I will abstain from voting until I have more time and actual gameplay data before making an opinion. Besides, the Las Vegas Open is this weekend, and that may tell us a lot.
Tannhauser42 wrote: I will abstain from voting until I have more time and actual gameplay data before making an opinion. Besides, the Las Vegas Open is this weekend, and that may tell us a lot.
How long does it take for thee results to be published?
The question doesn't take into account the different "eras" the previous Necron codex existed in. For example, at first the Necron flying circus was ridicilously powerful, later it wasn't as more and more armies got access to effective anti-air options.
I can't fathom how so many think they are now more powerful than before, when clearly the previous codex had a combination of things that eclipse the new Wraiths easily when combined. Ah well.
They are by all means a good effective army, but I find it's far-fetched to say they are now more powerful than what you could do with the previous codex. And the first five big tournaments will really not say much; new effective things tend to do better when they are still new and people are just learning to play against them ( just like with Imperial Knights, which I reckon had a winrate of somewhere around 70-80% before plummeting as people learned how to play against them. ) Wait until 5-8 big tournaments have taken place, and you might have a general picture of how the new Necrons fare in the competitive scene.
I'm personally guessing they will do well, but they won't start dominating the tournaments.
I wouldn't say they are stronger as in fire power ways. I feel as though they stayed the same in this area, as their fire power was always pretty good. I feel they were buffed in resiliency though. A lot harder to kill. One of the tricks I use to use was ensuring I kill the entire unit to ignore rp, which is gone. So now new tactics are needed.
I can't fathom how so many think they are now more powerful than before, when clearly the previous codex had a combination of things that eclipse the new Wraiths easily when combined. Ah well.
New wraiths were the go to unit, the change eclipsed all the other units. Several other units that you never saw on the table are now viable, and can be impossibly hard to kill. Lichguard with sword and shield in a reclimation legion are one of those unusually durable unit. Throw a lord+res orb in, and you are almost immune to everything but SD for a single phase.
New wraiths are not what is going to be the new necron speartip in tournaments.
Necrons did get overall more powerful, mainly because of the increase to resiliency, but also because in the old codex there was only about 25% of the book that was usable. Now, everything is good, and they have more synergy than they did. Plus, the formations giving out free special rules. That's always a plus.
I voted the same, because I think they're still a strong army, just in a different form. I actually have a 2k point game with my Daemons against some Crons, so we'll see how things shake out
Oldcron dex in 4th, powerful
Oldcron dex in 5th, weak with a few good builds with which it still could be quite the fight to win (as in tooth and nail with the slightest mistake biting you in the ass hard) even when used by talented players (Anyone remember DashofPepper and his Deciever led Wraithwing?)
Wardcron dex in 5th, very solid, not the best in terms of power but could definitely give the top contenders (GK, BA, SW) a run for their money
Wardcron dex in beginning of 6th, all powerful
Wardcron dex once several other codices began catching up with the 6th edition changes, Powerful, in the top tier but definitely not all powerful like they were in the beginning of 6th
Wardcron dex with advent of 7th, similar to previous, except all armies with psykers got a further leg up on Necrons arguably lowering their position on the powerscale (still upper tier though)
Newcron dex in 7th, It looks powerful, but I don't think it'll give them anywhere near the dominance they had in early 6th and throughout 4th edition. (But I am glad that the C'tan are once again a fairly good choice... okay, just the Nightbringer really )
I think they're undoubtedly stronger. Different, but stronger. They got some of the more exploitable aspects of their previous book toned down, but had tons of units get massive buffs and some insanely strong army-wide rules, RP being significantly more powerful overall. They're more flexible, have a greater variety of useable units, and they're just incredibly hard to kill.
I have no real experience against them as of yet, but they seem stronger to me. The new RP is better for multi-wound models than the old rule was. Also, a lot of units got buffed as well!
Their strength depends on the mission. If there are a relatively few objectives, and a blob of 20 warriors and some lychguard can sit on one, it's pretty tough for anyone else to score that, unless and objective secured vehicle piles in. Afterward, the vehicle dies to guass fire and then it's more of the same.
Definitely stronger. I've been playing with and against crons for a long time. They are stronger now than ever before, with the only possible exception being cronair builds in early 6th.
Our necron results since the new codex is 16w-1l-1d across all players combined, and one of them is a newbie that was constantly losing right before the dex came out. Even he is dishing out crushing victories left and right now.
I'll say stronger because of the improvements across the codex. Some singular units were buffed or nerfed, but changing Ressurection Protocols have helped the entire army as a whole. The incredible Wraiths now and the nerfed Transcendent C'Tan are big deals, sure, but the fact that there are now many ways to play the codex while still keeping that resiliency instead of singular builds and the rest suck, that's a strong army.
At the upper end of the competative scene (top table of GT's and such) I think they got a bit weaker as some of their Cheese got removed, but at the competative & casual level, they got much, much stronger, doubly so for casual since they're much more forgiving of mistakes due to their new found resilience.
niv-mizzet wrote: Definitely stronger. I've been playing with and against crons for a long time. They are stronger now than ever before, with the only possible exception being cronair builds in early 6th.
Our necron results since the new codex is 16w-1l-1d across all players combined, and one of them is a newbie that was constantly losing right before the dex came out. Even he is dishing out crushing victories left and right now.
Doesn't this speak volumes? 16-1-1, to me at least, is not a fluke. Especially when some of those wins are by noobs. Does anyone else have win/loss data of more than just 1 or 2 games?
Necron survivability is up, but all of their cool toys are reduced to hoping for 6's on damage rolls. Their anti-air is worse. Their antitank is still good, but it's worse than it was previously. The Tesla nerf hurt thier shooting, but their assault options got better.
I voted same. Harder to kill, but lost all their best ranged attacks.
adamsouza wrote: Necron survivability is up, but all of their cool toys are reduced to hoping for 6's on damage rolls. Their anti-air is worse. Their antitank is still good, but it's worse than it was previously. The Tesla nerf hurt thier shooting, but their assault options got better.
I voted same. Harder to kill, but lost all their best ranged attacks.
niv-mizzet wrote: Definitely stronger. I've been playing with and against crons for a long time. They are stronger now than ever before, with the only possible exception being cronair builds in early 6th.
Our necron results since the new codex is 16w-1l-1d across all players combined, and one of them is a newbie that was constantly losing right before the dex came out. Even he is dishing out crushing victories left and right now.
Doesn't this speak volumes? 16-1-1, to me at least, is not a fluke. Especially when some of those wins are by noobs. Does anyone else have win/loss data of more than just 1 or 2 games?
Not in my book. It's a new book that doesn't fit into the usual meta by being made of iron instead of being focused on dealing a lot of damage and instead doesn't take as much damage overall. It also eschews the standard FOC options for a different kind of build option that only lends more to the flavor as well. All it's showing to me is that the game hasn't adjusted yet to the book that is different to what they're used to facing and due to that the game is adjusting. In time everything will settle and we'll see the meta swing back the other way a bit.
My fairly competitive Space Wolf/Sisters army just got rolled in two back-to-back games, which just ended up feeling like the worst grind ever.
