Tesla Immortals.

I could drop his Resurrection Orb but I haven't got anything else to spend those points on (the cheapest unit costs more than the Orb, which would put me back to square one).

I could also drop the Destroyer Lord's Phylactery, but I don't want to do that either because it's a piece of wargear that I really want to test out.

Anybody try praets + ctan?

Praets have 10" and have the fly keyword, 10 praets and nightbringer seem like they'd make a hilariously good mayhem squad.

T5 2W 3+ with auto pass morale? 10" + advance + shoot + charge, fallback, shoot, charge back in, the look on your opponents face when 2 or 3 get rezzed...

It'll be expensive as heck though, 570ish pts?

10" + advance + shoot + charge, fallback, shoot, charge back in, the look on your opponents face when 2 or 3 get rezzed...

Fly allows to shoot after fallback, to charge you need some ability.

 crunkDealer wrote:
Anybody try praets + ctan?

Praets have 10" and have the fly keyword, 10 praets and nightbringer seem like they'd make a hilariously good mayhem squad.

T5 2W 3+ with auto pass morale? 10" + advance + shoot + charge, fallback, shoot, charge back in, the look on your opponents face when 2 or 3 get rezzed...

It'll be expensive as heck though, 570ish pts?

You cant also charge after advance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I want to teach my friend 40k with his necrons.
The list is 12 warriors, 3 scarabs, 5 tesla immortals, overlord, stalker.
What's the tl;dr on overlord upgrades(weapons, orb) and stalker weapons.

I heard tesla immortals are usually the best choice now, right?

I will take tessla immo, HGC for stalker and warscyte for overlord.
Tessla becuse MVBD and better mobility - you can advance and shoot and you can shoot from 24".
Warscyte for heroic intervention/counter atack. You have only pure scarab for cc. Against cc army overlord may save your live.
HGC for hi ap shoot. Noone else have it. Against Sv2/3 target you need it.

 vipoid wrote:
- Overlord w/ Voidblade, Resurrection Orb

It's not a big deal, but I have to ask... why the Voidblade instead of the Hyperphase Sword?
(I mean, why pay more points for something that does the exact same thing?)

 skoffs wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
- Overlord w/ Voidblade, Resurrection Orb

It's not a big deal, but I have to ask... why the Voidblade instead of the Hyperphase Sword?
(I mean, why pay more points for something that does the exact same thing?)

The reason is simply that I can't spend those 3pts anywhere else, so I might as well have my army be 1500pts exactly and at least satisfy my OCD.

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
- Overlord w/ Voidblade, Resurrection Orb

It's not a big deal, but I have to ask... why the Voidblade instead of the Hyperphase Sword?
(I mean, why pay more points for something that does the exact same thing?)

The reason is simply that I can't spend those 3pts anywhere else, so I might as well have my army be 1500pts exactly and at least satisfy my OCD.

Well, okay... but if you dropped 3 Immortals from a squad (giving the remainder Tesla Carbines and having them camp backfield objectives) you could afford 4 Scarabs to help screen for your guys.
Granted, that would leave you with two points free, which might not be ideal if making a list with OCD tendencies, but it would help optimize your list.

They announced that Codices are coming, and Necron Dynasties are called out by name as an example of subfactions getting their own rules (like Chapters). Very exciting. I wonder if this means we'll be one of the 10 out before Christmas, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 skoffs wrote:
Well, okay... but if you dropped 3 Immortals from a squad (giving the remainder Tesla Carbines and having them camp backfield objectives) you could afford 4 Scarabs to help screen for your guys.

Is that worth it, do you think? I'd expect 3 Immortals to pull more weight than 4 scarabs (especially since reducing the Immortal's squad size makes it easier to kill them and deny them RPs).

I guess my concern is that 4 Scarabs don't seem like much of a screen. What exactly would you do with them?

Requizen wrote:
They announced that Codices are coming, and Necron Dynasties are called out by name as an example of subfactions getting their own rules (like Chapters). Very exciting. I wonder if this means we'll be one of the 10 out before Christmas, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

SpikeyBits has a rumored release schedule from here to Christmas in which Necrons do not appear, FWIW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
Well, okay... but if you dropped 3 Immortals from a squad (giving the remainder Tesla Carbines and having them camp backfield objectives) you could afford 4 Scarabs to help screen for your guys.

