Really people don't think that a 6 man Reaver squad w/ 2D6 HoW and 4 HoW ST4. Wouldn't blow that up?

Especially with Heat Lances or whatever.

Hollismason wrote:
Really people don't think that a 6 man Reaver squad w/ 2D6 HoW and 4 HoW ST4. Wouldn't blow that up?

Especially with Heat Lances or whatever.

No. They probably won't. Heat lances are only str 6, so they will obviously be taken on the T5 rider. The HoW hits will be put on the vehicle, which is AV13. You need to roll a 6 on the damage table, followed by another 5 or 6. If you charge you will do around 1 hull point of damage.

Reavers might hurt it a little bit but they won't be likely to kill it in any reasonable amount of time.

I would say cc is the only reliable way to bring it down. Grotesques will take it down with poison and potential instant death. You really need an IC with these guys,, as their low LD is an issue. (Is the LD of a character factored in when rolling for MSS? I don't know, as usually it is the character that it is used on.)

HQ's:
Archon - Fail, ineffective shooting and combat. Can try and tank with shadow field, but is ID with 1st failed save.
Succubus: Fail. Can't effectively wound T5, can't get past 3+ invul.
Haemonculus: Fail. Can't get past 2+ armor.
Urien, Ld9 is mindshackle bait, can't get past 2+ armor.
Lelith and Drazhar: T5 2+/3++ to much to take.
Warriors: Lance/Blasters, needs 3+ to hit, 4+ to glance, 3+ invul. 9 shots = 1 glance. Best so far.
Wyches: If you can make it into combat, you might be able to tank the CCB.
Incubi: Fail. Full sized squad does less then 3 wounds. Worse with mind shackles and HoW.
Mandrakes: Fail. too weak.
Wracks: Fail, full squad does 1.25 wounds.
Grotesques: Mindshackle is a problem (ld3!), and only does 1.5 wounds after saves.
Beast Packs: Full 12 Clawed Fiends can kill him on the charge, good luck arriving in good shape.
Reavers: Massed Reavers (12 or more for 4 caltrops) has a chance through massed rending hits.
Hellions: Fail. (at everything)
Razorwing: expensive dark lances.
Scourge: blasters.
Talos: 3+ to hit, 3+ to wound, no save. 5 attacks on the charge, if you can catch him.
Cronos: worse than Talos.
Ravager: not as effective as blasters/lances on other platforms.
Void Bomber: more expensive for what's effectively 3 blasters.
Allies: Wraith Knight, and hope to pass the shackles test.

So what's likely to work:
Lots of Lance/Blaster shots. Like 27 of them.
Talos, if you can catch him, beasts and reavers could be send in to do the final wound, but I wouldn't go against a fresh CCB.

You could try shooting the CCB as it moves forward, tarpit it in the assault phase, and then finish it off with the Talos.

 CrownAxe wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You guys are overcomplicating the situation.

Saturation of Dark Lances should be just fine (and as far as I know about the new Dark Eldar codex, it shouldn't be hard to accomplish). 3++ is good, but it'll fail 1/3 of the time. Just keep firing until he's dead.

Its just not that simple. Lets mathhammer this out.

You want to deal 3 wounds so you need to get by its 3++ save (x3) wound on 2+ (x6/5) and hit on 3+ (x3/2)

That comes out 16.2 lances you need to fire at the CCB. That is a ton and is probably going to but most if not all of your lances in a single turn plus a lot of those lances are in the middle of units that could be doing something else such as in a warrior squad or a raider. Its just not a very efficient way of dealing it.

And then it reanimates.

Reanimation is going to be on a 5+. The chance is in your favor.

The mathhammer shows that the number of Lance shots needed isn't that bad. It takes a few turns with pure lances, but I fail to see the issue.

Grotesques: Mindshackle is a problem (ld3!), and only does 1.5 wounds after saves.

Only 1.5 wounds? What's the problem here? The overlord only has 3 wounds.

If using a coven army or detachment I think these would be especially fine. After turn 2 you will be fearless, so won't be going anywhere. You will tarpit the chariot, and take it out after a few rounds.

Is everyone taking crazy pills?

 Frozocrone wrote:
Talos SMASH!!!!

I kid of course, you need to catch it and it's faster than you.

