Merry Xmas metal bros.

I'm looking at starting a necron force, and since it will be my 3rd army (the plastic crack addiction is strong), if like to keep a relatively low model count.

I've got a fairly good idea about what I want to run, but I'm a bit stuck on choosing hqs. My instinct is to go with a CCB, with the lightning field relic. Are there any A rated warlord combos I should be going for?

Also has the first page been updated since the points drops?

Thanks all.

Welcome to the fold, we've had better days but CA 2018 helped us quite a bit. To give the unhelpful but nuanced answer to your HQ question, we don't really have any auto-include HQ. Even after the points reductions, our HQ tend to be expensive for what they do. You'll want my will be done in one form or another, but whether that's an overlord on foot or a command barge depends on dynasty and how you want to play.

In general the advice is go as cheap as you can on HQ, which is why a lot of people don't like the CCB, because it's 60 points more than an overlord on foot, and more or less requires an artifact to function. Also, The lighting field is tough to justify, because there are much better necron artifacts, and bringing more than 1 artifact puts a strain on our already thin number of CP.

One of the challenges with necron list building is that you will always be lean on CP. Our minimum battalion is just shy of 400 points, and that would be an egg shell detachment with little firepower or board control.

Is 36 warriors enough for a 2k point army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I saw this mine for another gwme and instantly thought of it as necron.

https://www.miniaturemarket.com/pip51013.html

I was thinking of "counts as triarch stalker" and maybe replacing the arms with mechanical tentacles from a chaios helbrute and putting some necron on cannons on the underside. Anyone else see it as necron?

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
Is 36 warriors enough for a 2k point army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I saw this mine for another gwme and instantly thought of it as necron.

https://www.miniaturemarket.com/pip51013.html

I was thinking of "counts as triarch stalker" and maybe replacing the arms with mechanical tentacles from a chaios helbrute and putting some necron on cannons on the underside. Anyone else see it as necron?

36 is definitely enough to use warriors for something in a 2k battle, the question is how. Currently you need to plan well to make good use of warriors. They are slow and weak if used suboptimally.

mrtomski wrote:
I'm looking at starting a necron force, and since it will be my 3rd army (the plastic crack addiction is strong), if like to keep a relatively low model count.

I've got a fairly good idea about what I want to run, but I'm a bit stuck on choosing hqs. My instinct is to go with a CCB, with the lightning field relic. Are there any A rated warlord combos I should be going for?

Also has the first page been updated since the points drops?

Choosing HQs depends on how competitive you want to be, the Quantum Shielding ability the CCB has isn't as relevant as it is on our other vehicles, the CCB is a character anyways, the vast majority of melee units are 1D or D3D or 3D, very rarely D6D or 6D, that means a CCB is only marginally tougher than an Overlord, that leaves the mobility and range which is only good if you are looking to shoot things forward with the Veil of Darkness or the Deceiver. The Warscythe Overlord is the best choice if you're bringing any number of units of 10 Tesla Immortals or Voidscythe Overlord if you're facing a lot of Knights. Lord is pretty good if you're spending more than 500 pts on <Dynasty> Infantry, I don't think there is any specific best loadout for him, but you want to stay away from Resurrection Orbs unless you're bringing several squads of 6 Destroyers or 10 Lychguard. Canoptek Cloak Cryptek is good if you are bringing any full-sized squads of Infantry and multiple models with Living Metal. Chronometron Cryptek is good if you are bringing Warriors. Destroyer Lord is kind of all round solid unit, he will rarely be trash, like an Overlord in a mechanized list or Cryptek in an MSU list, but he's only really amazing if you're taking at 600+ pts of Destroyers/Heavy Destroyers.

Our Unique characters also all have their little niches they fulfill.

There have not been any updates to the front page so far, look at the last few pages to see the discussion on what should or should not be changed, remember we are just random people on the internet, there are no tournament results with CA2018 AFAIK, waiting for more information is the better part of not wasting money on models you're not going to use. Try proxying different things for a couple of battles, see if the units work like you'd like them to.

I won a 2k CA2018 maelstrom game going first against Admech/Knights/Astra Militarum with my Zahndrekh Imotekh Double Battalion list. My opponent's was using some unconventional choices, like the melta/melee Knight and two of the warglaives. He also had two of the 40-shot Flyers. The mission we played involved selecting two objectives on your first turn, being fairly confident I could kill his Knight T1 I picked age of the machine and big game hunter and got D3+4 pts on my first turn. My opponent failed to assassinate Imotekh with 40 AP- shots (I think he assumed he was 3+ Sv, just putting out datacards might not be good enough). My opponent had a ton of high-damage shooting so his choices just happened to be almost nearly useless against me, no Kastelan Robots, no Gatling Knight and both 40-shot Flyers wasting their shots turn 1, one into Imotekh the other into a DDA which they hit on 5+. On top of this I was pretty lucky. I lost my first unit on his third turn and I had destroyed around 1200pts worth of my opponent's stuff on top of having a large VP lead.

I think I'm using the no-cover Strat too often, it might be better just to save the CP for turn 4/5, that's just hard to say when something has a 4+ Sv and is in cover and you want to shoot it with Tesla.

I think keeping a cryptek near a couple units of infantry is important t as the 5++ safe makes it hard to totally wipe out a full unit and allows a boost to RP rolls with 3", or 6" with the right wargear.

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
I think keeping a cryptek near a couple units of infantry is important t as the 5++ safe makes it hard to totally wipe out a full unit and allows a boost to RP rolls with 3", or 6" with the right wargear.

I started running them that way at first, but came to realize i was only very rarely getting use out of it.
Immortals only benefit from it when shot at by AP-3 or AP-4 weapons.

Warriors stand much more to gain from a Chronotek, and an Immortal Pride Overlord Warlord. Stick the chrono, OL, and a lord between 40 warriors, and they put out some pretty silly damage with good staying power as packs of destroyers roam about.

 iGuy91 wrote:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
I think keeping a cryptek near a couple units of infantry is important t as the 5++ safe makes it hard to totally wipe out a full unit and allows a boost to RP rolls with 3", or 6" with the right wargear.

I started running them that way at first, but came to realize i was only very rarely getting use out of it.
Immortals only benefit from it when shot at by AP-3 or AP-4 weapons.

Warriors stand much more to gain from a Chronotek, and an Immortal Pride Overlord Warlord. Stick the chrono, OL, and a lord between 40 warriors, and they put out some pretty silly damage with good staying power as packs of destroyers roam about.

For added fun, Deceiver them up in a Mephrit detachment for 80 shots S4 AP-2. Should grind most things. Season with a Ghost Ark and a gadzillion particle caster tomb blades to take the flank. No destroyers or wraiths needed (I decimated a Tau castle that way once). But it desperately wants to go first.

torblind wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
I think keeping a cryptek near a couple units of infantry is important t as the 5++ safe makes it hard to totally wipe out a full unit and allows a boost to RP rolls with 3", or 6" with the right wargear.

I started running them that way at first, but came to realize i was only very rarely getting use out of it.
Immortals only benefit from it when shot at by AP-3 or AP-4 weapons.

Warriors stand much more to gain from a Chronotek, and an Immortal Pride Overlord Warlord. Stick the chrono, OL, and a lord between 40 warriors, and they put out some pretty silly damage with good staying power as packs of destroyers roam about.

For added fun, Deceiver them up in a Mephrit detachment for 80 shots S4 AP-2. Should grind most things. Season with a Ghost Ark and a gadzillion particle caster tomb blades to take the flank. No destroyers or wraiths needed (I decimated a Tau castle that way once). But it desperately wants to go first.

Particle caster TB are not nearly the deal they were pre CA. Or rather Tessla and Gauss became a much better deal. spend the extra 4 points and give them real weapons.

Agreed. Mephrit Tesla Tomb Blades are better than particle casters due to the weight of fire they bring, AP-1 still, and you get those sweet bonus shots.

 iGuy91 wrote:
Agreed. Mephrit Tesla Tomb Blades are better than particle casters due to the weight of fire they bring, AP-1 still, and you get those sweet bonus shots.

This is true, unless of you're up against T3 where the difference is negligible

.. and with sautekh where the Tesla can get that sweet+1 to hit, though you're unlikely to spend 2CP that the tomb blades are firing their Teslas at


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It sort of is against other toughnesses too.

3 particle caster shots scores you two hits, at 10p that's 5p per hit.

4 Tesla shots scores you 4 hits, at 14p that's 3.5p per hit.

T3: PartC: wound rate 5/6 = 6.00pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 4/6 = 5.25pt per wound T4: PartC: wound rate 4/6 = 7.50 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 4/6 = 5.25 pt per wound T5: PartC: wound rate 4/6 = 7.50 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 3/6 = 7.00 pt per wound T6: PartC: wound rate 3/6 = 10.00 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 2/6 = 10.50 pt per wound

If the difference at T4 or >T6 matters to you, then go tesla, otherwise particle caster is not ineffective in a strict comparison, and if that is all you can afford, you're fine.

torblind wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
Agreed. Mephrit Tesla Tomb Blades are better than particle casters due to the weight of fire they bring, AP-1 still, and you get those sweet bonus shots.