Is that worth it, do you think? I'd expect 3 Immortals to pull more weight than 4 scarabs (especially since reducing the Immortal's squad size makes it easier to kill them and deny them RPs).

I guess my concern is that 4 Scarabs don't seem like much of a screen. What exactly would you do with them?

Scarabs rob more value from the Bolter spam lists than immortals and provide better/quicker objective capture density for the Conscript match up than immortals.

sieGermans wrote:

Requizen wrote:
They announced that Codices are coming, and Necron Dynasties are called out by name as an example of subfactions getting their own rules (like Chapters). Very exciting. I wonder if this means we'll be one of the 10 out before Christmas, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

SpikeyBits has a rumored release schedule from here to Christmas in which Necrons do not appear, FWIW.

They were the only one with that list and all other rumor mongers called it bogus. Also that list did not include GK at all and CSM aren't listed second, so it's pretty obviously not real.

Not saying we're for sure getting one, but I wouldn't look to that as reliable.

Requizen wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

Requizen wrote:
They announced that Codices are coming, and Necron Dynasties are called out by name as an example of subfactions getting their own rules (like Chapters). Very exciting. I wonder if this means we'll be one of the 10 out before Christmas, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

SpikeyBits has a rumored release schedule from here to Christmas in which Necrons do not appear, FWIW.

They were the only one with that list and all other rumor mongers called it bogus. Also that list did not include GK at all and CSM aren't listed second, so it's pretty obviously not real.

Not saying we're for sure getting one, but I wouldn't look to that as reliable.

Great shout!

Requizen wrote:
They announced that Codices are coming, and Necron Dynasties are called out by name as an example of subfactions getting their own rules (like Chapters). Very exciting. I wonder if this means we'll be one of the 10 out before Christmas, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

They are going to do all the SM chapters and a Prime Book you can bet, also the Chaos since that is the story they are pushing so that leaves what? one slot left for the rest of the races to fight over... yeah I would be shocked if we got one before the first of the new year.

Personally I doubt it'll be nothing but solid SM/CSM variant releases for the whole year, but it's possible. I think after SM/CSM/GK/DG we'll see at least one or two Xenos releases, and then probably IG and maybe Daemons.

Pyrothem wrote:
They are going to do all the SM chapters and a Prime Book you can bet...

Since they have an Intercessor on the cover of Codex Space Marines I believe it's safe to say that there won't be a separate codex for the Primaris at this time.

I really like Kutlakh, and plan to run him with Toholk and 10 Lychguard, carrying scythes. I'm concerned about their durability however, as they'll all have to walk the board. I haven't gotten any games of 8th in yet so I've not been able to see how they fare.

For those who have made use of Lychguard and/or Lychguard with Kutlakh, how did they perform under the circumstances in which you fielded them?

Would the points be better spent on a different type of close combat unit? Do you feel that a Resurrection Orb is necessary?

Do you guys think Silver Tide is viable this edition?

If so, what do you think a Silver Tide army should look like?
- How many Warriors should I aim for at, say, 1500pts?
- What support units (Overlords, Crypteks etc.) should I include and how many?
- Should I include any other units like Destroyers to take out heavier targets, or just add more Warriors?
- Do you think a Silver Tide list can work without Ghost Arks?

I think Silver Tide is very servicable in 8th. I like it better with Ghost Arks that without, but it'll work both ways IMO. I'd probably aim for at least 50-60 warriors at 1500. Immortals are also a great add, so mix and match there at will.

If you want all your Warriors covered, you'll need one Cryptek for every two full Warrior squads. So probably two for your list, and one overlord for MWBD shenanigans. My preference is to also buff with GAs, so pick your poison there.

I prefer D-Arks over Heavy Destroyers, but that's in my standard Silver Tide/QS spam approach to list building. You also need to think about how to bubble wrap - I'll either bubble wrap the infantry with vehicles against certain lists, or the other way round against Scion plasma spam. Scarabs are cheap and can help a lot with that.

There's a ton of different ways to build a ST list. Basically, start with about 20 warriors for every 500 points and go from there.

I have this impression that for Silver Tide lists, your Warriors will be your forward rank Objective grabbers while your Gauss Immortals will constitute the majority of your effective firepower with S5, AP-2.

The key to Silver Tide working is forcing your opponent into inefficiencies while extracting value from low point investment. From that perspective, for the latter, the high AP value on Immortal Gauss weaponry and the high shots count on Tesla Immortals (with MWBD).