This could be where a unit of ten Wyches has a place in your army - 50 points holding 240+ at bay? Yes, please.

A tarpit unit of Wyches could work.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You guys are overcomplicating the situation.

Saturation of Dark Lances should be just fine (and as far as I know about the new Dark Eldar codex, it shouldn't be hard to accomplish). 3++ is good, but it'll fail 1/3 of the time. Just keep firing until he's dead.

Its just not that simple. Lets mathhammer this out.

You want to deal 3 wounds so you need to get by its 3++ save (x3) wound on 2+ (x6/5) and hit on 3+ (x3/2)

That comes out 16.2 lances you need to fire at the CCB. That is a ton and is probably going to but most if not all of your lances in a single turn plus a lot of those lances are in the middle of units that could be doing something else such as in a warrior squad or a raider. Its just not a very efficient way of dealing it.

And then it reanimates.

Reanimation is going to be on a 5+. The chance is in your favor.

The mathhammer shows that the number of Lance shots needed isn't that bad. It takes a few turns with pure lances, but I fail to see the issue.

You don't have a few turns with lances. You get 1 then its in your lines killing stuff. You aren't going to have enough lances to kill it in one go.

Throw a big squad of Grotesques at it. Only has quantum shielding on the front. The rest of it is tissue paper.

Chariots are hit on front armor (in melee).

I think 6 reavers with 2 blasters is a good solution.

a Kitted out CCB with res orb, phylactery, phase shifter, warscythe, MSS, and lord is 285pts.

You can get 2 x (6 reavers with 2 blasters and 2 caltrops) for 292

which is 7 pts more...

1 squad of reavers charging alone, would be 2d6 str6 rending hits + 4 str 4 rending hits, then a bunch of attacks at I6 before MSS+lord attacks. As you can put all of the hits on the lord, you are looking at ~ 1-2 rends, 5 non rending wounds from hammer of wrath, and then 1 more wound on average at I6, for a total of 8 saves, statistically there is a good chance even with a 3++ the lord will lose 3 wounds right there, even if it doesn't you now have it locked in combat.

consider that is about half the cost of the kitted out lord on ccb, which is what many people run for CCB lords, and does not include the 2 blaster shots which could very well wound the lord or drop the QS on the CCB, which if were the case you could just pull the HOW hits onto the ccb armor 11, would would see on average ~ 4 hp done, which will kill the unit.

col_impact wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Ram the thing.

Probably the best chance to cause a pen to remove the shell.

And no jinks allowed

But 3++ on CCB blah blah blah moving on

That still requires you to run the Tantalus because nothing in DE can ram the CCB so it will have a huge target on its head (plus need to be running FW)

Not everyone agrees on the 3++
Tough nvm i forgot they changed the raming strength to armor not distance.

Couldnt reavers HoW a pen?

The Space Wolves codex came out and clarified how chariots work a bit better. The phase shifter grants a 3++ to the chariot profile, RAW and RAI. The non-necron community will try to argue this away, but they don't have rules justification for doing so. If people bother playing out the chariot with the 3++ they will find it is only a minor buff (except for the case of D weapons in CC).

RAI?

Comparing the Space Wolf Book to the Necron is like comparing apples to hand grenades.

The Necron book was written for 5th, we are now in 7th. I guarantee they had no intentions for its interaction in 7th when they designed that thing or it's upgrades.

Also whats with creating a false divide in the community? Non-necron community? Get off your High horse, most people play multiple armies. I play 5 armies and I play them all conservatively. ie I don't play with an abusive advantage created from grandfathered rules from 2 editions ago. It's not even like its necessary to make it amazing.

 adamsouza wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
The new DE codex limits the number of lances that can be taken by making them all around more expensive. It's like telling a SM player they have to spam lascannons

An Overlord on a Chariot is the most pimped out character the Necrons and all their advanced technology can muster, and it's still not as good as the Space Wolf Chariot, and you want a "cheap" solution to dealing with it ?

The entire Necron theme is hard to kill.

Space wolves can take it as a LOW and it's unique. Necrons can take as many as they have HQ slots. Massive difference.