This is true, unless of you're up against T3 where the difference is negligible

.. and with sautekh where the Tesla can get that sweet+1 to hit, though you're unlikely to spend 2CP that the tomb blades are firing their Teslas at


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It sort of is against other toughnesses too.

3 particle caster shots scores you two hits, at 10p that's 5p per hit.

4 Tesla shots scores you 4 hits, at 14p that's 3.5p per hit.

T3: PartC: wound rate 5/6 = 6.00pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 4/6 = 5.25pt per wound T4: PartC: wound rate 4/6 = 7.50 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 4/6 = 5.25 pt per wound T5: PartC: wound rate 4/6 = 7.50 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 3/6 = 7.00 pt per wound T6: PartC: wound rate 3/6 = 10.00 pt per wound Tesla: wound rate 2/6 = 10.50 pt per wound

If the difference at T4 or >T6 matters to you, then go tesla, otherwise particle caster is not ineffective in a strict comparison, and if that is all you can afford, you're fine.

28 Particle Tomb Blades do an average of 56 hits and 47 wounds against a T3 unit.
24 Tesla Tomb Blades do an average of 96 hits and 64 wounds against a T3 unit. That's 36% more firepower (at the worst of times) at the cost of 14% less durability and 14% less board presence. Then you add Overwatch where you get two tesla hits against 0,5 particle hits. No Particle Tomb Blades are far inferior, but remember that we all thought that both options were good before CA, so yes you should pull your particle beamers off if you want to take them to a tournament, but otherwise it really doesn't matter.

Isn't that exactly what I'm saying, just divide by the point cost difference and they're about equal.

Except for overwatch, which is important of you intended to play them as a charge shield.

torblind wrote:
Isn't that exactly what I'm saying, just divide by the point cost difference and they're about equal.

Except for overwatch, which is important of you intended to play them as a charge shield.

No, you said the difference is negligible against T3, 36% bonus firepower is not negligible and it matters even more against T4, less against T5 and T6, more against T 7+. You never want more than 1/3 Particle Beamers in your Tomb Blades, it's a waste of investment to not invest those extra points in the unit when you increase the firepower that much. If your Tomb Blades are a primary target for your opponent you might want to have 1/3 Particle Beamers, but if they aren't you want 0 Particle Beamers.

 vict0988 wrote:

torblind wrote:
Isn't that exactly what I'm saying, just divide by the point cost difference and they're about equal.

Except for overwatch, which is important of you intended to play them as a charge shield.

No, you said the difference is negligible against T3, 36% bonus firepower is not negligible and it matters even more against T4, less against T5 and T6, more against T 7+. You never want more than 1/3 Particle Beamers in your Tomb Blades, it's a waste of investment to not invest those extra points in the unit when you increase the firepower that much. If your Tomb Blades are a primary target for your opponent you might want to have 1/3 Particle Beamers, but if they aren't you want 0 Particle Beamers.

Per Point! You can't simply ignore 90% of what I'm posting about.

They're dealing 36% more damage and costing you 40% more. That's a negligible difference.

If you have 10 points left to kit out your last Tomb Blade you can safely go for particle casters knowing that they're about as point efficient as Teslas (with said caveats). Ie you don't have to shave 4 points elsewhere to go for Teslas to get better.

torblind wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

torblind wrote:
Isn't that exactly what I'm saying, just divide by the point cost difference and they're about equal.

Except for overwatch, which is important of you intended to play them as a charge shield.

No, you said the difference is negligible against T3, 36% bonus firepower is not negligible and it matters even more against T4, less against T5 and T6, more against T 7+. You never want more than 1/3 Particle Beamers in your Tomb Blades, it's a waste of investment to not invest those extra points in the unit when you increase the firepower that much. If your Tomb Blades are a primary target for your opponent you might want to have 1/3 Particle Beamers, but if they aren't you want 0 Particle Beamers.

Per Point! You can't simply ignore 90% of what I'm posting about.

They're dealing 36% more damage and costing you 40% more. That's a negligible difference.

If you have 10 points left to kit out your last Tomb Blade you can safely go for particle casters knowing that they're about as point efficient as Teslas (with said caveats). Ie you don't have to shave 4 points elsewhere to go for Teslas to get better.

36% more per point, that's what I wrote.

The only argument I can make for the Particle Blades is that they can camp on an objective further away and still shoot at targets. Of course that doesn't mean much overall, but it's a...niche I guess?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The only argument I can make for the Particle Blades is that they can camp on an objective further away and still shoot at targets. Of course that doesn't mean much overall, but it's a...niche I guess?

They are the same range as the other ones though. Take a unit of Heavy Destroyers or a DDA if you want long-ranged fire support, Scarabs if you just want to camp an objective and don't care about damage output. Those 4 pts they removed from Tesla Carbines and Gauss Blasters almost entirely removed the niche of Particle Beamers in a competitive setting.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The only argument I can make for the Particle Blades is that they can camp on an objective further away and still shoot at targets. Of course that doesn't mean much overall, but it's a...niche I guess?

They are the same range as the other ones though. Take a unit of Heavy Destroyers or a DDA if you want long-ranged fire support, Scarabs if you just want to camp an objective and don't care about damage output. Those 4 pts they removed from Tesla Carbines and Gauss Blasters almost entirely removed the niche of Particle Beamers in a competitive setting.

I thought they were 36"?

My bad. I can't really come up with anything then.

 vict0988 wrote:

torblind wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

torblind wrote:
Isn't that exactly what I'm saying, just divide by the point cost difference and they're about equal.

Except for overwatch, which is important of you intended to play them as a charge shield.

No, you said the difference is negligible against T3, 36% bonus firepower is not negligible and it matters even more against T4, less against T5 and T6, more against T 7+. You never want more than 1/3 Particle Beamers in your Tomb Blades, it's a waste of investment to not invest those extra points in the unit when you increase the firepower that much. If your Tomb Blades are a primary target for your opponent you might want to have 1/3 Particle Beamers, but if they aren't you want 0 Particle Beamers.

Per Point! You can't simply ignore 90% of what I'm posting about.

They're dealing 36% more damage and costing you 40% more. That's a negligible difference.

If you have 10 points left to kit out your last Tomb Blade you can safely go for particle casters knowing that they're about as point efficient as Teslas (with said caveats). Ie you don't have to shave 4 points elsewhere to go for Teslas to get better.

36% more per point, that's what I wrote.

Really? How does that relate to the math I'm quoting?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh you're including the body in the calculation. This is already a given in the situation I'm referring to.

I your tomb blades is your prioritized platform, you give them what they need to get the job done, both weapons and wargear.

The discussion that spurred this comparison was 40 mephrit warriors deceivered up in EF range. They welcome something fast to tie the lines together and go after the enemy's fast things. This is where you typically end up skimping on the points.

 iGuy91 wrote:


I started running them that way at first, but came to realize i was only very rarely getting use out of it.
Immortals only benefit from it when shot at by AP-3 or AP-4 weapons.

Warriors stand much more to gain from a Chronotek, and an Immortal Pride Overlord Warlord. Stick the chrono, OL, and a lord between 40 warriors, and they put out some pretty silly damage with good staying power as packs of destroyers roam about.

This post really stood out to me.

Which do we think is worth more: 40 Warrior blob with HQs, or Tesla Immortals? If we went with the 40 warrior blob for survivability, we could do a fairly nice list like this for 2000 points on the dot. Hilariously, this list also would have cost 321 extra before CA!



It seems pretty solid to me. You could even cut a Stalker to max the Immortals and add a Res Orb, although the extra Stalker seems fairly useful here.

Does Nihilakh buff the Chrono invuln save for warriors? Because having them camp an objective in late game with a 3+ and a 4++ sounds hilarious. Mephrit is likely still better.


Swapping the warriors for 2 max squads of Tesla Immortals gives you 140 extra points to mess around with. That's a pretty sizable difference.

Hi all, been itching to get my Necrons out for game after taking a bit of a break. I've been doing some reading on this thread to try and get back up to speed. Previously I have been running a lot of Tesla immortals, a CCB, Deciever, Scarabs and 6-12 Destroyers. I always lacked a bit on anti tank firepower so I am thinking of picking up a DDA or 2. Is it worth running a repair spider with them? Also I have picked up some Tomb Blades NOS, I'm wondering whether to equip them with Tesla or Gauss? Tesla seems the way to go but I am intending to run around 30 Tesla Immortals, would it be worth taking the gauss to deal with heavy infantry? We see a good mix of units in the local meta.


RE: Werekill
Nihilakh buff the Chrono invuln save for warriors? Because having them camp an objective in late game with a 3+ and a 4++ sounds hilarious. Mephrit is likely still better.

Yes you do get to add to affectivey a 4++ (BRB FAQ pg8).

Thanks EdO

 Werekill wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:


I started running them that way at first, but came to realize i was only very rarely getting use out of it.
Immortals only benefit from it when shot at by AP-3 or AP-4 weapons.