I didn't get rolled per-se, as I only lost by two objective-points, but it felt soooo demoralizing seeing the volume of saves of all kinds Decurion, etc, ends up allowing.
It just FEELS horrible shooting ignores cover melta by the handful, or high strength AP1 or 2, or even using TWC in assault and having shred for days, all be needed to remove just a couple models from a unit.
Army-wide 4+ Res, re-rolling 1s just made for a terribly unfun time, and very long games.
And that isn't even discussing the Wraiths with 3++, 4+ RP, re-rolling 1s, that tied up TWC for an entire game.
Yeah... I'd say they're somewhat stronger... if only as a result of how obscenely durable they are. They weren't going to table me, but they could just lock the game up, and endure their way to victory. :-p
niv-mizzet wrote: Definitely stronger. I've been playing with and against crons for a long time. They are stronger now than ever before, with the only possible exception being cronair builds in early 6th.
Our necron results since the new codex is 16w-1l-1d across all players combined, and one of them is a newbie that was constantly losing right before the dex came out. Even he is dishing out crushing victories left and right now.
Doesn't this speak volumes? 16-1-1, to me at least, is not a fluke. Especially when some of those wins are by noobs. Does anyone else have win/loss data of more than just 1 or 2 games?
Not in my book. It's a new book that doesn't fit into the usual meta by being made of iron instead of being focused on dealing a lot of damage and instead doesn't take as much damage overall. It also eschews the standard FOC options for a different kind of build option that only lends more to the flavor as well. All it's showing to me is that the game hasn't adjusted yet to the book that is different to what they're used to facing and due to that the game is adjusting. In time everything will settle and we'll see the meta swing back the other way a bit.
I sure would like it if that is the case. But isn't it just as likely that the cron players will adjust to their codex just as much as we do? As we learn counters, they will find more synergies. I don't hold out hope that the 16-1-1 results are going to change much as the DuriCron players become more adept at board control with their near-unkillable armies.
JimOnMars wrote: I sure would like it if that is the case. But isn't it just as likely that the cron players will adjust to their codex just as much as we do? As we learn counters, they will find more synergies. I don't hold out hope that the 16-1-1 results are going to change much as the DuriCron players become more adept at board control with their near-unkillable armies.
And what says they all have? Especially new players?
All the book provides upfront is durability, the rest is up to the player to use that the most effectively to win the game (instead of endure it).
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: My fairly competitive Space Wolf/Sisters army just got rolled in two back-to-back games, which just ended up feeling like the worst grind ever.
I didn't get rolled per-se, as I only lost by two objective-points, but it felt soooo demoralizing seeing the volume of saves of all kinds Decurion, etc, ends up allowing.
It just FEELS horrible shooting ignores cover melta by the handful, or high strength AP1 or 2, or even using TWC in assault and having shred for days, all be needed to remove just a couple models from a unit.
Army-wide 4+ Res, re-rolling 1s just made for a terribly unfun time, and very long games.
And that isn't even discussing the Wraiths with 3++, 4+ RP, re-rolling 1s, that tied up TWC for an entire game.
Yeah... I'd say they're somewhat stronger... if only as a result of how obscenely durable they are. They weren't going to table me, but they could just lock the game up, and endure their way to victory. :-p
The Wraiths don't get to re-roll 1's, that ability only applies to the Overlord from the Reclamation Legion Formation and any unit from the Formation within 12" of him.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: My fairly competitive Space Wolf/Sisters army just got rolled in two back-to-back games, which just ended up feeling like the worst grind ever.
I didn't get rolled per-se, as I only lost by two objective-points, but it felt soooo demoralizing seeing the volume of saves of all kinds Decurion, etc, ends up allowing.
It just FEELS horrible shooting ignores cover melta by the handful, or high strength AP1 or 2, or even using TWC in assault and having shred for days, all be needed to remove just a couple models from a unit.
Army-wide 4+ Res, re-rolling 1s just made for a terribly unfun time, and very long games.
And that isn't even discussing the Wraiths with 3++, 4+ RP, re-rolling 1s, that tied up TWC for an entire game.
Yeah... I'd say they're somewhat stronger... if only as a result of how obscenely durable they are. They weren't going to table me, but they could just lock the game up, and endure their way to victory. :-p
The Wraiths don't get to re-roll 1's, that ability only applies to the Overlord from the Reclamation Legion Formation and any unit from the Formation within 12" of him.
Which proves my point about people not getting the rules right being part of the real problem.
JimOnMars wrote: I sure would like it if that is the case. But isn't it just as likely that the cron players will adjust to their codex just as much as we do? As we learn counters, they will find more synergies. I don't hold out hope that the 16-1-1 results are going to change much as the DuriCron players become more adept at board control with their near-unkillable armies.
And what says they all have? Especially new players?
All the book provides upfront is durability, the rest is up to the player to use that the most effectively to win the game (instead of endure it).
That durability cannot be undersold, however. I've seen Newcron players multi-charging with reckless abandon just to tie up units they have no business being able to survive against. I can definitely see how new players will be doing disproportionately well with this Codex and they can essentially assault anything and bind things up even better than a 30-man blob of Ork Boyz, etc...
Seriously... I am almost shocked by the durability of this army. It is going to shake the meta is substantial ways, to be sure, with a problem being that there really is no answer. Their tricks work regardless of what is shot/charged, etc... at them. :-p
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and thanks for the catch, as it does mean my opponent was (i'm sure, unknowingly) cheating just a bit.
That said... the 3++, 4+ RP is an insane save anyway, and on a multi-wound model. How that one got through play-testing, on models that cheap, no less, I will never know.
When I was working on Strange Aeons I prided myself on grinding away at every number/mathematical choice, to ensure balance... I guess GW doesn't even make a first-pass at testing. :-p
This question is kinda black and white.
When the last necron codex was released it was ridiculously op. As time went on it was still a strong competitve codex. However it wasn't as dominant as when it was first released and for like a year and half after. Basically eldar and tau took the mantle. However the new codex is stronger then the old codex but not as broken as it was when the old codex was released. I fully expect necrons to be highly competitve and place high in tournaments this year including LVO. However eldar, tau, tyranids, demons and a few space marine combos are just as powerful. So it's not quite broken yet. I guess I will wait and see if someone devises some broken combo at LVO or adepticon.
JimOnMars wrote: I sure would like it if that is the case. But isn't it just as likely that the cron players will adjust to their codex just as much as we do? As we learn counters, they will find more synergies. I don't hold out hope that the 16-1-1 results are going to change much as the DuriCron players become more adept at board control with their near-unkillable armies.
And what says they all have? Especially new players?
All the book provides upfront is durability, the rest is up to the player to use that the most effectively to win the game (instead of endure it).
That durability cannot be undersold, however. I've seen Newcron players multi-charging with reckless abandon just to tie up units they have no business being able to survive against. I can definitely see how new players will be doing disproportionately well with this Codex and they can essentially assault anything and bind things up even better than a 30-man blob of Ork Boyz, etc...