This crappy analogy needs to stop.

blaktoof wrote:
I think 6 reavers with 2 blasters is a good solution.

a Kitted out CCB with res orb, phylactery, phase shifter, warscythe, MSS, and lord is 285pts.

You can get 2 x (6 reavers with 2 blasters and 2 caltrops) for 292

which is 7 pts more...

1 squad of reavers charging alone, would be 2d6 str6 rending hits + 4 str 4 rending hits, then a bunch of attacks at I6 before MSS+lord attacks. As you can put all of the hits on the lord, you are looking at ~ 1-2 rends, 5 non rending wounds from hammer of wrath, and then 1 more wound on average at I6, for a total of 8 saves, statistically there is a good chance even with a 3++ the lord will lose 3 wounds right there, even if it doesn't you now have it locked in combat.

With 2+/3++ and T5, If you pass the Ld8 test on 3 dice, you're averaging less then 1.5 wounds. Per squad.
If the MSS takes out a Caltrop guy, you've lost a good chunk of your hitting power.
2 full units, all getting in, and getting shots off on the way will do it. And then have a 50/50 he gets back up.
In a TAC build, firing a few shots and then charging is the best solution.

If the necron player expects DE, he'll have the Gauntlet of Fire, instead of the warscythe. Wall of death will drop one on the way in, and any template is a threat to a DE army.

 Red Corsair wrote:

RAI?

Comparing the Space Wolf Book to the Necron is like comparing apples to hand grenades.

The Necron book was written for 5th, we are now in 7th. I guarantee they had no intentions for its interaction in 7th when they designed that thing or it's upgrades.

Also whats with creating a false divide in the community? Non-necron community? Get off your High horse, most people play multiple armies. I play 5 armies and I play them all conservatively. ie I don't play with an abusive advantage created from grandfathered rules from 2 editions ago. It's not even like its necessary to make it amazing.

Yes, RAI. GW published new chariot rules for 7th edition and a new necron FAQ for 7th edition. We have fresh rules for dealing with necron chariots from them. RAW its very clear that the phase shifter confers to the chariot. Your argument is that they messed up in their fresh rulings and left an unintended interaction in there between phase shifter and the chariot so that its not RAI. This idea gained traction because a lot of stuff about these chariots is unprecedented and a conservative approach seemed warranted. However, with the release of the Space Wolves codex came a lot of clarification and a lot of precedent straight from a GW codex that was written entirely for 7th edition. The Space Wolves chariot has an invul save that is conferred from the Belt of Russ. Moreover, how the codex handles the chariot makes it clear that the USR of the rider and the wargear (e.g. terminator armour's deep strike ability) confer to the chariot unless otherwise blocked.

I used to think that the 3++ on the chariot was some easter egg (unintended buff) of a 5th edition codex in a 7th edition ruleset. But, with the release of the Space Wolves codex and the new information about chariots that can be gleaned from that codex it becomes crystal clear that RAW and RAI the phase shifter confers to the chariot. So my argument is that the 7th edition FAQ is fine as is to play RAW and we should play it that way unless the power level of the chariot is a problem. I have been playing it that way for a while and its not a problem.
So if you haven't already I suggest you read the Space Wolves codex and take careful note of how chariots are intended by GW to be handled. Then we can have a discussion about RAI. If you haven't read up on the SW codex, you haven't done your homework yet. And since you are advocating going directly against RAW you better be up to date on your homework.

your comparison of the SW chariot versus CCB is very flawed.

the Necron chariot has no Invulnerable save, the lord does.

The SW chariot has a invulnerable save, the specifies it extends to the rider and beasts pulling it.

If the necron codex specified the chariot had a save that extended to the rider then it would be a good comparison, currently that is not the case however.

additionally I am not sure what rules you think are the in faq that cover phase shifter extending to the chariot, but there is nothing even remotely close to that discussed in the faq or errata for the necron codex, and there is not a SW faq yet.

blaktoof wrote:
your comparison of the SW chariot versus CCB is very flawed.

the Necron chariot has no Invulnerable save, the lord does.

The SW chariot has a invulnerable save, the specifies it extends to the rider and beasts pulling it.

If the necron codex specified the chariot had a save that extended to the rider then it would be a good comparison, currently that is not the case however.

additionally I am not sure what rules you think are the in faq that cover phase shifter extending to the chariot, but there is nothing even remotely close to that discussed in the faq or errata for the necron codex, and there is not a SW faq yet.