Warriors stand much more to gain from a Chronotek, and an Immortal Pride Overlord Warlord. Stick the chrono, OL, and a lord between 40 warriors, and they put out some pretty silly damage with good staying power as packs of destroyers roam about.

This post really stood out to me.

Which do we think is worth more: 40 Warrior blob with HQs, or Tesla Immortals? If we went with the 40 warrior blob for survivability, we could do a fairly nice list like this for 2000 points on the dot. Hilariously, this list also would have cost 321 extra before CA!

Spoiler:

1x Chronotek
1x Overlord w/ warscythe (warlord w/ Immortal Pride and Veil)

20x Warriors
20x Warriors
5x Immortals

1x Triarch Stalker w/ Heat Ray
1x Triarch Stalker w/ Heat Ray

6x Wraiths
9x Tomb Blades w/ Tesla and Shadowlooms

1x DDA
1x DDA
1x DDA

It seems pretty solid to me. You could even cut a Stalker to max the Immortals and add a Res Orb, although the extra Stalker seems fairly useful here.

Does Nihilakh buff the Chrono invuln save for warriors? Because having them camp an objective in late game with a 3+ and a 4++ sounds hilarious. Mephrit is likely still better.


Swapping the warriors for 2 max squads of Tesla Immortals gives you 140 extra points to mess around with. That's a pretty sizable difference.

Well there is a subtle difference. Warriors need rapid fire range to be on par with immortals. If you're shooting at hordes that move up to charge you, that means you now have only a single turn of RF shooting before they get charged.

Against fast orks that may be an issue. Against slow moving death guard perhaps lese so.

Immortals have the full power of their horde clearing shooting from 24" and in.

With MWBD the horde-clearing capabilities of 20 warriors in RF and 10 immortals are about the same

Then 20 bodies have other advantages over 10 bodies, -1 AP is an advantage against other targets etc.

@Ed: Thanks! That really is pretty funny to me. A warrior blob with 3+ and 4++ is kinda crazy, albeit expensive on CP.

torblind wrote:

 Werekill wrote:

Collapsed for space:

Spoiler:

This post really stood out to me.

Which do we think is worth more: 40 Warrior blob with HQs, or Tesla Immortals? If we went with the 40 warrior blob for survivability, we could do a fairly nice list like this for 2000 points on the dot. Hilariously, this list also would have cost 321 extra before CA!

1x Chronotek
1x Overlord w/ warscythe (warlord w/ Immortal Pride and Veil)

20x Warriors
20x Warriors
5x Immortals

1x Triarch Stalker w/ Heat Ray
1x Triarch Stalker w/ Heat Ray

6x Wraiths
9x Tomb Blades w/ Tesla and Shadowlooms

1x DDA
1x DDA
1x DDA

It seems pretty solid to me. You could even cut a Stalker to max the Immortals and add a Res Orb, although the extra Stalker seems fairly useful here.

Does Nihilakh buff the Chrono invuln save for warriors? Because having them camp an objective in late game with a 3+ and a 4++ sounds hilarious. Mephrit is likely still better.


Swapping the warriors for 2 max squads of Tesla Immortals gives you 140 extra points to mess around with. That's a pretty sizable difference.

Well there is a subtle difference. Warriors need rapid fire range to be on par with immortals. If you're shooting at hordes that move up to charge you, that means you now have only a single turn of RF shooting before they get charged.

Against fast orks that may be an issue. Against slow moving death guard perhaps lese so.

Immortals have the full power of their horde clearing shooting from 24" and in.

With MWBD the horde-clearing capabilities of 20 warriors in RF and 10 immortals are about the same

Then 20 bodies have other advantages over 10 bodies, -1 AP is an advantage against other targets etc.

Right, Tesla Immortals do seem to be much more effective from a purely offensive perspective. What I'm curious about is seeing if the extra survivability is worth the drop-off in firepower and increase in points.

Personally? I'm not sure. We do also have to take into account the prevalence of -1 to hit, which hurts the Tesla a good bit. Maybe this more survivable blob is a good exchange, where we can hold objectives better? The long range guns of the opponent have much juicier targets, and enemy units have to approach to try to contest the objective.

I'd love to see more silver tides. As long as it has good enough answers to meta's hordes, it should work. If you mean to keep them on objectives, or at least one of them, you could perhaps throw in anrakyr for double cc output. He should be able to tag along with them. Nice if they need to charge into something nasty with poor armor (orks, genestealers, death guard filth).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nihilakh warriors that you play the stratagem get +1 to their save roll, so effectively 2+/4++ with a chrono nearby

@Torblind: How do they get the 2+? Warriors have a base 4+.

Anrakyr isn't too bad an idea, although I'm not sure how much I like the idea of him idly sitting with the warriors. It would also come at the cost of cutting a Stalker, as well.

It'd definitely make the blob more terrifying as a moving offense, I suppose. But then you might as well just consider Imotekh and 20x Tesla Immortals.

 Werekill wrote:
@Torblind: How do they get the 2+? Warriors have a base 4+.

Anrakyr isn't too bad an idea, although I'm not sure how much I like the idea of him idly sitting with the warriors. It would also come at the cost of cutting a Stalker, as well.

It'd definitely make the blob more terrifying as a moving offense, I suppose. But then you might as well just consider Imotekh and 20x Tesla Immortals.

They don't. I brainfarted

@torblind: Ha, no worries.

Still, I definitely continue to have mixed feelings on the warrior blobs. I certainly want to test it, but I suspect the sheer power of the Tesla Immortals will win out. We will see.

 Werekill wrote:
@torblind: Ha, no worries.

Still, I definitely continue to have mixed feelings on the warrior blobs. I certainly want to test it, but I suspect the sheer power of the Tesla Immortals will win out. We will see.

Only thing about Anrakyr and Immotekh is that neither of them have Immortal Pride to make your warriors fearless. Killing off 20 4+ bodies isn't the easiest thing in the world, especially when half your losses come back every turn, and nobody runs, ever.
To offset, a base OL, using Phaeron's Will will be able to comfortably provide both MWBD for 1 cp. Throw in the Reroll 1s to wound lord, and its solid.

Only thing I'll say is that its very, very grindy. You don't kill stuff with warriors outright, you kill it via attrition.

Otherwise, Mephrit benefits warriors well since they're seeking to be in Rapid Fire Range anyway.

@iguy: Yeah, I'm thinking the cryptec + overlord is the call overall instead of anrakyr, as you said. You could do anrakyr and make the cryptec the warlord, but eh.

And yup! It's very grindy, lol. I like the idea of this grindy, sturdy base mixed with QS spam and Wraiths. We still have a lot of kill power in the example list I made.

Got some Necrons for Christmas and are starting them for our yearly escalation league. We are starting at 500 points and I already own 2 boxes of warriors and the new Christmas bundle. Not worried about being ultra competitive but would also not like to get utterly obliterated every game so any tips/do & don'ts as I start.... much appreciate any advice as nobody in the area plays Necrons except one guy that brought the triple vault list so really don't have any experience with them

Asmodios wrote:
Got some Necrons for Christmas and are starting them for our yearly escalation league. We are starting at 500 points and I already own 2 boxes of warriors and the new Christmas bundle. Not worried about being ultra competitive but would also not like to get utterly obliterated every game so any tips/do & don'ts as I start.... much appreciate any advice as nobody in the area plays Necrons except one guy that brought the triple vault list so really don't have any experience with them

500 Points is tough if you want to use Warriors but sth. like this could be a nice starting Point.


++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (Necrons) [30 PL, 500pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Mephrit

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 95pts]: Artefact: The Veil of Darkness, Chronometron, Staff of Light
. Warlord: Warlord Trait (Codex 3): Immortal Pride

Lord [5 PL, 68pts]: Hyperphase Sword

+ Troops +

Immortals [4 PL, 75pts]: 5x Immortal, Tesla Carbine

Immortals [4 PL, 75pts]: 5x Immortal, Tesla Carbine

Necron Warriors [12 PL, 187pts]: 17x Necron Warrior

++ Total: [30 PL, 500pts] ++

Created with BattleScribe

The Chronotek gives you a 5++ invul bubble, which makes the Warriors pretty hard to kill, while the lord lets your RR 1s in Wounding + Mephrit giving you some extra teeth for Dmg output. Immortal Pride lets you pass moral and Veil can be used to either engage or disengage depending on your opponent.

Any way to remove 2 Warriors and add a minimum unit of Scarabs? I think that would be a good way to tie things up in such a small game.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Any way to remove 2 Warriors and add a minimum unit of Scarabs? I think that would be a good way to tie things up in such a small game.

I like Scarabs, but in low Point games RP is really strong, so i dont think they would be worth it.

Hi, I'm a bit new to these forums. I've been making a balanced competitive list by playing with combinations of our best units. This is what I have so far:


The main strategy is to keep my TBs on objectives early in the game while my DDAs abuse their insane range to take out all the T7 threats. Then once enough damage is done, I move my units up except for my smaller squad of tomb blades which sit on my objectives and spread out with scarabs to prevent deep strikes from behind.

