So, taking the heat away from Eldar for a second, I wanted to ask the community something. Is it possible to play a "casual" Decurion list? I'm asking because within the past 3 games, I've run less and less good stuff in each list, and still made a few friends not want to play against Necrons, as even my "casual" lists have been good. Here's an example of how things went.

First game, 2v2, Necrons/Eldar (Wasn't my idea, really...) vs. Skitarii/Blood Angels. They ran some average stuff, the blood angel friend ran Death Company with Astorath and some Assault marines with a Librarian, and the skitarii player used different infantry units and a single Onager (It was 1000 points a player). My Eldar bud used Guardians in a Serpent, Dire Avengers with a Spiritseer, Warp Spyders, Hawks, and Dark Reapers. No formations or anything. Then I used a Decurion. Command barge overlord with a Staff of Light, and some footslog troops, with 10 infiltrating Flayed Ones. They had a few bad rolls, but nothing serious. They smacked into my infantry and stayed there, and my elder counterpart lost a few models here and there. The Flayed ones proceeded to chew through scouts, 2 separate skitarri units, and killed the lone Astorath. Both players hate Necrons now.

The game right after that, my space marine bud wanted to try his first ever game against Newcrons, and wanted to try the Siege Vanguard list from forgeworld. So, he was using Ravenguard tactics, with a ton of outflanking tac squads, Sternguard in a razorback, Vanguard Vets with a Captain with the Teeth of Terra in a Storm Raven, 3 dakkapreds (2 in a squad with Monster Hunter), a Vindicator, and a Whirlwind. I tried to bring a tame list to have a fun game, so, I brought my generic Reclamation Legion (2 ~15 man blobs of warriors, 10 Immortals, 6 Tomb Blades, Lychguard with decked out Overlord on foot), A Judicator Battalion (Mainly cuz I've rarely played it), and the Nightbringer and The Deceiver. He blew up 3 Warriors turn 1 with the Vindicator (8 wounds, 5+ RP saved 5), and blew up the Deceiver with the Preds. Then proceeded to get tabled with little effort. His biggest complaint was he was "getting assaulted off the board by Warriors", which was true, for the most part. Sad thing is, the Praetorians mainly killed Rhinos, and my Overlord killed the Storm Raven and his Captain, otherwise, everything else died to Tomb Blades or basic Infantry. The Deceiver was the only full unit he killed. Thus, he refuses to play against Newcrons.

Then, last night I played a 2v2 with some friends (Dark Eldar/Tau Vs. Necrons/Space Marines), and we all used casual lists. Yes, I made sure my space marine friend was on my side. Wyches in Raiders, Bloodbrides with a Succubus, Kroot, Fire Warriors, Stealth suits, Crisis suits, Shadowsun, ext. My teammate used Assault Termies, Assault Marines, 2 Librarians, Sternguard in a Razorback, some Las Devs, and a ton of Tac Marines. My list had a Reclamation Legion with a full squad of immortals, 6 tomb blades, and a Command Barge. They were accompanied by 10 Flayed Ones, and an Annhilation Nexus (I wanted to bring the "sub-par" units). They had some back luck on their side, and my teammate was rolling pretty hot turn 2. We just called it at turn 5 as they had no objectives, and we were a ton of points in the lead (The Scouring). My Dark elder bud even admitted he shouldn't have run that list, but he really wanted to try and make wyches do something cool (we all know they cant). But, my teammate also admitted he saw that ending coming, because Necrons were involved.

So, I feel as though I can't win. I'll admit to you good folks, that I love the Decurion. Not because of the power-level, but because it makes my robots actually feel like they should. It gives flavor to my army, and I love that. Plus, I love how the army is built using the Decurion (The CAD is boring and prone to min/maxing, which I hate). But, should I just stop using it in casual games? What are your experiences with this, and what do you do to compensate? I love all the units in this book, even Wraiths and Destroyers, but god forbid I ever use those. So, am I in the wrong for even thinking of bringing Decurion? Am I "That guy"? Or is this based on something else, or even partially on my opponent for their lists? I'm at a loss here. These last few games I feel haven't been fun for anyone, even me, in all honesty.

Might be time to unbox the Tyranids for awhile...

some flavors are better then other. one of my most offten played opponents plays GK. Are GK op? no. Does he play unbound 6 NDKS vs IG? no. Sometimes he plays with 3 ndks sometimes he plays with 2 and some centurions or an imperial knight. Nothing OP just a casual list, he sometimes even takes realy sub par stuff like his GM. Just because he sculpted it himself. But I can't deal with his armies no matter what I do. In the case of necron or eldar, their casual lists are so good, that they could play against tournament lists and have a good chance to win.

I'd agree with you that the Decurion does add flavor.

And I think once other codex's get the treatment that necrons and elder have gotten now with the more flavorful army building formats it'll be leveled out. But when playing against 6th ed codex's and even the early 7th ed ones having the extra bonus's really give a leg up. So even when you aren't try-harding its still better then others.

So yeah, a casual Decurion is better than an average IG, SM, Tau...

 Hawkeye888 wrote:
I'd agree with you that the Decurion does add flavor.

And I think once other codex's get the treatment that necrons and elder have gotten now with the more flavorful army building formats it'll be leveled out. But when playing against 6th ed codex's and even the early 7th ed ones having the extra bonus's really give a leg up. So even when you aren't try-harding its still better then others.

So yeah, a casual Decurion is better than an average IG, SM, Tau...

Yeah, I agree

One of the issues of GW play balancing is that they change tracks before they finish a complete set of codices. Until Codex Necron all of the rule books were headed in one direction (weaker, more toned down, crappier troops). Since then, and the Decurion style armies, the general power level has shot up and the force organization has changed dramatically. I suppose Harlequins would be an exception, though I would argue that it's pretty hard to play Harlequins all by themselves anyhow. But Skitarii, Eldar, Necron, and what we've seen of Cult Mechanicus all have a similar power level and structure. The thing is, will they ride it out and give all the other factions the same treatment, or suddenly change their minds halfway through?

Personally, I like Decurion and Warhost. The factions feel much more complete with Core + Command + Auxiliary, as compared to CAD and just random formations in a zillion sources. I like also that some of the Auxiliary (or Core) are also formations in and of themselves. Such structure has wonderful opportunities when looking at the factions with a large number of models, like IG, SM, Tau, Tyranid, Ork and DE. Less so for GK and IK, who just don't have enough models; who knows what will happen to in power level to DA since they seem to never get love in that department, and BA aren't going to get another book for a little while, but at least they have some cool and useful formations. Plus, their models are close enough to vanilla to simply play them as such (unlike GK for example).

For my taste, GW has struck the right balance of formation limitations with flexibility and power level in the Decurion style army. You can choose the army that you want and build it the way you want to, but each subunit is structured (and consumes a certain number of points). With, I suppose, the exception of Wraithknights, but I guess that's just the Eldar equivalent of Imperial Knights. But cheaper, lol.

Such structure has wonderful opportunities when looking at the factions with a large number of models, like IG, SM, Tau, Tyranid, Ork and DE.

That is only true if the units making the formation are good to begin with. Eldar and necron have good units in general. So they get extra buff on top of good stuff. Stuff they would normaly take anyway. On the other hand something like wychs or ogryns is so bad, that even if a formation was there no one would take them anyway.

Also why necron and eldar got the decurion before other factions is beyond me. GW knew they were going to do this for 7th. Unless of course all the books until necron were made with 6th ed in mind, and are 7th ed books only in name.

Makumba wrote:

Also why necron and eldar got the decurion before other factions is beyond me. GW knew they were going to do this for 7th. Unless of course all the books until necron were made with 6th ed in mind, and are 7th ed books only in name.

I don't think they did. I think they write the books as they write the books, and the Decurion idea came some time down the pipe. Call them 7.5 format

The real question is whether all other major factions with full model sets will get a Decurion style force organization. I do agree with what you say though, Decurion style formations are more interesting when half the units for the faction aren't terrible picks in the first place. We shall see, I suppose!

Here's to hoping Space Marines turns out to be a good codex.

At OP, I feel your pain. I have now given everyone in my circle of gaming buddies a good stomping with the Decurion. I took a loss to a Reaver Titan with 4 Imperial Knights, but thats it.

Some of my friends have expressed approval of the new power, since it lets them take off their own kid gloves, and some have said (or I could just tell) that they don't want to play against Decurion anymore. Since I think Decurion makes Necrons play like they actually should, I'm not tossing it in for CAD to play games reminiscent of 6th, which I've already played a million of, but rather am just using my Nids and CSM against players who I can tell were frustrated against the Decurion.

To the OP: I know how you feel; I try to play Eldar without being cheesy, but some individuals simply can't be convinced otherwise.

From the units you brought and the lists you've posted about in the past, I can tell you're not the WAAC type. You brought units that you thought were cool and effective while not being over-the-top to the table, and managed to win.

The only thing really nasty about the Decurion is the Canoptek Harvest formation and Destroyer Cult+Triarch Stalker. Other than that, all of the other lists are perfectly fine and reasonable.

I like the Decurion-style detachment for xenos armies, as it gives them much more structural flavor than the IoM, and is more in line with the lore.

Looking at you opponents' lists, they all seem pretty strong and balanced, apart from the siege formation and the Dark Eldar list with no ranged support. It's most likely a matter of you simply outplaying them on the tabletop.

As for the complaints about being swept by Necron Warriors, that's your opponent's fault. Tac Marines will die in assault to Necron Warriors because the Warriors are considerably more durable. But units like Death Company and Assault Marines should pulverize Necrons in CC if they get the charge. The reason Necron Warriors can put the hurt on in CC is because they are more durable and have more attacks on the charge. It's a matter of dictating the terms of battle; charge your opponent's weak units and kite/shoot the scary CC units.

The reason a lot of people hate the new Necrons and the Decurion in particular is because they don't know how to play against them. None of the units in Necrons are overpowered (except for Wraiths, those could use a points increase). You wouldn't play against Tyranids the same way you would play against Space Marines? It's a matter of people adjusting their tactics and mindset.

Also, try playing more Malestrom. That tends to even everything out before the gods of RNG.

how to play against them? I thought casual means you take what you want. Right now the games looks like eldar and necron can build a casual+ list. Take almost everything they may want and it works great. And if lets say an IG player would want to play a casual list, he will get beaten hard by those eldar or necron list. Add RNG to it and you wonder why people dislike playing against those two armies and blame it on lack of skill of other people? realy?

I really dont understand the hate against the Decurion. People seem to complain about the Army wide bonus to RP, but that's nothing really new. We had a 4+ in the Oldcron Dex, it was available in the Wardcron Dex, and is still available outside of a Decurion. Sure we aren't paying for it in a Decurion, which might be a legit issue. I think the real issue is with the change to RP itself.

As I've been playing my games, I've been keeping track in my head, of how many models in a unit would've died if I had to make my RP rolls at the end of the phase. I've rarely seen enough wounds to potentially wipe out a whole unit until Turn 2 or 3. So the outcome isn't any different from previous editions to me. I should note that I don't run MSU, so I could see some problems there as well.

The big change did come in CC though, as we don't get to count the Casualties before RP, and we get more attacks back offering us a chance to cause more wounds, closing the Gap in LD to avoid being swept. Decurion or not, this is a huge adjustment that our opponents must deal with.

As for 'Casual' Decurions it's entirely possible. Most of the lists I've seen appear to be Rec+Canoptek or Destroyer. You still have a Battle Forged list if you run just the Formations, so that's an option. It gets into the 'Why not just take the bonus if you meet the requirements' argument, and the answer is the reason we're talking about it in the first place.

I've been running Szeras in CADs. I've have some other lists that I haven't played yet, but they're Dual CAD, or CADs with a Royal Court maxing out Crypteks. The Szeras lists have been enough to show that the 4+ RP isn't the issue. For some reason, my opponents lose the Stigma, and play a good game. Some of the guys that have played me repeatedly are seeing that it really has a small impact on the games.

I've been convincing some players to allow me to go Unbound. This is where I still take the Reclamation Legion, backed up by Triarch Stalkers w/o Judicator or wraiths w/o Canoptek. They seem to lose that Stigma when they note that my Flayed Ones and Tomb Blades don't have the bonus to RP once they get away from Szeras, but ignore the fact that the army tactics remain mostly unchanged. The Tomb Blade still score, destroy stuff in Cove, and Move all over the place. Flayed Ones still can't be ignored and generate an enormous number of wounds. Wraiths still are difficult to kill, and Tarpit most things even w/o gaining RP.

Yet, they still have more fun.