The former is trickier and in theory means forcing low strength guns to fire at high toughness targets or [and pertinent to a Silver Tide] forcing high strength and/or high Damage guns on our Warriors (to get value from RP). That means not presenting other more lucrative targets, such as destroyers and DDAs but also includes Ghost Arks. ... whereby, if we're not running GAs anyway as a result, then I reckon immortals become far better than Warriors for that list.

News from games tonight

1. 590 pt necrons vs thou sons, regular(?) game (objectives, slay warlord, first blood). We deployed longways on the board since both of us are mostly 5" movespeed and didnt want to spend the first two turns just moving
- All is dust plus cover is absolutely brutal, plus he rerolls saves of 1 from some aura or another
- Inferno bolt pistols are nasty

I had scythelord, 10 warrs, 5 gauss immortals, 3 scarab,THGC stalker. He had raptors, two squads of tzaangors, havocs, rubrics and a sorcerer dude. I lost to him getting linebreaker and chasing me off an objective. I think if I dropped stalker for praets or deathmarks I could've won. This was actually a really fun game


2. Ambush, 60 power. It was a 3 player game, me and thousand sons 30 power each getting ambushed by 60 power blood angels

- It was a cataclysmic stomp, BA literally lost a single marine and it was to a plasma overheat. Stormravens are drastically undercosted in power, what a joke. 5" movement makes it a nightmare to win, mathematically we would have needed to advance like 4 turns in a row just to get units to the end

In my version of ST i take only immortals because they have better fire power, tessla have better mobility, you dont need ark and you can forget about morale.
I played 1500 game with 4 immo unit, two tesla, two gauss. I take only one cryptek and overlord witch is enough. Just keep all infrantry close.
I also take DDA and stalker. I thing stalker is good for tasla immo with MVBD but destroyers cult will be also good.
You can take some scarab or 5 immo unit for objective grab. My expirience says that DDA dont need screaning in 1500 game but its depends from you opponents. DDA have powerfull array in 12" range and fly key word witch allow shot after flatout. He also have nice W. If someone whant deep strike ark with one unit you can counter his unit with array.

 crunkDealer wrote:


- All is dust plus cover is absolutely brutal, plus he rerolls saves of 1 from some aura or another

I think that only applies to invul saves. The reroll I mean.

Kuguar6 wrote:
In my version of ST i take only immortals
[...]
I take only one cryptek and overlord

Did you feel the Cryptek was worth it?
I mean, if you were just spamming Immortals there wasn't anything expensive that would have really benefited from it, right?
For how much he costs you could have just added a second cheap Overlord which would have given you more MWBD.

Here's my own take on a Immortal based Silver Tide- Covers all the TAC bases:
- CC punch
- anti HQ
- anti horde
- anti vehicle
- anti flyer
- screening

Haven't tried it yet (besides, I'll need more Immortals)

Out of interest, Skoffs, why the Deathmarks?

Also, do you think running more 6-7 man Immortal squads is better than running fewer 10-man ones?

The Deathmarks and understrength Immortals made me say eww.

It's a Brigade Detachment.
Requires 3 selections from everything, plus 6 troops.
(hence the cheapest selection from Elite and Fast)
I could probably get those Immortal units up to full strength if replaced all my Heavy slot choices with something cheaper... but would it be worth losing double DDAs?

 skoffs wrote:
It's a Brigade Detachment.
Requires 3 selections from everything, plus 6 troops.
(hence the cheapest selection from Elite and Fast)

I get that, but is it worth taking a Brigade in the first place?

The extra CPs are nice, but to get them you're having to spend 300pts on units that are of dubious efficiency at best, as well as compromising the core premise of the list by using unersized squads.

I'd much rather use a Battalion, drop the deathmarks and have the Immortals as 10-man squads. I think one of the 6 would be left at 8 models, so you could either drop a unit of scarabs to get that one up to 10 as well (either of these would also allow the third Overlord to upgrade to a Warscythe).

That's just my take, anyway.

My take on that list would be a bit different anyway, since I lack both Doomsday Arcs and Pylons. I'd probably just have something like:



A slight variation would be to drop the scarabs, add an extra Destroyer to one of the units and give the D. Lord and one of the Overlords Staffs of Light. However, that would only be 1999pts, making it worse in every conceivable way.