2 stalkers help cover for flubbed hit rolls for my DDAS and can be split up so one supports TBs or T-ark for maximum dakka. T-Ark is cheaper, sturdier, more versatile, and hits harder than a squad of destroyers, freeing up both CP for MD and a Cryptek to buff my TBs and allow them to be very annoying to take down. Sautekh for Synergy and a pitiful chance to retain one CP to use a 3rd MD. I have a friend Ill be playing soon who will use Deathguard so I'm hoping this is enough to overwhelm FNP and a possible Magnus/Morty. C&C very appreciated

 Stained Class wrote:
Hi, I'm a bit new to these forums. I've been making a balanced competitive list by playing with combinations of our best units. This is what I have so far:

Spoiler:

++ Outrider Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [55 PL, 974pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Sautekh

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 85pts]: Artefact: The Nightmare Shroud, Canoptek Cloak, Staff of Light

+ Fast Attack +

Canoptek Scarabs [4 PL, 65pts]: 5x Canoptek Scarab Swarm

Canoptek Scarabs [4 PL, 65pts]: 5x Canoptek Scarab Swarm

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 231pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Gauss Blasters: 2x Gauss Blaster

++ Spearhead Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [64 PL, 1015pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Sautekh

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 85pts]: Canoptek Cloak, Staff of Light, Warlord

+ Elites +

Triarch Stalker [8 PL, 125pts]: Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon

Triarch Stalker [8 PL, 125pts]: Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon

+ Heavy Support +

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Tesseract Ark [13 PL, 200pts]
. Two Gauss Cannons: 2x Gauss Cannon

++ Total: [119 PL, 1989pts] ++

The main strategy is to keep my TBs on objectives early in the game while my DDAs abuse their insane range to take out all the T7 threats. Then once enough damage is done, I move my units up except for my smaller squad of tomb blades which sit on my objectives and spread out with scarabs to prevent deep strikes from behind.

2 stalkers help cover for flubbed hit rolls for my DDAS and can be split up so one supports TBs or T-ark for maximum dakka. T-Ark is cheaper, sturdier, more versatile, and hits harder than a squad of destroyers, freeing up both CP for MD and a Cryptek to buff my TBs and allow them to be very annoying to take down. Sautekh for Synergy and a pitiful chance to retain one CP to use a 3rd MD. I have a friend Ill be playing soon who will use Deathguard so I'm hoping this is enough to overwhelm FNP and a possible Magnus/Morty. C&C very appreciated

A lot of tomb blades Dont use the nightmare shroud, its meh. Tesla tomb blades dont benefit from sautekh. If you change it to mephrit you would get better AP at half range. A T.ark doesnt hit harder than a unit of destroyers with EP.

Did they nerf destroyers without me knowing? I thought destroyers were still really awesome for us with the strategem tacked on. So, our heavy anti armor got cheaper while destroyers are still so powerful they are almost auto include right?

Creel wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Any way to remove 2 Warriors and add a minimum unit of Scarabs? I think that would be a good way to tie things up in such a small game.

I like Scarabs, but in low Point games RP is really strong, so i dont think they would be worth it.

15 dudes should still be enough, and tying up a unit at that low a point level is MUCH stronger than RP will ever be.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Did they nerf destroyers without me knowing? I thought destroyers were still really awesome for us with the strategem tacked on. So, our heavy anti armor got cheaper while destroyers are still so powerful they are almost auto include right?

There are some Hereteks who think Destroyers are bad now, they are wrong. I don't think they're auto-include any longer you can make a powerful list without them, whether you should include them depends on the rest of your army and your meta. I won't start my lists with Destroyers and end with Scarabs any longer, replacing the Destroyers with a Tesseract Ark or an Annihilation Barge and the Scarabs with Wraiths or Triarch Praetorians got tonnes better. You now only get 9,6 Destroyers for 3 DDAs instead of 11,6. You need two Scarabs to get a Praetorian instead of two and a half.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I won a 2k ITC game going first against Drukhari using my Zahndrekh Imotekh Overlord Double Battalion list. I shot and barely killed a squad of 2 Talos turn 1, I should definitely have shot down a Ravager instead because his Talos were extremely far back and not an immediate threat at all. My opponent got unlucky and failed a 6" charge with a re-roll which meant I had an entire extra DDA to fire turn 6 and meant my opponent failed to kill anything turn 5. Taking an Overlord instead of a Cryptek was a definite upgrade, the only downside is the immobility of my Veil of Darkness character. I'm considering running a CCB and an Annihilation Barge instead of an Overlord and a DDA and maybe also losing a couple of Immortals to make everything fit, this would take me down to 3 10+ W units which might come in handy in ITC missions, especially against opponents with a ton of anti-QS firepower because I can deny them that last VP or maybe even more if I can make them take an otherwise bad secondary because they can't do 4 VP on Big Game Hunter against this supposed list. I'm still on the fence about the AB, maybe just taking more Immortals or taking some Scarabs could work, problem is I'm already kind of overflowing with anti-Infantry so removing a DDA sounds horrible.

p5freak wrote:
A lot of tomb blades Dont use the nightmare shroud, its meh. Tesla tomb blades dont benefit from sautekh. If you change it to mephrit you would get better AP at half range. A T.ark doesnt hit harder than a unit of destroyers with EP.

Im treating TBs as infantry, if it's overkill do let me know as I've considered replacing my smaller squad of TBs with a second Guass T-Ark and another squad of scarabs. I have no idea what artifacts to use for Cyptek since nothing seems viable as I have nothing to use a veil on. Sautekh is for synergy with my other cryptek, Mephrit sounds nice but I'm worried about placing my TBs in RP range backfiring on me if I don't table a squad, however with 2 stalkers it might work. I'd need to math hammer for that.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Did they nerf destroyers without me knowing? I thought destroyers were still really awesome for us with the strategem tacked on. So, our heavy anti armor got cheaper while destroyers are still so powerful they are almost auto include right?

To clarify, Destroyers *WITH* EP hit hard but thats at the cost of having a cryptek babysit them with a veil and 1 CP per turn. Everyone and their grandmother targets them and can either wipe them out in 1 turn or cripple them so that EP becomes a waste. Before CA they were our strongest unit, but now that our more heavier vehicles are much cheaper (and TOUGHER to take down), I find that 1-2 T-arks can fulfill the role Destroyers have without taking up a lot of resources with T7 and QS to make them harder to take down even when focus fired. I'd rather have my cryptek be used to make my TB walls much more annoying. In addition, they already have 6 Guass shots each as well as a versatile cannon that can switch between a S8 anti-tank cannon and S5 crowd control to fit the situation, meaning that if I fire at a T7 I dont have to pray that I scrounge enough 5+ wound rolls to take it down before it blows my squad off the table.

They aren't bad by any means, but while building my list and taking in cost-effectiveness I found that Destroyers weren't as important anymore. The only issue with T-ark is that it can't cap objectives.

Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Did the T ark come down in points?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the gauss cannon it was 260.. it's not worth that.

 Stained Class wrote:

Im treating TBs as infantry, if it's overkill do let me know as I've considered replacing my smaller squad of TBs with a second Guass T-Ark and another squad of scarabs. I have no idea what artifacts to use for Cyptek since nothing seems viable as I have nothing to use a veil on. Sautekh is for synergy with my other cryptek, Mephrit sounds nice but I'm worried about placing my TBs in RP range backfiring on me if I don't table a squad, however with 2 stalkers it might work. I'd need to math hammer for that.

I suggest using the abyssal staff or sempiternal weave for the cryptek. Your TBs could get charged and attacked in melee at 12", but they can fall back and still shoot, because they have FLY.

Sn33R wrote:
Did the T ark come down in points?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the gauss cannon it was 260.. it's not worth that.

200 post CA2018 and it can cap objectives like any other unit in the game.

Creel wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Got some Necrons for Christmas and are starting them for our yearly escalation league. We are starting at 500 points and I already own 2 boxes of warriors and the new Christmas bundle. Not worried about being ultra competitive but would also not like to get utterly obliterated every game so any tips/do & don'ts as I start.... much appreciate any advice as nobody in the area plays Necrons except one guy that brought the triple vault list so really don't have any experience with them

500 Points is tough if you want to use Warriors but sth. like this could be a nice starting Point.


++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (Necrons) [30 PL, 500pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Mephrit

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 95pts]: Artefact: The Veil of Darkness, Chronometron, Staff of Light
. Warlord: Warlord Trait (Codex 3): Immortal Pride

Lord [5 PL, 68pts]: Hyperphase Sword

+ Troops +

Immortals [4 PL, 75pts]: 5x Immortal, Tesla Carbine

Immortals [4 PL, 75pts]: 5x Immortal, Tesla Carbine

Necron Warriors [12 PL, 187pts]: 17x Necron Warrior

++ Total: [30 PL, 500pts] ++

Created with BattleScribe

The Chronotek gives you a 5++ invul bubble, which makes the Warriors pretty hard to kill, while the lord lets your RR 1s in Wounding + Mephrit giving you some extra teeth for Dmg output. Immortal Pride lets you pass moral and Veil can be used to either engage or disengage depending on your opponent.

Thanks for the suggestions

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Based on suggestions so far, and the realization that Vehicles can cap points, I came up with this.