Everyone I've played in casual or pick up, I give them the option to play Decurion or non. First time, they usually say play whatever, so I go Decurion. After that I usually hear the usual 'That's OP' that were all seeing. I simply inform them that I will play next time w/o a Decurion, they just have to ask simple as that. When playing a non Decurion game, I make a case for Unbound, since the Reclamation legion is my favorite thing, and Unbound is the only way I can get it in w/o going Decurion. If not, then I play the exact same list, just as a CAD, and it still works.

EDIT: As above, Maelstrom games tend to be a better environment as stated above.

It's all about that 4+RP. When you play friendly games, play your Decurion, but don't roll the 4+RP. House rule it a 5+ or 6+. It really really sucks i know, but unfortunately Necrons are really broken now. With my IG, they are unbeatable IMO, and just plain not fun to play against.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
To the OP: I know how you feel; I try to play Eldar without being cheesy, but some individuals simply can't be convinced otherwise.

From the units you brought and the lists you've posted about in the past, I can tell you're not the WAAC type. You brought units that you thought were cool and effective while not being over-the-top to the table, and managed to win.

The only thing really nasty about the Decurion is the Canoptek Harvest formation and Destroyer Cult+Triarch Stalker. Other than that, all of the other lists are perfectly fine and reasonable.

I like the Decurion-style detachment for xenos armies, as it gives them much more structural flavor than the IoM, and is more in line with the lore.

Looking at you opponents' lists, they all seem pretty strong and balanced, apart from the siege formation and the Dark Eldar list with no ranged support. It's most likely a matter of you simply outplaying them on the tabletop.

As for the complaints about being swept by Necron Warriors, that's your opponent's fault. Tac Marines will die in assault to Necron Warriors because the Warriors are considerably more durable. But units like Death Company and Assault Marines should pulverize Necrons in CC if they get the charge. The reason Necron Warriors can put the hurt on in CC is because they are more durable and have more attacks on the charge. It's a matter of dictating the terms of battle; charge your opponent's weak units and kite/shoot the scary CC units.

The reason a lot of people hate the new Necrons and the Decurion in particular is because they don't know how to play against them. None of the units in Necrons are overpowered (except for Wraiths, those could use a points increase). You wouldn't play against Tyranids the same way you would play against Space Marines? It's a matter of people adjusting their tactics and mindset.

Also, try playing more Malestrom. That tends to even everything out before the gods of RNG.

Well, I did play last night against a new guy at our store, and he's never played against Newcrons yet. So, 1500 points, I brought my generic non-min Rec legion, and a Judicator Battalion, and he was using Ravenguard Tactics. We did, of course, play Maelstrom, the only downside was on top of him not killing anything (His Captain with assault marines did, in fact, get the charge, and got stuck in for 3 whole turns against Warriors) the cards were also against him. I didn't bother fully calculating, but he had a 1 wound Captain and 5 scouts left at the end of the game, and had killed 2 units of mine, and the score was somewhere in the ~17-5 range. Maelstrom is fun, but it can be one-sided, or add to the hurting for the other side just as easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chootum wrote:
It's all about that 4+RP. When you play friendly games, play your Decurion, but don't roll the 4+RP. House rule it a 5+ or 6+. It really really sucks i know, but unfortunately Necrons are really broken now. With my IG, they are unbeatable IMO, and just plain not fun to play against.

My IG friend has done rather well against my crons with his casual lists. First game we tied, then we did a 2v2 and it came to a win for Crons/Blood Angels, but by the skin of our teeth. In both games, Obj Sec was the big issue for Crons, and thats something IG do very well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Akar wrote:

I've been running Szeras in CADs. I've have some other lists that I haven't played yet, but they're Dual CAD, or CADs with a Royal Court maxing out Crypteks. The Szeras lists have been enough to show that the 4+ RP isn't the issue. For some reason, my opponents lose the Stigma, and play a good game. Some of the guys that have played me repeatedly are seeing that it really has a small impact on the games.

I actually respect the fact that this codex has support for the CAD. Obelisk's Sleeping Sentry rule, Orb of Eternity, Crypteks, Szeras, Implacable Conquerer warlord trait, ext. All of these things don't do nearly anything in a Decurion, but are infinitely better in a CAD. I made a footcron list to go against my friends Footdar list, and used Anrakyr, Szeras, Imotekh, and a ton of warriors and Immortals. Marching up the board, they'll essentially have most of the benefits of the Decurion, without the "tax" units. My space marine friend still thinks that's bogus, but, eh, what can you do?

 Akar wrote:
I really dont understand the hate against the Decurion. People seem to complain about the Army wide bonus to RP, but that's nothing really new.

It isn't this at all. The Decurion hate is just the same as CWE hate. Necron were a good, solid faction before, and pretty easy to play. A lot of people lost to them at a higher ratio than they did to other factions, and Decurion is effectively a buff to the faction. What people wanted was for Necron to be nerfed to uselessness, so that the people who used to win games regularly would moan about how useless their faction became -- kind of like Grey Knights.

 Talys wrote:

 Akar wrote:
I really dont understand the hate against the Decurion. People seem to complain about the Army wide bonus to RP, but that's nothing really new.

It isn't this at all. The Decurion hate is just the same as CWE hate. Necron were a good, solid faction before, and pretty easy to play. A lot of people lost to them at a higher ratio than they did to other factions, and Decurion is effectively a buff to the faction. What people wanted was for Necron to be nerfed to uselessness, so that the people who used to win games regularly would moan about how useless their faction became -- kind of like Grey Knights.

As much as I admit buffing an already good faction to be better isn't needed, wishing the opposite on a faction is still just as bad for a game overall. If Necrons were nerfed into nothingness, I'd quit 40k, simply because they're my favorite faction. So, I respect what GW did. Made our bad units good, nerfed the things that people complained about (MSS, Tesla), and changed Reanimation to what people wanted it to become. I remember talking about hopes for what the 7th ed. Codex would bring, and soooo many people said they should simplify RP to be a FNP roll, and non-necron players agreed. Viola, folks. But, now people complain about it even more. There's no winning!

 Talys wrote:

 Akar wrote:
I really dont understand the hate against the Decurion. People seem to complain about the Army wide bonus to RP, but that's nothing really new.

It isn't this at all. The Decurion hate is just the same as CWE hate. Necron were a good, solid faction before, and pretty easy to play. A lot of people lost to them at a higher ratio than they did to other factions, and Decurion is effectively a buff to the faction. What people wanted was for Necron to be nerfed to uselessness, so that the people who used to win games regularly would moan about how useless their faction became -- kind of like Grey Knights.

This is rather disingenuous. People expected a few specific issues to get nerfed. Tesla working absurdly well on snapshots, Nightscythes being priced like old 5E Skimmers, CCB's being absurdly unkillable, and Wraiths being a bit too capable. Nobody was going around wanting Necrons to get turned into a crap army.

What happened was that they fixed a couple things, very gingerly nerfed a couple, unthinkably buffed at least one, and massively overbuffed the army-wide capabilities.

The resulting problem then being that even relatively "mild" Necron builds often simply are too resilient for many armies to effectively combat, particularly armies not built to razor-edge competitive standards.

I would disagree. Yes, the bumped up the baseline performance of a lot of units, but they did not gingerly nerf a few units. They more or less wrecked them. It results in an optimized necron list being perhaps a bit better than it was with the 5ed codex while the weaker lists have become significantly stronger, especially if you are running a decurion. Necron lost a whole lot in the high strength shooting department and gained workable melee units that are not wraiths and CCB:s (which incidentally also took a massive hit, though is still good). They also gained a whole lot of durability due to a 50% army wide increase in reanimation.

Ratflinger wrote:
I would disagree. Yes, the bumped up the baseline performance of a lot of units, but they did not gingerly nerf a few units. They more or less wrecked them. It results in an optimized necron list being perhaps a bit better than it was with the 5ed codex while the weaker lists have become significantly stronger, especially if you are running a decurion. Necron lost a whole lot in the high strength shooting department and gained workable melee units that are not wraiths and CCB:s (which incidentally also took a massive hit, though is still good). They also gained a whole lot of durability due to a 50% army wide increase in reanimation.

What units got "wrecked"?

The only high strength shooting that was affected were Tesla Destructor units unless I'm missing something. Other ranged firepower units, like Doomsday Ark and Heavy Destroyers are significantly more capable.

 Vaktathi wrote:
What units got "wrecked"?

Tranny CTan , and old school Crypteks.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:
I would disagree. Yes, the bumped up the baseline performance of a lot of units, but they did not gingerly nerf a few units. They more or less wrecked them. It results in an optimized necron list being perhaps a bit better than it was with the 5ed codex while the weaker lists have become significantly stronger, especially if you are running a decurion. Necron lost a whole lot in the high strength shooting department and gained workable melee units that are not wraiths and CCB:s (which incidentally also took a massive hit, though is still good). They also gained a whole lot of durability due to a 50% army wide increase in reanimation.

What units got "wrecked"?

The only high strength shooting that was affected were Tesla Destructor units unless I'm missing something. Other ranged firepower units, like Doomsday Ark and Heavy Destroyers are significantly more capable.

Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

I dunno if I'd consider the Tranny C'tan in there, it wasn't strictly part of the older codex, existed only for a little over a year, and was only considered available in "normal" play for a few months.

As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Ratflinger wrote:


Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

Very few of these are "wreckings". Scarabs are still very effective against vehicles (5 or 6 bases will still destroy most vehicles in the game in a single round of combat), Destroyer Lords got access to Invul saves and can still be made to work with Wraiths (congo-lining for a turn or two is relatively easy, seen it done probably three or four times). Most of the rest were largely justifiable changes, particularly the CCB and MSS nerfs.

Ratflinger wrote:
and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save.

Debatably that didn't work that way, but anyway.

 Vaktathi wrote:
As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Right...our Crypteks basically became old school Lords with an Invul buff upgrade. Our Lords became shelf-material. And old school Crypteks are a fond memory.

There's really no reason to run Crypteks in a Decurion at all, unless you want the Invul. But with the Lord plus Overlord tax, plus the Chronometrons, that's a huge, huge points investment for a unit or two with a 5++

I have a list written up that's a CAD with two Invulteks buffing 2 Warrior squads, and no other RP units, just vehicle formations. I will play it someday, but that's a lot of point sink on the Crypteks even wihout the Royal Court taxes.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:
and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save.

Debatably that didn't work that way, but anyway.

Yes, very true. It worked like that RAW, but I think at least the Swedish FAQ ruled against the RAW interpretation. I know I at least did not play it with a 3++ on the barge.

 jasper76 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Right...our Crypteks basically became old school Lords with an Invul buff upgrade. Our Lords became shelf-material. And old school Crypteks are a fond memory.

There's really no reason to run Crypteks in a Decurion at all, unless you want the Invul.

That's probably a fair assesment I'd say, though aside from putting basic Lords in Warrior squads to pile out of Ghost Arks as assault units, I don't think I ever saw basic Lords used in the old book anyway.

 Vaktathi wrote:

There's really no reason to run Crypteks in a Decurion at all, unless you want the Invul. That's probably a fair assesment I'd say, though aside from putting basic Lords in Warrior squads to pile out of Ghost Arks as assault units, I don't think I ever saw basic Lords used in the old book anyway.

I used to run a Lord with my unit of Destrukteks to help them with their EL rolls. I'm still not over losing that unit, because its not like it was OP or anything (and I also spent a good bit of effort converting a unit that is now useless)

 Vaktathi wrote:
That's probably a fair assesment I'd say, though aside from putting basic Lords in Warrior squads to pile out of Ghost Arks as assault units, I don't think I ever saw basic Lords used in the old book anyway.

I used them all the time. Semp Weave, Warscythe, Orb was pretty much the standard loadout on my lists, and every Warrior and Immortal Squad had one. The 2+ was enough to tank wounds for the unit insuring I got to make RP against Heavy Shooting. The Warscythe allowed me to deal with Vehicles and most Challenges, even causing enough wounds to swing combat so I didn't break. The Orbs gave me the 4+ that I've always taken.

In order for me to get that now, I have to run a Royal Court, in a Decurion, and I still don't have access to the 2+ saves. I tried converting my old lists over, and ended up losing some cohesion to my force. I think the biggest injury was the change to courts now actually being ICs, so each one effectively made the units they were attached to worth an additional Kill Point. (Another contested rule, but off topic).

Most of the people I've spoken with actually don't have any problems with any of the units as they currently are. Online, I still see some complaints about Wraiths, but they're complaining about the same things they were before the Dex. The Decurion, is coming across as something that isn't seen as casual. And the OP was asking if there is a way to view it as acceptable in a Casual environment. The answer is yes, but it's the players responsibility.

It just sucks when I travel and people hear Decurion and shut down, but running the same list as a CAD, with the same results somehow changes the opinion of why they lost.

Ratflinger wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:
and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save.

Debatably that didn't work that way, but anyway.