Seriously... I am almost shocked by the durability of this army. It is going to shake the meta is substantial ways, to be sure, with a problem being that there really is no answer. Their tricks work regardless of what is shot/charged, etc... at them. :-p
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and thanks for the catch, as it does mean my opponent was (i'm sure, unknowingly) cheating just a bit.
That said... the 3++, 4+ RP is an insane save anyway, and on a multi-wound model. How that one got through play-testing, on models that cheap, no less, I will never know.
When I was working on Strange Aeons I prided myself on grinding away at every number/mathematical choice, to ensure balance... I guess GW doesn't even make a first-pass at testing. :-p
It got through because you have a single lynchpin model for the formation and it does start until the Necron player's first turn.
That lynchpin model isn't exactly fragile by any means, ESPECIALLY if it either goes first and activates RP, or hides because it's going second, and is also a hilariously good deal on its own considering its abilities and the fact that it costs an unupgraded techmarine.
I've already seen my triple minimum harvest list (over in 40k lists if you want to see it) run several times, and many people have fallen for the "shoot the spyders" trap. They basically spent their first two turns trying like mad to kill a specific 150 points of the cron army while the rest of it just did what it wanted with impunity. An 1850 army that doesn't take damage for 2 turns is better than a 2k army IMO.
At the end of the day the formation itself is balanced. It's strong, but not unreasonable. And if you're dealing with someone who wants to run 3 of them despite knowing your army can't handle that many (thus negating the whole "both players are supposed to have fun" thing) don't play them. There are plenty of good options in the codex so they don't need to spam that one to have an effective army.
Nothing about a 50pt T6 W3 3+svMC giving a potential 4+ "not a save" stacking save roll to a unit of 40pt T5 W2 3++sv model with a 12" move and Fleet assault move, for zero additional points cost, is balanced. Sorry, but it's really not.
That's not necessarily specific to Necrons, formations in general have this issue.
If someone else had proposed that to you 9 months ago as a house rule, you'd have laughed at them. I know I would have.
EDIT: same principle as the old CSM 3.5 "free" aspiring champion thing for favored number sized units. It was a rules mechanism designed to get you to run certain units in a certain way (which they conveniently sold boxes of exactly the right sized units for), but it wasn't balanced then, isn't any better now.
ClockworkZion wrote: Minimum cost to do that is 350 points (that gets you 3 Scarab bases, 3 Wraiths and 1 Spyder). That's not a cost I consider "unfair".
Seriously, if you're going to bring points into it, bring ALL the points into it, not the base cost of individual models.
350 points minimum? A spyder, 3 wraiths and 3 scarabs should be 230pts before any upgrades, not 350. At 350 you get 6 Wraiths in there.
ClockworkZion wrote: Minimum cost to do that is 350 points (that gets you 3 Scarab bases, 3 Wraiths and 1 Spyder). That's not a cost I consider "unfair".
Seriously, if you're going to bring points into it, bring ALL the points into it, not the base cost of individual models.
Your math is quite off sir. Check again.
And even if you bring the whole formation into the deal, it's not like they're being forced to take tactical terminators or something. Even the scarabs can be quite useful, as I've seen personally. They can tarpit a unit with less than s6 attacks forever, or eat a land raider. With RP on them as well, they're pretty silly good too, just not as ridic as the wraiths or the spyder.
ClockworkZion wrote: Minimum cost to do that is 350 points (that gets you 3 Scarab bases, 3 Wraiths and 1 Spyder). That's not a cost I consider "unfair".
Seriously, if you're going to bring points into it, bring ALL the points into it, not the base cost of individual models.
350 points minimum? A spyder, 3 wraiths and 3 scarabs should be 230pts before any upgrades, not 350. At 350 you get 6 Wraiths in there.
You're right, I mispunched something in when adding it up.
Regardless that's still not an unfair points cost in my book and all I'm hearing at this point, in my increasingly frustrated opinion, is more hot air and whinging than the entirety of Congress.
ClockworkZion wrote: Minimum cost to do that is 350 points (that gets you 3 Scarab bases, 3 Wraiths and 1 Spyder). That's not a cost I consider "unfair".
Seriously, if you're going to bring points into it, bring ALL the points into it, not the base cost of individual models.
Your math is quite off sir. Check again.
And even if you bring the whole formation into the deal, it's not like they're being forced to take tactical terminators or something. Even the scarabs can be quite useful, as I've seen personally. They can tarpit a unit with less than s6 attacks forever, or eat a land raider. With RP on them as well, they're pretty silly good too, just not as ridic as the wraiths or the spyder.
You're right, the math was off, but it doesn't change my point. It's not a cheap addition to an army to start with and the current Scarabs are nowhere as good as they used to be, and more expensive.
A single Harvest is not unbalanced, unfair or "OP". It only gets unreasonable when people play them wrong (re-rolling 1s when they aren't supposed to) or take more than 1 (unless you are up for a challenge or you both are doing something, like playing in a tournament with prizes on the line).
Seriously, the horse is dead, pick a new horse to beat on already because you've already driven this argument into the ground, lit it's remains on fire and danced on it's ashes.
My comments are backed up by game results. The newbie I wrote a list for is wrecking everyone with triple minimum MSU harvests. They just charge forward, the opponent shoots everything they can at 150 points of spyder, and then they permanently lose the use of 6 units of cron player's choice thanks to scarabs and wraiths. Plus whatever the veil lych squad decides to murder, and plus what the destroyers take out with their "ALL THE REROLLS" formation bonus, and plus what the standing part of the rec legion shoots down.
It's worked that way virtually every game so far. The end of the game is either the other army is tabled or they have a few guys held in combat while the crons are dragging out lawnchairs and martinis over by objectives.
It's bad enough that our group is banning the decurion for pick up games after this little testing phase.
Just played a game against Crons and man, their survivability is through the roof. I feel like they don't kill as much, especially in CC, but god do they just fething stay. They are awful to kill, especially Wraiths.
All of his shooting power comes from 9 Destroyers, 20 Warriors and 3 Tomb Blades? (20 boltguns, 6 AP3 Heavy Bolters with worse range and 3 ignores cover, S6 blasts)
I seriously don't understand how that little firepower (most of which has a range of 24" on platforms with a 6" move) is tabling opponents... And Wraiths/Scarabs seriously shouldn't be annihilating any units worth their salt in combat. Surviving, yes, but that's it.
Maybe try NOT aiming at the Harvests (as you've said, that's a waste) and shoot the other units (the Tomb Blades and then Destroyers)
niv-mizzet wrote: My comments are backed up by game results. The newbie I wrote a list for is wrecking everyone with triple minimum MSU harvests. They just charge forward, the opponent shoots everything they can at 150 points of spyder, and then they permanently lose the use of 6 units of cron player's choice thanks to scarabs and wraiths. Plus whatever the veil lych squad decides to murder, and plus what the destroyers take out with their "ALL THE REROLLS" formation bonus, and plus what the standing part of the rec legion shoots down.
It's worked that way virtually every game so far. The end of the game is either the other army is tabled or they have a few guys held in combat while the crons are dragging out lawnchairs and martinis over by objectives.
It's bad enough that our group is banning the decurion for pick up games after this little testing phase.
Congrats, you spammed a good unit and used that spam list to declare something broken.
