A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
Agreed. Necrons are an army that can clearly compete at the top of the meta but the way they do it is through tremendously narrow builds with little flexibility of choices. If you look at armies like DE and (to a lesser extent) Ad Mech, both of those had enough depth in their books that they were still competitive after they took their big nerfs. Ad Mech seem to have fallen off a cliff a little with the new Tau/Custodes meta though. The annoying thing for me is Flayed One spam is not really the kind of Necron army I want to play (or build!). The internal balance is still terrible.
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
You do realize that those two units, despite having a few things in common, are intended to do completely different tasks, right?
You know, different tools for different jobs.
But hey, if you insist upon using Deathmarks the same as you would Flayed Ones? Then of course your going to be disappointed in the results & see them as a "trap".
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
You do realize that those two units, despite having a few things in common, are intended to do completely different tasks, right?
You know, different tools for different jobs.
But hey, if you insist upon using Deathmarks the same as you would Flayed Ones? Then of course your going to be disappointed in the results & see them as a "trap".
Explain to me in what way Deathmarks are not a trap at their current price-point. They are overpriced compared to Doomsday Arks as well, I just mentioned Flayed Ones because they are perhaps the most similar unit Necrons have that is aggressively costed. Immortals are really similar as well, but they are a meh unit you take in lists that need mandatory Troops IMO.
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
You do realize that those two units, despite having a few things in common, are intended to do completely different tasks, right?
You know, different tools for different jobs.
But hey, if you insist upon using Deathmarks the same as you would Flayed Ones? Then of course your going to be disappointed in the results & see them as a "trap".
I have been playing and testing several variations of the same list for my Necrons and was wondering if others have tried in in a competitive environment, (I play casually now).
I won't give a full breakdown, but here are the Units:
Da-Rock wrote: I have been playing and testing several variations of the same list for my Necrons and was wondering if others have tried in in a competitive environment, (I play casually now).
I won't give a full breakdown, but here are the Units:
True on the x2 Dynasty, but that one worries me little as I would just go all Relentless/Eternal on both Patrols if our group or a Tourny requested it.
12 seems like a sweet spot. 10 ALWAYS gets taken out in a turn, but 12 holds 2 or 3 guys each time it seems. They are on backfield duty for deepstrike coverage and shielding the Doomstalkers.
So far 8 CP has been solid with me hitting zero on turn 3 only once.
They tend to be too occupied with 12 Wraiths, 14 Scarabs, 6 Destroyers etc....
In the majority of games they never get targeted. The Ork game with all their speed saw the two 10 man squads evaporate rather quickly, but it was a strange match as our super fast units seemed to wave at each other as they went for backfield units and objectives.
I'll give a shot with a 10 man and a 14 man unit. I like my Reapers a lot more of course. :-)
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
You do realize that those two units, despite having a few things in common, are intended to do completely different tasks, right?
You know, different tools for different jobs.
But hey, if you insist upon using Deathmarks the same as you would Flayed Ones? Then of course your going to be disappointed in the results & see them as a "trap".
Explain to me in what way Deathmarks are not a trap at their current price-point.
Can you point out to me another Necron unit that's designed to snipe off characters, can do so at considerable range, & can be deep struck in once you know where the targets are? I'd think this value would be self-explanatory.
Whatever the cost comparrison between a DM & a Flayed One, I've never yet seen a Flayed One pick off those annoying mid-lv solo characters handing out orders/buffs/etc while shrouded in "Look-out Sir".
Of course I might be a bit biased - where I play there's plenty of Guard, SoB, etc as well as a good # of other players using solo characters. So the tool I reach for is a sniper unit. Afterall, I can hold objectives with any # of other things. I can shoot up squads with just about any other unit in the codex. And I can melee with things way better suited than a DM. But I only have 1 way to target the annoyances.
And yes, killing the units they buff is on the to-do list. It's a priority. It's just a job for different units.
vict0988 wrote: They are overpriced compared to Doomsday Arks as well, I just mentioned Flayed Ones because they are perhaps the most similar unit Necrons have that is aggressively costed. Immortals are really similar as well, but they are a meh unit you take in lists that need mandatory Troops IMO.
Well we're getting closer in function.... At least both units shoot.
But if I'm shooting something I'd ordinarily target with an Ark with my DMs? I've A) run out of preferred targets/B) have nothing better to shoot at because of range/Los etc/C) it's an act of desperation.
If I'm firing an Ark at what I'd ordinarily shoot with Deathmarks? I'm just lucky. And have most likely run out of the Arks preferred targets.
I was able to win the first tournament I attended with this list! The ability to get in your opponent face quickly is great. I will probably take out Nightbringer to add some more flexibility though.
vict0988 wrote: A tier seems fair enough, but I think the disparity between our weakest units and our strongest units has gotten larger than it used to be. There is no room for 18 pt Deathmarks in a world with 10 pt Flayed Ones.
You do realize that those two units, despite having a few things in common, are intended to do completely different tasks, right?
You know, different tools for different jobs.
But hey, if you insist upon using Deathmarks the same as you would Flayed Ones? Then of course your going to be disappointed in the results & see them as a "trap".
Explain to me in what way Deathmarks are not a trap at their current price-point.
Can you point out to me another Necron unit that's designed to snipe off characters, can do so at considerable range, & can be deep struck in once you know where the targets are? I'd think this value would be self-explanatory.
Whatever the cost comparrison between a DM & a Flayed One, I've never yet seen a Flayed One pick off those annoying mid-lv solo characters handing out orders/buffs/etc while shrouded in "Look-out Sir".
Of course I might be a bit biased - where I play there's plenty of Guard, SoB, etc as well as a good # of other players using solo characters. So the tool I reach for is a sniper unit. Afterall, I can hold objectives with any # of other things. I can shoot up squads with just about any other unit in the codex. And I can melee with things way better suited than a DM. But I only have 1 way to target the annoyances.
And yes, killing the units they buff is on the to-do list. It's a priority. It's just a job for different units.
vict0988 wrote: They are overpriced compared to Doomsday Arks as well, I just mentioned Flayed Ones because they are perhaps the most similar unit Necrons have that is aggressively costed. Immortals are really similar as well, but they are a meh unit you take in lists that need mandatory Troops IMO.
Well we're getting closer in function.... At least both units shoot.
But if I'm shooting something I'd ordinarily target with an Ark with my DMs? I've A) run out of preferred targets/B) have nothing better to shoot at because of range/Los etc/C) it's an act of desperation.
If I'm firing an Ark at what I'd ordinarily shoot with Deathmarks? I'm just lucky. And have most likely run out of the Arks preferred targets.
Ccs you’re missing the point. The difference between flayed ones and death marks isn’t that one shoots and one doesn’t. It’s that one unit is hot garbage and the other isn’t.
Death marks don’t belong in an edition with prevalent bodyguards. Not targetable. Way over costed unimpressive output. If all you want is native deepstrike then...flayed ones are cheaper and better. Ironic.
Just because you have a soft metta doesn’t make bad units good. Death marks are a bad unit.
i feel if Deathmarks had 2shots they'd be fine otherwise. Not overly oppressive but deadly enough to be a problem. They are after all fairly tanky for their cost (T5 2+ in cover with RP) but they just dont hit anything hard enough to even be a distraction.
The Hexmark on the other hand needs pretty much a complete rework....
I will come to the defense of the deathmarks in my next video it may take a day or two but I will make it. Deathmarks can actually have a place in a competitive army I have often thought about using them!
I was able to win the first tournament I attended with this list! The ability to get in your opponent face quickly is great. I will probably take out Nightbringer to add some more flexibility though.
Did you consider the custom dynasty for the pregame move + obsec?
I was able to win the first tournament I attended with this list! The ability to get in your opponent face quickly is great. I will probably take out Nightbringer to add some more flexibility though.
Did you consider the custom dynasty for the pregame move + obsec?
What made you go Nephrek?
I like Nephrek because of the rule where I can automatically advance 6 and through the terrain. Sudden Storm protocol, relentless march, and translocate means 20-inch move with wraiths, 18-inch move with skorpekhs, and 13 with everything else. All of my melee units are in charging distance by turn 2 if I go first. Also the deep striking stratagem allows me to deep strike immortals for Retrieve. Late game my immortals were able to get on objectives
CKO wrote: I will come to the defense of the deathmarks in my next video it may take a day or two but I will make it. Deathmarks can actually have a place in a competitive army I have often thought about using them!
None of us watch a video. A couple paragraph defense is more than enough, but I think there's a reason people pass on them. The codex has been out for a long time, so I don't think you've found the one combo nobody else has.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vineheart01 wrote: i feel if Deathmarks had 2shots they'd be fine otherwise. Not overly oppressive but deadly enough to be a problem.
They are after all fairly tanky for their cost (T5 2+ in cover with RP) but they just dont hit anything hard enough to even be a distraction.
The Hexmark on the other hand needs pretty much a complete rework....
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
CKO wrote: I will come to the defense of the deathmarks in my next video it may take a day or two but I will make it. Deathmarks can actually have a place in a competitive army I have often thought about using them!
Given that no competitively successful army has found a use for them so far, I doubt that.
Deathmarks have the same problem most snipers do. You get 1 shot at your preferred target, if you're lucky. They usually won't have the firepower to kill a character in one round outside of a lot of luck getting 6s to wound. If they fail to kill their target it can usually hide from them quite easily until the enemy deals with the Deathmarks. They used to be an OK choice for DS onto objectives but now FO are so much cheaper I just don't see a use for the Deathmarks at all.
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
Yes, but the gauntlet is niche. It can be pretty funny against units of 10+ but otherwise it causes like 1 mortal wound typically.
It only causes a mortal on a roll of a 6. Its not an amazing relic its just a neat one.
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
Yes, but the gauntlet is niche. It can be pretty funny against units of 10+ but otherwise it causes like 1 mortal wound typically.
It only causes a mortal on a roll of a 6. Its not an amazing relic its just a neat one.
Eh just an edge case of making it easier to proc his ability to shoot again with his base pistols. I can't find much to do with him.
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
Yes, but the gauntlet is niche. It can be pretty funny against units of 10+ but otherwise it causes like 1 mortal wound typically.
It only causes a mortal on a roll of a 6. Its not an amazing relic its just a neat one.
Eh just an edge case of making it easier to proc his ability to shoot again with his base pistols. I can't find much to do with him.
The relic doesn't interact with the other pistols in any way.
Why the nonsymmetric setup of the Flayed Ones, why not 2x12 ?
What could be the substitute of the Nightbringer besides Deathmarks?
Warrior unit looks a bit small. I usually field 20 men blocks.
Thank you, I use the big blob of Flayed Ones to get the most out of the -1 to hit stratagem and the fight again stratagem. Big squads are needed for survival, it is possible to kill 12 Flayed Ones even with the -1. For example, the large squad was able to survive the Tau Crisis Suit Air frag attack with 4 models left. The 6 man squad is for RND.
I was going to make a video but here are the reasons Deathmarks should be considered. What happens when RND units such as a 6 man Flayed One unit are shot by 10 Deathmarks using the stratagem. There is a good chance you kill the unit or at least kill 3-4 and now they have a 50% chance or worse of getting RND. Also, that stratagem allows you to be up to 18 inches away meaning you may be able to place the death marks in an advantageous place. You may luck up and be able to place them on an objective or in a location where next turn they can get on an objective and if they are objective secured you will have 10 models who are as durable as immortals on an objective. Or you can place them in front of a unit to make a charge harder or they are forced to charge the deathmarks instead. The sniper rule is mediocre at best with the bodyguard rule every where but having mortals on 6's is helpful. That is why I sometimes think about using Deathmarks, it's a tech unit.
I agree 20 men blocks are where it's at with warriors, I just had a 10 man squad for home objectives and to make deep striking in my backfield harder.
If I take out the Nightbringer, I will add Lokhust Destroyers both variants. I will have the ability to deep strike them in with the stratagem. I would also add some more cc maybe another Skorpekh unit. I also think that Sky of Falling Stars is the best c'tan power now. No line of sight required and you can put d3 mortal wounds on 3 units.
I was going to make a video but here are the reasons Deathmarks should be considered. What happens when RND units such as a 6 man Flayed One unit are shot by 10 Deathmarks using the stratagem.
You can do the same with Immortals, deathmarks not needed
If the Gauntlet triggered the Hexmark's extra shots ability it would be neat but still not that great because...well...those pistols suck lol...
They really need to be AP2 imo....i dont think they need multi damage but definitely needs some buffage.
I was going to make a video but here are the reasons Deathmarks should be considered. What happens when RND units such as a 6 man Flayed One unit are shot by 10 Deathmarks using the stratagem.
You can do the same with Immortals, deathmarks not needed
The only units that can use the aetheric interception stratagem are units with the hyperspace hunter keyword.
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
Yes, but the gauntlet is niche. It can be pretty funny against units of 10+ but otherwise it causes like 1 mortal wound typically.
It only causes a mortal on a roll of a 6. Its not an amazing relic its just a neat one.
Eh just an edge case of making it easier to proc his ability to shoot again with his base pistols. I can't find much to do with him.
The relic doesn't interact with the other pistols in any way.
More than likely meant that the gauntlet can soften up a target before finishing it with normal pistols, so many 2-3 wound infantry these days. It's probably the best use of the gauntlet, but still a bit niche compared to the actually useful relics you can put on actually good characters.
I was going to make a video but here are the reasons Deathmarks should be considered. What happens when RND units such as a 6 man Flayed One unit are shot by 10 Deathmarks using the stratagem.
You can do the same with Immortals, deathmarks not needed
The only units that can use the aetheric interception stratagem are units with the hyperspace hunter keyword.
I was going to make a video but here are the reasons Deathmarks should be considered. What happens when RND units such as a 6 man Flayed One unit are shot by 10 Deathmarks using the stratagem.
You can do the same with Immortals, deathmarks not needed
The only units that can use the aetheric interception stratagem are units with the hyperspace hunter keyword.
is it worth a cp?