Yes, very true. It worked like that RAW, but I think at least the Swedish FAQ ruled against the RAW interpretation. I know I at least did not play it with a 3++ on the barge.

Same here. That unit was stupid enough without the invuln. >.>


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Akar wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That's probably a fair assesment I'd say, though aside from putting basic Lords in Warrior squads to pile out of Ghost Arks as assault units, I don't think I ever saw basic Lords used in the old book anyway.

I used them all the time. Semp Weave, Warscythe, Orb was pretty much the standard loadout on my lists, and every Warrior and Immortal Squad had one. The 2+ was enough to tank wounds for the unit insuring I got to make RP against Heavy Shooting. The Warscythe allowed me to deal with Vehicles and most Challenges, even causing enough wounds to swing combat so I didn't break. The Orbs gave me the 4+ that I've always taken.

In order for me to get that now, I have to run a Royal Court, in a Decurion, and I still don't have access to the 2+ saves. I tried converting my old lists over, and ended up losing some cohesion to my force. I think the biggest injury was the change to courts now actually being ICs, so each one effectively made the units they were attached to worth an additional Kill Point. (Another contested rule, but off topic).

Yeah, I personally enjoy running Lords, now that Voidblades are free. And even then, if I don't want that, here's some extra AP3 shooting. Plus, Crypteks in my Decuron has helped immensely against Instant Death (Manticores, Grotesques, ext).

 Vaktathi wrote:
I dunno if I'd consider the Tranny C'tan in there, it wasn't strictly part of the older codex, existed only for a little over a year, and was only considered available in "normal" play for a few months.

As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Ratflinger wrote:


Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

Very few of these are "wreckings". Scarabs are still very effective against vehicles (5 or 6 bases will still destroy most vehicles in the game in a single round of combat), Destroyer Lords got access to Invul saves and can still be made to work with Wraiths (congo-lining for a turn or two is relatively easy, seen it done probably three or four times). Most of the rest were largely justifiable changes, particularly the CCB and MSS nerfs.

Sure, 6 scarabs can still kill a vehicle but they will now only really be worth the investment against a land raider. They basically function like melee warriors and have little use beyond being a canoptek harvest tax. Honestly, I think the best use for them is to simply take 3 and scurry about to take unguarded objectives for cheap.

Justified or not the changes to the units are significant and removed a lot of cheesy necron stunts which does have an impact on what the army can do. Necrons do not have much in the way of s7 or s8 shooting anymore, though at least heavy destroyers may see some play. In addition Necrons only have Night Scythes to handle anti air from having 3 units that were good at it. The accumulated nerfs the annihilation barge received were over the top. At least it could have been made into a fast skimmer.

Big scary MC:s now threaten to wipe a squad of robots per turn without MSS as a deterrent. I do not get how you can think of those changes as insignificant. Some may be justified, but pretending like they do not matter seems a bit dishonest.

A casual decurion list is certainly possible.
Some of the biggest strengths of the list are it's synergy. Chances are if you take a decurion, no matter what way you build it, you probably accidentally built a strong list due to the decurion structure.

My reccomendations are C'tan and monoliths for 3 reasons.

1. Point sinks,
200 pts of meh. They will make your effective points level appropriate for the other effidient units.
2. Fluffy as hell.
C'tan are enslaved powerhouses that particularly arrogant or stupid overlords will unleash, considering the number of arrogant lords there are, they should be a pretty normal sight.
Monoliths are basically the necron drop pods, they are the first, second , third and final waves of the necron invasion. Fluffiest thing to see on the table.

And finally 3. Fun as hell.
C'tan blasting is always fun (particularly with the cards).
Monolith schenanigans are pretty fun too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I do love how fluffy the decurion is, regardless of if it sucked, I would field and expect to see it a lot.
They weren't lying, when on the intro page they called it a "fun way to build an army"

I would second the idea of bringing C'tans and Monoliths as point sinks in casual games. I think you can go with Lychguard too. An overlord surrounded by his Lychguard is defiantly a fluffy unit that I consider a bit meh, and can be used to intercept CC threats beelining for you.

Ratflinger wrote:
I would second the idea of bringing C'tans and Monoliths as point sinks in casual games. I think you can go with Lychguard too. An overlord surrounded by his Lychguard is defiantly a fluffy unit that I consider a bit meh, and can be used to intercept CC threats beelining for you.

As long as you do not bring orikan.

I would reccommend trazyn/anrakyr and maybe imotekh for casual games. Imotekh is a bit on the strong side if used well though.

I like running the Szeras anrakyr combo, but it's actually pretty strong

Well, I personally do not consider the Orikanstar thingy all that great. It sort of reminds me of the RC Disco Inferno from the previous codex. Sure, the unit is good, but realistically too costly for what it does. I have not tried it myself so do not want write it off entirely, though.

But yeah, it still probably is better to take something other than Orikanstar if you are aiming for a casual list.

I've tried, and had great success with the lychstar. You are right though, It's very points intensive. I dislike the whole shebang of it.
-10 LG (300)
Orikan 120
zhand 150
Olord/WS/NS 135
Solar tek 80
Obyron 120.

Almost 1k right there.
I like a trimmed version. It stands at home objective , or legs it to the relic.

Orikan
zand
5 LG
Imotekh (optional)
420-610 points. And still doesn't die. If you want it to stand ground it will do it.

It generally excells in the relic mission.

Ratflinger wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I dunno if I'd consider the Tranny C'tan in there, it wasn't strictly part of the older codex, existed only for a little over a year, and was only considered available in "normal" play for a few months.

As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Ratflinger wrote:


Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

Very few of these are "wreckings". Scarabs are still very effective against vehicles (5 or 6 bases will still destroy most vehicles in the game in a single round of combat), Destroyer Lords got access to Invul saves and can still be made to work with Wraiths (congo-lining for a turn or two is relatively easy, seen it done probably three or four times). Most of the rest were largely justifiable changes, particularly the CCB and MSS nerfs.

Sure, 6 scarabs can still kill a vehicle but they will now only really be worth the investment against a land raider. They basically function like melee warriors and have little use beyond being a canoptek harvest tax. Honestly, I think the best use for them is to simply take 3 and scurry about to take unguarded objectives for cheap.

Justified or not the changes to the units are significant and removed a lot of cheesy necron stunts which does have an impact on what the army can do. Necrons do not have much in the way of s7 or s8 shooting anymore, though at least heavy destroyers may see some play. In addition Necrons only have Night Scythes to handle anti air from having 3 units that were good at it. The accumulated nerfs the annihilation barge received were over the top. At least it could have been made into a fast skimmer.

Big scary MC:s now threaten to wipe a squad of robots per turn without MSS as a deterrent. I do not get how you can think of those changes as insignificant. Some may be justified, but pretending like they do not matter seems a bit dishonest.

I didn't say they were insignificant, I said they weren't "wreckings', turning useable units into unusable units (barring the MSS wargear, but that's not a unit/model, and was probably justified). Significant changes? Sure, I won't argue that. But "wrecked"? That's harder to swallow.

Hey, if you want a really quick fix for the Decurion that keeps much of the flavor and gives you a reason to take Crypteks, just swap the "+1 to Reamination Protocol Rolls" from Decurion with the "Reroll 1s for Reanimation Protocols" for the Reclamation Legion. It'll go along way towards balance, gives utility to units and wargear upgrades, and still feels the same, you know without the overpower dominance that a flat +33%+ resilience gave. It's the major fix from my Necron Balance Errata from over in the Proposed rules section, and I doubt you'll find opponents who will be opposed to you making a flavorful and simple switch to Decurion.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I dunno if I'd consider the Tranny C'tan in there, it wasn't strictly part of the older codex, existed only for a little over a year, and was only considered available in "normal" play for a few months.

As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Ratflinger wrote:


Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

Very few of these are "wreckings". Scarabs are still very effective against vehicles (5 or 6 bases will still destroy most vehicles in the game in a single round of combat), Destroyer Lords got access to Invul saves and can still be made to work with Wraiths (congo-lining for a turn or two is relatively easy, seen it done probably three or four times). Most of the rest were largely justifiable changes, particularly the CCB and MSS nerfs.

Sure, 6 scarabs can still kill a vehicle but they will now only really be worth the investment against a land raider. They basically function like melee warriors and have little use beyond being a canoptek harvest tax. Honestly, I think the best use for them is to simply take 3 and scurry about to take unguarded objectives for cheap.

Justified or not the changes to the units are significant and removed a lot of cheesy necron stunts which does have an impact on what the army can do. Necrons do not have much in the way of s7 or s8 shooting anymore, though at least heavy destroyers may see some play. In addition Necrons only have Night Scythes to handle anti air from having 3 units that were good at it. The accumulated nerfs the annihilation barge received were over the top. At least it could have been made into a fast skimmer.

Big scary MC:s now threaten to wipe a squad of robots per turn without MSS as a deterrent. I do not get how you can think of those changes as insignificant. Some may be justified, but pretending like they do not matter seems a bit dishonest.

I didn't say they were insignificant, I said they weren't "wreckings', turning useable units into unusable units (barring the MSS wargear, but that's not a unit/model, and was probably justified). Significant changes? Sure, I won't argue that. But "wrecked"? That's harder to swallow.

Well, Crypteks, Annihilation Barges and arguably Scarabs did get wrecked. The latter became more expensive, less killy and less durable. And sure, one does perhaps not take into account that one of the strongest Lords of War models in the game got turned into a subpar HS choice since it was not previously in the codex, but the game sure is moving in the direction of bigger scarier things while Necrons lost theirs.

Depends on how you define something getting wrecked I guess. But I would argue that previously good units that one now has little use to bring or got removed entirely is more accurately wrecked rather than gingerly nerfed.

I am not crying about the poor and hopeless position of the necrons here, mind you. Just saying that more than one powerhouse unit actually did take significant nerfs.

harkequin wrote:
A casual decurion list is certainly possible.
Some of the biggest strengths of the list are it's synergy. Chances are if you take a decurion, no matter what way you build it, you probably accidentally built a strong list due to the decurion structure.

My reccomendations are C'tan and monoliths for 3 reasons.

1. Point sinks,
200 pts of meh. They will make your effective points level appropriate for the other effidient units.
2. Fluffy as hell.
C'tan are enslaved powerhouses that particularly arrogant or stupid overlords will unleash, considering the number of arrogant lords there are, they should be a pretty normal sight.
Monoliths are basically the necron drop pods, they are the first, second , third and final waves of the necron invasion. Fluffiest thing to see on the table.

And finally 3. Fun as hell.
C'tan blasting is always fun (particularly with the cards).
Monolith schenanigans are pretty fun too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I do love how fluffy the decurion is, regardless of if it sucked, I would field and expect to see it a lot.
They weren't lying, when on the intro page they called it a "fun way to build an army"

I love Monoliths, and the Ctans, and have used both quite a few times. Every game with both Ctan shards I've won by a landslide, and the first few games with the codex I used a Monolith, and it destroyed a ton of stuff on it's own. They're both underrated units IMO (Though I'll admit they're not super competitive).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

harkequin wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:
I would second the idea of bringing C'tans and Monoliths as point sinks in casual games. I think you can go with Lychguard too. An overlord surrounded by his Lychguard is defiantly a fluffy unit that I consider a bit meh, and can be used to intercept CC threats beelining for you.

As long as you do not bring orikan.

I would reccommend trazyn/anrakyr and maybe imotekh for casual games. Imotekh is a bit on the strong side if used well though.

I like running the Szeras anrakyr combo, but it's actually pretty strong

I love running Anrakyr with Szeras, not only because of their buffs and such, but because fluff-wise they've worked together before, so it feels right. Also, Anrakyr got a bit better in this codex, so thats always a plus. Imotekh I also use quite a bit, and he's done really well. Gotta love having some AP2 shooting.

Just had my first game against the decurion yesterday and all my fears I read about it were true. As soon as my friend said he was running it I wanted to quit and it didn't help that he wouldn't let me change my list since it wasn't very well optimized because I was trying a few new units.

I landed a direct hit with a battle cannon hit on 10 immortals and killed only 2. Got 5 powerfist hit on scarabs and killed only 1. Whats a person supposed to do when their strongest weapons bounce off of basic infantry. The easiest thing for me to kill were 13 armor 4hp skimmer ghost arks which is ridiculous. I gave up after turn 4 since all I had left were two halves of csm squads and a helltalon bomber that had to fly off the table.

In my opinion I don't think decurion lists can be made to be casual due to the fact most armies do not have the damage output to deal with it.

I was happy when most of the unused necron units got buffed and became usable so I didn't have to fight the same boring necrons all the time. It seems GW went a little too far with buffs but I can accept that since most games have some balancing issues. My problem is with the formations which puts them way over the top. It's not just necrons either. Five hive tyrants in one army, imperial knight formations, the new eldar ones etc.