There's nothing "wrong" with Deathmarks.
In fact their ability to appear when and where ever you want them is fantastic, especially when countering your opponent's own deepstrike plans (not to mention the fact that getting rid of key HQ is the key to taking down certain lists)

Scion armies are very much in the meta right now, which alone makes Deathmarks super good. The more the meta lends towards Characters or elite type units coming in from reserves (GK, GSC, Nids with Tyrannocites, Deathwatch, etc), the better they'll be. If the game leans more towards blobs of dudes, good vehicles, or just walking tough units across the table, they're less good. But still good because they're one of the few innate DSers we get in the entire book.

Deathmarks seem unlikely to ever actually kill anything, certainly not anywhere near enough to justify their cost. However I think every army could use at least one cheap deepstrike unit for objective grabbing.

I would also say that it's never worth significantly altering a list to get extra CP.

Depends on what needs killing.

A deepstriking blob of Death Company on Jetpacks? No way man.

A 4 man Tempestus Command Squad with 4 Plasma Guns? Should kill 3 on average and save whatever unit it is they were trying to vaporize.

Bubble wrap scarabs would be a more efficient defense, but if you took the DMs for objective grabbing anyway that would be a handy use for them.

 skoffs wrote:
There's nothing "wrong" with Deathmarks.

Perhaps, but I find them unreliable at best (nt least because their usefulness varies considerably with the list you're facing).

 skoffs wrote:
In fact their ability to appear when and where ever you want them is fantastic, especially when countering your opponent's own deepstrike plans (not to mention the fact that getting rid of key HQ is the key to taking down certain lists)

That's true, but again is highly dependant on your opponent having the right list. Many HQs are going to be beyond their ability to kill (barring excessive luck with 6s), and many more will be outside of their optimum range. Likewise, I think countering Deep Strike stuff is going to be very list-dependant. e.g. they can probably make quick work of Scion Command Squads, but will be far less efective against, say, GK deep striking GK Terminators or Paladins. And that's assuming your opponent has deep strikers in the first place.

Again, it's not that Deathmarks are necessarily bad - it's that I wouldn't want to take them at the expense of the units that my list is supposed to be built around.

Deathmarks do not have to eliminate 100% of the enemy squad - they just have to mess with the other player's head.

"you have a unit that can intercept my deep strike???".

A huge part of this game is about confusing or disrupting the plans of your opponent.

If your opponent is super smart, they may do some quick math, and disregard the deathmarks. If they are super dumb....well, don't need to worry about anything else then..

davethepak wrote:
Deathmarks do not have to eliminate 100% of the enemy squad - they just have to mess with the other player's head.

One of my rules of list-building is that I never trade function for psychological games.

davethepak wrote:
If your opponent is super smart, they may do some quick math, and disregard the deathmarks. If they are super dumb....well, don't need to worry about anything else then..

I also don't like to rely on my opponent not being smart or making bad decisions.

I appreciate that others may well disagree on this, but that's just how I see it.

 skoffs wrote:

Kuguar6 wrote:
In my version of ST i take only immortals
[...]
I take only one cryptek and overlord

Did you feel the Cryptek was worth it?
I mean, if you were just spamming Immortals there wasn't anything expensive that would have really benefited from it, right?
For how much he costs you could have just added a second cheap Overlord which would have given you more MWBD.

Here's my own take on a Immortal based Silver Tide-

Spoiler:

+++ Silver Tide TAC +++

++ Brigade (Necrons) [118 PL, 1998pts] ++

+ HQ +
Overlord [7 PL, 112pts]: Warscythe
Overlord [7 PL, 112pts]: Warscythe
Overlord [7 PL, 104pts]: Hyperphase Sword

+ Troops +
Immortals [8 PL, 119pts]: 7x Immortal, Gauss Blaster
Immortals [8 PL, 119pts]: 7x Immortal, Gauss Blaster
Immortals [8 PL, 119pts]: 7x Immortal, Gauss Blaster
Immortals [8 PL, 119pts]: 7x Immortal, Tesla Carbine
Immortals [8 PL, 119pts]: 7x Immortal, Tesla Carbine
Immortals [8 PL, 102pts]: 6x Immortal, Tesla Carbine

+ Elites +
Deathmarks [5 PL, 100pts]: 5x Deathmark
Deathmarks [5 PL, 100pts]: 5x Deathmark
Deathmarks [5 PL, 100pts]: 5x Deathmark