Denying an opponent secondary is definitely worth a command point.
I don't have the codex handy but Hexmarks can be given relics correct? Gauntlet is a Pistol weapon so he can shoot that first before the other six pistols?
Yes, but the gauntlet is niche. It can be pretty funny against units of 10+ but otherwise it causes like 1 mortal wound typically.
It only causes a mortal on a roll of a 6. Its not an amazing relic its just a neat one.
Eh just an edge case of making it easier to proc his ability to shoot again with his base pistols. I can't find much to do with him.
The relic doesn't interact with the other pistols in any way.
More than likely meant that the gauntlet can soften up a target before finishing it with normal pistols, so many 2-3 wound infantry these days. It's probably the best use of the gauntlet, but still a bit niche compared to the actually useful relics you can put on actually good characters.
Pretty much what I meant. Makes the badly statted pistols he has to begin with do slightly better. I'm aware he can't generate extra shots with the Gauntlet.
How are people viewing a 6man Skorpekh Destroyers unit on the ground with a Chronomancer versus being in a single Night Scythe and using a CP for reserves and surviving a round to deploy?
I like both, with the Night Scythe being extra pretty on the board....but my main force is two 6 man Wraiths and a CCB up the middle. The Destroyers pull away some fire by being on the board.
Da-Rock wrote: How are people viewing a 6man Skorpekh Destroyers unit on the ground with a Chronomancer versus being in a single Night Scythe and using a CP for reserves and surviving a round to deploy?
I like both, with the Night Scythe being extra pretty on the board....but my main force is two 6 man Wraiths and a CCB up the middle. The Destroyers pull away some fire by being on the board.
With or without The Silent King?
Seems almost mandatory these days.
No Silent King. Waaaay too slow for my Wraith army. I don't own him, but I made a proxy by raiding my grandson's Grogu model/doll and some Triarch Stalker parts.
I don't like him without Warrior Blobs. His @ss is too big for terrain and the Wraiths just don't care.
I either use a CCB or a loaded arkana Technomancer who teleports with the Veil right in range of the 12 Wraiths to give +1 attacks and +1 To Hit...then bring a Wraith back at Command phase.
Everything else is too slow and out of position for the freakin Command phase abilities. :-)
One of Custodes big strengths is how difficult it is to pick secondaries for them because none of the "kill stuff" secondaries are likely to be good. You want things like Raise Banners, Engage and RND but I've found that often only gets you 2 of your 3 secondaries. Depending on your list TTL might work.
I won my game vs Custodes today. Dude had like 5 Characters including Trajan, Jetbike Capt w/ all the gimmicks, foot Capt w/ Plate, and some -1 hit aura guy. He had 5 V. Praetors all but 1 had salvoes, 2 Guardian units w/ spears, a unit that makes Characters untargetable and unit of Sisters plus a Telemon dread. My list is below, it's a version of QS spam. I took Teleport Homers, TTL, Behind Enemy lines. I let him rush toward me for 2 turns which allowed me to find an open spot for my Monolith to drop in his DZ and Prismatic breach in Immortals to do the action. I was able to do this for the last 3 turns at 8 VP per turn and all of my TTL units survived. I got 40 Primary points and all of the Retrieve Relic bonus points (he did too). Couldn't believe I got the win but he let me drop in and sit there in his DZ. The CCB, Stalker, and DDA's made nuisances of themselves keeping him occupied in the middle of the board.
Had a situation with my 12 Wraiths meeting up with Bobby G, Vitrix Guard and some marines on an Objective. I had my Technomancer with full buffs up and did some work on the charge even after a Heroic interruption by Gman.
What sucked was on his turn the 3 Librarians switched on Null Zone and fired off 3 Smites....followed by everyone else.....
Only one Wraith stood tall at the end and was quickly joined by another via Technomancer. I thought it was over because Gman raged across the board for two more turns....
at the end it was a 6 point win by the Necrons. I'm not as much a fan of "Overrun" as other scenarios.
It is illegal to cast 3 same powers different than Smite in one turn.
So 3 librarians casting Null Zone is illegal (also that is super weird to have 3 librarians).
Mage Aramil wrote: It is illegal to cast 3 same powers different than Smite in one turn.
So 3 librarians casting Null Zone is illegal (also that is super weird to have 3 librarians).
You only need to cast Null Zone once, I've run stranger things.
Mage Aramil wrote: It is illegal to cast 3 same powers different than Smite in one turn.
So 3 librarians casting Null Zone is illegal (also that is super weird to have 3 librarians).
Each power can be cast at most once in each psychic phase unless there is an exception rule.
Smite is an exception.
Yea the da rock's message might be bit unclear worded but only 1 null zone. Multiples don't do anything anyway as negated inv's don't do anything once inv's are done What he meant is 3 librarians first shut down inv's(so just one casting) and then 3 smite's(which is why 3 librarian mention in the first place). Boom. Nuked wraiths.
I'm finding more use and utility out of a Technomancer with two Cryptothralls and a Viel of Darkness + Fail-Safe Overcharger + Thrall of the Silent King than a CCB.
More room to teleport up right behind the 18" moving Wraiths giving them +1 Attack and +1 To Hit while bring one back in following Command phase.
The CCB is obviously good, but to be effective I need -2cp for double hand out of MWBD and some shooting here and there at 160 points min. For 160 I get the Techno package. Thralls aren't half bad shooting or in combat. The footprint is better too.
Da-Rock wrote: I'm finding more use and utility out of a Technomancer with two Cryptothralls and a Viel of Darkness + Fail-Safe Overcharger + Thrall of the Silent King than a CCB.
More room to teleport up right behind the 18" moving Wraiths giving them +1 Attack and +1 To Hit while bring one back in following Command phase.
The CCB is obviously good, but to be effective I need -2cp for double hand out of MWBD and some shooting here and there at 160 points min. For 160 I get the Techno package. Thralls aren't half bad shooting or in combat. The footprint is better too.
The only way i could get this to make sense is if you’re selling old techno models on foot lol.
You’re spending 160 points, our best relic and a warlord trait to get +6 attacks and some +1 to hit on some wraiths? That’s an insane investment for not much payoff. Home slice has a 5 inch move and the wraiths move 12 plus charge. Extra attacks is on one unit and how many wraith bodies are you getting into combat in any one spot? Big clunky models and maybe not a whole lot of charge targets in just that one spot. If there is screening your wraiths could normally just jump through them and charge something juicy but your techno is 9 inches out from the screen so now do you blend the screen or bail on your buffbot?
Ccb’s and technos are not mutually exclusive. In this scenario you are passing on the ccb. So what’s your noble for protocols? A lord? Extremely expensive and good for nothing but an orb caddie which is also expensive. An overlord? Completely outshone by a ccb for 50 points. Only real use for an overlord over a ccb is if you’re walking. Lychguard or warriors or some such. If you’re using fast units like most people he’s just a no go.
So you’re either talking about a techno AND a lord, or an overlord. Or! You’re running an outrider and not a battalion or patrols and hate protocols so much you don’t even want +1 to move turn 1 or something like that.
Our hqs are so ridiculously expensive how did you go and make a technomancer 160 points? Run two naked good god!
I don’t understand at all what your cryptothralls are doing for you. The ccb has incidental shooting but the cryptothralls arnt half bad? You mean their 12 inch pistols? The technomancer and the ccb both come with a staff of light and they can both upgrade to the voltaic staff. The only difference is the ccb has +1 ballistic skill and an under sling gauss cannon that’s also bs 2 vs your not half bad cryptothralls. The ccb could take a melee weapon and still out shoot a staff of light and pistols. Gets his weapons where he wants them too.
How on this good flat earth does the technomancer have a better footprint? The cryptothralls are a separate unit. Is the technomancer on foot not on a 25 mil base? The ccb has a larger footprint than a can of soda... you can also get that footprint wherever you want it. Being in range to buff units is the goal, ccb is thick and quick.
You literally spent a warlord trait to buff techno’s +1 to hit aura up to 9 inches, did that trait cost you a cp? The ccb starts at 9 and can get boosted to 12. That same warlord trait would also extend the ccb’s relentless March aura that techno doesn’t have at all. Or if 9 inches is all you need you could be rerolling charges on those wraiths. The ccb is just flat better and has the option to double tap. That’s a feature not a bug.
If you’re all in on wraiths how are you not all in on a ccb to roll with them? He can actually keep up. MWBD is better source of +1 to hit. Relentless March plus sudden storm means 14 inch move turn 1. Having the +1 strength protocol can spike up to strength 8 which is one of our very few ways of getting strength 8 in the whole book. 9 wounds of quantum shielding, auto explodes. He’s not the best in combat but it’s a thing he does. You can make him pretty decent at shooting or pretty decent in combat. Technomancer doesn’t want any part of anything cryptothralls or no.
I’d suggest running a ccb and technomancer with cloak behind two units of wraiths. Two units to take mwbd and two units for reanimation. Techno can heal the ccb and carry the veil. It’s different in my list because it’s porting an actual unit not cryptothralls, it’s taking them somewhere tastier than behind your own front lines and the techno can be fast enough to keep up with whatever he brought with him because of his cloak. The ccb can take whatever relic or none if you’re on a budget.
Honestly I like spending cp pregame or I don’t spend them fast enough because we don’t have a lot of great strats. Phaeron, strategic reserve, voltaic staff, sign me up.
I don’t think your 160 point techno is realistic at all. I think a better discussion would be what’s better between a ccb plus either a techno, chrono, second ccb or anrakyr versus the silent king.
So with the update, Flayer Warriors are definitely a lot worse vs a bunch of armies. I already preferred Immortals so that didn't affect me, but it definitely sucks for those players that liked the Warrior blocks in classic flare.
Da-Rock wrote: I'm finding more use and utility out of a Technomancer with two Cryptothralls and a Veil of Darkness + Fail-Safe Overcharger + Thrall of the Silent King than a CCB.
More room to teleport up right behind the 18" moving Wraiths giving them +1 Attack and +1 To Hit while bring one back in following Command phase.
The CCB is obviously good, but to be effective I need -2cp for double hand out of MWBD and some shooting here and there at 160 points min. For 160 I get the Techno package. Thralls aren't half bad shooting or in combat. The footprint is better too.
So let me get this straight.....you don't understand what I am talking about, but somewhere in your brain you decided a snarky tone would be best in your reply.....well, its the internet so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I think my favorite line has to be ( "I think a better discussion would be")....lol!!!!!!!! Man oh man dude.
I will try to answer some:
The only way i could get this to make sense is if you’re selling old techno models on foot lol.
You’re spending 160 points, our best relic and a warlord trait to get +6 attacks and some +1 to hit on some wraiths? That’s an insane investment for not much payoff. Home slice has a 5 inch move and the wraiths move 12 plus charge. Extra attacks is on one unit and how many wraith bodies are you getting into combat in any one spot? Big clunky models and maybe not a whole lot of charge targets in just that one spot. If there is screening your wraiths could normally just jump through them and charge something juicy but your techno is 9 inches out from the screen so now do you blend the screen or bail on your buffbot?
Well, you imagined one scenario...nice
160 points is for the Techno and Thralls. Thralls are mainly there to stop the shots that would come from them being out in the open. (Maybe clarifying possible other methods of playing would help.......We AVERAGE 3 rounds in our games. Typically with pre 6" move and 12" move I am withing charge range of things they wanted to move up. I only need to smack the middle and cause him to fall into my Wraiths while Scarabs, 40 Warriors and 10 Immortals get points. If they deploy back I win without having to try......of course there are lists that can handle this....thank god or it would be boring to play).
Ccb’s and technos are not mutually exclusive. In this scenario you are passing on the ccb. So what’s your noble for protocols? A lord? Extremely expensive and good for nothing but an orb caddie which is also expensive. An overlord? Completely outshone by a ccb for 50 points. Only real use for an overlord over a ccb is if you’re walking. Lychguard or warriors or some such. If you’re using fast units like most people he’s just a no go.
Protocols? Jesus.........
So you’re either talking about a techno AND a lord, or an overlord. Or! You’re running an outrider and not a battalion or patrols and hate protocols so much you don’t even want +1 to move turn 1 or something like that.
x2 Patrols
Our hqs are so ridiculously expensive how did you go and make a technomancer 160 points? Run two naked good god!
lol....120 plus 40 for Thralls. Hence me calling it the Techno package. I run x4 Technos because one is the main with gear, one sits back with Doomstalkers and two naked ones that sit with 20 man warrior blobs popping back warriors and often Wraiths depending on what went down during turn one.
I don’t understand at all what your cryptothralls are doing for you. The ccb has incidental shooting but the cryptothralls arnt half bad? You mean their 12 inch pistols? The technomancer and the ccb both come with a staff of light and they can both upgrade to the voltaic staff. The only difference is the ccb has +1 ballistic skill and an under sling gauss cannon that’s also bs 2 vs your not half bad cryptothralls. The ccb could take a melee weapon and still out shoot a staff of light and pistols. Gets his weapons where he wants them too.
I stated the CCB is great and offered a different option/opinion. If you can't pull it together enough to figure it out then me explaining it doesn't offer much.
How on this good flat earth does the technomancer have a better footprint? The cryptothralls are a separate unit. Is the technomancer on foot not on a 25 mil base? The ccb has a larger footprint than a can of soda... you can also get that footprint wherever you want it. Being in range to buff units is the goal, ccb is thick and quick.
If I need to explain this to you then it explains your confusion on everything else discussed here.
You literally spent a warlord trait to buff techno’s +1 to hit aura up to 9 inches, did that trait cost you a cp? The ccb starts at 9 and can get boosted to 12. That same warlord trait would also extend the ccb’s relentless March aura that techno doesn’t have at all. Or if 9 inches is all you need you could be rerolling charges on those wraiths. The ccb is just flat better and has the option to double tap. That’s a feature not a bug.