Right now I am trying to convince my friends that we should just ban all formations. At least until every codex get there own.

 Kiggler wrote:

Right now I am trying to convince my friends that we should just ban all formations. At least until every codex get there own.

Eh, I feel like that wouldn't quite be fair. That's like going back to 6th and banning all relics because not all the books had them. Besides, it's not really the formations that make Necrons stupid, it's the Decurion bonus on top of that.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, as most people do. But from what it sounds like, you had some bad luck, or he rolled really well. I got hit with a Demolisher Cannon and saved 5 out of 8 ID wounds from RP alone. That was just good rolling. Killing 2 Immortals sounds like he either had cover, or made way too many 5+'s.

 krodarklorr wrote:

harkequin wrote:
A casual decurion list is certainly possible.
Some of the biggest strengths of the list are it's synergy. Chances are if you take a decurion, no matter what way you build it, you probably accidentally built a strong list due to the decurion structure.

My reccomendations are C'tan and monoliths for 3 reasons.

1. Point sinks,
200 pts of meh. They will make your effective points level appropriate for the other effidient units.
2. Fluffy as hell.
C'tan are enslaved powerhouses that particularly arrogant or stupid overlords will unleash, considering the number of arrogant lords there are, they should be a pretty normal sight.
Monoliths are basically the necron drop pods, they are the first, second , third and final waves of the necron invasion. Fluffiest thing to see on the table.

And finally 3. Fun as hell.
C'tan blasting is always fun (particularly with the cards).
Monolith schenanigans are pretty fun too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I do love how fluffy the decurion is, regardless of if it sucked, I would field and expect to see it a lot.
They weren't lying, when on the intro page they called it a "fun way to build an army"

I love Monoliths, and the Ctans, and have used both quite a few times. Every game with both Ctan shards I've won by a landslide, and the first few games with the codex I used a Monolith, and it destroyed a ton of stuff on it's own. They're both underrated units IMO (Though I'll admit they're not super competitive).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

harkequin wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:
I would second the idea of bringing C'tans and Monoliths as point sinks in casual games. I think you can go with Lychguard too. An overlord surrounded by his Lychguard is defiantly a fluffy unit that I consider a bit meh, and can be used to intercept CC threats beelining for you.

As long as you do not bring orikan.

I would reccommend trazyn/anrakyr and maybe imotekh for casual games. Imotekh is a bit on the strong side if used well though.

I like running the Szeras anrakyr combo, but it's actually pretty strong

I love running Anrakyr with Szeras, not only because of their buffs and such, but because fluff-wise they've worked together before, so it feels right. Also, Anrakyr got a bit better in this codex, so thats always a plus. Imotekh I also use quite a bit, and he's done really well. Gotta love having some AP2 shooting.

Oh yeah, monoliths and c'tan are under rated. especially the c'tan, i feel their strenght is decent compensation for the random powers. C'tan are so damn fun to use though.

Also, I'm pretty sure Anrakyr got straight up nerf-hammered. I remember because I'm still bitter. His Mitm got neutered, his tachyon arrow nerfed (okay doesn't count), and with a WS being AP2 now he's quite sub par. He's still my favorite, I just wish they didn't gut Mitm, he was the one HQ who was solid as he was. Am I missing something where he got buffed? Probably overlooking something.

harkequin wrote:

Oh yeah, monoliths and c'tan are under rated. especially the c'tan, i feel their strenght is decent compensation for the random powers. C'tan are so damn fun to use though.

Also, I'm pretty sure Anrakyr got straight up nerf-hammered. I remember because I'm still bitter. His Mitm got neutered, his tachyon arrow nerfed (okay doesn't count), and with a WS being AP2 now he's quite sub par. He's still my favorite, I just wish they didn't gut Mitm, he was the one HQ who was solid as he was. Am I missing something where he got buffed? Probably overlooking something.

Well, His MitM was nerfed a tad, but it was rather good before, and it still okay now. Also, RP makes him more survivable, and his Tachyon Arrow got "nerfed" if you call it that. Oh no, it's only 120" range . But, he's WS5 and BS5 now, which make it a bit more useful. Also, his Warlord trait is rather useful. Plus, Relentless Crusading Furious Charging Rapid-Firing Gauss Immortals. Thats pretty fun.

Plus, Relentless Crusading Furious Charging Rapid-Firing Gauss Immortals. Thats pretty fun.

okay sold .
You are right though, I was a tad focussed on his specific changes, I forgot about how the general changes like WS5 and RP buff him quite well.

And BS5 means I can fire my arrow reliably, if only i could fire it 11 feet ....

harkequin wrote:

Plus, Relentless Crusading Furious Charging Rapid-Firing Gauss Immortals. Thats pretty fun.

okay sold .
You are right though, I was a tad focussed on his specific changes, I forgot about how the general changes like WS5 and RP buff him quite well.

And BS5 means I can fire my arrow reliably, if only i could fire it 11 feet ....

Lol. I've shot it in both games I've played him. First one, I actually rolled a 2 To Hit, and then exploded a Command Chimaera. The next game, almost destroyed his Warlords tank again. All while running around sweeping units and exploding vehicles. He's a ton of fun.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Kiggler wrote:

Right now I am trying to convince my friends that we should just ban all formations. At least until every codex get there own.

Eh, I feel like that wouldn't quite be fair. That's like going back to 6th and banning all relics because not all the books had them. Besides, it's not really the formations that make Necrons stupid, it's the Decurion bonus on top of that.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, as most people do. But from what it sounds like, you had some bad luck, or he rolled really well. I got hit with a Demolisher Cannon and saved 5 out of 8 ID wounds from RP alone. That was just good rolling. Killing 2 Immortals sounds like he either had cover, or made way too many 5+'s.

It wasn't just bad luck and good rolls. Both of us had good and bad moments that game. I went into that knowing I had no chance and even if I remade my list I still don't think I stood a chance with the units I have access to.

I agree it is mostly the decurion bonus thats puts it way over the top but Necrons are a strong codex with out those formations as well. Banning formations to me seems to be a fair alternative so there can be friendly enjoyable fair casual games. It's not like we are banning certain units or wargear. Why should some armies get free bonus's with very little drawback while others can't?

If banning formations isn't the right answer then what is? In a casual gaming group how do you propose a chaos player like me to compete or any other army?

Before anyone gets the wrong idea I am not trying to be being rude or hate on necrons (even though I have despised them since 3rd edition lol). I am just trying to come up with a fair solution for a friendly gaming environment instead of it becoming win at all cost lists.

My main opponent runs Necrons, and always a Decurion (because why wouldn't you?)

However even if I play super try hard mode GK I struggle, I have never beaten him and its a sore spot, even when he runs a less good Decurion.

Its obviously designed to be hard to beat and adds a lot of flavour, but I do miss old RP!

Enjoy playing your dex tbh, your opponents will figure it out eventually, I know im trying until I do!!

 Kiggler wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Kiggler wrote:

Right now I am trying to convince my friends that we should just ban all formations. At least until every codex get there own.

Eh, I feel like that wouldn't quite be fair. That's like going back to 6th and banning all relics because not all the books had them. Besides, it's not really the formations that make Necrons stupid, it's the Decurion bonus on top of that.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, as most people do. But from what it sounds like, you had some bad luck, or he rolled really well. I got hit with a Demolisher Cannon and saved 5 out of 8 ID wounds from RP alone. That was just good rolling. Killing 2 Immortals sounds like he either had cover, or made way too many 5+'s.

It wasn't just bad luck and good rolls. Both of us had good and bad moments that game. I went into that knowing I had no chance and even if I remade my list I still don't think I stood a chance with the units I have access to.

I agree it is mostly the decurion bonus thats puts it way over the top but Necrons are a strong codex with out those formations as well. Banning formations to me seems to be a fair alternative so there can be friendly enjoyable fair casual games. It's not like we are banning certain units or wargear. Why should some armies get free bonus's with very little drawback while others can't?

If banning formations isn't the right answer then what is? In a casual gaming group how do you propose a chaos player like me to compete or any other army?

Before anyone gets the wrong idea I am not trying to be being rude or hate on necrons (even though I have despised them since 3rd edition lol). I am just trying to come up with a fair solution for a friendly gaming environment instead of it becoming win at all cost lists.

Ask that he doesn't use Decurion. I played 1 (Yes, 1 out of 20 something) using a CAD, and because I wanted more Elites, I took one formation in addition to the CAD (Because formations can also be used that way). My girlfriend, who also plays Chaos, actually did exceedingly well against me that game, though I still came out on top due to Tactical Objectives. The formations are awesome, and aren't game-breaking in themselves. Thats why I mentioned the Decurion giving them the additional bonuses is where it gets silly. So, that's why I don't think outright banning formations is required, since other people take hits too (CSM, Tyranids, most 7th Ed. codexes, ext).

Ratflinger wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Ratflinger wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I dunno if I'd consider the Tranny C'tan in there, it wasn't strictly part of the older codex, existed only for a little over a year, and was only considered available in "normal" play for a few months.

As for the Cryptek, I'll grant they lost a lot of utility, the bigger issue with them I think is that they don't have much of a place in a Decurion (though they do in a CAD).

Ratflinger wrote:


Transcendant C'tans got toned down from its Lord of War status rather than being a powerhouse unit included in the regular codex.
Annihilation Barges went from being mobile, cheap to mediocre to bad with the price increase and added tesla nerfs.
Harbringers of Destruction and their 36" s8 ap2 shooting got removed.
Scarabs became more expensive and no longer eat vehicles for dinner.
Destroyer Lords can no longer accompany the fast CC units. They are still not all that bad, but Wraiths can no longer be turned into quite the same killing machines as before, even they can tarpit things extremely well and also go toe to toe with a lot of CC units.
Mindshackle Scarabs can no longer be used as a way to get a chance against strong Monstruous Creatures.
Command Barges can no longer sweep attack (You could pretty much take down a flyer a turn with it before) and the barge itself do no longer get an invulnerability save and its rider cannot get a 2+ armor save.

Very few of these are "wreckings". Scarabs are still very effective against vehicles (5 or 6 bases will still destroy most vehicles in the game in a single round of combat), Destroyer Lords got access to Invul saves and can still be made to work with Wraiths (congo-lining for a turn or two is relatively easy, seen it done probably three or four times). Most of the rest were largely justifiable changes, particularly the CCB and MSS nerfs.

Sure, 6 scarabs can still kill a vehicle but they will now only really be worth the investment against a land raider. They basically function like melee warriors and have little use beyond being a canoptek harvest tax. Honestly, I think the best use for them is to simply take 3 and scurry about to take unguarded objectives for cheap.

Justified or not the changes to the units are significant and removed a lot of cheesy necron stunts which does have an impact on what the army can do. Necrons do not have much in the way of s7 or s8 shooting anymore, though at least heavy destroyers may see some play. In addition Necrons only have Night Scythes to handle anti air from having 3 units that were good at it. The accumulated nerfs the annihilation barge received were over the top. At least it could have been made into a fast skimmer.

Big scary MC:s now threaten to wipe a squad of robots per turn without MSS as a deterrent. I do not get how you can think of those changes as insignificant. Some may be justified, but pretending like they do not matter seems a bit dishonest.

I didn't say they were insignificant, I said they weren't "wreckings', turning useable units into unusable units (barring the MSS wargear, but that's not a unit/model, and was probably justified). Significant changes? Sure, I won't argue that. But "wrecked"? That's harder to swallow.

Well, Crypteks, Annihilation Barges and arguably Scarabs did get wrecked. The latter became more expensive, less killy and less durable. And sure, one does perhaps not take into account that one of the strongest Lords of War models in the game got turned into a subpar HS choice since it was not previously in the codex, but the game sure is moving in the direction of bigger scarier things while Necrons lost theirs.

Depends on how you define something getting wrecked I guess. But I would argue that previously good units that one now has little use to bring or got removed entirely is more accurately wrecked rather than gingerly nerfed.

I am not crying about the poor and hopeless position of the necrons here, mind you. Just saying that more than one powerhouse unit actually did take significant nerfs.

Yes, some units did take significant nerfs, I just don't think that equate to being "wrecked", which to my mind means something objectively bad, that can't pull its weight at all, as opposed to just being less optimal than other choices (which may often means there's something wrong with those other units).

I don't think Scarabs are at all bad, they're still pretty good anti-vehicle, can still be reinforced for free, and are still amazing tarpits and effective at destroying things like Fire Warrior gunlines, entrenched IG infantry, and other such things without having to devote more valuable resources. They're not as good as they were before, but they're hardly *bad* units by any objective standard.