ClockworkZion wrote: Minimum cost to do that is 350 points (that gets you 3 Scarab bases, 3 Wraiths and 1 Spyder). That's not a cost I consider "unfair".
Seriously, if you're going to bring points into it, bring ALL the points into it, not the base cost of individual models.
350 points minimum? A spyder, 3 wraiths and 3 scarabs should be 230pts before any upgrades, not 350. At 350 you get 6 Wraiths in there.
You're right, I mispunched something in when adding it up.
Regardless that's still not an unfair points cost in my book and all I'm hearing at this point, in my increasingly frustrated opinion, is more hot air and whinging than the entirety of Congress.
Well, from my point of view, it's difficult to think of much that matches the same killing power, resiliency, and speed for that number of points, particularly once you enlarge the wraith unit to 6 strong.
It's certainly challenging to think of anything of that can deal with the formation, particularly as part of the Decurion, that's of roughly equal points cost.
I've noticed that Flesh Hounds with a Khorne Herald + Grimoire + The First War of Armageddon + Hatred Locus are pretty good at dealing with Wraiths when charging.
That's 347 points for 12 Flesh Hounds and the Juggernaut Herald who has the Grimoire if I recall correctly. Unitwide 2++, Hatred, Furious Charge and 27 Wounds. And ofcourse the cost of the vehicle giving them the Armageddon ( had a Sicaran myself as it's Fast, but hey, it was doing other things too than just buffing. ) On the charge that's 42 attacks with Hatred, with minimum S and WS of 5.
With support from the rest of the army I've now had them mow down the minimum harvest Wraiths twice. When they were gone the Necrons were pretty helpless.
But, there were only 2 of the minimum formations. 3 would probably be worse, but not undoable ( maybe. ) You can ofcourse fail your Grimoire inwhich case you might end up rather dead ( unless you play Daemons and Kairos, inwhich case your chance of success is quite high. )
Now that's all before making them Invisible with Be'lakor ofcourse, I just left him out at first since he bumps the cost " a bit " and just makes the whole thing overkill. But yeah, fire needs to be fought with fire. After that they're dog food and there were hardly any losses. So even if I invested a gakton of points into utterly decimating them it paid off, as the same combo decimated the rest of the Necron army aswell ( and totals to 892 points iirc, so there's space for other stuff and that already includes a large melee unit, a top tier tank, and the most ridicilous singular FMC in the game. )
Super small sample size and next time I will ask him to bring 3 formations, but it has been a complete overkill on the first two games atleast.
Edit: Tried to get the point costs and stats as accurate as possible, no book/scribe with me now.
RunicFIN wrote: I've noticed that Flesh Hounds with a Khorne Herald + Grimoire + The First War of Armageddon + Hatred Locus are pretty good at dealing with Wraiths when charging.
That's 347 points for 12 Flesh Hounds and the Juggernaut Herald who has the Grimoire if I recall correctly. Unitwide 2++, Hatred, Furious Charge and 27 Wounds. And ofcourse the cost of the vehicle giving them the Armageddon ( had a Sicaran myself as it's Fast, but hey, it was doing other things too than just buffing. ) On the charge that's 42 attacks with Hatred, with minimum S and WS of 5.
With support from the rest of the army I've now had them mow down the minimum harvest Wraiths twice. When they were gone the Necrons were pretty helpless.
But, there were only 2 of the minimum formations. 3 would probably be worse, but not undoable ( maybe. ) You can ofcourse fail your Grimoire inwhich case you might end up rather dead ( unless you play Daemons and Kairos, inwhich case your chance of success is quite high. )
Now that's all before making them Invisible with Be'lakor ofcourse, I just left him out at first since he bumps the cost " a bit " and just makes the whole thing overkill. But yeah, fire needs to be fought with fire. After that they're dog food and there were hardly any losses. So even if I invested a gakton of points into utterly decimating them it paid off, as the same combo decimated the rest of the Necron army aswell ( and totals to 892 points iirc, so there's space for other stuff and that already includes a large melee unit, a top tier tank, and the most ridicilous singular FMC in the game. )
Unit wide 3++. Still, that's a pretty large unit to dedicate and unfortunately, the Herald takes up one of the all important HQ slots.
The First War of Armageddon should make it a unitwide 2++ unless I misunderstood said Litany of Hate. I ran CSM with allied Daemons in these two games. And yes, quite a large unit but as I mentioned they didn't just steamroll the wraiths, they steamrolled everything else aswell ( well, mr. Be'la helped a few times. ) It could very well be that next time he will play differently and the whole thing can still fail to bad Grimoire rolls, not saying it's a foolproof strategy. But hey, atleast there is something that seemingly just walks over the Wraiths if all goes well.
Said unit is also a pretty good bubblewrap for a Chaos Typhon with FWOA. But then you can't afford Be'lakor most of the time, and you kind of want Perdus Rift Anomaly anyways.
I used a calculator so this might and probably isn't accurate, but a Wraith smacking an Invisible 2++ Flesh Hound gets 0.019 wounds through?
Even if it is, then your 1 tarpit (that has a 5++ invulnerable save every 3rd turn 'cause you don't have fateweaver) engages 1 of his 3 tarpits. What are his other 2 units of 4+ FNP wraiths doing (because daemons can't kill the spyders effectively early)?
In said games I engaged both 2 tarpits and as mentioned before, supported the Flesh Hounds with the rest of my army ( such as shooting at them before engaging and finishing the few odd ones off with Be'lakor. ) I either got 2 wounds in or killed a Wraith by shooting in the newest game, can't recall what happened with that in the first. I was stuck with the 2 formations for 3 turns, there was no third. After that I was free to pretty much demolish the rest as there was nothing as tough as the Wraiths on the Necron side.
I'd presume the third would be fighting against the rest of my army, isn't that quite obvious.
I kinda have a hunch were this is going and I'm not joining the reality dodging, ever receeding vacuum bubble inwhich every action one does in a match is perfectly countered by the opponent in theory, when in practice such things just never happen. I also said it's not a foolproof strategy, merely mentioned something that can take on the wraiths and come out on top, unless there's like 18 of them.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: My fairly competitive Space Wolf/Sisters army just got rolled in two back-to-back games, which just ended up feeling like the worst grind ever.
I didn't get rolled per-se, as I only lost by two objective-points, but it felt soooo demoralizing seeing the volume of saves of all kinds Decurion, etc, ends up allowing.
It just FEELS horrible shooting ignores cover melta by the handful, or high strength AP1 or 2, or even using TWC in assault and having shred for days, all be needed to remove just a couple models from a unit.
Whilst I agree, this seems a little ironic when many people have exactly the same problem with TWC, in that they can tank a frankly ridiculous amount of firepower (including AP1/2/3 stuff, thanks to SS), and even a couple of them hit like a truck in melee. God help you if there's a Lord attached.
Vaktathi wrote: Nothing about a 50pt T6 W3 3+svMC giving a potential 4+ "not a save" stacking save roll to a unit of 40pt T5 W2 3++sv model with a 12" move and Fleet assault move, for zero additional points cost, is balanced. Sorry, but it's really not.