No, he is my Warlord. No nobles since that type of list would obviously have a CCB in it. CCB with two squads of Wraiths needs -2cp in order to cover both squads. Again, if you read my post I stated the CCB is obviously good, but "In my experience" I had a better time with the Techno package. My CCB was always getting tagged and trying to get out of the Wraiths way while not getting into range of units that would eat it up. Again, still an awesome unit.
If you’re all in on wraiths how are you not all in on a ccb to roll with them? He can actually keep up. MWBD is better source of +1 to hit. Relentless March plus sudden storm means 14 inch move turn 1. Having the +1 strength protocol can spike up to strength 8 which is one of our very few ways of getting strength 8 in the whole book. 9 wounds of quantum shielding, auto explodes. He’s not the best in combat but it’s a thing he does. You can make him pretty decent at shooting or pretty decent in combat. Technomancer doesn’t want any part of anything cryptothralls or no.
Repeating yourself, but yes, it moves faster than a Veiled in Techno after turn 1, but as I stated before my goal is to get the opponents attention while still keeping my Warlord alive as he buffs and brings back a Wraith each turn.
I’d suggest running a ccb and technomancer with cloak behind two units of wraiths. Two units to take mwbd and two units for reanimation. Techno can heal the ccb and carry the veil. It’s different in my list because it’s porting an actual unit not cryptothralls, it’s taking them somewhere tastier than behind your own front lines and the techno can be fast enough to keep up with whatever he brought with him because of his cloak. The ccb can take whatever relic or none if you’re on a budget.
Best suggestion and tone in your post. I have enjoyed the use of a Veil with a Chrono and even a Skorpehk Lord, but I found it difficult to get where I wanted with a charge unit and fell back to just using Warriors blasting away. Still good, was just looking for something different. (I swear my charge dice rolls hate me!)
Honestly I like spending cp pregame or I don’t spend them fast enough because we don’t have a lot of great strats. Phaeron, strategic reserve, voltaic staff, sign me up.
I don’t think your 160 point techno is realistic at all. I think a better discussion would be what’s better between a ccb plus either a techno, chrono, second ccb or anrakyr versus the silent king.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So with the update, Flayer Warriors are definitely a lot worse vs a bunch of armies. I already preferred Immortals so that didn't affect me, but it definitely sucks for those players that liked the Warrior blocks in classic flare.
The Tesla Immortals got a bit closer in comparison. Especially if the meta will turn towards invuls
You really lost your cool over a joke bro. I threw in a lol and everything.
I’m very well aware that 160 also buys the cryptothralls. You were specifically talking about your 160 point technomancer “package” and comparing it to a ccb so I was doing the same. I mentioned the cryptothralls many times not sure how you think I forgot all about them. If you dropped that techno then the arcanum and thralls would go with almost like it was one unit.
You did manage to make a techno cost 160 points because those cryptothralls are there to be ablative wounds and you said so yourself. With the metta in the shape it is, with our hq’s as expensive as they are yeah Im a little flabbergasted that you managed to spend 160 points to NOT take a ccb. Especially when the ccb would be more effective at the stated goal of buffing wraiths. The ccb itself is over costed relative to the metta and you are paying the same price for a much lesser unit and telling everyone how great it is. I disagree. I’m allowed to do that.
You tried to talk up the cryptos shooting while being completely dismissive of the ccb’s shooting. Yeah I thought it was a little goofy, I didn’t mean to hurt your feelers. Just wanted to break it down.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of course you would spend two cp on phaeron if he is backing up two units of wraiths I just don’t get why you think it’s such a terrible cost you can’t live with paying. I don’t understand how that makes the ccb a lesser unit for having the option. +1 to hit is one of most powerful buffs we have access to and it’s also our most consistent. why wouldn’t you want to spread the love? You already spent the points what’s a cpl cp?
Pull it together enough to figure it out? Because I disagree with you I’m just asleep at the wheel? So aggressive. If someone doesn’t like your idea then they must not have a thought in their head?
So you are taking two patrols. “Obviously you would have a ccb in this build” yeah! Thats pretty much my point! I said if you wanted protocols it would make a lot more sense to have a ccb than a garbage lord. You seem to agree because your taking another cryptek instead of said garbage lord (or overlord).
Protocols. Yeah. You might not like them but don’t act like I’m stupid because I mentioned you needed a noble in your list for our buffs. That you would be turning down an asset in your scenario or taking a suck fill in like a lord. You might not like the protocols (nobody does) but they are what we have. I even mentioned there was a good chance you didn’t care about protocols. Was one of my scenarios and I talked about the merits and drawbacks of doing so.
Lighten up. If you’re talking about a ccb OR a techno then throwing away protocols is a legitimate consideration. I gave two examples.
Its to bad We can’t talk about the relative footprints. Bigger is better right? They both get character blocked but the ccb gives you more coverage to get your buffs to multiple units that arnt in the same spot. I guess I am confused because they arnt on the same planet when considering footprints. Unless we are seeing it from different angles.
I thought I made a bunch of reasonable points and broke it down pretty well. You might disagree with my logic but I was not speaking gibberish. Not sure how I’m so far beneath you we can’t talk about it. That’s just un American.
I think a ccb is a much better choice than your techno “package”. If we are comparing and contrasting. I’m sorry you disagree. This is a forum though right? You did post your theory in hopes of having it discussed? If we agreed completely there would be no discussion.
I do think comparing two crypteks to a ccb would be a better discussion. Or your 160 point techno to a pair of crypteks which would also be about 160 points.
Manchild 1984 wrote: MWBD on wraiths adds 33% damage beginning turn 1. The Techno resurrection requires taking a hit first but is better turns 2-3.
SK can be the Protocol enabler and C'Tans the spreaders. Not that I care about protocols.
within 6" of a friendly NECRONS CHARACTER model (excluding C’TAN SHARD models)
And only on Tuesdays...
To make this somewhat on topic, I did play against Necrons rather than as them at the weekend and we did do the traditional end of turn 3 dance, "oh sorry I didn't have protocols on that unit and that unit during the combat phase", "don't worry about it, you killed nothing".
Cauthon wrote: You really lost your cool over a joke bro. I threw in a lol and everything.
I’m very well aware that 160 also buys the cryptothralls. You were specifically talking about your 160 point technomancer “package” and comparing it to a ccb so I was doing the same. I mentioned the cryptothralls many times not sure how you think I forgot all about them. If you dropped that techno then the arcanum and thralls would go with almost like it was one unit.
You did manage to make a techno cost 160 points because those cryptothralls are there to be ablative wounds and you said so yourself. With the metta in the shape it is, with our hq’s as expensive as they are yeah Im a little flabbergasted that you managed to spend 160 points to NOT take a ccb. Especially when the ccb would be more effective at the stated goal of buffing wraiths. The ccb itself is over costed relative to the metta and you are paying the same price for a much lesser unit and telling everyone how great it is. I disagree. I’m allowed to do that.
You tried to talk up the cryptos shooting while being completely dismissive of the ccb’s shooting. Yeah I thought it was a little goofy, I didn’t mean to hurt your feelers. Just wanted to break it down.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of course you would spend two cp on phaeron if he is backing up two units of wraiths I just don’t get why you think it’s such a terrible cost you can’t live with paying. I don’t understand how that makes the ccb a lesser unit for having the option. +1 to hit is one of most powerful buffs we have access to and it’s also our most consistent. why wouldn’t you want to spread the love? You already spent the points what’s a cpl cp?
Pull it together enough to figure it out? Because I disagree with you I’m just asleep at the wheel? So aggressive. If someone doesn’t like your idea then they must not have a thought in their head?
So you are taking two patrols. “Obviously you would have a ccb in this build” yeah! Thats pretty much my point! I said if you wanted protocols it would make a lot more sense to have a ccb than a garbage lord. You seem to agree because your taking another cryptek instead of said garbage lord (or overlord).
Protocols. Yeah. You might not like them but don’t act like I’m stupid because I mentioned you needed a noble in your list for our buffs. That you would be turning down an asset in your scenario or taking a suck fill in like a lord. You might not like the protocols (nobody does) but they are what we have. I even mentioned there was a good chance you didn’t care about protocols. Was one of my scenarios and I talked about the merits and drawbacks of doing so.
Lighten up. If you’re talking about a ccb OR a techno then throwing away protocols is a legitimate consideration. I gave two examples.
Its to bad We can’t talk about the relative footprints. Bigger is better right? They both get character blocked but the ccb gives you more coverage to get your buffs to multiple units that arnt in the same spot. I guess I am confused because they arnt on the same planet when considering footprints. Unless we are seeing it from different angles.
I thought I made a bunch of reasonable points and broke it down pretty well. You might disagree with my logic but I was not speaking gibberish. Not sure how I’m so far beneath you we can’t talk about it. That’s just un American.
I think a ccb is a much better choice than your techno “package”. If we are comparing and contrasting. I’m sorry you disagree. This is a forum though right? You did post your theory in hopes of having it discussed? If we agreed completely there would be no discussion.
I do think comparing two crypteks to a ccb would be a better discussion. Or your 160 point techno to a pair of crypteks which would also be about 160 points.
Cheers.
I think you are missing the point of my original post........Bro
My original post stated that I was finding good results with that Techno Package and that I knew the CCB was great. I'm not sure why you keep swing around that point as if I was saying it was better than the CCB.
The reason for my lack of tolerance for your reply was your tone, (and probably your use of "Bro"). Being an asshat in a post wasn't why I posted in the first place. I wanted to see if anyone else had similar results on the setup. Have you played with any of what I stated or did you just have an opinion on it because it wasn't what you thought was good?
Footprints - I think we missed each other completely here :-) I was strictly talking about 12 Wraiths clogging up space around terrain and trying to fit in a CCB's base. Footprint as in base size on the table. Your Footprint I agree with, MWBD out from that along with any other buff is way better on the CCB.
My lists live at 8 or 9 CP and that usually is the difference between the Phaeron hit or not having it.
The entire point of my post was to see what others had on the build type versus the obvious CCB build. My Techno package is used 40% of the time while various other builds have a CCB 60% of the time.
Your response was similar to ones I see where someone posts a list and states they don't have much other options and get replies from people advised them to replace this or that with the cookie cutter options that Tourny players use and that many players most likely do not own.
wuestenfux wrote: Anyone using a larger amount of Flayed Ones with some good success?
They featured in a number of top lists before Armour of Contempt, I am not sure if people are dropping them now that they are AP1 on the charge and 0 the rest of the time against SM and Sororitas.
punisher357 wrote: I don't think we're going to see any really solid improvements until a new codex drops. We'll keep getting bandaid fixes until then.
If you're not playing very competitively, it's still a fun army.
I play Necrons almost like a "good stuff" magic deck. Single units without much teamwork, worked fine so far.
I have a small local tourney coming up and need help with a list.
It's only 650 points, i know most people are expecting me to turn up with my Eldar so I want to give them a shock and play with Necrons.
Looking for a fun list but not one that will fall to a stiff breeze. Any ideas? I know Necrons struggle at smaller levels so I am finding it hard to put something together.
Crafter91 wrote: I have a small local tourney coming up and need help with a list.
It's only 650 points, i know most people are expecting me to turn up with my Eldar so I want to give them a shock and play with Necrons.
Looking for a fun list but not one that will fall to a stiff breeze. Any ideas? I know Necrons struggle at smaller levels so I am finding it hard to put something together.
Are the list subjected to a FOC?
If not, take a TSK - impossible to shift at this pt level.
Crafter91 wrote: I have a small local tourney coming up and need help with a list.
It's only 650 points, i know most people are expecting me to turn up with my Eldar so I want to give them a shock and play with Necrons.
Looking for a fun list but not one that will fall to a stiff breeze. Any ideas? I know Necrons struggle at smaller levels so I am finding it hard to put something together.
Are the list subjected to a FOC?
If not, take a TSK - impossible to shift at this pt level.
Crafter91 wrote: I have a small local tourney coming up and need help with a list.
It's only 650 points, i know most people are expecting me to turn up with my Eldar so I want to give them a shock and play with Necrons.
Looking for a fun list but not one that will fall to a stiff breeze. Any ideas? I know Necrons struggle at smaller levels so I am finding it hard to put something together.
Are the list subjected to a FOC?
If not, take a TSK - impossible to shift at this pt level.
Ok so in light of not yet owning a Silent King... and for the fact that it's a fairly easy-going tournament and i'm not looking to lose any friends this is the list I'm thinking of playing with....
Unusual choice... I'm going with Nephrekh - normally I wouldn't be a fan of this Dynasty in bigger games but in this list I think it works well.
My thinking is that it will give the Skorpekhs and Technomancer a 16" move, and the Implacable Conqueror trait will give the SDs reroll charges. He can also revive models in the unit as needed while they get into combat.
It will also allow me to put the warriors into deepstrike for 1cp, making sure their short range guns actually do some damage.
On top of that, the added bonus of an armywide 6++ is better than nothing - particularly for the LHDs.
The hope is that the Technomancer will be able to make it back to the LHDs to revive them as needed before the unit is wiped, with Prismatic Obscurification protecting him from being shot at if he's left in the open. He also has Veil of Darkness to help with this if needed.
Obviously, the scarabs are simply there to hold backline objectives and score points.
Interesting... would you run them as a single large unit or split into two?
I'm not sure if Manchild would agree on this, but I have found all in one larger unit to be good for several reasons.....
Its going to be a target and naturally you want more models to support reanimation. (Lately I haven't been as excited about 5++ saves from a Chronomancer, but I do love a Techno bring one back each turn......wish we had a -1 AP and +1 armor save option for things like Destroyers and Wraiths. :-) )
Also, I LOVE the x2 big blade baddies in the group laying the wood on stuff. So yes for x6 Skorpekh Destroyers......(in my humble opinion of course).
I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
Singleton Mosby wrote: I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
Yes, it's worth it to get both. Because then you have options as to what to play.
Sometimes you might play NB. Other times the VD. Now & then you nay well field both....