Annihilation Barges are perhaps a bit overcosted, but again, not an unusable unit, and don't compare unfavorably next to many common units on other armies (e.g. next to a LR Exterminator for the same price, my fav LR variant, the LR has better armor and longer range, but can't Jink, can't generate extra hits, is much slower and is easier to kill in assaults due to not having rear AV11, I'd largely consider them pretty equal). The bigger issue AB's have is that Nightscythes still do the same thing, at the same price, *and* are transports that don't take HS slots and don't have problems being fit into Decurions.

Crypteks in a Decurion are largely pointless I'll grant you, but in a traditional CAD they certainly are still usable units.

 Kiggler wrote:
Whats a person supposed to do when their strongest weapons bounce off of basic infantry.

My advice: concentrate on volume of fire rather than high strength/low AP fire. You'll probably do better forcing a high volume of saves, rather than a low volume of saves at a -1 RP penalty.

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kiggler wrote:
Whats a person supposed to do when their strongest weapons bounce off of basic infantry.

My advice: concentrate on volume of fire rather than high strength/low AP fire. You'll probably do better forcing a high volume of saves, rather than a low volume of saves at a -1 RP penalty.

This is your best bet.

To me casual means fun - so it's impossible to have fun if for free - your whole army is 33% harder to kill. The least fun part of this game is going through the whole process of shooting wounding and woundpooling just to watch your enemy make 9 saves with 0 fails....that kinda stuff just makes me want to quit playing.

So I'd have to say no - it's not possible to play casual decrion.

aronthomas17 wrote:

Enjoy playing your dex tbh, your opponents will figure it out eventually, I know im trying until I do!!

Or they will just stop playing you.

Until they get there own dichimerons.

krodarklorr wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kiggler wrote:
Whats a person supposed to do when their strongest weapons bounce off of basic infantry.

My advice: concentrate on volume of fire rather than high strength/low AP fire. You'll probably do better forcing a high volume of saves, rather than a low volume of saves at a -1 RP penalty.

This is your best bet.

I fail to see how that is any better. Not everyone plays eldar or tau either which have easy access to said weapons. It's either low number of wounds with 5+rp re-roll ones or high number of wounds with armour save and 4+ rp re-roll ones. Take your pick both results end close to the same way.

Xenomancers wrote:To me casual means fun - so it's impossible to have fun if for free - your whole army is 33% harder to kill. The least fun part of this game is going through the whole process of shooting wounding and woundpooling just to watch your enemy make 9 saves with 0 fails....that kinda stuff just makes me want to quit playing.

So I'd have to say no - it's not possible to play casual decrion.

Pretty much this. You got to have respect for your opponent/s. If your opponent/s doesn't have the means to compete against your list then you shouldn't expect them to play and enjoy a losing game.

 Kiggler wrote:

I fail to see how that is any better. Not everyone plays eldar or tau either which have easy access to said weapons. It's either low number of wounds with 5+rp re-roll ones or high number of wounds with armour save and 4+ rp re-roll ones. Take your pick both results end close to the same way.

I dunno, my friend brought nothing but Heavy Bolters and Autocannons on his Preds, and a bunch more AP 4 with Sternguard and Tac marines with Heavy bolters. He did much, much better.

So he tailored using units and heavy weapons no one would ever use in a normal game? Did he use FW too, am sure FW has units dripping with ap4 weapons that are heavy3 or morel.

I've had to stop using the Decurion and 'crons for that matter in my friendly games. Even toned down to bare mins, theres no patience for them anymore.

Makumba wrote:
So he tailored using units and heavy weapons no one would ever use in a normal game? Did he use FW too, am sure FW has units dripping with ap4 weapons that are heavy3 or morel.

AP4 is useful against Necrons Warriors. It's also useful against Fire Warriors, and anybody else who has a 4+ (Sisters?). Games against Necrons and Tau are normal games. You can't blame Xenos for the fact that everyone loads up on AP3 and AP2 to try and beat MEQs, TEQs, and vehicles (although I'd bring plenty of AP3 as well against Necrons because most units have a 3+).

My friend and main opponent plays necrons. He used the Decurion for a little while and now uses standard CAD. I did beat him with the ole green skins when he ran a Decurion. But I wasn't playing a "casual" army, he was.

It took my green tide to smash into him to not let him win. And even then it took a very long time to get through some of his units.

This is why I say a casual Decurion is a tier above most other armies casual list.

AP4 weapon spam would work if every decurion list was just warrior blob spam but there not. What about immortals, ghost arks, wraiths, tomb spyders, destroyers, tomb blades, etc. In my particular game it certainly were not the warriors causing me issues.

 Kiggler wrote:
AP4 weapon spam would work if every decurion list was just warrior blob spam but there not. What about immortals, ghost arks, wraiths, tomb spyders, destroyers, tomb blades, etc. In my particular game it certainly were not the warriors causing me issues.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I was thinking of Warrior spam. You're right though, its worth investing in AP3 against Necron armies most of the time due to so much 3+.

The few times I've played against decurions were pretty bad. Was almost tabled in one and last night I got stomped 9 to 2 and had to concede on turn 3. The staying power is real. I'm not sure there's a friendly way of playing 4 up save 4 up rp re-rolling 1s. Usually to tone down lists I just bring more basic troops... that would probably have the opposite effect here.
'

On paper, Skitarii do huge amounts of damage to Necrons (or anything), even in a Decurion.

.89 x .67 x .5 x .5 x 30 = 4.47 dead necron warriors from 10 radium carbines with BS7.

 Akar wrote:
When playing a non Decurion game, I make a case for Unbound, since the Reclamation legion is my favorite thing, and Unbound is the only way I can get it in w/o going Decurion.

Just wanted to point this out (and forgive me if someone else already has) But since the Reclamation Legion is a formation, you CAN run a Battle Forged list with them inside it. The only requirement for a Battle Forged list is that all models belong to a Detachment or to a Formation. That's really it. You can have a battle forged list of all formations, you can just tack on a Reclamation Legion to a CAD. It all works, no need for Unbound. (though, really, Unbound doesn't give you much besides a random extra model or the ability to turbo spam one thing, the latter which is not worth the whining. lol)

As for the topic at hand, to the OP, try and make a challenge of how janky you can make your lists and see if you can still win games. Use combinations of unit you would NEVER consider. Worse comes to worse, it sucks but you found something to play against when it comes to the really casual lists. But you might also find some cool combos you can use in regular games. And for variety, bring out your Nids. I know I would want to trade off anyways just because I like variety, but it would also help against new players or really casual players. It doesn't have to be every game, but shake things up.

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kiggler wrote:
Whats a person supposed to do when their strongest weapons bounce off of basic infantry.

My advice: concentrate on volume of fire rather than high strength/low AP fire. You'll probably do better forcing a high volume of saves, rather than a low volume of saves at a -1 RP penalty.

Considering how an IG gunline firing 120 Las gun shots (the very definition of "volume of fire") only puts one or two wounds on a set of Harvest Wraiths, this really isn't much of a help, either.

Well, the Decurion was the start of the New Paradigm (or maybe the Dark Eldar Carnival of Pain was?). Followed by the Harlequin thingie, Eldar Warhost, Khorne Daemonkin whatchamacallit, and Skitarii thingumbob.

Has anybody tried running these things against each other?

I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

I'd wouldn't say running Dec-Crons to be casual at the moment.
Several games I've had with them have resulted in wipe out victory's. Best option for a casual list would take either CAD or unbound and do something silly there. Aside from it being fun chances are it'll still do alright. (Also just go unbound Canoptek lists, many many many scarabs)

I have never played against Necrons but everything I've read here is quite depressing. The example of the battle cannon fail to kill has struck me, precisely because I have always thought that nothing cannot be settled by a 120mm shell direct hit.

Sounds like the only way to end a fight with Necrons is being tabled. I am not a sore loser but I don't want to waste my time. It's not Necron players fault but it's just the way it goes.

Going back to some earlier comments about the decurion, and the downright dirty nasty things you can do with it. My opponents who get demoralized are already bummed enough when facing a destroyer cult without stalker. If I tossed a triarch stalker in my decurion, I think heads would roll. Though running CAD and brining out those dirty tricks might change the pace a little.

In my past few games, my necrons haven't tabled, or even come very close to tabling my opponent. I have been able to control the table well, and not die. It seems like my opponents are most demoralized when say, a battle cannon hits warriors in the open, and some don't die.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

Apparently a lot of people think Skitarri are ridiculous, as well as the new Admech coming out. But, against Crons? I don't see them fairing too well. And I played my Eldar bud with the new Dex, he played stuff like Shuricannon bikes, Wraithknight with D cannons, Bunch of Aspect warriors, and Serpents. He hit me pretty hard, but once the Wraithknight went down, he slowly got tabled by turn 5. Granted, that was with using a very good list, not something really casual, as I was expecting a closer game.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

Apparently a lot of people think Skitarri are ridiculous, as well as the new Admech coming out. But, against Crons? I don't see them fairing too well. And I played my Eldar bud with the new Dex, he played stuff like Shuricannon bikes, Wraithknight with D cannons, Bunch of Aspect warriors, and Serpents. He hit me pretty hard, but once the Wraithknight went down, he slowly got tabled by turn 5. Granted, that was with using a very good list, not something really casual, as I was expecting a closer game.

Skitarii are an army that, on their own, are powerful but with majorly critical weaknesses. Their squad special weapons, doctrina rules, and a couple other things are absolutely absurdly powerful, and the Skitarii Vanguard are everything I've always wanted IG Stormtroopers to be, but even better. The big weakness is the lack of transports, that's what's lost every game I've seen Skitarii lose so far, though of course, allies rules allow them to work around this. With the new AdMech stuff, they'll probably be even more powerful. I'm not entirely sure how they'll do against Necrons, it will be interesting to see. I haven't seen Necrons and the new Eldar play yet in person unfortunately.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

Apparently a lot of people think Skitarri are ridiculous, as well as the new Admech coming out. But, against Crons? I don't see them fairing too well. And I played my Eldar bud with the new Dex, he played stuff like Shuricannon bikes, Wraithknight with D cannons, Bunch of Aspect warriors, and Serpents. He hit me pretty hard, but once the Wraithknight went down, he slowly got tabled by turn 5. Granted, that was with using a very good list, not something really casual, as I was expecting a closer game.

Skitarii are an army that, on their own, are powerful but with majorly critical weaknesses. Their squad special weapons, doctrina rules, and a couple other things are absolutely absurdly powerful, and the Skitarii Vanguard are everything I've always wanted IG Stormtroopers to be, but even better. The big weakness is the lack of transports, that's what's lost every game I've seen Skitarii lose so far, though of course, allies rules allow them to work around this. With the new AdMech stuff, they'll probably be even more powerful. I'm not entirely sure how they'll do against Necrons, it will be interesting to see. I haven't seen Necrons and the new Eldar play yet in person unfortunately.

Eldar vs. Crons is a much closer matchup, even with stronger lists, but in my experience, Crons still outlived them and pushed them off the table.

This might be a long shot - Though I think GK are actually the best matchup vs crons outta the old codex.

Basically all my firepower is AP4 with pretty good volume - and most of it is ignore cover too. Defensively most of my stuff is 2+ save too. So I'm ignoring their basic save and usually taking my 2+ against their weapons.

NDK can 1 shot a wraith or any other MC in their books.

Cleansing flame out the buttocks. Lot's of AP4 torrents. Heavy psycannons and ap3 in CC with just about everything in the army and the ability to go ID (which brings the 4+ down to a 5+ right?.)

I'd try it out - fortunately there is only a few Necron players in my area so I havn't been able to try it out yet. Only played them with dark angels so far lol. I did win the game but only because it was a warrior spam list and I run lots of land speeders and dakka banner with bikes and a knight titan. If their were wraiths in that army I would have been tabled turn 2.

Is It Possible To Run A "Casual" Decurion?

Short answer, no.

The decurion is made of many small formations, and each of these formations contain at least some units who are viable, if not competitive.

The lack of ability to choose weaker units as a whole means that it is hard to make a decurion list more casual. Once the said units are improved by various buffs, the decurion ensures that even a poorly made cron force with little focus will still perform better than many of its peers.

Perhaps the only way to make a casual decurion imo is to take the core choices, and then spend all the other points on C'tan.

If a decurion list that spams walking MCs who receive no reanimation protocols could not be considered casual, then I doubt anything else could be.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

Is It Possible To Run A "Casual" Decurion?

Short answer, no.

The decurion is made of many small formations, and each of these formations contain at least some units who are viable, if not competitive.

The lack of ability to choose weaker units as a whole means that it is hard to make a decurion list more casual. Once the said units are improved by various buffs, the decurion ensures that even a poorly made cron force with little focus will still perform better than many of its peers.

Perhaps the only way to make a casual decurion imo is to take the core choices, and then spend all the other points on C'tan.

If a decurion list that spams walking MCs who receive no reanimation protocols could not be considered casual, then I doubt anything else could be.