Read the entry for phase shifter in the necron codex. Then read the rules for chariots, especially the first paragraph and how we treat the chariot. RAW, the chariot has 3++ if the rider buys the phase shifter. It's all RAW and has been recognized as such for a long time. The controversy surrounds RAI and not RAW.

I fail to see anything supporting your claim, maybe you should quote some actual rules to support such a claim and put it in YMDC. Your personal recognition of this does not mean it is RAW.

blaktoof wrote:
I fail to see anything supporting your claim, maybe you should quote some actual rules to support such a claim and put it in YMDC. Your personal recognition of this does not mean it is RAW.

There are only 3 chariots in all of 40K, what esle am I supposed to compare the CCB to, other than the other chariots in 40K ?

I don't have a Demon Codex handy, does the Chaos Chariot get a 5++ save for Demonic ?

blaktoof wrote:
I fail to see anything supporting your claim, maybe you should quote some actual rules to support such a claim and put it in YMDC. Your personal recognition of this does not mean it is RAW.

So you're failing to read the Chariot and phase shifter rules? Phase shifter gives the model a 3+ invulnerable. How many models is an Overlord on CCB?

rigeld2 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
I fail to see anything supporting your claim, maybe you should quote some actual rules to support such a claim and put it in YMDC. Your personal recognition of this does not mean it is RAW.

So you're failing to read the Chariot and phase shifter rules? Phase shifter gives the model a 3+ invulnerable. How many models is an Overlord on CCB?

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

 adamsouza wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
I fail to see anything supporting your claim, maybe you should quote some actual rules to support such a claim and put it in YMDC. Your personal recognition of this does not mean it is RAW.

So you're failing to read the Chariot and phase shifter rules? Phase shifter gives the model a 3+ invulnerable. How many models is an Overlord on CCB?

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

What are the exact rules for the 2+ save weave? Does the CCB also get a 2+ armor save?

 Exergy wrote:

What are the exact rules for the 2+ save weave? Does the CCB also get a 2+ armor save?

Sure. But it doesn't do anything. Armour saves have no effect on hits allocated to vehicles.

Says who?

Nowhere is it written that vehicles CANT take armor saves.

And if you say that "not saying it CAN either", I'll point out that it never actually says vehicles can take invuls either.

And I doubt anyone has any interpretation of RAI that armor worn by the rider is supposed to give an armor save to the chariot itself.


As for the daemon chariot, it unquestionably gets the save because the chariot itself is noted to be a daemon.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Says who?

Nowhere is it written that vehicles CANT take armor saves.

Under Armor Saves

"To take an armour save, roll a D6 and compare the result to the Armour Save characteristic of the model that has been allocated the Wound."

Vehicles can't be allocated wounds so they can't take armor saves.

Frankly, if somebody tried to pull off a "CCB armour save", I'd punch them in the face to check its armour save. I highly doubt anyone but a TFG would try to pull off such a thing.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Says who?

Nowhere is it written that vehicles CANT take armor saves.

And if you say that "not saying it CAN either", I'll point out that it never actually says vehicles can take invuls either.

And I doubt anyone has any interpretation of RAI that armor worn by the rider is supposed to give an armor save to the chariot itself.


As for the daemon chariot, it unquestionably gets the save because the chariot itself is noted to be a daemon.

"Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound or, in the case of vehicles, suffers a penetrating or glancing hit – the Armour Piercing value of attacking weapons has no effect on an invulnerable save."

My CCB was killed in a recent fight vs the Dark Eldar. They shaved off a wound with a few str 8 ap 2 shots, then did enough wounds in close combat.
The unit that took him down was a bunch of nagas (?) including a few half snake things. There was also an archon thing with instant death (made my 2+ saves) and another HQ with ap 2 that declined a challenge.

Reavers are probably the best option. A unit of 12 w/caltrops is nearly the same points, and as others have pointed out will put a significant number of wounds on the lord. What hasn't been mentioned yet is Hit and Run, which is stock for them. Even if they don't get the job done on the first charge, there is likely to be enough of them to HnR out and do it over again.