Is this better than my last list with 3 TB squads or do I already have a good balance in the last list minus the Dynasty and artifacts?

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Based on suggestions so far, and the realization that Vehicles can cap points, I came up with this.

Spoiler:

++ Outrider Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [43 PL, 782pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Mephrit

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 85pts]: Artefact (Mephrit): The Voltaic Staff, Canoptek Cloak, Staff of Light

+ Fast Attack +

Canoptek Scarabs [6 PL, 91pts]: 7x Canoptek Scarab Swarm

Canoptek Scarabs [4 PL, 78pts]: 6x Canoptek Scarab Swarm

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine

++ Spearhead Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [77 PL, 1215pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Sautekh

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 85pts]: Canoptek Cloak, Staff of Light, Warlord

+ Elites +

Triarch Stalker [8 PL, 125pts]: Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon

Triarch Stalker [8 PL, 125pts]: Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon

+ Heavy Support +

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Tesseract Ark [13 PL, 200pts]
. Two Gauss Cannons: 2x Gauss Cannon

Tesseract Ark [13 PL, 200pts]
. Two Gauss Cannons: 2x Gauss Cannon

++ Total: [120 PL, 1997pts] ++

Is this better than my last list with 3 TB squads or do I already have a good balance in the last list minus the Dynasty and artifacts?

Just go ahead with a ****-load of tomb blades, its going to be a fun match and certainly a bit of a surprise for your opponent.

Hey metal bros.

So forming a list to start purchasing models.

Going for a 2 bat sautekh, with tesla immortals, imotek, obryon and zahn, doomsday arcs.

I'm thinking that having a c-tan would be a good use of the final points. I have a couple of questions
1. Are 2 DDAs enough or should I go for 3.
2. Is a nightbringer worth his points in this kind of list.
3. Is there should I run some immortals as gauss or stick solely to tesla?

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Weird, the link works for me. It's the "post CA annihilation barge" thread on this same board.

I'd summarize, but I'm currently on mobile and just now waking up. Maybe later.

mrtomski wrote:
Hey metal bros.

So forming a list to start purchasing models.

Going for a 2 bat sautekh, with tesla immortals, imotek, obryon and zahn, doomsday arcs.

I'm thinking that having a c-tan would be a good use of the final points. I have a couple of questions
1. Are 2 DDAs enough or should I go for 3.
2. Is a nightbringer worth his points in this kind of list.
3. Is there should I run some immortals as gauss or stick solely to tesla?

1. Two DDAs are enough, we have other good units and according to this thread Necrons are still bottom tier so who really cares? DDAs are okay against most things and amazing against a fair few things. I think they're our best choice, tournament results are going to speak for themselves.
2. Yes, he is cool, probably not the best choice against most armies, but amazing for his pts in a few matchups. He's particularly good at killing Monsters, but pretty useless against Knights.
3. I'm going to change over to at least 8 Gauss Immortals when I play wysiwyg to lessen the amount of Tesla I need to buy, but I think Tesla is better if you're running 3 MWBDs and a must if you're running 4 MWBDs, your opponent is going to mow down the tesla first and you'll be buffing the sup-par Gauss. Gauss is still quite a lot better against a few targets, more targets without MWBD and Methodical Destruction which usually gives Tesla an edge, with Obyron and/or Veil you can threaten RF quite quickly I imagine so it's really not the end of the world either way.

I won a 2k game going first against Tyranids with my Anrakyr Szeras Balanced list. The list went from 10 Triarch Praetorians to 20 Triarch Praetorians, it's become a lot stronger, probably not the kid gloves list it used to be, I guess I'm going to start using more Spyders. I forgot to use Szeras end of Movement ability every turn and failed to keep my Warriors and Immortals in Fearless range during deployment. Praetorians rushed forward and dealt a heavy blow to my opponent, I bodyblocked his Scythed Hierodule with my Scarabs, saving my Triarch Praetorians, letting them cut my opponent's infantry to ribbons. Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers handled the rest.

I won a 2k ITC game going second against Deathwing/Dark Angels/Astra Militarum list with my Zahndrekh Imotekh Overlord Double Battalion list. Deathwing aren't a threat barring amazing charge rolls, Infantry Squads die when they come close to Immortals.

I won a 2k ITC game going second against Spacewolves/Astra Miltarum/Castellan with the same list. My opponent rushed all his Space Wolves forward and they died. He surrendered after losing his Wolf Lord to Overwatch and attacks from 10 Immortals. His luck was atrocious but he said he could have won staying back and lighting me up instead of coming forwards.

I won a 2k kill point game going first against Blood Angels Primaris spam with my Supreme Seraptek Flayed Ones list. It was supposed to be a casual game, I brought the Seraptek because I was thinking that since this list only got 46 pts it's probably one of the more casual lists you can bring, Seraptek is still pretty good, and it's still not fun in casual games. I didn't ask my opponent if he knew the rules of the Seraptek because he'd played me before and knew the basics of Necrons, but he had no idea what it was so when he got charged turn 1 he was a bit shocked. Had it been a tournament it would be on him to ask, but I think I failed in making the game fun for the both of us. I chose not to bring my Flayed Ones in, my army did fine without them. My opponent also failed more or less every roll that counted making for a very one-sided game.

 Werekill wrote:

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Weird, the link works for me. It's the "post CA annihilation barge" thread on this same board.

I'd summarize, but I'm currently on mobile and just now waking up. Maybe later.

The link fails in mobile yet works on a desktop

Thankfully I was able to read it before I gamed with a friend and your data was REALLY helpful. Stalkers really aren't as useful as I thought, and rolling 2's was more problematic if anything when I tested them. Instead I fixed my list up with some minor tweaks:



This list basically boiled down to what units can abuse RP and QS the best to stay on the board to outstay the opponent's units. TBs in big squad supported by Scarabs and a Cryptek work to deny or take objectives while being a hard to hit or kill unless a lot of resources are focused on one squad. Triple Guass Tessarks are run as a single unit that act like a squad of Destroyers with 18 Guass shots and a very versatile way of dealing with either infantry or T7s. A Cryptek stays wedged inside the squad to heal any of them that get scratched by enemy fire. DDAs support them from afar and move up to help with infantry mid-game. 6CP is used for primarily 3 uses of MD. I'm still unsure whether HS or Immortal Pride is better to run as a warlord trait, but both work have their positives. I ran HS for the chance to get back 1 CP that could be used for a re-roll.

This list was able to surprise my opponent by taking down his Mortarion in 1 turn by focus firing on him with all my Heavies buffed by MD. Needless to say we were both shocked by their efficiency. I honestly feel like this is my strongest list so far.

So, I had a very silly list idea which I think could be fun, running a c'tan bomb.

Specifically, running a deceiver, nightbringer, and a cosmic transcendent ctan, with a 9 man unit of scarabs.

The deceiver takes the other c'tan and scarabs, and places them all 12 inches away, they then move into range (they cannot charge but thats ok), and barrage the enemy with mortal wounds, using all the ctan power strategems to add more powers, with 27 ablative scarab wounds to get through before you can harm the big guys. Some of those powers would be devastating against tightly packed armies.

Paired with Nephrek wraiths for a turn 1 charge, could give someone a lot of threats to think about in a casual game.

I have my 1st 1k Tournament since CA18 and I am thinking of running this;



Basic idea is that I have lots of Anti tank as well as QS which should be a pain to deal with. And with 8 TBs having -1 to hit and 4+ RP they should be a pain as well.

I'll be advancing the cryptek to keep up with the Tesla TBs and the Sautekh SoL isn't affected by advancing as it auto hits. Is also a great weapon to active the Sautekh Stratagem so that my TBs can activate Tesla and a 5+ and if I use the triarch Stalker to re-roll 1s I should perform lots of Dakka.

The cryptek, TBs, T.Stalker and 1 DDA will be a deathstar. With TBs in front, cryptek in the middle, T.Stalker behind the cryptek and DDA side says to protect the T.Stalker from behind charges.

2 DDAs will definitely be stationary on objectives. Once everything T8+ is dead they will also move about making use of their gauss arrays as well. Between 3 DDAs I'll have 30-60 S4 -1 shots as well so this list does produce anti infantry as well.

3 scarabs to soak any smite of whatever T1 or hold objective. Considering swapping them for the extra TB.

Your ideas guys?

 Odrankt wrote:
I have my 1st 1k Tournament since CA18 and I am thinking of running this;

Spoiler:

++ Spearhead Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [59 PL, 993pts] ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Dynasty Choice: Dynasty: Sautekh

+ HQ +

Cryptek [5 PL, 85pts]: Artefact (Sautekh): The Abyssal Staff, Canoptek Cloak, Staff of Light, Warlord

+ Elites +

Triarch Stalker [8 PL, 125pts]: Heat Ray

+ Fast Attack +

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

Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts]
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine

+ Heavy Support +

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]

Total: [59 PL, 993pts]

Basic idea is that I have lots of Anti tank as well as QS which should be a pain to deal with. And with 8 TBs having -1 to hit and 4+ RP they should be a pain as well.