I agree that the core Reclamation Legion is the best way to go for making a casual/friendly Decurion. But a lot of the Necron formations are not that OP, with the exception of the Canoptek harvest and the Destroyer Cult + Triarch Stalker.

C'tans, especially the Nightbringer, are IMO an severely underrated unit. They may not be as strong as other choices, but they provide significant benefits and are either a giant fire magnet or a nasty surprise for your opponent.

As far as balance goes, why shouldn't every unit in the codex be at least somewhat viable? It's the sign of solid internal balance.

The reason people are still complaining about Necrons is because the new Eldar codex has distracted the internet's collective consciousness. The best counter to Necrons that I have seen is to have a dedicated CC "hammer" that can shred through Necron infantry. Wraiths are a bigger problem though; weight of fire seems to be the best answer to them.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

Is It Possible To Run A "Casual" Decurion?

Short answer, no.

The decurion is made of many small formations, and each of these formations contain at least some units who are viable, if not competitive.

The lack of ability to choose weaker units as a whole means that it is hard to make a decurion list more casual. Once the said units are improved by various buffs, the decurion ensures that even a poorly made cron force with little focus will still perform better than many of its peers.

Perhaps the only way to make a casual decurion imo is to take the core choices, and then spend all the other points on C'tan.

If a decurion list that spams walking MCs who receive no reanimation protocols could not be considered casual, then I doubt anything else could be.

I agree that the core Reclamation Legion is the best way to go for making a casual/friendly Decurion. But a lot of the Necron formations are not that OP, with the exception of the Canoptek harvest and the Destroyer Cult + Triarch Stalker.

C'tans, especially the Nightbringer, are IMO an severely underrated unit. They may not be as strong as other choices, but they provide significant benefits and are either a giant fire magnet or a nasty surprise for your opponent.

As far as balance goes, why shouldn't every unit in the codex be at least somewhat viable? It's the sign of solid internal balance.

The reason people are still complaining about Necrons is because the new Eldar codex has distracted the internet's collective consciousness. The best counter to Necrons that I have seen is to have a dedicated CC "hammer" that can shred through Necron infantry. Wraiths are a bigger problem though; weight of fire seems to be the best answer to them.

Wraiths are the biggest problem.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
Wraiths are a bigger problem though; weight of fire seems to be the best answer to them.

Pure volume of fire is hardly a counter against reanimation Wraiths (doesn't 120 lasgun shots only hurt one Wraith?). The sweet spot is mid strength volume of fire but even that is pretty paltry. I think the best answer is something like SS TWC with high strength, fearless, and their own 3++.

Wraiths are just one of those things that are just too absurdly resilient against everything. High quality shooting bounces off the 3++, and even S8/9 weapons will not ID them. Small arms like lasguns and bolters simply can't be leveraged in suffucient numbers to get through T5, multiple wounds, a 3++ and RP. As noted, the sweet spot is stuff like Autocannons, but even they aren't spectacularly effective.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Wraiths are just one of those things that are just too absurdly resilient against everything. High quality shooting bounces off the 3++, and even S8/9 weapons will not ID them. Small arms like lasguns and bolters simply can't be leveraged in suffucient numbers to get through T5, multiple wounds, a 3++ and RP. As noted, the sweet spot is stuff like Autocannons, but even they aren't spectacularly effective.

I can get behind that. My Tau friend used nothing but Crisis Suits and Hazard Suits in my 3rd game with the new dex. Tons, and I mean tons, of S5-S7 Twin-linked shooting. Took him 2 full turns of shooting his whole army at the Wraiths. One was still left at the end of the game.

If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The only issue with that, is getting everyone at my shop to adopt those rules.

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The problem with Zagman's proposed errata is that it is just as bad as the core rules GW puts out, but in different ways.

For example, did you know that Flyers can't Jink anymore, as that would be claiming a cover save, which isn't allowed anymore? Or that Scatbikers at S5 are much more balanced than S6?

His Necrons one is almost as bad. With what he's proposing, C'tan spam will be the best option for Necron cheesemongers (220 points for a Trans C'tan? Really?)

I don't want to get on the guy so hard, as he did put a lot of effort into compiling those errata and they address some of the fundamental imbalances in the game, but I would take GW writing rules over him.

Fan rules/House rules should be an FAQ to fix the small details, not changing things wholesale.

Apart from some questionably OP formations, Necrons are fine balance-wise. People just haven't figured out effective strategies for playing against them because the internet has been freaking out about Eldar.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The problem with Zagman's proposed errata is that it is just as bad as the core rules GW puts out, but in different ways.

For example, did you know that Flyers can't Jink anymore, as that would be claiming a cover save, which isn't allowed anymore? Or that Scatbikers at S5 are much more balanced than S6?

His Necrons one is almost as bad. With what he's proposing, C'tan spam will be the best option for Necron cheesemongers (220 points for a Trans C'tan? Really?)

I don't want to get on the guy so hard, as he did put a lot of effort into compiling those errata and they address some of the fundamental imbalances in the game, but I would take GW writing rules over him.

Fan rules/House rules should be an FAQ to fix the small details, not changing things wholesale.

Apart from some questionably OP formations, Necrons are fine balance-wise. People just haven't figured out effective strategies for playing against them because the internet has been freaking out about Eldar.

Asides from how bonkers the Canoptek formation can be, I can slightly agree. Even as a Necron player, it can pretty intense to bring even my Immortals down, and I question that they shouldn't have both the buffs of Relentless AND Move Through Cover. Marines can't even charge after using their Bolters, so at the very least they should be able to charge afterwards. I dunno, Tacticals need major fixing, but this is the wrong topic to delve on that.

Especially Relentless though, because I can take Wraiths with ID Guns with 24 range and 3++/4+++. Manage to find points for a Destroyer Lord and it almost isn't even fun.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

We've played Warhost, Decurion, Harlequin + Dark Eldar, Harlequin + Eldar, and Skitarri + BA, with, I think, pretty decent lists. The Skitarii are pretty freaking amazing. A lot of their units consistently outperform mathhammer theorycrafting, at least so far. I don't mean lucky dice; I mean, the special rules high mobility (Dragoons), flexibility, and of course totally awesome troop weaponry just make for a great take-all-comers army.

Necron are hard-wish to kill, but I daresay we've kind of gotten used to them. Eldar have so much new stuff we will be exploring them for months to come. At least we get to see some eldar models that we've shelved for some years back on the tabletop.

None of them have had a 100% win rate.

One thing curious, we have been getting together more frequently (and playing more 40k) to try out new stuff with new units dropping on us like pod spam. Also trying more hardcore games (as opposed to arranged scenarios) with optimal units to better test the new units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Asides from how bonkers the Canoptek formation can be, I can slightly agree. Even as a Necron player, it can pretty intense to bring even my Immortals down, and I question that they shouldn't have both the buffs of Relentless AND Move Through Cover. Marines can't even charge after using their Bolters, so at the very least they should be able to charge afterwards. I dunno, Tacticals need major fixing, but this is the wrong topic to delve on that.

Especially Relentless though, because I can take Wraiths with ID Guns with 24 range and 3++/4+++. Manage to find points for a Destroyer Lord and it almost isn't even fun.

While I don't disagree Immortals are tough to kill (well hey they are called immortals right?), measuring them against tactical marines isn't helpful, because everyone who plays space marines thinks tacticals are pretty bad ;(

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I haven't seen Necrons fight the new Eldar just yet, nor Skitarii, might see that happen this weekend, but I've seen them face Harlequins and KDK and tabled them both. Still haven't seen a Decurion lose a game yet in person.

We've played Warhost, Decurion, Harlequin + Dark Eldar, Harlequin + Eldar, and Skitarri + BA, with, I think, pretty decent lists. The Skitarii are pretty freaking amazing. A lot of their units consistently outperform mathhammer theorycrafting, at least so far. I don't mean lucky dice; I mean, the special rules high mobility (Dragoons), flexibility, and of course totally awesome troop weaponry just make for a great take-all-comers army.

Necron are hard-wish to kill, but I daresay we've kind of gotten used to them. Eldar have so much new stuff we will be exploring them for months to come. At least we get to see some eldar models that we've shelved for some years back on the tabletop.

None of them have had a 100% win rate.

One thing curious, we have been getting together more frequently (and playing more 40k) to try out new stuff with new units dropping on us like pod spam. Also trying more hardcore games (as opposed to arranged scenarios) with optimal units to better test the new units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Asides from how bonkers the Canoptek formation can be, I can slightly agree. Even as a Necron player, it can pretty intense to bring even my Immortals down, and I question that they shouldn't have both the buffs of Relentless AND Move Through Cover. Marines can't even charge after using their Bolters, so at the very least they should be able to charge afterwards. I dunno, Tacticals need major fixing, but this is the wrong topic to delve on that.

Especially Relentless though, because I can take Wraiths with ID Guns with 24 range and 3++/4+++. Manage to find points for a Destroyer Lord and it almost isn't even fun.

While I don't disagree Immortals are tough to kill (well hey they are called immortals right?), measuring them against tactical marines isn't helpful, because everyone who plays space marines thinks tacticals are pretty bad ;(

Being a Necron player mostly, I can tell you how bad they are. Merely having used them a lot is just a bonus.
They could be an easy fix, but Lord knows GW won't do anything about it.

Two things

1) to make a game more casual take a small legion in you decurion and one small auxiliary choice, like death marks (750pts). All other formations take as discreet detachments rather than as decurion. Everliving won't apply which needs them nicely.

2) 15 immortals dropping out of a night scythe and rapid firing will pretty much kill anything. They are deadly. With added buffs from phyrran rules superb.

Ffyllotek wrote:

2) 15 immortals dropping out of a night scythe and rapid firing will pretty much kill anything. They are deadly. With added buffs from phyrran rules superb.

15 immortals is 255 points and scythe is 130. That's Imperial Knight points -- essentially there's tons of stuff in the game that's 385 points that can "pretty much kill anything". The question is, does it kill 385 points, and the next round, does it survive getting hit back?

I think at 12" range, that's 5 unsaved wounds. Which isn't bad, but there's stuff that will survive that, and there are other units in the game at nearly 400 pts that will do just as much or more damage. Kataphron Destroyers and Breachers come to mind immediately; Wraithguard with either cannons or scythes obviously... you see what I'm getting at

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The problem with Zagman's proposed errata is that it is just as bad as the core rules GW puts out, but in different ways.

For example, did you know that Flyers can't Jink anymore, as that would be claiming a cover save, which isn't allowed anymore? Or that Scatbikers at S5 are much more balanced than S6?

His Necrons one is almost as bad. With what he's proposing, C'tan spam will be the best option for Necron cheesemongers (220 points for a Trans C'tan? Really?)

I don't want to get on the guy so hard, as he did put a lot of effort into compiling those errata and they address some of the fundamental imbalances in the game, but I would take GW writing rules over him.

Fan rules/House rules should be an FAQ to fix the small details, not changing things wholesale.

Apart from some questionably OP formations, Necrons are fine balance-wise. People just haven't figured out effective strategies for playing against them because the internet has been freaking out about Eldar.

Actually, I'd be all for completely trashing ALL of GW's rules and rewriting from the ground up. I don't think Zagman goes nearly far enough.

I don't know about you, but I don't know which list I'm playing ahead of time. Do you? If so, then your "effective strategies" are nothing more than list tailoring for a foe. Trying playing BA and being blind as to your next opponent. In that framework, Necrons are not remotely fair.

What, isn't maximum Immortal unit size 10?

Alcibiades wrote:
What, isn't maximum Immortal unit size 10?

Yeah, I'm sure it is.

Martel732 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The problem with Zagman's proposed errata is that it is just as bad as the core rules GW puts out, but in different ways.

For example, did you know that Flyers can't Jink anymore, as that would be claiming a cover save, which isn't allowed anymore? Or that Scatbikers at S5 are much more balanced than S6?

His Necrons one is almost as bad. With what he's proposing, C'tan spam will be the best option for Necron cheesemongers (220 points for a Trans C'tan? Really?)

I don't want to get on the guy so hard, as he did put a lot of effort into compiling those errata and they address some of the fundamental imbalances in the game, but I would take GW writing rules over him.

Fan rules/House rules should be an FAQ to fix the small details, not changing things wholesale.

Apart from some questionably OP formations, Necrons are fine balance-wise. People just haven't figured out effective strategies for playing against them because the internet has been freaking out about Eldar.

Actually, I'd be all for completely trashing ALL of GW's rules and rewriting from the ground up. I don't think Zagman goes nearly far enough.

I don't know about you, but I don't know which list I'm playing ahead of time. Do you? If so, then your "effective strategies" are nothing more than list tailoring for a foe. Trying playing BA and being blind as to your next opponent. In that framework, Necrons are not remotely fair.