That's not necessarily specific to Necrons, formations in general have this issue.
If someone else had proposed that to you 9 months ago as a house rule, you'd have laughed at them. I know I would have.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: My fairly competitive Space Wolf/Sisters army just got rolled in two back-to-back games, which just ended up feeling like the worst grind ever.
I didn't get rolled per-se, as I only lost by two objective-points, but it felt soooo demoralizing seeing the volume of saves of all kinds Decurion, etc, ends up allowing.
It just FEELS horrible shooting ignores cover melta by the handful, or high strength AP1 or 2, or even using TWC in assault and having shred for days, all be needed to remove just a couple models from a unit.
Whilst I agree, this seems a little ironic when many people have exactly the same problem with TWC, in that they can tank a frankly ridiculous amount of firepower (including AP1/2/3 stuff, thanks to SS), and even a couple of them hit like a truck in melee. God help you if there's a Lord attached.
Don't forget that TWC have psyker support on top of that.
niv-mizzet wrote: My comments are backed up by game results. The newbie I wrote a list for is wrecking everyone with triple minimum MSU harvests. They just charge forward, the opponent shoots everything they can at 150 points of spyder, and then they permanently lose the use of 6 units of cron player's choice thanks to scarabs and wraiths.
That's how a scarab farm always worked. You just took 6 dedciated assault units, and the opponent spent theit time shooting the Sypders instead, and then wondered how they got tarpitted.
Also, rolling 1's a few rounds in a row happens. Just last night I ran CAD + Decurion + Canoptek Swarm and my fraking Canoptek Swarm's Spyder killed itself in Turn 3, by taking a wound each time he spawned scarabs
Furyou Miko wrote: Can someone please explain to me how Wraiths got better? Same stat line, slightly more expensive, Whip Coils nerfed...
Beasts, +1t, access to a formation that gives them RP, whip coils making them i5 during combat, a price drop on their upgrades. The only real negative is that they went up 5pts.
Furyou Miko wrote: Can someone please explain to me how Wraiths got better? Same stat line, slightly more expensive, Whip Coils nerfed...
Beasts, +1t, access to a formation that gives them RP, whip coils making them i5 during combat, a price drop on their upgrades. The only real negative is that they went up 5pts.
... Whip Coils got significantly worse, but Beasts and +1 Toughness I'll grant you. The formation, yes, but that's not really the Wraiths' fault themselves.
Yes, Whip Coils are worse. Old Coils were always strike first or simultaneous. New coils mean that there are a lot of things that strike before Wraiths.
Furyou Miko wrote: Can someone please explain to me how Wraiths got better? Same stat line, slightly more expensive, Whip Coils nerfed...
They became beasts, which makes them faster.
Whip Coil had an incredibly small nerf for a big point-cost reduction.
Their Toughness went to 5 and they have a Formation to give them RP (and even RP4+)
Yes, Whip Coils are worse. Old Coils were always strike first or simultaneous.
They did get worse, but they also got 70% of their cost knocked off. So, a Wraith squad with Whip Coils costs the same as before, but has T5 and Fleet thrown into the bargain.
Furyou Miko wrote: New coils mean that there are a lot of things that strike before Wraiths.
I can't think of many, to be honest. Maybe some Dark Eldar stuff? And, of those, virtually none have the capacity to inflict any significant damage on the Wraiths (most will need 6s just to wound them).
What I6+ units do you think will be slaughtering Wraiths left, right and centre? I'm honestly intrigued because they're bloody durable at the best of times, and most units with I6 or higher have traded power for speed.
Furyou Miko wrote: The formation, yes, but that's not really the Wraiths' fault themselves.
It's hard to see Whip Coils as being worse, yeah some things can strike first, but it's even less critical now, the Whip Coils are much cheaper, and the affect doesn't only work against enemy models in base to base contact.
Standard for old Whip Coils was 3 to a unit, which let you kill a few members of a unit before they could strike back, and was very handy for slowing down single targets such as monstrous creatures.
New Whip Coils are given to the whole unit as standard, and let them strike before 90% of things, at the same time as a few things and behind... Some Eldar and Daemons, I guess?
I'd say the situations where it's an improvement outweigh the handful of situations where it isn't.
Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Durability is great but it does not win games on its own. A poster upthread mentioned that Necrons will be really strong in casual games, but due to the lack of spammable cheese and real teeth will not dominate on the competitive scene, and I agree with this sentiment.
I actually love the new codex. Now there is mostly good internal balance so I can bring much more of my toys to the battlefield than before. A great thematic army that is very forgiving, but hardly OP.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Durability is great but it does not win games on its own. A poster upthread mentioned that Necrons will be really strong in casual games, but due to the lack of spammable cheese and real teeth will not dominate on the competitive scene, and I agree with this sentiment.
I actually love the new codex. Now there is mostly good internal balance so I can bring much more of my toys to the battlefield than before. A great thematic army that is very forgiving, but hardly OP.
Indeed. The Necron units are some of the best in the game, point by point, but if you look at the LVO top10 armies, almost every army is either 'carried' by FMCs, Knights or Wave Serpents. That said, if an army with 50 Space Marine Scouts or Orks Green Tide can get top10, Necrons certainly should be able to. In this case I'd go as far as saying the best players weren't playing Necrons at the LVO, and if they had, there'd be multiple Necron armies in the top10.
In my opinion the only really noticeable absence in the results is that there's just one Tau army in the top33, and even that is piloted by a guy who always does really well.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Ugh... I knew it was gonna happen. I wanted to think people on here were smarter than this, but I KNEW in my soul it would happen.
That because some guy didn't put together, paint, and practice with a new necron army and then travel to Las Vegas with it mere weeks after the book came out and then go on to win flawlessly round after round against other extremely competitive lists, that there would be people that would take it as gospel proof that they are perfectly fine.
I'm gonna put everything that's wrong with that line of thought here and just come back to quote it when I need to.
First up: do you even know if anyone played 7crons? Are you sure they didn't play wardcrons, since that was allowed? Do you have their lists? Do you know those players to be amazing generals? Do you know what dice rolls went against the odds in their games? Do you know if they got tossed into a bad matchup for their list?
Maybe some cron players came up with good 7cron lists and didn't want to travel across the country, or didn't have that weekend free, or couldn't finish painting/modeling/buying their list in time so they brought something else? Maybe they weren't sure how good the army was and decided to go with a "safer" choice, possibly due to not enough time to both make the army AND practice with it sufficiently. Maybe they went with lists they thought were good, but haven't done enough testing to really optimize them yet?
Also 26th out of several hundred isn't bad, and in Swiss style tournies means he may have been just a win or a draw away from top 8. It means he was at least 4-2 or 4-1-1, or maybe even 4-0-2. Hardly a scrub out. In most mtg Swiss tournies of that size, that's close enough to get prize support. That's not too shabby when you consider the competition up near the top tables. Do you know what opponents the cron players faced? Maybe their losses are against some of the top armies.
With all these variables, and a sample size of ONE tournament as evidence, making any kind of claim one way or the other based on it is ludicrous and wholly unscientific!