I'll be advancing the cryptek to keep up with the Tesla TBs and the Sautekh SoL isn't affected by advancing as it auto hits. Is also a great weapon to active the Sautekh Stratagem so that my TBs can activate Tesla and a 5+ and if I use the triarch Stalker to re-roll 1s I should perform lots of Dakka.

The cryptek, TBs, T.Stalker and 1 DDA will be a deathstar. With TBs in front, cryptek in the middle, T.Stalker behind the cryptek and DDA side says to protect the T.Stalker from behind charges.

2 DDAs will definitely be stationary on objectives. Once everything T8+ is dead they will also move about making use of their gauss arrays as well. Between 3 DDAs I'll have 30-60 S4 -1 shots as well so this list does produce anti infantry as well.

3 scarabs to soak any smite of whatever T1 or hold objective. Considering swapping them for the extra TB.

Your ideas guys?

Only comment: Tomb Blades are not Infantry, thus no +1 Rp.

Cloak Cryptek still good to repair DDA/Stalker.

Crypteks Technomancer ability affects all Reanimation Protocols units with +1 RP. Not just infantry. Infact, all Modifiers regarding RO are not limited to infantry. Just models that can have it. Including Canoptek units via the Stratgem.

Fellow overlords, after CA is Imohtek a decent choice? As I'm now running at least 2 Tesla immortals squads now after CA, his dual MWBD seems tasty along with his other rules. Plus free CP and CP Regen warlord traits. Too pricey before but I'm thinking possibly competitive now. Thoughts?

Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper. Tomb blades got 4 points cheaper a model, and they fill that anti-infantry niche while being faster, harder to hit and benefiting more from RP. Doomsday arks also got cheaper, at 320 points for two of them, and two DDAs are much better at fighting knights than 6 destroyers.

To quantify those statements,

9 tomb blades is 252 points vs 300 for 6 destroyers, assuming MEQ here is how the math works out

Tomb blades 36 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 10.7 wounds for 252 points = 23.5 points per wound
Destroyers 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 2/3 * 5/6 = 7.65 wounds for 300 points = 39.2 points per wound

The weaker the unit the better the tomb blades are, so against GEQ or Orks, tomb blades perform much better. Destroyer perform a little better against Primaris, terminators, and Nobz, but I don't see many of those in my meta.

Against Knights

2 x DDAs: 7 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 7.3 damage = 43.8 points per damage
Destroyers: 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 1/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 6.1 damage = 49.2 points per damage

All bets are off on an extermination protocol rounds, but we tend to run very lean on CP, and destroyers are pretty squishy compared to to either DDAs or Tomb blades. So you either deep strike them when you need them (which cost another CP, dictates the dynasty, and limits their presence to after the first turn), or risk them getting shot off of the board before they can do anything. Also a round after round investment of CP to make a unit work is less than ideal for an army that has 9 to 10 CP in most configurations.

 buddha wrote:
Fellow overlords, after CA is Imohtek a decent choice? As I'm now running at least 2 Tesla immortals squads now after CA, his dual MWBD seems tasty along with his other rules. Plus free CP and CP Regen warlord traits. Too pricey before but I'm thinking possibly competitive now. Thoughts?

I think imotekh is viable now, if you play him with at least two maxed infantry units.

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

There is no where stating that if you take Imotekh that he has to be your warlord. You can choose any HQ to be your warlord so you can pick which trait you want in your list.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

There is no where stating that if you take Imotekh that he has to be your warlord. You can choose any HQ to be your warlord so you can pick which trait you want in your list.

While that is true, you dont get the 1 CP he provides, if he isnt the warlord.

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

@Tauris_Blazestar

That´s true but giving up on the extra CP while taking, doesn´t sound that great tbh.

So for my first attempt at a competitive list post CA I came up with this:


It performed far better than I expected it to. Was up against admech cawl parking lot with a knight. The triarch stalker is really good for the points now, and I love the tomb blades even more than before. Giving the DDA reroll 1s and +1 to hit via MD is really solid. I'm strongly considering moving the tomb blades to sautekh and scraping the nephrekh detachment and just putting destroyers in an aux to save points on the lord and the scarabs so as to upgrade one DDA to Tess ark. What do you all think?

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

@Tauris_Blazestar

That´s true but giving up on the extra CP while taking, doesn´t sound that great tbh.

It would be, but as it's not a hit roll, wound roll or damage roll, you'd have to pay a CP to do it.

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:


How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

If you roll for the storm you inflict damage, so its a damage roll, sort of. If you dont agree that its a damage roll, then imotekh gives you +1 CP. If you use it to re-roll the storm its a free re-roll, sort of.

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

This may be worth Asking in YMDC.

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Weird, the link works for me. It's the "post CA annihilation barge" thread on this same board.

I'd summarize, but I'm currently on mobile and just now waking up. Maybe later.

The link fails in mobile yet works on a desktop

Thankfully I was able to read it before I gamed with a friend and your data was REALLY helpful. Stalkers really aren't as useful as I thought, and rolling 2's was more problematic if anything when I tested them. Instead I fixed my list up with some minor tweaks:

*list was here*

Just make sure to keep in mind that the Stalker still does a respectable amount of damage by itself, and it's fairly sturdy. The only huge gap is between GEQ numbers.

But your list looks very solid!

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Gauss Pylon or Sentry pylons with the Gauss weapon. C'tan and Destroyer Lords aren't horrible, but not a real counter either. Destroyers aren't great unless your opponent regularly flies within 22" of them, while also not killing them. I think they're a bad counter because you don't get to re-roll 3s and 4s To Hit when shooting with Extermination Protocols, regardless of modifiers, -2 just cuts your shooting in half for Destroyers. Realistically the unit is too tough to deal with, ignore it and try to beat the rest of your opponent's army if you can't get within 12".

I won a 2k game against mono-Grey Knights going second with my Zahndrekh Lychguard Night Shroud list. Lychguard seem pretty bad, they do so little work considering their price compared to Teslamortals, I can't think of an opponent where I'd genuinely want to take them. The Night Shroud isn't worth its points, it might be as good as our other flyers, I just don't see how often my opponent is going to let me do a fly-over of an important unit, it's nearly useless against a large number of armies. I ran out of CP turn 1, definitely overspent, I was spending like I had 14, but my list just had 9 so that sucked, but not much because my opponent had terrible rolls and couldn't do any damage to me. I've also been forgetting to use Zahndrekh's random ability much of the time.

Creel wrote:

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

It's just an arbitrary roll, it's not any one of those very specific rolls for which the Sautekh warlord gets a free reroll.

Since a reroll a hit/wound/damage roll of your Sautekh is unlikely to give a substantial advantage, the value of this reroll certainly is questionable. Perhaps if he wielded a Dmg3 CC weapon or if Imotekh was shooting his Dmg2 weapon at a sentinel or something which threatens your tesla immortals and really needs to die.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Anything that does MW, is auto hitting, or has +1 to hit FLY. But, there is a stratagem which gives another -1 to hit, so even with +1 to hit, you are back at -2. As vict0988 already said, ignore it. Try to kill the rest of your opponents army. If flyers are the only unit(s) left, he is tabled and loses the game. Unless you play one of the new CA18 missions where you dont automatically lose when tabled.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Could you charge them with something CTan? Or destroyer Lord(s)if you fly those

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

It's just an arbitrary roll, it's not any one of those very specific rolls for which the Sautekh warlord gets a free reroll.

Since a reroll a hit/wound/damage roll of your Sautekh is unlikely to give a substantial advantage, the value of this reroll certainly is questionable. Perhaps if he wielded a Dmg3 CC weapon or if Imotekh was shooting his Dmg2 weapon at a sentinel or something which threatens your tesla immortals and really needs to die.

I respect your opinion and it´s really GW´s fault for not defining things in there rules that causes a lot of confusion, but i dont see how those three type of roles are very specific, especially considering how often wound and damage roll gets mixed up in the various rules. Probably best to open a ymdc thread about this.

My default lists are 2 bats, with immortals, using Mephrit.

Assuming that's a solid core what do you recommend to support? Also, I have a triarch stalker and Monolith model. I am reading some love for the stalker... but dare I ask if monoliths are still terrible? If so, just how bad?

With the Abyssal Staff + Methodical Destruction you can get a fairly easy +1 to hit on a Hemlock. Of course this requires Sautekh which honestly is much better than Mephrit. I feel like Mephrit is a gigantic trap and it's a similar issue to what Tau players were having before they realized Velocity Trackers were good; an extra -1 AP doesn't matter if you can't hit anything or if you can't even get into half range to make use of it in the first place. The main thing with Hemlocks is that they themselves are actually pretty short range so the mass minus-to-hit stacking is mainly applicable in turn 1. I've managed to have some success recently with 3 DDA's and a unit of destroyers NOT in deepstrike. Now, 3 Eldar flyers will hurt, you can't avoid it, but by placing everything down and not in deepstrike I do force them to choose a bit harder on what they want to focus on. If I don't get first turn the main thing is just bracing and hoping the damage isn't too severe, but also positioning my stuff so that the flyers need to get right up close to hit the targets they want to hit which leaves them close enough to ignore the Altaioc -1 in my turn 1. With a Chronotek nearby your Destroyers could very possible absorb all 3 Hemlock fire before dying which then leaves 3 DDA's, with maybe 1 or 2 in rapid fire range, to retaliate and helped along with the aforementioned Abyssal Staff, Methodical Destruction and maybe a Triarch Stalker too.