I wouldn't say I know the specific list ahead of time, but most of my games at my local shop consist of two people agreeing to a game and creating a list right there, at the same time. Or, someone will have a very specific list ahead of time and ask who wants to play it. I'm not for list tailoring, but knowing what opponent or army you're fighting and building a general idea list isn't a bad thing.

Well, I don't get to. So consider the players that are in that boat.

Martel732 wrote:
Well, I don't get to. So consider the players that are in that boat.

Might I ask why not? Do you frequently play in a league or something of the sort?

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Well, I don't get to. So consider the players that are in that boat.

Might I ask why not? Do you frequently play in a league or something of the sort?

We just get together and draw opponents randomly. So no one can list tailor.

plus what do you if your opponent can build a counter build you can't beat without buying a new army, while he is using just his standard stuff or just replaced one or two models? Buy a new army every 3 weeks?

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Well, I don't get to. So consider the players that are in that boat.

Might I ask why not? Do you frequently play in a league or something of the sort?

We just get together and draw opponents randomly. So no one can list tailor.

Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:
plus what do you if your opponent can build a counter build you can't beat without buying a new army, while he is using just his standard stuff or just replaced one or two models? Buy a new army every 3 weeks?

Well, luckily that doesn't really happen. We're all in the same mindset of not countering and directly tailoring against people.

"Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me."

Why would it matter if GW wrote decent rules? What's wrong with making a list completely blind?

Martel732 wrote:
"Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me."

Why would it matter if GW wrote decent rules? What's wrong with making a list completely blind?

Well, lets say I want to run a fun game, and try out some Ctan shards. But, my friend is bringing his Dark Eldar. That would be a ton of wasted points against him. That's why I said not to tailor, per se, but if you're fighting a certain faction, it's nice to know what not to bring.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me."

Why would it matter if GW wrote decent rules? What's wrong with making a list completely blind?

Well, lets say I want to run a fun game, and try out some Ctan shards. But, my friend is bringing his Dark Eldar. That would be a ton of wasted points against him. That's why I said not to tailor, per se, but if you're fighting a certain faction, it's nice to know what not to bring.

That is also list tailoring, though. When you put equipment in your list that might be rendered useless against certain opponents, you have to build contingencies into your list. You shouldn't be able to run Ctan shards risk-free in your list, imo.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me."

Why would it matter if GW wrote decent rules? What's wrong with making a list completely blind?

Well, lets say I want to run a fun game, and try out some Ctan shards. But, my friend is bringing his Dark Eldar. That would be a ton of wasted points against him. That's why I said not to tailor, per se, but if you're fighting a certain faction, it's nice to know what not to bring.

That is also list tailoring, though. When you put equipment in your list that might be rendered useless against certain opponents, you have to build contingencies into your list.

Call it what you will, but most people at my store don't like blindly going into games. Getting roflstomped right off the bat because of random is already a thing in the game itself, and we don't need to make that matter worse by rolling a bad matchup.

That definitely makes many matchups much, MUCH easier. I don't have that luxury. It doesn't work out well for BA as it turns out. Of course, the converse is that players can't optimize weapons loadouts for meqs, either. That fact doesn't seem to help much, though.

Martel732 wrote:
That definitely makes many matchups much, MUCH easier. I don't have that luxury. It doesn't work out well for BA as it turns out. Of course, the converse is that players can't optimize weapons loadouts for meqs, either. That fact doesn't seem to help much, though.

Yeah, it certainly does suck that your group does things that way, but I guess you have to adapt. I don't think I could ever do it, honestly. I enjoy playing casual, fun games way too much.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That definitely makes many matchups much, MUCH easier. I don't have that luxury. It doesn't work out well for BA as it turns out. Of course, the converse is that players can't optimize weapons loadouts for meqs, either. That fact doesn't seem to help much, though.

Yeah, it certainly does suck that your group does things that way, but I guess you have to adapt. I don't think I could ever do it, honestly. I enjoy playing casual, fun games way too much.

Those ARE the casual games. That's not even a tournament set up. Do you really think your way would help BA that much? I don't think so, really. BA are pretty easy to tailor for.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That definitely makes many matchups much, MUCH easier. I don't have that luxury. It doesn't work out well for BA as it turns out. Of course, the converse is that players can't optimize weapons loadouts for meqs, either. That fact doesn't seem to help much, though.

Yeah, it certainly does suck that your group does things that way, but I guess you have to adapt. I don't think I could ever do it, honestly. I enjoy playing casual, fun games way too much.

Those ARE the casual games. That's not even a tournament set up.

I know. But, again, what do you do if you wanna try out sub-optimal units? Hope you don't get paired against Douchy McDouchpants?

Martel732 wrote:


Actually, I'd be all for completely trashing ALL of GW's rules and rewriting from the ground up. I don't think Zagman goes nearly far enough.

Haha your not the only one, these rules are absolute trash.

Thing is its easier to get people on board with an errata than a rewrite. It also has the benefit of being able to use existing material (armies etc) from GW instead of writing it from scratch - despite their terrible balance the GW codexes can be a useful resource in this way

Been looking at a ruleset based on Bolt Action myself

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
If the rules as is are failing you then try homeruling it.

Zagman's written a pretty cool game-wide errata in Proposed Rules, maybe give that a shot.

The problem with Zagman's proposed errata is that it is just as bad as the core rules GW puts out, but in different ways.

For example, did you know that Flyers can't Jink anymore, as that would be claiming a cover save, which isn't allowed anymore? Or that Scatbikers at S5 are much more balanced than S6?

His Necrons one is almost as bad. With what he's proposing, C'tan spam will be the best option for Necron cheesemongers (220 points for a Trans C'tan? Really?)

I don't want to get on the guy so hard, as he did put a lot of effort into compiling those errata and they address some of the fundamental imbalances in the game, but I would take GW writing rules over him.

Fan rules/House rules should be an FAQ to fix the small details, not changing things wholesale.

Apart from some questionably OP formations, Necrons are fine balance-wise. People just haven't figured out effective strategies for playing against them because the internet has been freaking out about Eldar.

Go post your concerns in his Necron errata. I run Orks and Chaos and those erratas seem great - he's made so much unviable garbage playable that I can't wait to give it a try

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That definitely makes many matchups much, MUCH easier. I don't have that luxury. It doesn't work out well for BA as it turns out. Of course, the converse is that players can't optimize weapons loadouts for meqs, either. That fact doesn't seem to help much, though.

Yeah, it certainly does suck that your group does things that way, but I guess you have to adapt. I don't think I could ever do it, honestly. I enjoy playing casual, fun games way too much.

Those ARE the casual games. That's not even a tournament set up.

I know. But, again, what do you do if you wanna try out sub-optimal units? Hope you don't get paired against Douchy McDouchpants?

Where I play, try them out, but just be prepared to lose.

Makumba wrote:plus what do you if your opponent can build a counter build you can't beat without buying a new army, while he is using just his standard stuff or just replaced one or two models? Buy a new army every 3 weeks?

Hyperbole much, buddy? Seriously, go find an Eldar or Necron or AdMech player who isn't a cheesemonger and play against them. I think you'll find the experience quite informative.

Martel732 wrote:"Ouch, yeah that doesn't seem fun to me."

Why would it matter if GW wrote decent rules? What's wrong with making a list completely blind?

I'm not saying that GW's rules are any good, but that they're all we have to make do with. Feel free to change them; I know I do, with the consent of my opponent.

Building lists blind is what most people do for pickup games, and that's fine. But they should also be aware of the power level of the list they're bringing. Necrons are powerful but far from unbeatable. I think that they've shifted the meta, to where some sort of CC "hammer" is necessary in armies now. In the case of Blood Angels, Death Company seem like an excellent blend of durability and killing power.

New Answer -- YES! Just play your casual Decurion against the casual Adeptus Mechanicus War Convocation and all their free casual upgrades and relics.

 Talys wrote:
New Answer -- YES! Just play your casual Decurion against the casual Adeptus Mechanicus War Convocation and all their free casual upgrades and relics.

*Unit upgrades subject to normal restrictions. Relics are one per model. Note that this formation may be the size and points value of an entire army*

You see? This is what happens when people don't pay attention! They're so focused on one set of robots that another set comes around and slaps them awake!

Hyperbole much, buddy? Seriously, go find an Eldar or Necron or AdMech player who isn't a cheesemonger and play against them. I think you'll find the experience quite informative.

I play IG, two of my opponents use eldar, the third uses GK. It is not a hyperbol. IF they would try to tailor, my IG would be dead. Better yet the GK player doesn't even have to tailor, he uses his normal TAC stuff and it counters my list.

I don't know what a cheesemonger is to be honest, and I know how playing other necron or eldar player is suppose to be informative. I played people from other shops and other cities. Everyone uses the same units and the same list with little changed, like some places treat ally as second CAD while others don't or some don't accept formations, while others do. Which isn't even much change for necron or eldar anyway, as both decurions necron and eldar have are FoC not just formations.

To be honest the GK TAC list tackles basically every army well (I can't think of a single army that it does poorly against).

SGTPozy wrote:
To be honest the GK TAC list tackles basically every army well (I can't think of a single army that it does poorly against).

Ironically, BA. And other marines sporting grav cents, for different reasons. I don't fear GK at all, and I'm scared of a lot of lists in this game. Their model count is even worse, and the super-MC is garbage against BA.

Makumba wrote:

Hyperbole much, buddy? Seriously, go find an Eldar or Necron or AdMech player who isn't a cheesemonger and play against them. I think you'll find the experience quite informative.

I play IG, two of my opponents use eldar, the third uses GK. It is not a hyperbol. IF they would try to tailor, my IG would be dead. Better yet the GK player doesn't even have to tailor, he uses his normal TAC stuff and it counters my list.

I don't know what a cheesemonger is to be honest, and I know how playing other necron or eldar player is suppose to be informative. I played people from other shops and other cities. Everyone uses the same units and the same list with little changed, like some places treat ally as second CAD while others don't or some don't accept formations, while others do. Which isn't even much change for necron or eldar anyway, as both decurions necron and eldar have are FoC not just formations.

It's nice that your opponents don't list tailor against you. Ironically, IG have some hard counters to Eldar and Necrons. Spam artillery barrages until their big units are dead. Hit big models with lots of lascannons. Lasguns are for pouring wounds on anything that gets close.

You say your opponents all use the same units? They could be cheesemongers, in that they spam powerful competitive-level units and armies in a more casual setting. Or you could have the problem of Martel732, where your local scene is simply too competitive. In that case, it's time to find a new group of people to play with.

Also, some rules clarifications: Allied detachments are not a second CAD. They are a separate Allied Detachment, unless it's Tyranids. And the Decurion/Warhost/Slaughtercult is not an FOC; it is a formation in its own right, but one made up of Formations instead of FOC slots.

It's always a serious indictment of this game that the solution to playing people who want to win is to go find people who want to win a lot less.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

It's nice that your opponents don't list tailor against you. Ironically, IG have some hard counters to Eldar and Necrons. Spam artillery barrages until their big units are dead. Hit big models with lots of lascannons. Lasguns are for pouring wounds on anything that gets close.

Half the artillery got taken out of the codex. Of what remains, the Basilisk remains identical to its 3E incarnation, unimpressive as ever, costing as much as many Russ tanks with nowhere near the armor and a minimum range (which precludes firing indirectly) that typically covers most of the board and thus reduces its utility in that role to near zero outside of apocalypse games. The Manticore is both less capable in its intended AT role relative to its 5E incarnation (due to changes in the way vehicles are killed) and got more expensive to boot, though yes isn't terrible killing Necron Warriors...if they're out in the open. The only consistently useful artillery weapon however is the Wyvern. And yes, the Wyvern is absolutely murder on Eldar infantry if they're caught out of transports, but otherwise it's not doing much, and Eldar have their own tools to deal with AV12/10/10 open topped vehicles. Against Necrons, the Wyvern is decidedly less impressive, and is really only much of any threat to the absolute weakest and most expendable units you'll find in a Decurion.


IG lascannons are not typically super impressive. your options typically are single BS3 lascannons on things like Russ tanks or Sentinels (that can't benefit from Orders), or infantry heavy weapons squads (which are some of the least efficient and most easily removed heavy weapons units in the game). Space Marine armies actually typically do Lascannon spam far more effectively than IG, as even though IG can take a larger volume of Lascannons, SM's can pack in almost as many on far more effective and resilient units. The only really effective lascannon platform IG have is the Vendetta, and while not a bad flyer, its absence for that critical turn 1 (and sometimes turn 2) means you don't see it included as often as it used to be (even before they increased its cost by 40pts)

Meanwhile, Lasguns don't kill squat. I think I inflicted a grand total of 2 wounds over three games in the tournament I played in this weekend with lasguns playing at 1850pts? They're not even all that able to be concentrated unless you're running a big blob squad, and even then, you get 300pts of naked IG blob getting FRFSRF shooting a Decurion Warriors, with everyone somehow in double-tap range, you're maybe killing six 13pt Warriors? Maybe one Canoptek Harvest RP Wraith? Sure, they'll kill Eldar infantry, but any basic gun in rapid fire distances will.