Singleton Mosby wrote: I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
The biggest reason for the difference is the Nightbringer and Deciever models are very old models from a time when they were actually quite large compared to most models in the game at that point. When they released the Void Dragon, the old model size just doesn't really hold up to what they are supposed to represent, especially in today's lineup filled with big centerpiece models.
Singleton Mosby wrote: I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
The biggest reason for the difference is the Nightbringer and Deciever models are very old models from a time when they were actually quite large compared to most models in the game at that point. When they released the Void Dragon, the old model size just doesn't really hold up to what they are supposed to represent, especially in today's lineup filled with big centerpiece models.
100% agree. The nightbringer is in desperate need of a revamp for the model. I was a little disappointed with the rules for the void dragon, but the model was okay. Void dragon rules just seem a little inflexible. Granted, you shouldn't have a model that's great at everything, but the void dragon just seems lacking.
I'm not playing very competitive metas, so I tend to stick to the Nightbringer just because it's more fun in my opinion.
I'd like to use deathmarks too, but they just seem too expensive without much of a payoff.
Crafter91 wrote: I have a small local tourney coming up and need help with a list.
It's only 650 points, i know most people are expecting me to turn up with my Eldar so I want to give them a shock and play with Necrons.
Looking for a fun list but not one that will fall to a stiff breeze. Any ideas? I know Necrons struggle at smaller levels so I am finding it hard to put something together.
For those interested, it was a rather successful event - and I was robbed of first place by the new Tyranids... lol I'll get to that.
List overall was really flexible at 650 points. Having VOD and the option to deepstrike a unit for 1cp thanks to Nephrek meant I always had good board control and options open.
First game was against Ynnari which I lost but scored well on for points. I had a solid first 3 turns until the Yncarne decided to wreck face... What can you do? lol
Second game I expected to lose against Thousand Sons. I won first turn and decided it was going to be all or nothing. VOD the skorpekhs turn one deleting some rubrics and my Heavy Destroyers made light work of terminators. I didn't actually depstrike anything in this game, but my warriors and scarabs were able to stand firm on their objectives long enough to score well.
End result, I was left with nothing but scarabs thanks to the insane psychic phase of the TSons but by that point I was too far ahead on points.
Third game was against Tau. Again I very much expected to lose, especially when he killed all my heavy destroyers in turn one. I was able to pull the win out of my backside with some clever movements around terrain, consolidating behind cover etc to keep the rest of my units alive. My skorpekhs did some serious work in this match up. Again, I did well on points.
By this point, I only had one game left and all other players were on 2 wins to 1 loss - but I was ahead by about 60 points to the next player. I could almost smell that gold medal...
Fourth and final game was against Tyranids, and let's just say, I have never been apologised to more by my opponent. His list comprised of a hive tyrant, 20 hormagaunts, 2 units of 3 warriors and 3 zoanthrobes.
Despite winning the first turn, I did very very little, and then in his first turn, was charged by the gaunts and Hive Tyrant. My heavy destroyers and skorpekhs both died.
In my turn two, I brought on my necron warriors that were in deepstrike but their efforts were futile, and they were then killed in combat in his turn two along with my scarabs and that was the end of the game.
In the last game I scored two points (or 12 if you count painted bonus) which meant that several other players were able to overtake my lead on points in their games.
In the end, I dropped from the top spot and I placed 5th. Still though, holding my own against Ynnari and then beating out Tau and Thousand Sons was a good enough moral victory for me.
Went home with my head held high - several people commented their disbelief that Necrons made the final.
Singleton Mosby wrote: I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
The biggest reason for the difference is the Nightbringer and Deciever models are very old models from a time when they were actually quite large compared to most models in the game at that point. When they released the Void Dragon, the old model size just doesn't really hold up to what they are supposed to represent, especially in today's lineup filled with big centerpiece models.
100% agree. The nightbringer is in desperate need of a revamp for the model. I was a little disappointed with the rules for the void dragon, but the model was okay. Void dragon rules just seem a little inflexible. Granted, you shouldn't have a model that's great at everything, but the void dragon just seems lacking.
I'm not playing very competitive metas, so I tend to stick to the Nightbringer just because it's more fun in my opinion.
I'd like to use deathmarks too, but they just seem too expensive without much of a payoff.
See I actually hope they don't update it. It's perfect the way it is imo. I'd really hate to see it get a bunch of extra bs added to it. If anything the Void Dragon should have been smaller.
Singleton Mosby wrote: I am about to start playing necrons and currently assembling a CC destroyer list. In this I would like one or two C'tan but are a bit confused.
There is the small but amazing Nightbringer and the big Void dragon which has a new model which I like a bit less. Is their base size really do much different? Bit weird ain't it?
And is it worth it to get two?
The biggest reason for the difference is the Nightbringer and Deciever models are very old models from a time when they were actually quite large compared to most models in the game at that point. When they released the Void Dragon, the old model size just doesn't really hold up to what they are supposed to represent, especially in today's lineup filled with big centerpiece models.
100% agree. The nightbringer is in desperate need of a revamp for the model. I was a little disappointed with the rules for the void dragon, but the model was okay. Void dragon rules just seem a little inflexible. Granted, you shouldn't have a model that's great at everything, but the void dragon just seems lacking.
I'm not playing very competitive metas, so I tend to stick to the Nightbringer just because it's more fun in my opinion.
I'd like to use deathmarks too, but they just seem too expensive without much of a payoff.
See I actually hope they don't update it. It's perfect the way it is imo. I'd really hate to see it get a bunch of extra bs added to it. If anything the Void Dragon should have been smaller.
I will get both
But I gather there's a lot of difference between hire you play them on the table. Not only because of different rules but also LOS due to the size of the model or easy of hiding.
p5freak wrote: We dont have good stratagems, but other armies do. It will do some good for us when other armies have less CP to play with.
the changes will give less CP at start but more over 5 turns. (not that I live 5 turns)
I think the point p5 is making, is that other armies are very capable of spending well over half their CP before the end of turn 1. With Necrons not usually being in that position, it will be a net gain for us against those factions. That's especially true when you consider the most common reason to spend so many CPs so quickly is to increase damage output, so we should see a decrease in front-loaded damage, which helps factions like Necrons who rely on resilience.
Yes, enemy armies will not be able to blow all their 10+ CP in the first two turns. Which will help us with reanimation, because our units will not get blown off the table.
I read this entire thread. Took me several weeks lol. So much useful info and real experience data. Thank you!
I'd like to throw this out there. I'm new to 9th Ed. and haven't played many games. Most of my minis come from the Indomitus box x2, plus a LHD and Doomstalker. And I'm playing friendly games with Power rather than competitive games with points.
So... I actually like the Overlord. They're decent in combat, MWBD and Relentless March are great, but what I love most is something that was only mentioned once or twice in these 84 pages. The Arrow of Infinity! A relic that, for me, is auto-take. Only the Overlord and Anrakyr can take it, which might be why it's been ignored (Overlords being less popular than the CCB).
I screwed up my first Arrow by targetting a character with an invulnerable save, who made their save. But targetting dreadnaughts and vehicles has been super useful. 2+ to hit, usually 2+ to wound, AP -5, auto 6 damage. That's enough to drop a centrepiece to their next stat block, which can be really helpful. Combine with a Doomstalker, and you can take out the heaviest enemy unit on turn 1 with any luck.
And I definitely prefer the Doomstalker over the LHD. My LHD achieved exactly nothing. My Doomstalker one-shotted a Flyer and helped take out a tank. Obviously that's just anecdotal data, but I prefer the Doomstalker. (The model also looks way cooler. )
Anyway, thanks all for this thread. It's been very useful.
Hecate wrote: I read this entire thread. Took me several weeks lol. So much useful info and real experience data. Thank you!
I'd like to throw this out there. I'm new to 9th Ed. and haven't played many games. Most of my minis come from the Indomitus box x2, plus a LHD and Doomstalker. And I'm playing friendly games with Power rather than competitive games with points.
So... I actually like the Overlord. They're decent in combat, MWBD and Relentless March are great, but what I love most is something that was only mentioned once or twice in these 84 pages. The Arrow of Infinity! A relic that, for me, is auto-take. Only the Overlord and Anrakyr can take it, which might be why it's been ignored (Overlords being less popular than the CCB).
I screwed up my first Arrow by targetting a character with an invulnerable save, who made their save. But targetting dreadnaughts and vehicles has been super useful. 2+ to hit, usually 2+ to wound, AP -5, auto 6 damage. That's enough to drop a centrepiece to their next stat block, which can be really helpful. Combine with a Doomstalker, and you can take out the heaviest enemy unit on turn 1 with any luck.
And I definitely prefer the Doomstalker over the LHD. My LHD achieved exactly nothing. My Doomstalker one-shotted a Flyer and helped take out a tank. Obviously that's just anecdotal data, but I prefer the Doomstalker. (The model also looks way cooler. )
Anyway, thanks all for this thread. It's been very useful.
Overlords aren't bad but relying on anything from Command Protocols has never worked for me - they're largely a waste of time beyond turn 2 in my opinion.
Arrow of Infinity is an interesting one. To bring it into 9th edition as an autotake for me, it would need one or several of the following - the ability to use more than once a game, the ability to ignore invun saves, the ability to indirect fire or ignore Look Out Sir (think yondu's arrow in Guardians of the Galaxy). It's not a bad one, but it could be better and there are better options out there.
LHDs are good in units of 3. I take them and sit a Technomancer with them to respawn and heal them. I've given him the VoD in several games too before so that if they get caught up in combat he can get them out to a safe area of the table and they can still shoot because they haven't fallen back.
Doomstalkers are good but too unreliable for my liking. If they had D3+3 shots and D6 damage it would make them an absolute autotake - but they're definitely not bad by any means.
Yeah, I haven't had much luck with Protocols either.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I have 2 Plasmancers thanks to Indomitus. Might get a Technomancer too. I like the idea of bringing back D3 Warriors per turn. And I like the idea of the Psychomancer, but will probably forget half the rules. Not yet experienced enough to play cunning with rules...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Best performing unit for me in virtually every game are the Skorpekhs. I doubt I'll ever run a list without them.
Hecate wrote: And I'm playing friendly games with Power rather than competitive games with points.
So... I actually like the Overlord. They're decent in combat, MWBD and Relentless March are great...
A lot of discussion in tactics threads is about list building and pts efficiency. A Doomscythe will kill an equal amount whether it is 160 or 200 pts, but if you're trying to construct a strong list those 20-40 pts per unit add up to a lot of extra efficiency if you can avoid overcosted units, which units are overcosted depends on a lot of things, like local enemy factions, terrain and missions played. Saying they're decent in combat doesn't say much, Warhound Titans are really strong in combat and shooting compared to an Overlord. What sorts of strategies you think work better or worse with an Overlord like your idea of focus-firing with your Arrow of Infinity and Doomstalker is more valuable.
The Arrow of Infinity! A relic that, for me, is auto-take. Only the Overlord and Anrakyr can take it, which might be why it's been ignored (Overlords being less popular than the CCB).
It's just a bad relic. Even in the best case scenario you're dealing 2 more wounds to a Dreadnought or Carnifex with it on average. Against T5-6 units with an invulnerable save? It's not even 1 wound on average. There is also a lot of times when you need 2-4 wounds after wounding something with your Doomstalker where an Arrow of Infinity is overkill. You should really try the Veil of Darkness and Voltaic Staff instead.
My Doomstalker one-shotted a Flyer....
Doomstalkers are awful against Flyers because they are only BS 4+, being reduced to hitting on 5s is really harsh and it's not really worth it to get a Cryptek to babysit one and if you play on dense terrain having 3 Doomstalkers sitting in the same place makes them easy to outmanoeuvre to block their line of sight. Doomsday Arks pay a trivial amount for their extra BS and durability, so much so that their gauss flayers are basically free. They do look neat though, I wish we had gotten Reanimators and Doomstalkers instead of Arks back in 5th. In Sautekh they can get +1 to hit without a babysitter which is pretty neat, but with the removal of the synergy between the Stratagem and tesla the dynasty is pretty dead.
I'd assume Anrakyr could take relics... Says the inexperienced person. He has the Tachyon Arrow, which is required for the Arrow of Infinity.
Also, I'm not saying the Doomstalker is great against flyers. Just that I did 1-shot a flyer with mine, whereas my LHD has been utterly useless. As I said - anecdotal evidence.
*shrug*
(Veil is awesome, though, I agree. And I'm willing to pay extra CP to get extra relics.)
Its taking a relic for one instance of 6D that still has a chance to fail and you dont get to try again if it fails either. Overlord melee especially with the glaive is meh. Not bad, but not amazing either. I literally never use the glaive/arrow combo, any overlord i take is either Anrakyr (which cant take the relic arrow) or using an Orb (which cant take an arrow as well for some reason). Bout the only times i even have a relic slot free is if i dont have a technomancer, which is rare. Technomancer can take the Volatic Staff, which makes him yet another decently strong 18" shooting attacker in addition to its other perks (base staff of light blows). Relic orb is mandatory imo Veil of darkness is mandatory imo
Arrow relic would be useful to me if it ignored invuls. Virtually every target i can think of i'd want to try to use it on has an invul so i'd rather not even risk bringing it. Upping the damage or letting it fire multiple times could be a bit ridiculous so i wouldnt wish for that kind of buff.
That being said, i wish it was easier to bring those arrows in general. I'd love to field 3-4 of the nonrelic variant but im forced into the glaive to do that and overlapping powers.
Anecdotal evidence like that isn't worth a lot. One time I killed a Daemon Prince shooting with a squad of dual Bolt Pistol Vanguard, but I'd not exactly defend them as a good shooting unit. Quite the opposite, I just wanted to use my friend's HH Destroyer models for a game since they looked neat.
I have tried every option in the codex and in my experience the Doomstalker rocks far beyond any other option.
T-Players dislike "Swingy" options and I fully understand, but I personally hate the less punch in your face for the more consistant yet under performing version.