+ Fast Attack +
Canoptek Scarabs [2 PL, 39pts]: 3x Canoptek Scarab Swarm
Canoptek Scarabs [2 PL, 39pts]: 3x Canoptek Scarab Swarm
Canoptek Scarabs [2 PL, 39pts]: 3x Canoptek Scarab Swarm

+ Heavy Support +
(FW) Sentry Pylon [8 PL, 150pts]
. Sentry Pylon: Gauss Exterminator

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 203pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 203pts]

Covers all the TAC bases:
- CC punch
- anti HQ
- anti horde
- anti vehicle
- anti flyer
- screening

Haven't tried it yet (besides, I'll need more Immortals)

For cryptek i take szeras. He boost all immo, once per turn, give better RP and have nice weapon. Troops durability its hard to mathammer. One immo can keep unit alive and give you 5 more.
MVBD on full tesla immo unit give you 5 immo more. 5 immo are cheepest then overlord so i dont need overlord just for MVBD. I take anrakyr for better counter cc.

Has anyone successfuly faced current top tier lists?

I can't see how necrons can face brimstones, scout limits, scions and mass infantry armies like orks and nids.

Tesla options are way too pricey points per damage and games mostly deviate towards maneurs and lucky malestrom missions draws. Not bad per se but kind of too much counter fluffy for necrons to entirely avoid clashes with the enemy. The nerf of the Tessaract vault trashed it completely and forge world didn't provide any answers.

Would sell my soul for 3-4ed will be back instead of currect protocols.

They also have other functions with their Interception.

-Changes opponents positioning. Do they try to move in such a way to prevent you from being able to place the Deathmarks as an intercept?
-Drop down into a piece of terrain and create a 2+ unit that must be dealt with, changing the opponent's target priority
-If the opponent is DS'ing a combat unit, you can drop the Deathmarks into the middle of the unit they want to charge. 5 DMs aren't the scariest thing - but now it's another unit they have to deal with if they charge, splitting attacks, eating extra overwatch, etc.

-If they have multiple DS units, you can place the Deathmarks in such a way that the next unit to come in cannot arrive where it wants. They can counter this with clever positioning, but it limits their options.

Honestly Deathmarks are good if only because you'll see Scions a lot. While they're not mathematically the best for mathhammer, the rules they have make them worth the points.

But again, for ST army we want max infrantry wound and hit. DMs have less W and A then warriors and immo. If your ST will have less point then opponent horde you probably lost. DMs grab your points outside ST so they are good for different army style.

Scions are kind of deathmark's only ideal target and they cost half what the dmarks do. Even something like a 31pt commissar wrapped in conscripts who is only t3 and a 4+ save takes like 180 points of deathmarks to kill.

 vipoid wrote:


One of my rules of list-building is that I never trade function for psychological games.

I also don't like to rely on my opponent not being smart or making bad decisions.

I appreciate that others may well disagree on this, but that's just how I see it.

I am not going to "disagree" with you - but let me expand on this concept - I made my point in a terse manner.

I also rely on function - obviously, their value is also that they can shoot.

HOWEVER - everyone takes the "psychological" tactic in this game.
Or rather - its called tactics and counter tactics.

What model did you deploy first? What did you deploy last? Did you just put an objective near the middle? What type of game plan do you have?
You put X in reserves? what does that mean? The deceiver excells at this - you are completely changing the game after someone had a plan.

Target priority is quite possibly the most important part of the execution of your plan for the game - I have seen many games won or lost this way.
You can make the decisions regarding target priority more difficult by presenting multiple threats - or even feints with units - thus increasing the changes your opponent will make an incorrect decision.

Every single aspect of this game is tactics/psychological - except the actual die rolls.
Just some people are bad at it.

Fan67 wrote:
Has anyone successfuly faced current top tier lists?

I can't see how necrons can face brimstones, scout limits, scions and mass infantry armies like orks and nids.

Tesla options are way too pricey points per damage and games mostly deviate towards maneurs and lucky malestrom missions draws. Not bad per se but kind of too much counter fluffy for necrons to entirely avoid clashes with the enemy. The nerf of the Tessaract vault trashed it completely and forge world didn't provide any answers.

Would sell my soul for 3-4ed will be back instead of currect protocols.