I'm not sure why I'm bothering with this post. I'm just going to have another severe case of face palming the next time someone says "hey look they didn't win that one tournament, that shows for a fact that they aren't good!"
I hate seeing 10 mile logical leaps. So yes I mad!
Edit: the win %'s are up, and despite no necrons actually making it to top 8, their overall win % is fantastically good, better than eldar, in fact. So there's that, too. Again, we don't know if those are 7cron lists or wardcrons, among other variables.
Also looked at the two cron records in the high 20 ranks. Looks like they were probably both 4-1-1.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't think there's much point in comparing an army's balance / strength in a game that still has stuff like IK or WS flying around.
Not quite how I'd put it, but yes: In a format where spam is king, you're going to get a really warped view as to whether an army is overpowered or not. Instead, you'll get a view on whether an army contains a number of absurdly overpowered units or not.
Honestly though, the Necron overpowered list is pretty much as follows:
Wraiths,
Tomb Blades,
Ever Living.
Canotek formation? Yes, but that's because it buffs wraiths, not because of the specific buffs.
You hit the nail on the head changemod. Case in point - Nick Nanavti may very well win the LVO because he has found two ridiculous units in the Daemons book (screamers and blight drones) and maximized them with supporting elements that cover for their (few) weaknesses.
As for the NewCrons, I think they have a strong and synergistic codex. Is this better than it was before? Absolutely. May they show up to tournaments and do well in the future because of the very strong units they have? In time, I think they will. That being said, it's hard to complain with all of the diversity at the top of the LVO standings. Even Orks, CSM and DA apparently have a chance! Go figure!
vipoid wrote: What I6+ units do you think will be slaughtering Wraiths left, right and centre? I'm honestly intrigued because they're bloody durable at the best of times, and most units with I6 or higher have traded power for speed.
Not so much units, but lots of big scarey things Avatar of Khaine, Greater Daemons, Daemon Princes(?), Space Marine Personalities, Harlequin HQs, etc...
I'm not bitching about the nerf, but those big scarey close combat monsters that wraiths used to gang up on and attack first, now don't give a crap about whip coils.
To be honest I'm all in favor of the new whip coils because of the points reduction and simpler rules.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Durability is great but it does not win games on its own. A poster upthread mentioned that Necrons will be really strong in casual games, but due to the lack of spammable cheese and real teeth will not dominate on the competitive scene, and I agree with this sentiment.
I actually love the new codex. Now there is mostly good internal balance so I can bring much more of my toys to the battlefield than before. A great thematic army that is very forgiving, but hardly OP.
Proves something I've said many times before nicely. They're durable but you need a strong player behind that to make the most of it.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Ugh... I knew it was gonna happen. I wanted to think people on here were smarter than this, but I KNEW in my soul it would happen.
That because some guy didn't put together, paint, and practice with a new necron army and then travel to Las Vegas with it mere weeks after the book came out and then go on to win flawlessly round after round against other extremely competitive lists, that there would be people that would take it as gospel proof that they are perfectly fine.
I'm gonna put everything that's wrong with that line of thought here and just come back to quote it when I need to.
First up: do you even know if anyone played 7crons? Are you sure they didn't play wardcrons, since that was allowed? Do you have their lists? Do you know those players to be amazing generals? Do you know what dice rolls went against the odds in their games? Do you know if they got tossed into a bad matchup for their list?
Maybe some cron players came up with good 7cron lists and didn't want to travel across the country, or didn't have that weekend free, or couldn't finish painting/modeling/buying their list in time so they brought something else? Maybe they weren't sure how good the army was and decided to go with a "safer" choice, possibly due to not enough time to both make the army AND practice with it sufficiently. Maybe they went with lists they thought were good, but haven't done enough testing to really optimize them yet?
Also 26th out of several hundred isn't bad, and in Swiss style tournies means he may have been just a win or a draw away from top 8. It means he was at least 4-2 or 4-1-1, or maybe even 4-0-2. Hardly a scrub out. In most mtg Swiss tournies of that size, that's close enough to get prize support. That's not too shabby when you consider the competition up near the top tables. Do you know what opponents the cron players faced? Maybe their losses are against some of the top armies.
With all these variables, and a sample size of ONE tournament as evidence, making any kind of claim one way or the other based on it is ludicrous and wholly unscientific!
I'm not sure why I'm bothering with this post. I'm just going to have another severe case of face palming the next time someone says "hey look they didn't win that one tournament, that shows for a fact that they aren't good!"
I hate seeing 10 mile logical leaps. So yes I mad!
Edit: the win %'s are up, and despite no necrons actually making it to top 8, their overall win % is fantastically good, better than eldar, in fact. So there's that, too. Again, we don't know if those are 7cron lists or wardcrons, among other variables.
Also looked at the two cron records in the high 20 ranks. Looks like they were probably both 4-1-1.
I had people telling me the first big tournament like this would prove how "broken" the codex was, so I'd say you should have been making this argument ages ago, not when the tournament results prove you wrong.
And I won't say that there are some valid points there, but since you can't prove them either way we have to wait and see what comes from later tournaments instead.
What about the tournament proves anyone wrong? Did someone actually say crons were going to win? If anything, I'd say the win % is a better factor to look at, given that it's a more broad statistic rather than "did a necron list go 5-1 or 6-0 y/n?"
And that statistic says necrons were doing fantastic on average at this one tournament.
And again we don't know the ratio of lists that were 7crons or 5crons, and the numbers get twisted around by mirror matches, bad matchups, and such.
I have a lot of play evidence to suggest decurion crons are flat out top tier good. I don't see anything about the lvo results disputing that.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Ugh... I knew it was gonna happen. I wanted to think people on here were smarter than this, but I KNEW in my soul it would happen.
That because some guy didn't put together, paint, and practice with a new necron army and then travel to Las Vegas with it mere weeks after the book came out and then go on to win flawlessly round after round against other extremely competitive lists, that there would be people that would take it as gospel proof that they are perfectly fine.
I'm gonna put everything that's wrong with that line of thought here and just come back to quote it when I need to.
First up: do you even know if anyone played 7crons? Are you sure they didn't play wardcrons, since that was allowed? Do you have their lists? Do you know those players to be amazing generals? Do you know what dice rolls went against the odds in their games? Do you know if they got tossed into a bad matchup for their list?
Maybe some cron players came up with good 7cron lists and didn't want to travel across the country, or didn't have that weekend free, or couldn't finish painting/modeling/buying their list in time so they brought something else? Maybe they weren't sure how good the army was and decided to go with a "safer" choice, possibly due to not enough time to both make the army AND practice with it sufficiently. Maybe they went with lists they thought were good, but haven't done enough testing to really optimize them yet?
Also 26th out of several hundred isn't bad, and in Swiss style tournies means he may have been just a win or a draw away from top 8. It means he was at least 4-2 or 4-1-1, or maybe even 4-0-2. Hardly a scrub out. In most mtg Swiss tournies of that size, that's close enough to get prize support. That's not too shabby when you consider the competition up near the top tables. Do you know what opponents the cron players faced? Maybe their losses are against some of the top armies.