I do agree that getting rid of D6 on number of attacks and damage would make my life easier. :-)
What do people think of Cryptothralls for tying up weak units away from objectives?
Note: I'm trying to figure out if the following is reliable. Not saying it's reliable. Anyway:
Cryptothralls for tying up weak units in melee away from objectives, compared to scarabs. The thralls have T5 vs. the scarabs' T3, so a weak unit would likely need 5s to wound, compared to 3 or 4+. They have less wounds than scarabs, but being harder to wound in the first place combined with a 3+ save makes them significantly harder to kill (against weak units anyway). It's also possible to RP one of them, but you can't count on that. They're slower, too.
I had 2 Thralls in melee with a squad of 20 Pink Horrors, and it took the Horrors 3 entire turns to shift them. Definitely worthwhile there.
Again, just trying to guage whether this is common enough to be worthwhile. 3 Scarabs would be the same Power Level, but easier to remove, I think.
Hecate wrote: What do people think of Cryptothralls for tying up weak units away from objectives?
Note: I'm trying to figure out if the following is reliable. Not saying it's reliable. Anyway:
Cryptothralls for tying up weak units in melee away from objectives, compared to scarabs. The thralls have T5 vs. the scarabs' T3, so a weak unit would likely need 5s to wound, compared to 3 or 4+. They have less wounds than scarabs, but being harder to wound in the first place combined with a 3+ save makes them significantly harder to kill (against weak units anyway). It's also possible to RP one of them, but you can't count on that. They're slower, too.
I had 2 Thralls in melee with a squad of 20 Pink Horrors, and it took the Horrors 3 entire turns to shift them. Definitely worthwhile there.
Again, just trying to guage whether this is common enough to be worthwhile. 3 Scarabs would be the same Power Level, but easier to remove, I think.
What say you?
On paper it seems fine, but realistically how often are you successfully making it across the board or to a location where they're doing something without dying on the way or being intercepted by a unit that walks right over them? They're just not mobile and can't have enough models to survive open field movement imo.
I usually hide my Cryptothralls behind a ruin for a counter-charge or put them into strategic reinforcements for actions. Between the changes to actions in GT missions, points change to Flayed Ones and Skorpekhs and the nerf to Cryptothralls' bodyguard rule I feel pretty pessimistic about Cryptothralls.
It takes 60 WS 4+ S3 AP- attacks to kill 3 Scarabs, their durability is not an issue and their mobility is better so for tying units up Cryptothralls are not great. Having 3 models is a lot better than 2 if you want to charge multiple enemy units or consolidate into another unit than the one you charged.
My problem with Scarabs is their 6+ save. AP anything-non-zero wipes them out really easily. I might try taking some special rules for an invuln. There was a Dynasty that gives an invuln. if memory serves. Whereas the Thralls have a good save already. Not great, but good.
I've been playing Nephrekh in recent games (an unusual choice, I know) but the 6++ has saved my scarabs plenty of times.
FYI, the 6++ isn't the reason for playing the Dynasty, just a perk.
Personally though I like Scarabs. I try to hide them from firepower at all which isn't usually too difficult as they're tiny and then charge them into scary combat units to tie them up.
The 1cp strat to blow one up is also nice. You can commit absolute sh*thousery with that strat if you only put one scarab in engagement range and then blow it up so that your opponent can't attack back...
Beyond that, scarabs are also great for blocking nasty Psyker armies. I run them in units of 5 and 20 wounds is a lot to chew through with D3 smites and such.
Overall, scarabs are the more versatile option and I think that's what makes them the winner here.
So what's the consensus on our flyers? Are they only good for being transports?
I'm torn between the Doomscythe and the Nightscythe. I'm thinking that extra anti-tank would be nice, but the transport might be more tactical. The heavy death ray, though...
Hecate wrote: So what's the consensus on our flyers? Are they only good for being transports?
I'm torn between the Doomscythe and the Nightscythe. I'm thinking that extra anti-tank would be nice, but the transport might be more tactical. The heavy death ray, though...
As I said, I'm torn.
Magnetize your deathray & the transport lens (whatever it's called). Play a few games with each & find out what works best for you.
Me? I've gotten more use out of mine as Doomscythes.
Hecate wrote: So what's the consensus on our flyers? Are they only good for being transports?
I'm torn between the Doomscythe and the Nightscythe. I'm thinking that extra anti-tank would be nice, but the transport might be more tactical. The heavy death ray, though...
As I said, I'm torn.
When the Monolith gets flying, it will be the better transport
i'm too paranoid to use it as a transport. Its not that tough to take down, its only slightly more durable than a dakkajet. I get that i can run 6 skorpekhs + 10 warriors and just eat warrior deaths but thats also kinda pricy lol
If i use it as a normal transport its kinda sitting in the wide open for a turn. If i try to use the stratagem with it, it kinda hinges on either A) my opponent lacks long-range big guns or B) my opponent has 0 idea what having a nightscythe + stuff in reserves means, which isnt a valid tactic thats just preying on newbies. Or, C) we are playing on a map with large enough solid walls for a plane to hide...which i virtually NEVER see happen lol (they can still hide behind things if they cant be seen at all)
Or you have two for redundancy, and take advantage of the fact that they don't have traditional transport capacity so you don't need to declare what's in which transport, and you're unlikely to lose both at once, plus if you lose neither you now can choose which flank to drop your units on.
However, that's a lot of points to waste on transports and on meh flyers.
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: Or you have two for redundancy, and take advantage of the fact that they don't have traditional transport capacity so you don't need to declare what's in which transport, and you're unlikely to lose both at once, plus if you lose neither you now can choose which flank to drop your units on.
However, that's a lot of points to waste on transports and on meh flyers.
TRANSPORT This model has a transport capacity of 20 <DYNASTY> CORE INFANTRY, <DYNASTY> INFANTRY CHARACTER or DYNASTIC AGENT INFANTRY models.
It is a normal transport in addition to the ability to use the Primastic Dimensional Breach Stratagem.
I'd hope warriors go down a point, especially with the new BS that is armor of contempt warriors just dont do squat and they werent that amazing to begin with (just not necessarily bad)
Points are up and holy crap a LOT of necron changes, too many for me to actually mark down while still pretending to work lol
Virtually all of our HQs got cheaper, i think the Skorpekh Lord is the only one that isnt affected.
Ctans got massively cheaper (50pts for Dec/Void, 40pts for Night/TC)
Freaking Tomb Blades (the thing i have been forcing myself to paint because theyre in the way of my painting catalog) dropped 10 flipping points.
I think they fudged up the Lokhust costs.... basics are listed as 40pts with the heavy loadout options and heavy is flat 50pts no options lolgjgw...
I am going to do it for 1d4chan so I might as well post it here so none of you have to do the work over again.
Warscythes are the same cost as hyperphase blades, what a phoned in bunch of nonsense, this is so clearly made with an algorithm and not based on any intelligent analysis or playtesting (-5 to characters in pts bracket X, -10 for those in pts bracket Y and -15 for those in bracket Z). The only HQ that got no love was the Skorpekh Lord, probably the least pts-efficient of the bunch excluding Psychomancers and almost certainly the least popular. You'll have to compare with changes to other factions to estimate whether this is a net increase or decrease in power level for our faction.
Anrakyr the Traveller -10 7% Catacomb Command Barge -10 6% Chronomancer -5 6% Illuminor Szeras -15 9% Imotekh the Stormlord -15 10% Lokhust Lord -5 (-5%) Lord -5 (-7%) Nemesor Zahndrekh -10 7% Orikan the Diviner -10 9% Overlord -5 5% Plasmancer -5 7% Psychomancer -5 7% Royal Warden -5 7% Technomancer -5 7% Trazyn the Infinite -10 10% Vargard Obyron -10 10%
Cryptek Arkana and Wargear All Cryptek Arkana down 5 pts. All Lord and Overlord weapons down 5 pts. Overlord and Lord Res Orb down 5 pts. Upgrading Lokhusts to Heavy Lokhusts is down 5 pts. A 2-man Lokhust + Heavy Lokhust duo is down 15%. Shadowlooms down 2 pts.
I think warriors are shelved lol... everything else seems fine.
Edit: Canoptek units are less important
Yeah, outside a single blob of 20, I don't see Warriors being worth much when Immortals have so many benefits.
Feth Immortals, Tomb Blades are knocking their socks off. Just go cheap and get 2x shots for 1,5x cost. With an EVEN CHEAPER Silent King, it's a no-brainer IMO.
The new balance dataslate just gave Necrons a pretty major buff. Protocols now only require a character on the board and you can select one that isn't assigned at the start of the game to be active all game. Combined with recent points drops this might actually push us towards the middle of the pack.
Also, all vehicles are now Core, including TSK. IIRC, that means you can use the veil on them.
Slipspace wrote: The new balance dataslate just gave Necrons a pretty major buff. Protocols now only require a character on the board and you can select one that isn't assigned at the start of the game to be active all game. Combined with recent points drops this might actually push us towards the middle of the pack.
Also, all vehicles are now Core, including TSK. IIRC, that means you can use the veil on them.
So you could Veil a Monolith?
Forget veil....
You can use a Nightscythe to come in from reserves.... use Prismatic Dimentional Breach to port in a Monolith and set it up... 1" away from anything? Am I reading that right?
Slipspace wrote: The new balance dataslate just gave Necrons a pretty major buff. Protocols now only require a character on the board and you can select one that isn't assigned at the start of the game to be active all game. Combined with recent points drops this might actually push us towards the middle of the pack.
Also, all vehicles are now Core, including TSK. IIRC, that means you can use the veil on them.
So you could Veil a Monolith?
Forget veil....
You can use a Nightscythe to come in from reserves.... use Prismatic Dimentional Breach to port in a Monolith and set it up... 1" away from anything? Am I reading that right?
Pretty sure Prismatic Dimensional Breach, requires the unit to be 'wholly within 3" ' of the Night Scythe. Don't think that'll quite fit!
Bold of you to assume GW had intentions and isn't just firing from the hip. Everything in 9th except for the core rules and Crusade content has been phoned in 100%.
Posting this new points/dataslate improved Arking Lot list for posterity here. Transhuman, everything but Ctan is core. 3+/5++, 5+ mw shrug. Absolutely brutal in play testing today. Suggest taking 2w regen from (Undying Legion) for permanent command protocol.
ELITES
C’tan Shard of the Nightbringer (320)
1x C’tan Shard of the Nightbringer
POWER S: C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - Gaze of Death, Sky of Falling Stars
Triarch Stalker (135) Twin heavy gauss cannon
1x Triarch Stalker: Twin heavy gauss cannon
I think the addition of core to every vehicle has made tesseract arks and doomsday arks absolutely bonkers. D6 attacks is still swingy, but when you MWBD them and they roll 6 attacks they're hefty bois. If you stick a few within aura range of TSK it gets pretty nasty pretty quick. I took apart a Knight Abominant on bottom of first turn really easily with TSK and one DDA using MWBD on TSK and the DDA + the aura. It's _DEFINITELY_ going to get FAQ'd that the TSK can MWBD himself.
zmc wrote: I think the addition of core to every vehicle has made tesseract arks and doomsday arks absolutely bonkers. D6 attacks is still swingy, but when you MWBD them and they roll 6 attacks they're hefty bois. If you stick a few within aura range of TSK it gets pretty nasty pretty quick. I took apart a Knight Abominant on bottom of first turn really easily with TSK and one DDA using MWBD on TSK and the DDA + the aura. It's _DEFINITELY_ going to get FAQ'd that the TSK can MWBD himself.
Helps with hit modifiers. His aura is the bigger bonus I suppose. He gets Blades and Stars until they FAQ it out, as being a Vehicle makes him and the twins core.
zmc wrote: Helps with hit modifiers. His aura is the bigger bonus I suppose. He gets Blades and Stars until they FAQ it out, as being a Vehicle makes him and the twins core.
My point is that you are only getting 10% more hits which is pretty modest and it shouldn't work against the most popular Harlequin builds either. It'd be a bigger deal if you were constantly reviving your bodyguards. SK is so mandatory now that it's silly. Maybe some Destroyer-focussed builds can go without him.
SK now getting CORE is hilarious and ridiculous. GW is so fething stupid. You can veil him, he benefits from hypermaterial ablator, his menhirs can be reanimated, you can give him S+1 with disruption fields, he gives himself +1" move, he can MWBD himself, Illuminor can mechanical augment him, possibly giving him a BS of 1+, Anrakyr gives him +1 attack, he benefits from immortal pride and implacable conqueror, etc.
I think people need to calm down about the VEHICLES get CORE buff, it's the least significant change of the last week.
Our vehicles weapons are so bad that MWBD and hit rerolls from the king don't save them.
Most of the crazy interactions are not actually good- Prismatic Dimensional Breach TSK out of a Monolith would be hilarious, but bad. Veiling TSK requires you to be Szarekhan, as does resurrecting a Menhir, I'm going to try it but Obsekh/ Novokh are where it's at. There's always Szeras, you might get a T8 king! Or res a Menhir! Most likely you'll wish you hadn't wasted 145pts on him. +1 Attack on TSK or Monolith from Anrakyr? Not worth 130pts.
There are some minor benefits to be had from Hypermaterial Ablator and Diruption Fields on TSK. Ablator is only relevant vs AP1, DF will occasionally help a bit.
The only competitive practical implications of vehicles getting CORE are from TSK getting his own buffs, which are very nice! The points drops, Protocols and Secondarys are what's game changing.
Just making sure I understand what the dataslate says.
Is it that: any unit with the Command Protocols rule, will benefit from the chosen protocol/directive in each round just for being on the table. PLUS benefit from another protocol the whole game, with the ability to swap directives each round OR for the select 6 dynasties, they can benefit from both directives of their protocol the whole game if that one is not chosen to apply to a specific round.