So reavers not only offer one of the best damage outputs against it, but also provide a tar-pitting option as well. Throw in some Farseer support, and they can pretty reliably get the job done in 1/2 turns.

I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Says who?

Nowhere is it written that vehicles CANT take armor saves.

Armor saves require wounds to be allocated. How many wounds do vehicles take again?

And if you say that "not saying it CAN either", I'll point out that it never actually says vehicles can take invuls either.

Except it does. They finally fixed that in 7th edition.

I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Yeah, not seeing a great chance of killing it, even without the invul save.

edit: This also ignores Mindshackles

 adamsouza wrote:

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

 Exergy wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

 Desubot wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

he still has sheildbreakers right. The model has an invuln save, so it loses it.

 Desubot wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

Well, I mean, in about every aspect, screw the Vindicaire.

Hollismason wrote:
I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

I'd tend not to take the blasters on the reavers, as you'll be jinking a lot for that sweet 3+ cover. Reavers just seem like the easy choice here, as you wouldn't even be list building to bring them in. They're pretty freaking phenomenal now and pretty easy standouts in the codex, so I imagine most lists having 1/2 squads base anyway. Worst case scenario, you sac a few reavers to tie him up for 2 turns (likely killing him) while the rest of the army focuses on things it can kill.

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

well only problem with that is wyches cant take haywire grenades en mass anymore so only possibily 1 hit passed a MSS seems kinda weak sauce (unless im missing another weapon)

I believe forgeworld reapers have blast type and much stronger haywire IIRC

Actually...having read the rules for haywire again, I'm not so sure that the vehicle doesn't suffer the effect regardless of where the actual hit is allocated.

...same argument for grav weapons. Maybe this isn't so bad afterall?

 Desubot wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

well only problem with that is wyches cant take haywire grenades en mass anymore so only possibily 1 hit passed a MSS seems kinda weak sauce (unless im missing another weapon)

I believe forgeworld reapers have blast type and much stronger haywire IIRC

No such luck. You could spend the 135 points, but you would have to use the large blast, which will only do 1 haywire hit per turn, if it doesnt scatter off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

haywire grenades work just fine in combat. Unfortuneatly, DE got nerfed and can only take haywire grenades on characters, who will get eaten by MSS, or the warsythe

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

I think for a Reaper's points, I would rather take a Ravager with three Dark Lances

Granted the Reaper has access to Flickerfields though, but to my knowledge it's only one shot

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

Umm, rear armor. That would probably kill it in one go with HoW.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

Umm, rear armor. That would probably kill it in one go with HoW.

Chariots resolve at front armor :/

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

HoW has to hit the chariot

Yeah my question would be since it all happens simultaenously wouldn't the AV 13 go away after the first penetrating hit? Just like Scarabs work? I'm pretty sure that is how it plays out. Like it's all at I10 right? So would it reduce it to 10 after the first?

There is this great quote from the movie Knight's Tale that comes to mind.

When the main villain asks another character how he would defeat the hero, his reply is "With a stick, while he slept"

Hollismason wrote:
I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

You can't split up the hits, it's in the chariot rules.
When in combat, you choose for each model, to either hit the rider, or the chariot. To put the S6 rending hits on the charge, you also have to put the S6 non-rending hits, the S4 hits, and all those S3 attacks on the chariot. If you can pop the quantum before you hit, put it all on the chariot. If you can't I'd put it all on the rider.

 Frozocrone wrote:
I think for a Reaper's points, I would rather take a Ravager with three Dark Lances

Granted the Reaper has access to Flickerfields though, but to my knowledge it's only one shot

They cost about the same, but the Reaper strips more hull points per turn, is more surviable, and has a nifty blast option if you want. It also has a chance to ID T5, 6, 7, even 8.

The ravager is more consistant (lowever variance), is good at reliable ID T4, and is AP2.

col_impact wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

The SW codex has very little to do for the INTENTION of the necron codex, given that they were written two editions apart, and chariot rules changed massively between the two.

And in any case, nothing in the way the SW chariot is written brings any information on if invul saves are transffered from the "rider" to "chariot" and vice versa.
To quote "Stormrider has a 4+ invulnerable save" this is quite unquestionable that its the chariot itself that enjoys the 4++, not logan.
Logan himself has the "belt of russ" that grants him a 4++. ("A Belt of Russ confers a 4+ invulnerable save.")
Now, its quite clear that if the intention was that the effects of items from one are transferred to the other, there is no reason to have the double entry of stormrider's invul on top of "belt of russ" that the rider has.