With all these variables, and a sample size of ONE tournament as evidence, making any kind of claim one way or the other based on it is ludicrous and wholly unscientific!
I'm not sure why I'm bothering with this post. I'm just going to have another severe case of face palming the next time someone says "hey look they didn't win that one tournament, that shows for a fact that they aren't good!"
I hate seeing 10 mile logical leaps. So yes I mad!
Edit: the win %'s are up, and despite no necrons actually making it to top 8, their overall win % is fantastically good, better than eldar, in fact. So there's that, too. Again, we don't know if those are 7cron lists or wardcrons, among other variables.
Also looked at the two cron records in the high 20 ranks. Looks like they were probably both 4-1-1.
Well said. The short sightedness of some is amazing. You mean a couple of weeks to get a national level army assembled, painted, and game tested isn't enough?
niv-mizzet wrote: What about the tournament proves anyone wrong? Did someone actually say crons were going to win?
Pretty much, suggested by anyone who said Necrons were broken good and had displace Eldar as the most broken.
What is the definition of broken good, other than to suggest that they will win almost all of the time ?
I have a lot of play evidence to suggest decurion crons are flat out top tier good. I don't see anything about the lvo results disputing that.
While I agree that Necrons are awesome, they didn't even place in the top 25 at LVO. Tournaments are "the" proving grounds for what is top tier.
40K is full of "Monkey See, Monkey Do" players who copy, or least get inspiration, from top tier tournament lists. There is no top tier tornament list for Necrons, yet.
Necron players will get better wielding the new options, and no doubt place better in future tournaments, but I still think this speaks that thier newfound durabilty alone doesn't win trounaments.
I personally said they were broken among 7th codices and able to put up a fight against the top tier 6th books. Looking at the results, I'd say I was pretty accurate. Their win % is great, and a bunch of builds from 6th books litter the top ranks above them.
Even so, it's still just one data point, and a very unreliable one at that, given the timing of the codex release.
Even if a 7cron list DID get in top 8, I'd be saying the same thing the other direction. A few guys at a single tournament does not a satisfactory set of data points make.
vipoid wrote: What I6+ units do you think will be slaughtering Wraiths left, right and centre? I'm honestly intrigued because they're bloody durable at the best of times, and most units with I6 or higher have traded power for speed.
Not so much units, but lots of big scarey things Avatar of Khaine, Greater Daemons, Daemon Princes(?), Space Marine Personalities, Harlequin HQs, etc...
I'm not bitching about the nerf, but those big scarey close combat monsters that wraiths used to gang up on and attack first, now don't give a crap about whip coils.
To be honest I'm all in favor of the new whip coils because of the points reduction and simpler rules.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
That's pretty much the definition of big scarey things isn't it ?
I'm not saying it's auto win. My point was that the things that wraiths had the most trouble with, and therefore benefited the most from the old whip coils rules with, are now the same things that ignore the benefits of the new style whip coils.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't think there's much point in comparing an army's balance / strength in a game that still has stuff like IK or WS flying around.
Not quite how I'd put it, but yes: In a format where spam is king, you're going to get a really warped view as to whether an army is overpowered or not. Instead, you'll get a view on whether an army contains a number of absurdly overpowered units or not.
Honestly though, the Necron overpowered list is pretty much as follows:
Wraiths,
Tomb Blades,
Ever Living.
Canotek formation? Yes, but that's because it buffs wraiths, not because of the specific buffs.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
That's pretty much the definition of big scarey things isn't it ?
I'm not saying it's auto win. My point was that the things that wraiths had the most trouble with, and therefore benefited the most from the old whip coils rules with, are now the same things that ignore the benefits of the new style whip coils.
Yes, but my point was I had a BT with 2 Greater Rewards, in this case a Blade of Blood for +1 Attack and 4+ FNP, and he still struggled against them. Even with ID, they have a 3++/5+ RP. Don't get me wrong, if I have to fight them, the first thing going at them is my Soul Grinder (because they can't hurt it now, I believe?) or my BT and my Biomancied DP.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't think there's much point in comparing an army's balance / strength in a game that still has stuff like IK or WS flying around.
Not quite how I'd put it, but yes: In a format where spam is king, you're going to get a really warped view as to whether an army is overpowered or not. Instead, you'll get a view on whether an army contains a number of absurdly overpowered units or not.
Honestly though, the Necron overpowered list is pretty much as follows:
Wraiths,
Tomb Blades,
Ever Living.
Canotek formation? Yes, but that's because it buffs wraiths, not because of the specific buffs.
How are Tomb Blades over powered?
i think the issues are bikes in general (Jink is very powerful, often with mitigated downside through TL'd weaponry or irrelevant on assault bikes, extra Toughness, insane speed), coupled with absurdly cheaply priced no-brainer upgrades that people are never *not* going to take.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
That's pretty much the definition of big scarey things isn't it ?
I'm not saying it's auto win. My point was that the things that wraiths had the most trouble with, and therefore benefited the most from the old whip coils rules with, are now the same things that ignore the benefits of the new style whip coils.
Yes, but my point was I had a BT with 2 Greater Rewards, in this case a Blade of Blood for +1 Attack and 4+ FNP, and he still struggled against them. Even with ID, they have a 3++/5+ RP. Don't get me wrong, if I have to fight them, the first thing going at them is my Soul Grinder (because they can't hurt it now, I believe?) or my BT and my Biomancied DP.
Sigvatr wrote: I don't think there's much point in comparing an army's balance / strength in a game that still has stuff like IK or WS flying around.
Not quite how I'd put it, but yes: In a format where spam is king, you're going to get a really warped view as to whether an army is overpowered or not. Instead, you'll get a view on whether an army contains a number of absurdly overpowered units or not.
Honestly though, the Necron overpowered list is pretty much as follows:
Wraiths,
Tomb Blades,
Ever Living.
Canotek formation? Yes, but that's because it buffs wraiths, not because of the specific buffs.
How are Tomb Blades over powered?
i think the issues are bikes in general (Jink is very powerful, often with mitigated downside through TL'd weaponry or irrelevant on assault bikes, extra Toughness, insane speed), coupled with absurdly cheaply priced no-brainer upgrades that people are never *not* going to take.
T5 dudes that can jink with a 3+ cover save (equipment upgrade) with the new Reanimation Protocols can be a very hard unit to shift. For peanuts they can be given an upgrade to give them the Ignores Cover rule, so they can kill fliers with a quad gun or rip apart light infantry (expecially with the blast weapon they can all take for really cheap, too). And, I think that is the real issue for Tomb Blades: they and all their upgrades are really inexpensive. They were stupidly expensive before to the point of uselessness, now the only real downside to taking lots of Tomb Blades is how much space they take up on the table.
Yeah, they're incredibly hard to put down, very cheap as an overall unit for what they offer, and the upgrade options are so cheap as to not even really be an option, they might as well have just built them and the cost into the base unit because they're never *not* going to be taken.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
That's pretty much the definition of big scarey things isn't it ?
I'm not saying it's auto win. My point was that the things that wraiths had the most trouble with, and therefore benefited the most from the old whip coils rules with, are now the same things that ignore the benefits of the new style whip coils.