That does indeed (if accurate) seem to add significant weight to some of the Dynasties with a build to take fullest advantage of their protocol/directive. Also a lot of stacked rules to remember, but at least its always on, instead of 'oops moved too far away from a Noble, now all of a sudden you forgot how to shoot better.
Kcalehc wrote: Just making sure I understand what the dataslate says.
Is it that: any unit with the Command Protocols rule, will benefit from the chosen protocol/directive in each round just for being on the table. PLUS benefit from another protocol the whole game, with the ability to swap directives each round OR for the select 6 dynasties, they can benefit from both directives of their protocol the whole game if that one is not chosen to apply to a specific round.
That does indeed (if accurate) seem to add significant weight to some of the Dynasties with a build to take fullest advantage of their protocol/directive. Also a lot of stacked rules to remember, but at least its always on, instead of 'oops moved too far away from a Noble, now all of a sudden you forgot how to shoot better.
It's in addition to. So for Novokh you're getting +1 S on the charge on 6s to wound +1 AP the entire game if you have a Necron Character on the table in addition to another Protocol each turn following the old rules.
I still think pre-game move is king, the only time you want anything other than permanent fall back and shoot is in a vehicle list without blast weapons or a melee list. Usually, you don't really need both the directives, getting both is a very minor benefit IMO.
For a melee army you would want Hungry Void. For a vehicle army you would want Undying Legions or possibly Eternal Guardian if the enemy weapon profiles are right and you are running a lot of static vehicles like Obelisks and Doomsday Arks. I propose that for a shooty Mephrit list or shooty Nephrekh list permanent Conquering Tyrant is going to be superior to permanent Vengeful Stars or Sudden Storm.
Since is when is getting light cover only relevant against AP1 ?? It works against every AP.
3+ 4++ vs 2+ 4++
Against AP-2 or better it's the same. That's why it's a bigger deal for Monoliths and Obelisks since it's relevant against AP-1 all the way up to AP-5.
Against AP-2 or better it's the same. That's why it's a bigger deal for Monoliths and Obelisks since it's relevant against AP-1 all the way up to AP-5.
Against AP-2 or better it's the same. That's why it's a bigger deal for Monoliths and Obelisks since it's relevant against AP-1 all the way up to AP-5.
And what if you cant use inv ?
Like against an AP-6 railgun or a melee weapon? We are talking about a Librarian being within Null Zone range and then another unit shooting from more than 12" away for it to matter against AP-2. Am I missing something?
A) More things benefit from MWBD than dont, odds are your overlord will be in range of 2 things for most of the game if not all of it, especially if you Thrall him up (probably the only trait im even looking at...)
B) Our strats are largely meh, +1 to hit is about as useful as most of them, so you arent really cutting into strat cp funding that much.
Most lists ive been theorycrafting with have it on there, because almost the entire list can benefit.
A) More things benefit from MWBD than dont, odds are your overlord will be in range of 2 things for most of the game if not all of it, especially if you Thrall him up (probably the only trait im even looking at...)
B) Our strats are largely meh, +1 to hit is about as useful as most of them, so you arent really cutting into strat cp funding that much.
Most lists ive been theorycrafting with have it on there, because almost the entire list can benefit.
I tend to agree. It was practically any auto take beforehand, I just think we do have a few really decent strats that I want to be using every game really, so it presents a small problem. I think starting with 8 CP would have been the sweet spot but hey ho
MinMax wrote:Hand of the Phaeron implies you're not taking The Silent King, which is probably a mistake.
Don't have him and don't really wanna buy or build him so yeah lol
I tended to not use Phaeron before because most of the time i would only have 2 core units near my overlord for 1 maybe 2 turns, and usually one of them was melee focused.
Then again i also been using the CCB with skorpekh escorts so thats probably my fault.
MinMax wrote: Hand of the Phaeron implies you're not taking The Silent King, which is probably a mistake.
{shrug} By the time I get him built & painted it won't be.
By that time GW will have TSK and TITANIC units excluded from the CORE change.
Based on how they explained that TSK was intentionally made core, I somehow think they'll leave that change in play, but possibly FAQ some of the dumber interactions (menhir res, etc). I do agree that I think we'll see TITANIC units excluded in a future faq.
At minimum i see them saying Rites only works on units that have Reanimation.
Reviving spyders is pretty obvious that would happen giving them core, but reviving Menhirs i highly HIGHLY doubt they thought of that, since GW rarely thinks things through for balance changes.
Based on how they explained that TSK was intentionally made core, I somehow think they'll leave that change in play, but possibly FAQ some of the dumber interactions (menhir res, etc). I do agree that I think we'll see TITANIC units excluded in a future faq.
They will wait 4 weeks, until all TSK are sold out, and then remove the CORE keyword from him.
Based on how they explained that TSK was intentionally made core, I somehow think they'll leave that change in play, but possibly FAQ some of the dumber interactions (menhir res, etc). I do agree that I think we'll see TITANIC units excluded in a future faq.
They will wait 4 weeks, until all TSK are sold out, and then remove the CORE keyword from him.
LMAO honestly I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL if they actually did this. I wonder if they'd remove core from him but FAQ his rules so he still buffs himself w/ his auras. Honestly that'd be an interesting change.
Alternatively, if Necrons are doing poorly in six months the next round of buffs will be -50 points on TSK and giving him Armour of Contempt. And -1 point on Hexmark Destroyers. Balanced buffs for the whole faction.
It is very odd how they want to make him so autotake.
They have done some good buffs to Necrons externally but are hurting internal balance, as well as the silent king being pratically autotake, troops wise they have basically made immortals autotake over warriors. 3 points more for +1 toughness, +1 save, +1 attack and either +1 S, -1 ap +6" range or + 18" range on shooting (depending on comparing gauss flayers or reapers)
Blndmage wrote: I just realized I can't use the Strat to res my Lokhust Lords, it requires NOBLE, or CRYPTEK.
It's even more annoying because they castrated the Nanoscarab Casket. So the Destroyer Lord went from being able to revive twice in one game (once with the Casket, once with the stratagem) to not being able to resurrect at all.
EightFoldPath wrote: Alternatively, if Necrons are doing poorly in six months the next round of buffs will be -50 points on TSK and giving him Armour of Contempt. And -1 point on Hexmark Destroyers. Balanced buffs for the whole faction.
It is very odd how they want to make him so autotake.
Blndmage wrote: I just realized I can't use the Strat to res my Lokhust Lords, it requires NOBLE, or CRYPTEK.
It's even more annoying because they castrated the Nanoscarab Casket. So the Destroyer Lord went from being able to revive twice in one game (once with the Casket, once with the stratagem) to not being able to resurrect at all.
Tell me about it. The only HQs I actually have models of are 2 Destroyer Lords, and 1 Lord.
Blndmage wrote: I just realized I can't use the Strat to res my Lokhust Lords, it requires NOBLE, or CRYPTEK.
It's even more annoying because they castrated the Nanoscarab Casket. So the Destroyer Lord went from being able to revive twice in one game (once with the Casket, once with the stratagem) to not being able to resurrect at all.
Tell me about it. The only HQs I actually have models of are 2 Destroyer Lords, and 1 Lord.
Aside, I hate what they did to Lords in general. The introduction of Overlords turned them from leaders into minor and perpetually-substandard supports.
Blndmage wrote: I just realized I can't use the Strat to res my Lokhust Lords, it requires NOBLE, or CRYPTEK.
It's even more annoying because they castrated the Nanoscarab Casket. So the Destroyer Lord went from being able to revive twice in one game (once with the Casket, once with the stratagem) to not being able to resurrect at all.
Tell me about it. The only HQs I actually have models of are 2 Destroyer Lords, and 1 Lord.
Aside, I hate what they did to Lords in general. The introduction of Overlords turned them from leaders into minor and perpetually-substandard supports.
I feel like lords just have no actual identity. Their purpose is completely gone. They should have just not added the royal warden and instead given the fallback ability to Lords imo. Give people a reason to take them over the overlords.
Parsalian wrote: I feel like lords just have no actual identity. Their purpose is completely gone. They should have just not added the royal warden and instead given the fallback ability to Lords imo. Give people a reason to take them over the overlords.
They compete very badly with Triarch Stalkers and SK, they used to be Command Protocols tax but that's gone.
Parsalian wrote: I feel like lords just have no actual identity. Their purpose is completely gone. They should have just not added the royal warden and instead given the fallback ability to Lords imo. Give people a reason to take them over the overlords.
They compete very badly with Triarch Stalkers and SK, they used to be Command Protocols tax but that's gone.
They aren't in the same league as the SKat all. Let alone competing with him....
Vs a Triarch Stalker? Um.... You'll have to explain.
{I} see
*Lord: a cheap HQ character that might tote a res-orb. Job(s) = filling HQ slot, res-orb duty, Command Protocols(formerly), maybe toting additional wargear, misc shooting/melee duties if needed.
*Triarch stalker: An Elites slot gun platform costing twice as much+, protected by quantum shielding. Job = a big shiny distraction Carnifex by any other name.
I don't see these two competing for the same roles at all....
What are you seeing?
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: Obviously just referring to the fact that he provides rerolls to hit, like TSK and stalker.
At this point, if you want a res orb, he's your man because you don't need more MWBD after the king.
They should demote him and take away all of his other abilities. Make him like, 50 points with no possible upgrades and just comes with a res orb by default. Maybe then he'd serve a decent purpose.
CKO wrote: Sounds like "All Hail The SIlent King" ended up being a great title for this thread after all!
So has anyone else actually had the opportunity to use the Szeras + TSK shenanigans (obviously not in a tournament setting as this is largely been ruled against)? I got my first game in something like 6 months this weekend and played against my friend's GK army. He was running a little bit of a jank list, but still took the staple Grand Master in Dreadknight + 2 additional Dreads along w/ Draigo and another character (chaplain or something, i forget) but also took a Stormraven to be fun. Since he got the first turn he decided to just try for a quick alpha strike on TSK using the raven and grand master. By the end of his shooting he had brought down the Menhirs and took TSK down low enough to be bracketted once. My turn ressed a Menhir and deleted his raven w/ shooting and finishing in combat w/ the king as well as taking his grand master down to 3 wounds, forcing him to use both the 3+ invuln and once per game shunt reaction. I was also lucky enough to get +1 Toughness on TSK turn 1 (but went second so it didn't help against his attempted alpha strike).
The reason I bring this whole thing up is because he ended up forfeiting after my t2 since by that time i was able to kill his GM, Raven, another dreadknight, and multiple interceptor units while only losing my 3-man scarabs, and a few models from various other units. He tried in T2 to finish off TSK but again only got him down to 3 wounds since the Menhir res + technomancer heal effectively gives a minimum 7 wounds back per turn (including living metal).
So all of that to basically say, this is some VERY niche tech and a large points investment, but in the end it's the entire reason the game ended so fast. While I do think it is legal based purely on RAW, now I can def understand why TOs would decide to not allow it. It may be a really specific interaction, but it was obviously not an enjoyable experience for my friend. I did mention to him that I wanted to play it once before the FAQ inevitably makes this a thing of the past so I won't be abusing it much.
Im really wanting to use Tomb Blades now that they have had their points reduced. How does everyone feel they are best used? units of 3, 5, or 9? Bare bones with particle beamers to keep them 20 pts?
Vyergulf wrote: Im really wanting to use Tomb Blades now that they have had their points reduced. How does everyone feel they are best used? units of 3, 5, or 9? Bare bones with particle beamers to keep them 20 pts?
Units of 3. run them with particle beamers for the flat 60 point units. Use them as super fast objective deniers/action monkeys that can be thrown away/traded.
Vyergulf wrote: Im really wanting to use Tomb Blades now that they have had their points reduced. How does everyone feel they are best used? units of 3, 5, or 9? Bare bones with particle beamers to keep them 20 pts?
Units of 3. run them with particle beamers for the flat 60 point units. Use them as super fast objective deniers/action monkeys that can be thrown away/traded.
Hmm. I am wanting to run 3 units of 3 scarabs and 3 units of 3 tomb blades. cheap units to do as you stated.
Vyergulf wrote: Im really wanting to use Tomb Blades now that they have had their points reduced. How does everyone feel they are best used? units of 3, 5, or 9? Bare bones with particle beamers to keep them 20 pts?
Units of 3. run them with particle beamers for the flat 60 point units. Use them as super fast objective deniers/action monkeys that can be thrown away/traded.
Hmm. I am wanting to run 3 units of 3 scarabs and 3 units of 3 tomb blades. cheap units to do as you stated.
I'm not sure you'll actually need 3 units of scarabs tbh. If you run 3 tomb blade units, you can use 1 (2 if you NEED) scarab units for first turn super quick plays. Put a unit in the way of something or plop them on an objective you know will be contested by your opponent and do your ancient machineries before they even get onto it so you don't have to worry about it later. Then when you need, zoom the Tomb Blades further towards your opponent's backfield.
JNAProductions wrote: So, what's a good start to a Necron force? I've got some models from the 9th Edition Starter Kit (forget which ones exactly, though), but not many.
Nightbringer is pretty good bang for the buck.
The combat Patrol is now pushed. (build Tesla Immortals?)
i believe immortals are favored over warriors right now for troops but warriors with reapers are still viable so a couple Necron starter forces isnt a bad start.
I'd probably get some Wraiths, as i dont think ive seen many lists ever not use them. Ironic since thats the one non-FW unit i dont own any of lol
Depends on the level of competitiveness you are aiming at.
I tend to play semi-competitive (proper lists but i dont 100% min-max my gak and sometimes run suboptimal units). For me, the Void Dragon is awesome, but i dont think hes that common in true competitive formats (nightbringer/tctan now days i believe)
The competitive folk tend to stick to the custom dynasty for +6" pregame move and everything is obsec. Mephrit/novokh are pretty dang good too though, especially now with the protocols change.
JNAProductions wrote: So, what's a good start to a Necron force? I've got some models from the 9th Edition Starter Kit (forget which ones exactly, though), but not many.