Fighting brimstone list next week, and have beaten both IG, tabled nids, and fighting orks on Monday. We stand up quite well to them. I was disheartened before playing but after seeing how dangerous we are when we get in close, and how easy it is to get there now....

MWBD Timmortals are very, very good. Trying TB tesla soon, have good hopes. Anni barge is good, just cant draw attention to it. Tesseract vault is AMAZING against hordes (maybe not as great against IG but the rest, shreds hordes and they cant answer its huge wound pool easily.

Every single forgeworld unit is viable, and some are Top Teir now. The ark is probably the best, pylons are dirt cheap for what you get, centipedes are good, HQ's are good, pylon is best macro weapon that FW make.....

I was pretty impressed with what tesla can do for its points against harder to kill stuff (meq) and I can't imagine tesla would see a reduction in damage output vs horde armies with low Sv

Hej Guys

I just had my first ever Necron game 1020 points. My opponent was Dark Eldar with a more fluffy list but still had some Dark lances and blasters, and bikers. On turn 3 my opponent conceded with only 1 unit of bikers left on his side after my turn 4, and with me losing only my Tomb blades.



I chose the Checker style deployment (Can't remember name) so I could be close to Mid as much as possible. Because I only had 6 units I was guaranteed to go first. Naturally my opponent seized the innitiative


Game Notes and Highlights

In a 1000 point game, max unit Immortals and Warriors were never close to being wiped out, and RP bringing back units made it more so.

QS from annihlation barge ignored 9 wounds (4+5) from 2 dark lances, which was magnificant. He decided not to shoot at it with Dark Lances rest of the game

Rapid fire Overwatch from Warriors wiped Hellion unit that tried to charge them

My immortals and Warriors both got charged on different occasions. On my turn I simply fall back, and the other unit shot the charging unit out of the game.

If we get into Rapidfire range + MWBD our troops are very very deadly. Immortals don't really care much about +1 cover save when their weapons -2AP

Overlord was a beast in combat and wiped a unit of Incubi by himself in 2 combat phases. He was left with 2 wounds then got charged by an Archon and took him to 1 wound before dying (To keep the game thematic we decided to make them fight each other withouth interferance, so I didn't charge with my MWBD Immortals to the Archon)

There was no point in game I wished I had a Cryptek for ++5 or +4RP instead of the Overlord.

Doomsday Scythe was deadly with S10, which wiped a Talos that was annoying my warriors and Took Raider down to lowest weapon profile so I could ignore it. Because of careful placing by my opponent, My Doomsday Scythe was forced to fly off the board. It was my first time using a flyer so I have to be more careful in the future, lesson learned

Living Metal was very useful, slowly getting wounds backs on AB and Overlord. My AB finished the game with 1 wound




I had a blast playing the necrons, just all those small rules really makes it enjoyable for me. There is something very satisfying when you opponent rolls 5 damage on D6 dark lance you roll a 1 on your QS save. Our HQs rules look so much more fun than other factions HQ as well. So I am definitely looking forward to my next game

Reexamining the Silver Tide Immortal Brigade build,
You could take 6 full Immortal units and go cheap minimums on everything else (just because they're the cheapest takes in each category doesn't necessarily mean they're bad takes).
Functional, but not exactly competitive.
The only thing it might have trouble with is vehicle spam.

3K brigade build looks ok. Example:

2K build have some tax and dont have flexibility.

Are there any serious competitive events at over 2k?

I had my first 8th game yesterday. Small game, 500ish point to test the new with my necrons vs my friends Skitarii.

I had 10 warriors, 5 gauss immortals, the Overlord and an Stalker vs 10 vanguard, 5 Ruststalkers the Dominus and a Dunecrawler.

I won at turn 4, very fun to play indeed. Immortals were aces, being way better than its troops, and the Overlord destroyed the Onager in a couple turns. At the end the warriors were impossible to wipe.

I'm still nervous about footslogging anything to be honest. I'm looking at Night Scythes for my Gauss Immortals while the Tesla ones move up the field.

I like Night Scythes, but they're so expensive, especially since you really want to bring (number of units inside + 1) to try and not lose the dudes within.

Yeah, units of 10 Gauss Immortals inside Night Scythes is fine, so long as you have more than one. If you can manage to drop them into cover within 12" of a juicy target, they'll do great.
With maxed G.Imms in NSs at the fore, MSU T.Imms on backfield objectives, and a Warrior brick for the midfield, you should have pretty decent field control.