Yes, but my point was I had a BT with 2 Greater Rewards, in this case a Blade of Blood for +1 Attack and 4+ FNP, and he still struggled against them. Even with ID, they have a 3++/5+ RP. Don't get me wrong, if I have to fight them, the first thing going at them is my Soul Grinder (because they can't hurt it now, I believe?) or my BT and my Biomancied DP.
I will say that I think a lot of it is because people haven't purchased Tomb Blades, because their obsessed with Wraiths. Seriously, Tomb Blades are crazy good and probably the best Point for Point model in the entire codex.
People will sing a different tune once players start using large units of Tomb Blades.
Hollismason wrote: I will say that I think a lot of it is because people haven't purchased Tomb Blades, because their obsessed with Wraiths. Seriously, Tomb Blades are crazy good and probably the best Point for Point model in the entire codex.
People will sing a different tune once players start using large units of Tomb Blades.
Honestly, I think Warriors are the best point-for-point model in the Codex (I may be biased there as I have 100+ of the 2E metals). Tomb Blades are good, but too many of them are unwieldy due to their physical size.
No one I know who plays Necrons even has any, they were just a terrible terrible unit, their basically suped up Immortals w/ 12" move, T5 and Ignore cover.
It's seriously a good unit and I expect that once people start playing them they'll see how powerful they are.
Honestly, I think Warriors are the best point-for-point model in the Codex (I may be biased there as I have 100+ of the 2E metals). Tomb Blades are good, but too many of them are unwieldy due to their physical size.
Don't you find that the metal Warriors look too bulky for a measly 4+ save though? 'swhy I use mine as Immortals.
vipoid wrote: What I6+ units do you think will be slaughtering Wraiths left, right and centre? I'm honestly intrigued because they're bloody durable at the best of times, and most units with I6 or higher have traded power for speed.
Not so much units, but lots of big scarey things Avatar of Khaine, Greater Daemons, Daemon Princes(?), Space Marine Personalities, Harlequin HQs, etc...
I'm not bitching about the nerf, but those big scarey close combat monsters that wraiths used to gang up on and attack first, now don't give a crap about whip coils.
To be honest I'm all in favor of the new whip coils because of the points reduction and simpler rules.
A lot of those "big scary things" still have to get through T5 2W 3++/4+ RP. It's not a straight up win for the big scary things unless they are buffed/tooled out to hell.
Wraiths should never consider Avatars, Greater Daemons, DPs, or most ICs as "scary". They are designed to slaughter those types of single or low model count units. They hit with the same strength as most MCs, with Rending, and they have a 3++. Thanks to the nerf to Smash, they needn't fear ID, and even if Lysander was laying into them, they still have a 3++ and 5+ RP if in the decurian. A unit of 6 Wraiths w/whip coils (258 points) will absolutely murder any MC that dares stand in their way, and probably the vast majority of HQ units as well. You would be really hard pressed to put together an HQ unit for similar points that could stand up to 6 wraiths.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
elotar wrote: The argument, that no competitive player got time to paint wraiths and scarab farms to compete at LVO is a fun one.
Most competitive players should already have a ton of Wraiths and scarab farms painted.
I do think that it may take some time for Necron players to adjust to the new codex and get the most out of it, but in the meantime, one of the old stand-by builds, Wraith-wing, got made better so really they don't NEED to adjust that much. My usual Necron opponent is having to adjust because he relied on alot of the old codex's "dirty tricks" (ie, MSS, Imotekh's lightning, Snapfire Tesla on ABs, Cryptek shenanigans, all the crap that was nerfed). The new codex is more straightforward and relies less on shenanigans, although the decurian certainly has its share of SMH bonuses.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Durability is great but it does not win games on its own. A poster upthread mentioned that Necrons will be really strong in casual games, but due to the lack of spammable cheese and real teeth will not dominate on the competitive scene, and I agree with this sentiment.
I actually love the new codex. Now there is mostly good internal balance so I can bring much more of my toys to the battlefield than before. A great thematic army that is very forgiving, but hardly OP.
LVO allowed the Eldar Lynx up front. A survivable ranged D-weapon platform is a hard counter to wraithwing type lists. It's presence is likely to have influenced army selection quite a bit.
the_hanged_man wrote: Necrons had all of the cheese removed, and the Las Vegas Open 2015 results show this now that the first two day results are out. The highest ranking Necron player came in at 26th place...no where near the top 8.
Durability is great but it does not win games on its own. A poster upthread mentioned that Necrons will be really strong in casual games, but due to the lack of spammable cheese and real teeth will not dominate on the competitive scene, and I agree with this sentiment.
I actually love the new codex. Now there is mostly good internal balance so I can bring much more of my toys to the battlefield than before. A great thematic army that is very forgiving, but hardly OP.
LVO allowed the Eldar Lynx up front. A survivable ranged D-weapon platform is a hard counter to wraithwing type lists. It's presence is likely to have influenced army selection quite a bit.
They allowed it, I'm curious if their exit polling thinks that was a good idea.
The Lynx is largely in the perfect AV range for Necrons to take down quite quickly, and vs Wraiths will largely rely on rolling 6's to wound to ignore that 3++.
I mean, it's not an ignorable threat, but it's also one of the easiest superheavies to destroy (if it wants to be in a position to do any shooting at least), and is really reliant on good rolls to deal with Wraiths.
Do we have any info on how many Lynx's were present, if any?
Vaktathi wrote: Do we have any info on how many Lynx's were present, if any?
No exact numbers, but the LVO thread made them out to be a common sight.
Not related to the current discussion, but it has been asked before, there was also a mention that that the entire Decurion was considered a single detachment. So it would have been legal to take the Decurion (Reclamation legion + the 1-10 add on detachments) + Allied detachment
With the Decurion I think the army overall is way stronger. MSS, Tesla and Scarab nerfs notwithstanding, the army is vastly more durable now. Even a dedicated assault unit will have a much harder time sweeping them in combat after RP rolls, which was probably the only reliable way to kill a large unit before. Wiping a unit before RP is no longer possible. Rerolling ones on RP is a slight buff that in corner cases makes a big difference. Army wide RP is bonkers. Move through cover is great. Not having to choose to rapid fire or charge and instead doing both? Huge. All the weaknesses they had have been largely alleviated by the changes if you use the Decurion. Spam lists are going to suffer, but on the whole they are much more resilient and didn't lose much in return except stuff that felt very unfair. They do feel slightly less demoralizing in my experience, though- at least they lost the weird movement from RP and once saves and RP is made you're not going to go into target priority seizures like before. Anyone that doesn't see FNP plus, relentless and MTC on a whole army (well, most of) as very very good is kidding themselves. As good as that Barges and Croissants all day nonsense? Probably not. But honestly, I'm shocked anyone could lose at all with that setup. Good riddance.
) It could very well be that next time he will play differently and the whole thing can still fail to bad Grimoire rolls, not saying it's a foolproof strategy. But hey, atleast there is something that seemingly just walks over the Wraiths if all goes well.
Well said. The short sightedness of some is amazing. You mean a couple of weeks to get a national level army assembled, painted, and game tested isn't enough?