Nightbringer is pretty good bang for the buck. The combat Patrol is now pushed. (build Tesla Immortals?)
honestly I think it's safer to build w/ gauss but really just magnetize them. I did it myself and it wasn't hard at all and they fit easily. Unrelated to the build process though, I think tesla just aren't worth at all atm. I know you mentioned the same to me in my list in the other thread but the more i play the less i want to keep using tesla.They're fine for some things, but in the end i usually just want gauss.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JNAProductions wrote: So, what's a good start to a Necron force? I've got some models from the 9th Edition Starter Kit (forget which ones exactly, though), but not many.
To answer your question though:
Skorpekh Destroyers are likely the best 'killy' unit in the necron codex atm.
Tomb Blades in MSU are really good objective scorers, same for scarabs in MSU.
Wraiths are solid but have a little lower damage output since they hit on 4s but their tech is being able to move very fast ignoring everything around them and fallback and charge is extremely strong.
Ophydian Destroyers are actually quite solid damage output with the new command protocols but are slightly squishier so they're best used for counter punch than mid-board control.
Most current competitive lists are built around the Silent King but this isn't something to look at when starting the army, just as a heads up for the future.
People, myself included, are starting to pick up some interest in Doomscythes (flyer with big gun) now that it saw some significant point drops AND has core.
Chronomancer and Technomancer are the go-to crypteks and you likely want 1 of each in your list.
As for C'tan - all of them are generally solid. The consensus is that the Deceiver is the weakest, but someone just won a major w/ a list that took him along w/ a big block of tomb blades w/ upgrades (unusual) and Lokhust Destroyers (also unusual to see). So really if you can find a way to play to the strengths of each C'tan, they can all be good. The Transcendent is hard to question as a pick though because it's significantly cheaper and pumps MWs. Void Dragon is a solid anti-vehicle tech choice and since the model is absolutely awesome, I can't blame anyone for taking him. The Nightbringer is definitely the strongest individually w/ his ignoring invulns built-in, but you do pay a bit more for him. So like I said, they're all good in their own way and you kind of can't go wrong regardless of your choice if you have a plan for it.
Lastly since this is getting long, Lokhust Heavy Destroyers are kind of our only reliable anti-vehicle and some of our longest ranged shooting. They're decent in units of 2 or 3, most people choosing to run 1 unit of 3. I like running 2x2 but again, preference and strategy should dictate your choice there. Most lists seem to run at least a couple of these guys now.
My current thinking is that a competitive Necron list starts with The Silent King, 2 C'tan, and 3 x 3 Tomb blades. After that fill the rest of the points with various types of destroyer or Wraith. I also think that we can skip troops entirely. A 20 Warrior block may still have some play, but otherwise the only reason to take troops is to save CP, which just isn't that important.
Based on that I've come up with the following, and can't decide what to drop to get it under 2k:
This is a Supreme Command, Outrider, and Auxiliary Support detachment, costing 5 CP. Another 1 CP for the Veil means it starts with 3 CP thanks to the King. I've saved a lot of points on troops and HQ for maximum good stuff.
I don't know what to drop to save 30pts to make it 2k, I'm considering: - 1 Wraith - 1 Ophydian - 3 Tomb blades + 2 Plasmacytes
I don't know what to drop to save 30pts to make it 2k, I'm considering:
- 1 Wraith
- 1 Ophydian
- 3 Tomb blades + 2 Plasmacytes
Any thoughts?
I'd cut an Ophydian given those choices. Wraiths I find their damage output extremely underwhelming if you don't send them in 5 strong, they just swing and miss so frequently when hitting on 4s you really need the numbers. Ophydian's will still get their job done at 4, in fact ideally I think they do fine as a 3 man squad. Tomb blades are amazing with their speed and I wouldn't want to lose them, especially just for plasmacytes(those I find only good if you are running Skorpekhs in squads of 6).
Thanks. I'm leaning towards dropping an opydian. Maybe drop 2 and get the plasmacytes in. I take the plasmacytes to screen and grab objectives rather than for their buff. In the backfield they can be 6" from my heavy destroyers to help prevent deeps trikes. If I'm going first it feels much better to suicide a plasmacyte onto an objective to score Treasures than any other unit - provided I can get a destroyer unit within 6" of them behind obscuring. Sometimes they can still be cheaky and use their ability to not be shot within 3" of destroyers to survive on an objective
Short question: What is the state on C’tan in competitive lists? I’ve read here and there that a list with 1-2 Transcended ones can do some serious work paired with Eternal Expansionists and Blades/Scarabs for Objective play, but in the same time I have not seen a single batrep or list with such a setup in the wilds.
charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote: Short question: What is the state on C’tan in competitive lists? I’ve read here and there that a list with 1-2 Transcended ones can do some serious work paired with Eternal Expansionists and Blades/Scarabs for Objective play, but in the same time I have not seen a single batrep or list with such a setup in the wilds.
They are super viable. That is my conclusion based on seeing them a lot in competitive lists and Necrons doing well in tournaments recently. I don't even think Deceiver is awful because it synergizes with glass cannons and Doomscythes are viable at the moment. Not interacting with SK, primaries and Command Protocols is the only downside, but including 1 seems almost mandatory from what I remember seeing in competitive Necron lists that have performed well recently.
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: So much for the Silent King in every list now that he no longer receives Command Protocols.
What? This makes no sense. They removed core, he literally has everything else he used to get. He's still going to be in virtually every single competitive list (minus a couple where people are experimenting at high level).
literally all removing core does is stop some extremely weird/unfluffy/semi cheesy mechanics from affecting him or the CCB. Most people i know flatout ignored Core anyway because it just didnt make sense. Silent King is still an insane unit to use.
Also, he never got command protocols. Agents dont benefit from them, period, being core didnt affect that.
SK has Command Protocols and he's always had them on his datasheet. The only interaction between agent and Protocols is them not stopping you from getting them if you include them in another Dynasty. Maybe you're thinking of dynasty buffs.
Vineheart01 wrote: huh, somehow i remember command protocols being denied too... not just dynasty codes.
The confusion probably comes from the fact that Dynastic Agents are cited in the command protocols rules as a non-factor. Basically stated that they don't prevent the army from benefiting from the rules even though they're not part of the dynasty itself.
As with many of my issues with renoun armies is they usually require an army you dont typically have.
I'd love to. I dont have any ophidians, only 6 skorpekhs, and 20 flayed ones lol
EviscerationPlague wrote: So anyone do anything interesting with the Annihilation Legion? Dual Vanguard detachment or nah?
Nihilakh lets you take units of 6 ObSec Flayed Ones and lets you do actions with Destroyers while shooting, Novokh gets your Flayed Ones where you want them to go and gives you a melee boost Stratagem. Dual Vanguard is pointless since you cannot bring more than 6 Elites units.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So anyone do anything interesting with the Annihilation Legion? Dual Vanguard detachment or nah?
Nihilakh lets you take units of 6 ObSec Flayed Ones and lets you do actions with Destroyers while shooting, Novokh gets your Flayed Ones where you want them to go and gives you a melee boost Stratagem. Dual Vanguard is pointless since you cannot bring more than 6 Elites units.
I was more thinking of it for the fact you'd want 3 units each of the Lokust and Ophydians, but I guess I forgot how expensive all the Destroyer units are LOL I'm confused why you bring up Novokh or Nihilakh though. They lose the Codes but still keep access to Legion keyword? Never looked at these Army Of Renowns before
The Flayed Ones keep their Dynasty Trait and everyone keeps their Dynasty keyword for Stratagem, Relic/WL trait purposes. You could of Szarekhan if you wanted a much more expensive version of Scarabs as MW meatshields.
If you want 3 units of Lokhusts you'd go for a Spearhead since then you could also take 3 Heavy Lokhusts. If you want 3 Ophydians you can take an Outrider if you don't already have both a Spearhead and a Vanguard.
I actually think Destroyers are pretty cheap, filling up the list is pretty easy, but yeah, extra formations is largely unnecessary.
Flayed ones dont get cult of annihilation and annihilation protocols, because they dont have the DESTROYER CULT keyword. Because of that they dont lose their dynastic code. So you can still play the pregame move/obsec dynasty, they will get obsec at 5 models, no need to play 10.
p5freak wrote: Flayed ones dont get cult of annihilation and annihilation protocols, because they dont have the DESTROYER CULT keyword. Because of that they dont lose their dynastic code. So you can still play the pregame move/obsec dynasty, they will get obsec at 5 models, no need to play 10.
You could get double ObSec right? Why wouldn't you use Deep Strike and Novokh though? Is it because the Flayed Ones need to do actions turn 1?
p5freak wrote: Flayed ones dont get cult of annihilation and annihilation protocols, because they dont have the DESTROYER CULT keyword. Because of that they dont lose their dynastic code. So you can still play the pregame move/obsec dynasty, they will get obsec at 5 models, no need to play 10.
You could get double ObSec right? Why wouldn't you use Deep Strike and Novokh though? Is it because the Flayed Ones need to do actions turn 1?
Yes, you could get double obsec, if you play 10 flayed ones they would count as 20. I have forgotten that the rest of the army doesnt get pregame move/obsec, it would be better to go with any of the original dynasties, to get access to their stuff.
Catacomb Command Barge
lord
Orikan the Diviner
Immortals
Necron Warriors
C'tan Shard of the NIghtbringer
Canoptek Scarab Swarms
Canoptek Wraiths
Lokhust Destroyers
Where should I deploy them left to right or forward to backwards? A friend told me to have Canoptek Scarab Swarms in front of Necron Warriors to tie up attacks then fall back to have the Necron Warriors shoot.
Catacomb Command Barge
lord
Orikan the Diviner
Immortals
Necron Warriors
C'tan Shard of the NIghtbringer
Canoptek Scarab Swarms
Canoptek Wraiths
Lokhust Destroyers
Where should I deploy them left to right or forward to backwards? A friend told me to have Canoptek Scarab Swarms in front of Necron Warriors to tie up attacks then fall back to have the Necron Warriors shoot.
Army list would be nice.
Then we would know how many units per type.
Put your units in places where they can take objectives or stop your opponent from taking an objective.
Hide your fragile units first. If you can keep your Nightbringer safe for a turn or two by hiding him and use him to apply pressure by keeping him out of LOS behind terrain in a forward position you might be able to keep him alive the entire game. Keep things out of LOS or in cover when possible.
Don't split up more than necessary, that's a recipe for half your units not participating when they are most needed and your buffs not landing on something important. Units that are in the center can better respond to the flanks, while a unit on one flank has a very hard time responding to the other flank. Veil of Darkness and faster units being on the flank enables them to be more responsive than a simple unit of Warriors.
You can also look at battle reports to see how people use different units.
So...is the Phylacterine Hive and Severed Dynastic Code just flat out useless?
Phylacterine Hive allows Crypteks to use Rites of Reanimation on a Destroyer Cult or Canoptek as if they were core.
Thing is, those units are already core.
Severed allows you to use Command Protocols at 9" as opposed to 6".
However, since the balance update Command Protocols are now battlefield wide.
Am I missing something, or did GW just done goofed?
Severed and Vassal Kingdom is useless, there's a rumour that Eternal Conquerors will become equally useless. I think Severed would have been more appropriate as the ObSec option thematically. Eternal Conquerors is thematically the exact same as Interplanetary Invaders, that's shoddy writing. Here's how I'd have done it: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/800276.page#11196393
Phylacterine Hive lets a Technomancer heal a Scarab Swarm base once per game. So practically useless.
Was giving Wraiths, Destroyers and Spyders CORE a mistake post release? Yeah, but Necrons ended up being pretty balanced both internally and externally so I wouldn't call it a massive blunder even if Phylacterine Hive became practically useless. Would it have been better if they gave Phylacterine Hive a new use? Not really, Cryptek Arcana and the other faction equivalents adds too much bloat to the game. They should be turned into Relics or added as normal options to individual Crypteks as appropriate. I don't know why the Harbinger wargear was unique in the first place in 5th edition.
The Annihilation Legion is also useless bloat because they decided to remove the Noble keyword post-release. Is it better design to not have the Codex be buried in needless restrictions like CORE and NOBLE? Yeah, but it should have been done early while writing the codex, not after the release.
What Armies of Renown is there a reason to make for the current codex? One for spamming Ghost Arks since having more than two is pretty pointless and I'm sure there are a hundred or so people with 4+ Ghost Arks from 5th when that was briefly meta. Another one for taking Triarch Stalkers and Triarch Praetorians in the same list because they barely synergize currently. These are issues that cannot be fixed with points and that are still problems. Instead the writers created one for Canoptek units and one for Destroyers because of the initial flaws of the NOBLE keyword.
We haven't even discussed the Canoptek one yet, I'm guessing it's as garbage as the other one. A brief glance indicates as much, it's as terribly written as well. Who the heck cares about re-rolling 1s on Reanimation when rolling 3+ dice and you need all of them to be 5s. How about fixing the mechanic for multi-wound models by making them roll one dice each instead? Jeez. You can still get access to Dynasty-specific Strats as well.
So I noticed something funny about the Doomstalker and DDA.
It says it can't use High Power if it didn't stay stationary in the previous movement phase.
Which means that if you take Expansionist, you can hide it behind cover, move it out if you get first turn and nuke something with the high power statline as it the move was at the start of the battleround, not during the movement phase.
Also, Protocol of the Conquering Tyrant and Undying Legions seem to be pretty strong picks for a constant Protocol.
The first gives a constant range boost to Aura range to LW, MWBD and Rites of Reanimation. So reanimators can heal at 9" range as opposed to 6". Which...probably isn't enough to make it good, but it might mean you can hide it better?
The second gives permanent rerolls to RP, which seems decent.
I guess which one to pick as a constant depends on who you're fighting and how many auras and crypteks you have running.