Alternatively you could try using TBs to try the forward push, but they'll probably be more expensive.

10 Immortals (gauss) - 170
10 Immortals (gauss) - 170
1 Night Scythe - 174
1 Night Scythe - 174
= 688

13 Tomb Blades (gauss, shields, scopes) - 663

Who's got better firepower and survivability, though?

I created a simple chart to help compare things like Doomsday Arks vs Heavy Destroyers etc. here:

http://www.dice-hammer.com

Punch in the weapon options for units you'd like to compare, and then toggle forth and back between groups etc. The idea is to show in the same view performance against both hordes and vehicles/monsters

^
Seems like a cool tool, but I think I ran into a problem.
I tried putting in the stats for Tesla Immortals with MWBD and the top armor save / toughness boxes all just went black.

That is incredibly helpful, thank you.

Bug report: the range only seems to turn rapid fire on or off and not outrange weapons entirely. For instance a doomsday ark keeps hitting with the cannon and the flayer arrays no matter how far you set the distance but the flayer arrays do get doubled fire at 12 or less. You can still just toggle the arrays on or off to see what you want but something like a knight with 3 or 4 different weapon types with different ranges it gets more fiddly to be toggling and untoggling the whole list.

Thanks! I'll look into it tomorrow. (CET time here)

Hey guys, I need some help.

I have a game tomorrow against my brother. He will be playing a list called "Tzeentch Flying Circus"
the list contains;


any idea on how to counter this obvious smite-spam? No forge world allowed so my only way of deny the witch is with Sypders.

I've never actually read the entry for The Changeling before, that's actually a pretty good argument for deathmarks but it would take 12 to kill him from 13"+.

Basically you can shoot at magnus or the lord of change or the chariots from turn 1 with heavy hitters like ddarks or heavy ds but the only way to target the sub 10 wound guys including the 2 deamon princes who will really tear your army apart is by first clearing out the horrors screening them. Our best way to clear out hordes of low armor save units is tesla, except as long as The Changeling is on the board everything on that list gains a -1 to hit modifier which isn't just 1 more miss result on a dice, it also means it's impossible to get tesla exploding 6s (or with MWBD it's only a normal chance).

Although a gauss pylon from forgeworld would be nice for instantly pasting magnus, i think your best bet is a mix of warriors, scarabs, and doomsday arks. None of those are extra crippled by the -1 to hit modifier and all of them have a big load of wounds with a meh armor save which will waste most of the value of mortal wounds from smite spam. Gloom prisms aren't really great here, there's so many psychic powers that maybe denying 1 or 2 of them won't noticeably curb the damage output and spyders are pretty good smite targets. Keep your scarabs within 2" of your warrior phalanx so none of the flying monsters have a place to land behind them to charge the inner units which will give you at least one more turn to fall back and shoot. You don't really need the ark's big stand still cannon shot since nothing is over t7 and almost all their saves are invulnerable so any ap over -2 is wasted so don't be afraid to move them around to get use out of the flayer arrays or to split up your forces so the units hiding in the horrors with their slower 6" move can't chase both.

 Actinium wrote:
I've never actually read the entry for The Changeling before, that's actually a pretty good argument for deathmarks but it would take 12 to kill him from 13"+.

Why would Deathmarks be shooting from 13"+ away? Their ability requires them to be within 9-12".

Also, the best answer to inv saves is mortal wounds and Tesla... which ironically, the Tesseract Vault has plenty of both (not necessarily saying it's a good idea to take, just that it might be worth considering if you had the option).

The 9-12" range only applies to ethereal interception, their anti deep strike deep strike, which doesn't apply here. Here they just use regular hunters from hyperspace deep strike and they land 13+" away because that list is taking 45 horrors explicitly to protect its sub 10 wound characters so there's no way in hell the changeling isn't wrapped tight in the center of that far outside rapid fire range.

If you don't kill the changeling with sniper fire then every unit in that army has a daemon and tzeentch keyword tags so they all get -1 to hit if they're within 9" of the changeling, which means no exploding 6s for tesla weapons. A vault's tesla spheres go from getting 20 hits a turn to getting 10 hits a turn. Also the horrors are resilient because they split into more horrors when they die and the owning player gets to allocate losses to the smallest horrors first, so their model count will always remain low and seismic assault won't really be good against them.