 Grimgold wrote:
I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper. Tomb blades got 4 points cheaper a model, and they fill that anti-infantry niche while being faster, harder to hit and benefiting more from RP. Doomsday arks also got cheaper, at 320 points for two of them, and two DDAs are much better at fighting knights than 6 destroyers.

To quantify those statements,

9 tomb blades is 252 points vs 300 for 6 destroyers, assuming MEQ here is how the math works out

Tomb blades 36 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 10.7 wounds for 252 points = 23.5 points per wound
Destroyers 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 2/3 * 5/6 = 7.65 wounds for 300 points = 39.2 points per wound

The weaker the unit the better the tomb blades are, so against GEQ or Orks, tomb blades perform much better. Destroyer perform a little better against Primaris, terminators, and Nobz, but I don't see many of those in my meta.

Against Knights

2 x DDAs: 7 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 7.3 damage = 43.8 points per damage
Destroyers: 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 1/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 6.1 damage = 49.2 points per damage

All bets are off on an extermination protocol rounds, but we tend to run very lean on CP, and destroyers are pretty squishy compared to to either DDAs or Tomb blades. So you either deep strike them when you need them (which cost another CP, dictates the dynasty, and limits their presence to after the first turn), or risk them getting shot off of the board before they can do anything. Also a round after round investment of CP to make a unit work is less than ideal for an army that has 9 to 10 CP in most configurations.

So in the spirit of re-examining units that we neglected before the CA 2018, I took a look at flayed ones. Against MEQ they are pretty competitive with tomb blades in terms of throughput for a given points value, assuming Novokh:

hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 1/2 + (1/2 * 1/2) = 3/4
Chance to fail save: 1/3

so 8/9 * 3/4 *1/3 * 3 = .67 wounds per fight phase per model
thus 17/.67 = 25.3 points per wound against MEQ

Against marines at 13PPM that gives them about a 2 to 1 ratio, which is a good points invested vs points destroyed. They will do better against GEQ in terms of wounds inflicted, but GEQ are much cheaper and thus the ratio of points invested to points destroyed is worse:

hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Chance to fail save: 2/3

So 8/9 * 8/9 * 2/3 * 3 = 1.6 wounds per fight phase
thus 17/1.6 = 10.6 points per wound

Against GEQ at 4PPM = 2.65 to 1 ratio, which is still not a bad ratio, though for larger flayed one blobs you'll run out of victims before you can reach that, since a 20 man flayed one blob would require 32 victims to get that ratio.

So the next question is how broad is their target profile, to channel my inner mad scientist, let check their worst target profile, knights. I'll cheat slightly and assume you spend 1 CP for disruption fields to give them +1 str:

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail save: 1/3

So .48 wounds per model per combat round, so for a 20 man blob that's almost 10 wounds, against what is their worst target profile.

The math says they are more flexible than destroyers while being significantly tougher, and as a cherry on top they gain the maximum benefit from RP. However good math and good tabletop experience are often strangers, they are slow, and thus hard to get into melee. Deep striking them is a trap, because they can't show up until the second round, and you'll likely have to wait until the third round to get them into CC. So that leaves Hoofing it, Veil of darkness, or a nightscythe. Veil is probably the best offensive option since you can add a warlord trait (like crimson haze or implacable conqueror), Night scythe is the best chance to get them into CC (if it survives) and the idea of 20 flayed ones squeezing out of a clown car is just amusing. Hoofing it is probably the worst option, since even advancing with MWBD on the first round you'll only be able to charge (6" + 5" + 3.5" + 7") = 21.5" on average, which is short of the 24" you'll have to cover for a second round charge. It might not be a bad option if you have an opponent that you know is coming for you (like orks or tyranids). I'll play around with lists to see if I can make a viable melee army for necrons.

*edit* Here is the list, still needs some polish but is an interesting deviation from the normal necrons lists:

Ed Orange wrote:
Hi all, been itching to get my Necrons out for game after taking a bit of a break. I've been doing some reading on this thread to try and get back up to speed. Previously I have been running a lot of Tesla immortals, a CCB, Deciever, Scarabs and 6-12 Destroyers. I always lacked a bit on anti tank firepower so I am thinking of picking up a DDA or 2. Is it worth running a repair spider with them? Also I have picked up some Tomb Blades NOS, I'm wondering whether to equip them with Tesla or Gauss? Tesla seems the way to go but I am intending to run around 30 Tesla Immortals, would it be worth taking the gauss to deal with heavy infantry? We see a good mix of units in the local meta.

Gauss is generally thought to be the best option AFAIK. The problem with Gauss Immortals is their inability to move into range quickly enough and then the fact that they can get locked in combat and possibly even taken hostage.

Anybody think we'll see a resurgence of the Gauss Pylon? Or is it only really amazing against things without an invul? I'm a little concerned it'll be useless against 3++ Knights, they can just save a re-roll for it and be fine. Maybe with a DDA you can trigger Rotate on a Castellan and then shoot the Pylon at something else, or if he doesn't you maybe get a few wounds on it, Methodical Destruction for the win. Something like Pylon, 3 DDAs, two Triarch Stalkers, Cloaktek, Annihilation Barge. Aaand that's not 2000 pts any longer. It would have been 1700 now it's 1400. Add 600 pts worth of Ork hate.

 Grimgold wrote:
I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper. Tomb blades got 4 points cheaper a model, and they fill that anti-infantry niche while being faster, harder to hit and benefiting more from RP. Doomsday arks also got cheaper, at 320 points for two of them, and two DDAs are much better at fighting knights than 6 destroyers.

To quantify those statements,

9 tomb blades is 252 points vs 300 for 6 destroyers, assuming MEQ here is how the math works out

Tomb blades 36 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 10.7 wounds for 252 points = 23.5 points per wound
Destroyers 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 2/3 * 5/6 = 7.65 wounds for 300 points = 39.2 points per wound

The weaker the unit the better the tomb blades are, so against GEQ or Orks, tomb blades perform much better. Destroyer perform a little better against Primaris, terminators, and Nobz, but I don't see many of those in my meta.

Against Knights

2 x DDAs: 7 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 7.3 damage = 43.8 points per damage
Destroyers: 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 1/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 6.1 damage = 49.2 points per damage

All bets are off on an extermination protocol rounds, but we tend to run very lean on CP, and destroyers are pretty squishy compared to to either DDAs or Tomb blades. So you either deep strike them when you need them (which cost another CP, dictates the dynasty, and limits their presence to after the first turn), or risk them getting shot off of the board before they can do anything. Also a round after round investment of CP to make a unit work is less than ideal for an army that has 9 to 10 CP in most configurations.

So to summarize, Tomb Blades are better against MEQ at 12" than Destroyers at 12", DDAs are better against Knights when you ignore our best Stratagem that costs a whopping 1 CP. Destroyers are more versatile and don't rely on getting into RF range or standing still, they're our best anti TEQ choice but when you ignore those things there is no reason to take them over two of our other top choices. You really just made Destroyers sound amazing by pointing out how little better DDAs and TBs are in your cheripicked scenarios.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

There is no where stating that if you take Imotekh that he has to be your warlord. You can choose any HQ to be your warlord so you can pick which trait you want in your list.

You'd be a fool not to, he gets you a free CP for being your WL and he has the best WL trait available to Necrons. The only WL trait that has any chance of being better is the Fearless/Deny trait and that's only better in certain niche armies. In those armies you should not pick Imotekh. I haven't been triggering Methodical Destruction with his Lord of the Storm ability, I've read that you can trigger it like this, what would lead anyone to think you can? Also, a free re-roll is free. Just because it is a worse version of the Astra Militarum one does not mean it is no longer good.

Inevitableq wrote:
I'm strongly considering scraping the nephrekh detachment and just putting destroyers in an aux to save points on the lord and the scarabs.

Letting go of Methodical Destruction and Relentless Advance and paying 2 CP to Deep Strike a squad of Destroyers is not worth it. They're perfectly fine as Sautekh if you play on tables with enough terrain. If you don't then you definitely do not want to get rid of any Doomsday Arks.

 Grimgold wrote:
... The math says Flayed Ones are more flexible than destroyers...

Where in the math does it say they have range 24"? You can multiply Flayed Ones damage by 0,28 because they need to actually successfully charge to do anything, then you also have to subtract some or a lot of attacks because of Overwatch, depending on how effective the Overwatch is you could be looking at 2-6 dead FOs and still a possibly failed charge. Flayed Ones are good if you are a god at rolling charge distances (and if you never forget them ), but mathematically they are trash. The best you can get is re-roll failed charge rolls and having a CP ready, so if you roll no 5+s you re-roll and if you roll at least 1 5+ but don't roll 9+ you can get up to 40-60% chance of succesfully charging turn 2. Nephrekh Destroyers have a 100% chance of shooting turn 2 unless you're playing against a select few opponents that can fire when you DS.

 vict0988 wrote:

So to summarize, Tomb Blades are better against MEQ at 12" than Destroyers at 12", DDAs are better against Knights when you ignore our best Stratagem that costs a whopping 1 CP. Destroyers are more versatile and don't rely on getting into RF range or standing still, they're our best anti TEQ choice but when you ignore those things there is no reason to take them over two of our other top choices. You really just made Destroyers sound amazing by pointing out how little better DDAs and TBs are in your cheripicked scenarios.