Martel732 wrote:
It's always a serious indictment of this game that the solution to playing people who want to win is to go find people who want to win a lot less.

The same could be said of any game, whether it be Warhammer or Cribbage. It's all a matter of the person's mindset of what they want to get out of the game.

That said, Necrons are durable. They're probably the most durable army in the game. Fortunately, 5/6 times this game is not about killing as many Necrons as possible (and that 6th time is best discounted, as nobody that I know actually enjoys kill points). Especially in Malestrom, victory goes to whoever gets the most objectives. I've had games where I was losing multiple critical units, but still won due to objectives. The Decurion is not good at holding objectives, because Objective Secured is a thing and it matters.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's always a serious indictment of this game that the solution to playing people who want to win is to go find people who want to win a lot less.

The same could be said of any game, whether it be Warhammer or Cribbage. It's all a matter of the person's mindset of what they want to get out of the game.

That said, Necrons are durable. They're probably the most durable army in the game. Fortunately, 5/6 times this game is not about killing as many Necrons as possible (and that 6th time is best discounted, as nobody that I know actually enjoys kill points). Especially in Malestrom, victory goes to whoever gets the most objectives. I've had games where I was losing multiple critical units, but still won due to objectives. The Decurion is not good at holding objectives, because Objective Secured is a thing and it matters.

As a Decurion player, and someone that DOES attend tournaments, Objective Secured has come up so little I could count the games on one hand when it did something.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's always a serious indictment of this game that the solution to playing people who want to win is to go find people who want to win a lot less.

The same could be said of any game, whether it be Warhammer or Cribbage. It's all a matter of the person's mindset of what they want to get out of the game.

That said, Necrons are durable. They're probably the most durable army in the game. Fortunately, 5/6 times this game is not about killing as many Necrons as possible (and that 6th time is best discounted, as nobody that I know actually enjoys kill points). Especially in Malestrom, victory goes to whoever gets the most objectives. I've had games where I was losing multiple critical units, but still won due to objectives. The Decurion is not good at holding objectives, because Objective Secured is a thing and it matters.

As a Decurion player, and someone that DOES attend tournaments, Objective Secured has come up so little I could count the games on one hand when it did something.

My mistake. I shouldn't have assumed that just because ObSec is important in my armies and strategies that it should apply to Necrons.

What is it about the Decurion that makes ObSec useless? Is it just their sheer durability?

ObSec is a very conditional bonus.

First,and foremost, an objective has to be contested in the first place. If objectives are not contested, then ObSec is utterly irrelevant.

Second, an ObSec unit has to be one of the contesting units. If an objective is contested by two non-Obsec units (e.g. FA bikers rushing over to an objective that's held by an HS tank) well then ObSec doesn't do anything for the army that has it.

Third, there are other ways to neutralize an opponent's control of an objective. Killing or forcing the controlling unit to break and run are of course the obvious solution.

Fourth, and this is the big one, for it to ulitmately determine the winner, the objective in question has to be decisive. If you're playing a Maelstrom mission and losing 4-13, well, gettin an ObSec unit to secure an objective from an opponent to end 5-13 didn't change anything...

Where ObSec really makes itself most felt is in Maelstrom missions, which aren't universally played, and even where they are played they aren't typically the *only* missions played. Even there, the units that typically make best use of it are things like Eldar Jetbikes that can zip around the board nabbing something each turn, and Necrons don't have a unit to fill that role even in a traditional CAD.

Is ObSec useless? No. Is it a gigantic weakness that's going to bite Decurion armies in the ass and cost them games on a routine basis? No.

For some anecdotal evidence, in the tournament I played this weekend, not a single game was decided by Objective Secured. What took the event was Eldar D-weapon spam and Tigurius with Gravcents and Knights.

 Vaktathi wrote:
ObSec is a very conditional bonus.

First,and foremost, an objective has to be contested in the first place. If objectives are not contested, then ObSec is utterly irrelevant.

Second, an ObSec unit has to be one of the contesting units. If an objective is contested by two non-Obsec units (e.g. FA bikers rushing over to an objective that's held by an HS tank) well then ObSec doesn't do anything for the army that has it.

Third, there are other ways to neutralize an opponent's control of an objective. Killing or forcing the controlling unit to break and run are of course the obvious solution.

Fourth, and this is the big one, for it to ulitmately determine the winner, the objective in question has to be decisive. If you're playing a Maelstrom mission and losing 4-13, well, gettin an ObSec unit to secure an objective from an opponent to end 5-13 didn't change anything...

Where ObSec really makes itself most felt is in Maelstrom missions, which aren't universally played, and even where they are played they aren't typically the *only* missions played. Even there, the units that typically make best use of it are things like Eldar Jetbikes that can zip around the board nabbing something each turn, and Necrons don't have a unit to fill that role even in a traditional CAD.

Is ObSec useless? No. Is it a gigantic weakness that's going to bite Decurion armies in the ass and cost them games on a routine basis? No.

For some anecdotal evidence, in the tournament I played this weekend, not a single game was decided by Objective Secured. What took the event was Eldar D-weapon spam and Tigurius with Gravcents and Knights.

Thanks for the write-up. I hadn't really taken all of the factors in Objective Secured into account. I assumed that since Necron armies don't tend to have lots of ObSec units it was one of their weaknesses. This only supports my theory that Close Combat is the answer to Necrons: their mainline troops are weak at it and Necrons have I2 across the board. CC can also prevent the scoring of objectives and contest them, can kill units or force them to run away, and can be effective in all mission types (except kill points, but nobody likes kill points). Note that this doesn't apply to Wraiths; volume of fire and praying to the dice gods are the only practical solutions for most armies, because Wraiths mulch their way through anything and everything.

On a side note, that tournament sounds like absolutely no fun. I hope that ranged D is mysteriously FAQ'ed out in the next one you attend.

Ideally CC would be the way to do it against things like Warriors and Immortals, but Necrons also have a good number of solid CC units now as well to help alleviate that, even without Wraiths. Even at I2, Lychguard and Flayed Ones can still put out a lot of hurt.

I wouldn't look at ObSec really as a weakness, more just as a "trim option" they don't happen to have in a Decurion would really be the way I'd look at it.

The tournament was for the most part fun (I did lose to the Tigurius list, but I couldn't hit squat, 9 lascannons fired on the first turn hit with only 1 shot), but yeah, that Eldar list was absurd, and not to bash the guy playing it on a personal level, but he's not normally a guy that places highly (has to be reminded of rules, even beneficial ones from his own codex, often does weird things like spend lots of warp charges casting Conceal on a unit that nobody is ever going to shoot at, etc) and it felt rather illustrative of most of our local group's fears about that book.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's always a serious indictment of this game that the solution to playing people who want to win is to go find people who want to win a lot less.

The same could be said of any game, whether it be Warhammer or Cribbage. It's all a matter of the person's mindset of what they want to get out of the game.

That said, Necrons are durable. They're probably the most durable army in the game. Fortunately, 5/6 times this game is not about killing as many Necrons as possible (and that 6th time is best discounted, as nobody that I know actually enjoys kill points). Especially in Malestrom, victory goes to whoever gets the most objectives. I've had games where I was losing multiple critical units, but still won due to objectives. The Decurion is not good at holding objectives, because Objective Secured is a thing and it matters.

As a Decurion player, and someone that DOES attend tournaments, Objective Secured has come up so little I could count the games on one hand when it did something.

I'd have to agree with you there. Obj Sec has almost never mattered, and the only times it does is in Maelstrom against Guard players.

I ran a Decurion list last night composed of a Relamation Legion plus the Living Tomb formation (iirc, that's what its called...the one with the Obelisk), and a unit of Deathmarks. Compared to the Decurion lists I've run before, this one felt the most "casual". I won the game, but only by 1 point against a 30k Marine list...and it was one of those games I thought I was going to lose until the game was done and we counted the points up.

Martel732 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
To be honest the GK TAC list tackles basically every army well (I can't think of a single army that it does poorly against).

Ironically, BA. And other marines sporting grav cents, for different reasons. I don't fear GK at all, and I'm scared of a lot of lists in this game. Their model count is even worse, and the super-MC is garbage against BA.

GK don't sport a lot of low AP weapons. This makes meq's a not so great matchup for GK's...it's only a real problem if they have nothing but plasma guns and grav guns...which is basically all the time.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
To be honest the GK TAC list tackles basically every army well (I can't think of a single army that it does poorly against).

Ironically, BA. And other marines sporting grav cents, for different reasons. I don't fear GK at all, and I'm scared of a lot of lists in this game. Their model count is even worse, and the super-MC is garbage against BA.

GK don't sport a lot of low AP weapons. This makes meq's a not so great matchup for GK's...it's only a real problem if they have nothing but plasma guns and grav guns...which is basically all the time.

I crush every grav/plasma/melta shot I can into most lists. Because Riptides and Wraithknights. GK are just a hapless bystander because their durability is merely average, perhaps below average. DC with hidden powerfists are really bad news for GK as well. This is how I know GK are not a power list: they actually care about units BA can field. They can't "lulz Astartes" me off the table like Eldar.

 jasper76 wrote:
I ran a Decurion list last night composed of a Relamation Legion plus the Living Tomb formation (iirc, that's what its called...the one with the Obelisk), and a unit of Deathmarks. Compared to the Decurion lists I've run before, this one felt the most "casual". I won the game, but only by 1 point against a 30k Marine list...and it was one of those games I thought I was going to lose until the game was done and we counted the points up.

Close games like that are usually the sign of two players/armies that are well-balanced against each other. At least we know one way to counter Necrons: bring out the 30k!

Would be interesting to see how that list fared against a 40k army...

Martel732 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
To be honest the GK TAC list tackles basically every army well (I can't think of a single army that it does poorly against).

Ironically, BA. And other marines sporting grav cents, for different reasons. I don't fear GK at all, and I'm scared of a lot of lists in this game. Their model count is even worse, and the super-MC is garbage against BA.

GK don't sport a lot of low AP weapons. This makes meq's a not so great matchup for GK's...it's only a real problem if they have nothing but plasma guns and grav guns...which is basically all the time.

I crush every grav/plasma/melta shot I can into most lists. Because Riptides and Wraithknights. GK are just a hapless bystander because their durability is merely average, perhaps below average. DC with hidden powerfists are really bad news for GK as well. This is how I know GK are not a power list: they actually care about units BA can field. They can't "lulz Astartes" me off the table like Eldar.

I think it's a pretty even matchup - Gk are slightly better in CC than BA so if I can get in CC I usually come out on top. Dreadknights can GG every squad they got except DC - they require 2 DK. Plasma spam is really annoying a GK. Makes me feel less bad about going null deployment and putting my whole army in their face turn 1.

The issue is that the DKs will only fight what I want them to fight. It's a major issue for GK. Plus, the amount of short range AP 2 BA have is absurd, really. It just doesn't help most of the time.

I just can't find it fun at all with my 8 Zerkers and a fully kitted out Chaos Lord charging at a Overlord, and after three turns all being removed and then a Blood Thirster charges in and gets killed and at the end of all the overlord still has 1 wound left. Keep in mind he was alone, so he never used a LOS. Also, wraiths... Not fun in any aspect of any game...

 dragoonmaster101 wrote:
I just can't find it fun at all with my 8 Zerkers and a fully kitted out Chaos Lord charging at a Overlord, and after three turns all being removed and then a Blood Thirster charges in and gets killed and at the end of all the overlord still has 1 wound left. Keep in mind he was alone, so he never used a LOS. Also, wraiths... Not fun in any aspect of any game...

I'm tempted to say bad luck in your case. Those units should all be capable of killing a standard Necron Overlord. But one that's on a command barge with 2+ save and relic scythe is another matter entirely. Were you aiming for the lord, or the barge he was on?

The 'Thirster *should* kill an Overlord, but the Overlord solo'ing 8 Berzerkers on his own is entirely plausible given the way RP works now.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The 'Thirster *should* kill an Overlord, but the Overlord solo'ing 8 Berzerkers on his own is entirely plausible given the way RP works now.

Berserkers are over costed, and need an Icon/IC to be effective. It this was with Demonkin, I'm more curious about the load outs and how they made the play.

I don't disagree about the Necron Overlord though. 2+/4++/4+RP/IWND is just brutal.

He wasn't even on a barge and it was daemonkin. Thing is I rolled the WT that gave me the zealot trait on my warlord and I still couldn't kill him.