However, in the necron codex, to quote "A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save"
This brings forth a simple consideration-when this codex was written there was no "dual profile" chariot, but the rider and chariot were separate models so the intention is clear that the wearer alone gains the save, and the chariot itself is definitely not wearing it.

So while yes, RAW (read as written), its quite clear that it does transfer under current rules, RAI (read as intended) its quite clear it is not the original intention, as the rules when it was originally wirtten did not support a transfer, the two were totally separate models.

 BoomWolf wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

The SW codex has very little to do for the INTENTION of the necron codex, given that they were written two editions apart, and chariot rules changed massively between the two.

And in any case, nothing in the way the SW chariot is written brings any information on if invul saves are transffered from the "rider" to "chariot" and vice versa.
To quote "Stormrider has a 4+ invulnerable save" this is quite unquestionable that its the chariot itself that enjoys the 4++, not logan.
Logan himself has the "belt of russ" that grants him a 4++. ("A Belt of Russ confers a 4+ invulnerable save.")
Now, its quite clear that if the intention was that the effects of items from one are transferred to the other, there is no reason to have the double entry of stormrider's invul on top of "belt of russ" that the rider has.

However, in the necron codex, to quote "A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save"
This brings forth a simple consideration-when this codex was written there was no "dual profile" chariot, but the rider and chariot were separate models so the intention is clear that the wearer alone gains the save, and the chariot itself is definitely not wearing it.

So while yes, RAW (read as written), its quite clear that it does transfer under current rules, RAI (read as intended) its quite clear it is not the original intention, as the rules when it was originally wirtten did not support a transfer, the two were totally separate models.

The Necron codex was updated by the Necron FAQ after 7th edition came out. The FAQ provides fresh rules for dealing with the Necon chariot and they certified it for use in 7th. They very much intend for us to use the FAQ as written. Your claim is that they made a mistake and missed an unintended interaction. However, what we find out in the Space Wolves codex is that there is no unintended interaction. The Space wolves codex points out that the deep strike ability of the terminator armor that Logan wears would confer to the chariot so they explicitly block that ability. This is because the ability to deep strike is conferred to the model (which in this case is the chariot model) that wears the terminator armor. The interaction between rider wargear and the chariot model is what the Space Wolves codex elucidates.

Your argument only makes sense in those days prior to the Necron FAQ being updated for 7th. GW took a deliberate and conscientious pass at updating the codex for 7th. The burden of proof is on you to prove that a mistake was made where otherwise everything works perfectly fine by RAW. Do you have any proof beyond mere suspicion that a mistake was made in the updated for 7th FAQ with regards to the rules that clearly grant the phase shifter 3++ to the chariot?

I never argued about the RAW, and you play by the RAW no matter what the RAI says, as long the RAW "works" in game, and in this case it does.
Poorly, clearly unintended interaction, but from a mechanical standpoint it works, even if totally unbalanced.

However, while you point out that the deepstrike is clarified against making so it must transfer, it completely ignore that if so than the belt of russ should also transfer, yet they felt the need to give stormrider its own 4++ regardless.

What it brings us to, is that while rules are generally shared when its a a "model" basis, as the two are technically one model, the dual profile means that things like saves are not generally supposed to cross over, and they only does so in the necron case due to the aged wording.

Pointing out the FAQ does not say anything about it means little, given how many codices had 7th edition FAQs not fix glaring holes (for example, tau trait 1 makes your warlord's precision shots to be impossible to LoS, too bad you dont HAVE precision shots on ICs anymore and only if you take a very specific wargear choice available only to suits.)

 BoomWolf wrote:
I never argued about the RAW, and you play by the RAW no matter what the RAI says, as long the RAW "works" in game, and in this case it does.
Poorly, clearly unintended interaction, but from a mechanical standpoint it works, even if totally unbalanced.

Can you even show that it is unbalanced? I have been playing it with a 3++ for a while and it's balanced to me. Going from a 4+ to a 3++ does not broken make.