Alright everyone, I need some help with this one. With the new Arks of Omen detachment it seems that even though TSK is a Dynastic Agent, having the "Szarekhan" dynasty keyword means we can't actually use him in any lists that aren't "Szarekhan." Obviously this seems like he's gonna start picking up some dust on the shelf, but I'm wondering if anyone can see a reason why this isn't actually true.
If the consensus is that we are stuck building lists without TSK can we all spam post the GWFB page with this question for clarification so that they hopefully FAQ it ASAP? Seems to me that the intent of the detachment is completely at odds with the intent of that rule for characters of this nature but that's just me.
Thoughts?
edit: I realize this may be somewhat premature so forgive my gloom and doom
All units must be from the same faction, that faction is NECRONS. It's the same restriction all the other Detachments have had. Besides SK with Szarekhan vehicles wasn't terrible, do we know what pts changes Necrons are getting yet?
Silent King is an Agent. Agents ignore the different dynasty problem, and also dont benefit from them. Silent King forces your dynasty-specific strats to be Szar ones. The Agent rule allows him to be in any dynasty without breaking dynasty rules, regardless of the Szar tag. Its always been that way because Necrons are army-wide to break protocols if you do that and part of the reason to bring TSK is protocol shenanigans (whether people use it or not he still has a rule meant for it)
Pretty sure thats the sole reason he has a dynasty tag is because afaik unless you did not include a lord/overlord in your army at ALL none of the other agents could be a warlord, which would throw a weird monkeywrench in which dynasty are your strats from (or relics for that matter as both mention "if your warlord is... then you can use..."
vict0988 wrote: All units must be from the same faction, that faction is NECRONS. It's the same restriction all the other Detachments have had. Besides SK with Szarekhan vehicles wasn't terrible, do we know what pts changes Necrons are getting yet?
Weren't they already in the balance update?
Or are they changing the points after they already changed the points?
Parsalian what you say is currently an "issue" but I expect it will get fixed soon. TOs may also decide they don't care, but worth asking about before you show up to the tournament though.
Page 80 of the codex says:
If your army is Battle-forged, you cannot include units from two different dynasties in the same Detachment.
Page 51 of the codex says two things:
Dynastic Codes
All NECRONS units with this ability, and all the models in them, gain a Dynastic Code so long as every unit in that Detachment is from the same dynasty.
Dynastic Agents and Star Gods
DYNASTIC AGENT and C'TAN SHARD units can be included in a NECRONS Detachment without preventing other units in that Detachment from gaining a Dynastic Code.
DYNASTIC AGENT and C'TAN SHARD units never gain a Dynastic Code.
You can include a maximum of one C'TAN SHARD model in each NECRONS Detachment in your army.
Nowhere does it say DYANSTIC AGENTs avoid the Battle-forged purity check, just the Dynastic Code purity check.
For comparison with other codexes:
TSons
If your army is Battle-forged, you cannot include units from two different Great Cults in the same Detachment (AHRIMAN does not belong to any one cult, and so can be included in any THOUSAND SONS Detachment).
Simple enough, Magnus also doesn't have a Cult so we can just say that is an example, but now we try:
Death Guard
If your army is Battle-forged, you cannot include units from two different plague companies in the same Detachment.
Typhus had the following ability on his datasheet:
This model can be included in any Death Guard Detachment without preventing other units in that Detachment from carrying a Plague Company Contagion. This model can only carry a Plague Company Contagion if it is in a Harbingers Detachment.
They FAQ'd it to say:
This model can be included in any Death Guard Detachment, even though you cannot normally include units from two different plague companies in the same Detachment, without preventing other units in that Detachment from carrying a Plague Company Contagion. This model can only carry a Plague Company Contagion if it is in a Harbingers Detachment.
I would say that works, but I could see someone trying to argue against it. However, Typhus is not the best unit in the codex, so no one really cares when DG players take him. Mortarion like Magnus and Ahriman has no Cult/Plague Company so should be ok.
There may be something for Supreme Commanders in the Arks of Omen mission pack that we haven't seen but I don't think so, or they may release a FAQ that says something like "you can take a Supreme Commander detachment but lose one HQ slot from your AoO detachment". Shadowsun and Ghaz would like that FAQ too I'm guessing.
On a differen topic, I would also suggest people not getting too worked up about Phylacterine Hive or Severed. Most of the Arkana and Ancient Dynasties are functionally useless, same as the Warlord Traits and Relics.
vict0988 wrote: All units must be from the same faction, that faction is NECRONS. It's the same restriction all the other Detachments have had. Besides SK with Szarekhan vehicles wasn't terrible, do we know what pts changes Necrons are getting yet?
Weren't they already in the balance update? Or are they changing the points after they already changed the points?
Oh, Warriors dropped 2 points down to 11. Triarch Stalkers dropped 10 down to 110. Deathmarks dropped 2 down to 13. Tomb Blades dropped 2 down to 18. Triarch Praetorians dropped 2 down to 20. Doomsday Arks dropped 15 down to 145. Ghost Arks dropped 15 down to 115. Monoliths dropped 30/50 (free wargear) down to 270. Obelisks dropped 30 down to 270. Tesseract Vaults dropped 40 down to 360. Convergence of Dominion dropped 20 down to 80.
So let me get this straight, 2 days ago Tomb Blades, one of the most popular competitive units since the last MFM are getting as big a buff as Triarch Praetorians a unit which wasn't included in any competitive top 4 lists in 9th?
The loss of AoC also means Flayed Ones who dissappeared due to it may come back. 10 point FOs vs. 11 point Warriors is my current internal debate.
I think you still need to go Nihilakh (instead of Eternal Conquerors) but upon reading the second half of their dynastic code, their warlord trait and their relic I'm not surprised they weren't seen much. The strategem has some potential (assuming you don't go permanent Sudden Storm).
They're cheap, but they are still a close combat unit with poor saves and one wound that take up an elite slot. If you take them go big I guess and play havoc in your opponent's back line. 20 T4 models in the face is still a problem
What are necrons supposed to do against monster spam these days? Are destroyers still the answer?
The problem Flayed Ones have is that they are a cheap chaff close combat unit in an otherwise mostly ranged army -- being sold by GW as an elite style boxed set.
I'm convinced they were originally conceived this update round as an elite close combat unit and then got bumped down to chaff/standard and either no one told production or it was too late.
The result is an expensive elite troop style box for a chaff unit.
Overread wrote: The problem Flayed Ones have is that they are a cheap chaff close combat unit in an otherwise mostly ranged army -- being sold by GW as an elite style boxed set.
I'm convinced they were originally conceived this update round as an elite close combat unit and then got bumped down to chaff/standard and either no one told production or it was too late.
The result is an expensive elite troop style box for a chaff unit.
At least they aren't immortals. They're troop unit that you pay for as if they were elites, because they're a dual kit with deathmarks.
Necrons are already pretty good at clearing chaff anyway; it's monsters and vehicles (ironically) that they have trouble with.
That said, Flayed Ones do have the ability to appear anywhere on the map, and a large blob of models is a sure way to distract your opponent, especially if you manage to get a charge off.
Are heavy destroyers really the only good anti-vehicle / monster option necrons have?
DDA/Doomstalker is too unreliable and better suited against infantry because of blast.
All of the necron close combat options are better suited against infantry due to relatively low damage, number of attacks and little staying power.
I guess the doom scythe is a possibility? Kind of expensive though
considering the Doom weapons are still D6 damage for some reason, yeah the heavy destroyer is still the most reliable.
If they'd change Doom weapons to D3+3 (the Doomscythe is but nothing else weirdly enough) i think Arks or even the Stalkers would be fine at dealing with monsters/vehicles. But nothing hurts more than getting 3-4 wounds through with sheer luck and rolling all 1s and 2s lol.
Biggest thing that comes to mind we can do easier now is Nightscythe dumping Skorpekhs with the stratagem. Nothing changed to disallow the Nightscythe from using it if it comes from reserves, it just couldnt use it turn1. Previously thats a lot of CP to do it because of reserves, now its just 2 and 100% safe from being sniped T1.
Hey guys, been completely out of the 40K scene for close to 6+ months now. Can anyone give me a quick n' dirty run down of how Necrons stand across the meta and some notable changes I should be paying attention to.
Mixzremixzd wrote: Hey guys, been completely out of the 40K scene for close to 6+ months now. Can anyone give me a quick n' dirty run down of how Necrons stand across the meta and some notable changes I should be paying attention to.
Overread wrote: The problem Flayed Ones have is that they are a cheap chaff close combat unit in an otherwise mostly ranged army -- being sold by GW as an elite style boxed set.
I'm convinced they were originally conceived this update round as an elite close combat unit and then got bumped down to chaff/standard and either no one told production or it was too late.
The result is an expensive elite troop style box for a chaff unit.
At least they aren't immortals. They're troop unit that you pay for as if they were elites, because they're a dual kit with deathmarks.
Overread wrote: The problem Flayed Ones have is that they are a cheap chaff close combat unit in an otherwise mostly ranged army -- being sold by GW as an elite style boxed set.
I'm convinced they were originally conceived this update round as an elite close combat unit and then got bumped down to chaff/standard and either no one told production or it was too late.
The result is an expensive elite troop style box for a chaff unit.
At least they aren't immortals. They're troop unit that you pay for as if they were elites, because they're a dual kit with deathmarks.
Didn't Deathmarks get cheaper than Immortals too?
13 points for a Deathmark is just insane, Immortals are 15 points. Deathmarks were 19 a year at the start of 9th. It shows how bad they were and how much powercreep the game has gone through that 30 Deathmarks isn't an auto-include. Terrible $ value for the kit if you want Deathmarks. I don't think you'd be wrong to include Deathmarks in your list now. A unit of 10 Deathmarks is probably okay, their Stratagem is pretty cool.
Did anyone notice that you cannot use the SK in an AoO detachment, unless you play szarekhan ? There are no allies for necrons, so its only one AoO detachment.
If your army is Battle-forged, you cannot include units from two different dynasties in the same Detachment.
Overread wrote: The problem Flayed Ones have is that they are a cheap chaff close combat unit in an otherwise mostly ranged army -- being sold by GW as an elite style boxed set.
I'm convinced they were originally conceived this update round as an elite close combat unit and then got bumped down to chaff/standard and either no one told production or it was too late. The result is an expensive elite troop style box for a chaff unit.
At least they aren't immortals. They're troop unit that you pay for as if they were elites, because they're a dual kit with deathmarks.
Didn't Deathmarks get cheaper than Immortals too?
13 points for a Deathmark is just insane, Immortals are 15 points. Deathmarks were 19 a year at the start of 9th. It shows how bad they were and how much powercreep the game has gone through that 30 Deathmarks isn't an auto-include. Terrible $ value for the kit if you want Deathmarks. I don't think you'd be wrong to include Deathmarks in your list now. A unit of 10 Deathmarks is probably okay, their Stratagem is pretty cool.
Immortals are 16 points, not 15. It is pretty ridiculous how "elite" options are cheaper points wise than the troops. That's not what Elite means. Flayed Ones need to moved to Troops or be some sort of weird no-slot option, Deathmarks need a buff, because right now they are glorified scouts. Which unless I'm mistaken, are troops. And yeah, the kit is way too expensive. If you want immortals, you pay too much. If you want to run deathmarks you need to run a lot of them to farm MW, and you still pay too much.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mixzremixzd wrote: Hey guys, been completely out of the 40K scene for close to 6+ months now. Can anyone give me a quick n' dirty run down of how Necrons stand across the meta and some notable changes I should be paying attention to.
The codex is a mess and there's no point going by the hard version because large parts of it have been changed in the Balance sheets, often at the expense of other rules.
- Command Protocols have been rewritten. You no longer need a noble in range to use them, as they affect the entire table. You just need a character. Which is great, because that range requirement was stupid and necessitated bunching everything up. - It also renders Severed completely useless, because they didn't think to update that trait with the change. Oops.
-A lot of dataslates now have core. Which is great, because Necron synergies run on Cores and the best units weren't core before the change. - It also means that nearly every dataslate in the book is inaccurate, and phylacterine hive is practically useless because the point of it was to allow you to ressurect destroyers. Who are now core now and as such eligible to be revived with Rites of Reanimation. Woops.
- RP is terrible for Multiwound models. You need all successes to bring back one. Which means that signature Necron rule is useless on the best necron units. Woops.
They're not terrible and you can get some mileage out of them. Necron shooting is still pretty deadly and technomancers are an amazing support unit, capable of keeping your most expensive and dangerous units alive. However, the codex itself is absolute gak. If you don't already have it, don't bother getting it and wait for GW to release a new one, hopefully written by someone who doesn't have contempt for Necrons and at least try to make them well designed and functional, so as to not necessitate heavy changes to core faction rules and dataslates in future balance updates.
Gauss weapons should have a special rule considering them literally disassembling enemies atom by atom. What would that rule be except a pathetic little AP reduction?
epaemil wrote: Gauss weapons should have a special rule considering them literally disassembling enemies atom by atom. What would that rule be except a pathetic little AP reduction?
epaemil wrote: Gauss weapons should have a special rule considering them literally disassembling enemies atom by atom. What would that rule be except a pathetic little AP reduction?
In 3rd ed they used to have a chance to instantly kill vehicles.
epaemil wrote: Any tips on how to use the transcendent ctan? Really want to field one, am up against orks, ultras, and guard.
Anti-matter Meteor + Sky of Falling Stars + random personality. Park him in range to use Sky of Falling Stars without getting shot all game and try to pick things off in melee if you can overwhelm your opponent or avoid getting shot. Goonhammer should have a Getting Started Necrons article that explores how best to use the units in the codex.
How breakable is the Void Dragon mini? It looks super fragile, even by GW's standards. I kind of want 1 for my army, but not if it's gonna break often.
Its a lot more durable than it looks, but its still thin plastic so if dropped it will most likely break somewhere.
But at least when handling mine i dont feel like i need to be uber careful with it, like simply handling it alone would break it or something.
What he meant is 3 librarians first shut down 
)