However, while you point out that the deepstrike is clarified against making so it must transfer, it completely ignore that if so than the belt of russ should also transfer, yet they felt the need to give stormrider its own 4++ regardless.

The belt of Russ is not optional wargear so it is sufficient to merely say that it has a 4++. In the case of the deep strike a more lengthy explanation is required since something is effectively being taken away.

What it brings us to, is that while rules are generally shared when its a a "model" basis, as the two are technically one model, the dual profile means that things like saves are not generally supposed to cross over, and they only does so in the necron case due to the aged wording.

Pointing out the FAQ does not say anything about it means little, given how many codices had 7th edition FAQs not fix glaring holes (for example, tau trait 1 makes your warlord's precision shots to be impossible to LoS, too bad you dont HAVE precision shots on ICs anymore and only if you take a very specific wargear choice available only to suits.)

Pointing out a FAQ has left an interaction in says a lot. The Space Wolves codex points out minimally that they are fully aware of the interaction and have chosen to leave as is. This is because the interaction works as intended.

Since RAW is clear, works, is unbroken, and is freshly certified by GW, there is no justification to do anything but RAW.

The burden of proof is on you. You need to show a mistake has happened or a broken situation has been created.

So it seems assault is the only reliable way to down the pesky thing. So which unit seems more fit to deal with it? Reavers, grots, or wyche tarpit until talos squad reaches it?

 flaming tadpole wrote:
So it seems assault is the only reliable way to down the pesky thing. So which unit seems more fit to deal with it? Reavers, grots, or wyche tarpit until talos squad reaches it?

I missed this before, but Void Raven Bomber.
It's S8 AP2 blast. Because it's blast, the chariot must take the hit. All you need is 1 pen to drop the shielding, and the chariot is toast.

 HawaiiMatt wrote:

 flaming tadpole wrote:
So it seems assault is the only reliable way to down the pesky thing. So which unit seems more fit to deal with it? Reavers, grots, or wyche tarpit until talos squad reaches it?

I missed this before, but Void Raven Bomber.
It's S8 AP2 blast. Because it's blast, the chariot must take the hit. All you need is 1 pen to drop the shielding, and the chariot is toast.

This means that the Void Mine is a nice solution as well, right? S9 AP2 Lance large blast sounds good.

 SarisKhan wrote:

 HawaiiMatt wrote:

 flaming tadpole wrote:
So it seems assault is the only reliable way to down the pesky thing. So which unit seems more fit to deal with it? Reavers, grots, or wyche tarpit until talos squad reaches it?

I missed this before, but Void Raven Bomber.
It's S8 AP2 blast. Because it's blast, the chariot must take the hit. All you need is 1 pen to drop the shielding, and the chariot is toast.

This means that the Void Mine is a nice solution as well, right? S9 AP2 Lance large blast sounds good.

You've got to move over it to use the mine, which means you can't bring the guns to bear. It's either 1 S9 or 2 S8. I'll go with the 2.

-Matt

How about some Wraithguard with a Webway Portal Archon? DS in the rear arc and force him to put that S10 shooting on his rear AV11 or risk ID on the lord. Scythes might work as well thanks to ID+Autowound/Autopen on a 6.

A counter is pointless when it costs more than what it was meant to counter.

 HawaiiMatt wrote:

 flaming tadpole wrote:
So it seems assault is the only reliable way to down the pesky thing. So which unit seems more fit to deal with it? Reavers, grots, or wyche tarpit until talos squad reaches it?

I missed this before, but Void Raven Bomber.
It's S8 AP2 blast. Because it's blast, the chariot must take the hit. All you need is 1 pen to drop the shielding, and the chariot is toast.

Sweet, now there's a somewhat justifiable reason to take them.

 BoomWolf wrote:
A counter is pointless when it costs more than what it was meant to counter.

After safely landing with pin-point accuracy and waxing the CCB, you've still got a unit of T6 models fearless models with S10 guns.
If you can counter it with no loss, and then still contribute, it's great.

Except they are slow and with very little range.

If you can fit the dudes in a gunboat though...

Honestly I'd just play MSU and ignore the buggers. They are 300+ points each and can only kill one thing at a time. Don't bother assaulting it because you just give it a chance to damage you in your turn as well.