I'm not sure you did the math, so let me do it to show you how much smoke your blowing.

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail a save: 2/3

so the damage they would do on a EP round is:
8/9 * 5/9 * 2/3 * 2 * 18 = 11 wounds

That's four wounds more, and if you were to instead blow that CP on a reroll for the DDA (say number of shots or a failed wound), it would only be less than 1 wound of difference. Do you think that extra fraction of a wound justifies the fragility of destroyers when compared to DDAs? I sure don't, the fragility of destroyers has vexed me this entire edition, and in a meta this heavy on knights, it's not like people don't bring the right weapons to wipe out a destroyer squad in a single round.

A few other points,
- I never said destroyers were bad, in fact my very first sentence in the quote says this "I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper."
- Cherry picking involves looking for edge cases to support your point, I used two of the most common opponents you'll likely face at a tournament. For instance if I were cherry picking I wouldn't have used knights I would have used LRBT, because it doesn't have an invul, which would have made the DDA better. If I were cherry picking I would have used genestealers instead of MEQ since they have an invul which cuts down on the effectiveness of destroyers. Please don't accuse me of being intellectually dishonest, especially when you do the very thing you accuse me of in the same breath.
- Do you run into many TEQ, because I sure don't. This is a good example of cherry picking, taking a unit that doesn't see the light of day in the competitive scene and using it as an excuse as to why your argument is somehow better.
- With a 14" move and fly tomb blades should never have a problem getting into raid fire range, Tomb blades are also considerably tougher than destroyers, and benefit more from RP.
- If I make destroyers sound amazing it's because I was looking only at their offensive output, instead of their well known issues. I do that because I want to compare their strengths to units who are arguably better in every other way. On Offense destroyers only edge out their rivals with a stratagem, and have a lifespan of a turn or two once they get into the action.
- Destroyers are a high risk high reward unit, in an army designed around snowballing. They do have a broad range of targets, but end up playing second fiddle to units that are designed to do specific roles. Take lychguard for instance, with that same 1 CP investment, they can drop 20 wounds on a knight in a single round, destroyers are lucky to get half of that. for that same CP, 300 points of tesla immortal is almost double the output of destroyers against infantry, thanks to double my will be done.

I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but you talk like you have all this knowledge about necrons, but even a cursory examination of what you are talking about shows that you are mistaken. If you are just looking to snark, might I suggest reddit, at least you can earn fake internet points by playing the buffoon over there.

The fact you said Destroyers were less geared for killing a Knight than Lychguard says more about you not playing the army than the guy you're replying to

Come on guys, this is perhaps the friendliest tactica thread on dakkadakka, don't start the new year like this!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The fact you said Destroyers were less geared for killing a Knight than Lychguard says more about you not playing the army than the guy you're replying to

Well they do more wounds, don't they. Doesn't mean you get to see that on table, which also he is not saying.

 Grimgold wrote:


So that leaves Hoofing it, Veil of darkness, or a nightscythe. Veil is probably the best offensive option since you can add a warlord trait (like crimson haze or implacable conqueror), Night scythe is the best chance to get them into CC (if it survives) and the idea of 20 flayed ones squeezing out of a clown car is just amusing.

Strictly speaking, NIght scythe means also they don't get their till turn two (because deployed off the board), the exact reason you moved away from deep striking. The Monolith on the other hand..


As for being tough..

Having played against Necrons with Necrons, I experienced first hand how lack luster our mid range damage output is, I was unsuccessful at taking down 6 destroyers in my 2nd turn. 18 wounds 3+ T5 isn't particularly more fragile than 20 wounds T4 4+ (flayed ones). If Flayed ones should become the next great thing, they certainly would get blown of the board a lot easier than destroyers.

Cmon guys!

just as @torblind said lets not start the new year like that!

I have to agree with @Grimgold that Destroyers are very fragile. I DO think they are one of our best units. Plus now that we can better use 2 battalions its a well spent CP for EP.
But I DO think they arent our only best unit they were before CA2018.
Spending a CP on a 300point unit and hoping for many 5s isnt a solution that many people consider „best“.

Destroyers aren't that fragile, imo.
I've had games where they absolutely refuse to get wiped, even after taking a bit of punishment.

It depends on positioning, I think. Abuse LoS and range limits, use chaff to tie up targets and force your opponent to deal with threats. I actually really like warrior blobs for this purpose, because some opponents get really scared of them and try to whittle them down before they get into range. If monoliths didn't have that stupid 3 turn delay before they can be properly used, dropping in a monolith with 20 warriors would be a hilarious surprise.
In theory its still strong, but it depends on surviving until the monolith arrive and having enough CP left over to use the emergency invasion beam if the monolith gets focused down.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

torblind wrote:


Having played against Necrons with Necrons, I experienced first hand how lack luster our mid range damage output is, I was unsuccessful at taking down 6 destroyers in my 2nd turn. 18 wounds 3+ T5 isn't particularly more fragile than 20 wounds T4 4+ (flayed ones). If Flayed ones should become the next great thing, they certainly would get blown of the board a lot easier than destroyers.

Necron mirror matches are pretty boring. Most mirror matches are, but necrons are especially boring, because you're just slugging at each other, and neither army has the damage output to do anything.
Its actually pretty ironic that the army that necrons can most reliably get RP against is necrons.

Pretty sure 18 T5 3+ save wounds is more durable than 20 T4 4+ save wounds though. One has a higher toughness stat and better saves characteristic.

One likes small arms more than the other. However, destroyers really hate weapons with good damage characteristics and high strength.
In fact, they and monoliths are the only units that particularly hate them; with any other necron unit small arms or Damage 2-3 appears to be sufficient. Which means that your opponent can just dump lascannons into destroyers. Its why I think it would do wonders for the necron army if there was something like a mini-monolith unit that could serve as a front-line battle tank. Something like a predator, except with more wounds, living metal, T8 and armed with a deathray and 2 gauss cannons. Because Necron Science is the Best in the World.

With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

MrPieChee wrote:
With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

Yes, from what you say, but I usually bring Tesla immortals for that insane, sweet MWBD force multiplier, won't get that with a barge.

 Grimgold wrote:
I'm not sure you did the math, so let me do it to show you how much smoke your blowing.

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail a save: 2/3

so the damage they would do on a EP round is:
8/9 * 5/9 * 2/3 * 2 * 18 = 11 wounds

That's four wounds more, and if you were to instead blow that CP on a reroll for the DDA (say number of shots or a failed wound), it would only be less than 1 wound of difference. Do you think that extra fraction of a wound justifies the fragility of destroyers when compared to DDAs? I sure don't, the fragility of destroyers has vexed me this entire edition, and in a meta this heavy on knights, it's not like people don't bring the right weapons to wipe out a destroyer squad in a single round.

A few other points,
- I never said destroyers were bad, in fact my very first sentence in the quote says this "I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper."
- Cherry picking involves looking for edge cases to support your point, I used two of the most common opponents you'll likely face at a tournament. For instance if I were cherry picking I wouldn't have used knights I would have used LRBT, because it doesn't have an invul, which would have made the DDA better. If I were cherry picking I would have used genestealers instead of MEQ since they have an invul which cuts down on the effectiveness of destroyers. Please don't accuse me of being intellectually dishonest, especially when you do the very thing you accuse me of in the same breath.
- Do you run into many TEQ, because I sure don't. This is a good example of cherry picking, taking a unit that doesn't see the light of day in the competitive scene and using it as an excuse as to why your argument is somehow better.
- With a 14" move and fly tomb blades should never have a problem getting into raid fire range, Tomb blades are also considerably tougher than destroyers, and benefit more from RP.
- If I make destroyers sound amazing it's because I was looking only at their offensive output, instead of their well known issues. I do that because I want to compare their strengths to units who are arguably better in every other way. On Offense destroyers only edge out their rivals with a stratagem, and have a lifespan of a turn or two once they get into the action.
- Destroyers are a high risk high reward unit, in an army designed around snowballing. They do have a broad range of targets, but end up playing second fiddle to units that are designed to do specific roles. Take lychguard for instance, with that same 1 CP investment, they can drop 20 wounds on a knight in a single round, destroyers are lucky to get half of that. for that same CP, 300 points of tesla immortal is almost double the output of destroyers against infantry, thanks to double my will be done.

I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but you talk like you have all this knowledge about necrons, but even a cursory examination of what you are talking about shows that you are mistaken. If you are just looking to snark, might I suggest reddit, at least you can earn fake internet points by playing the buffoon over there.

Re-rolling a wound roll on a DDA grants you 1,6 more unsaved wounds, which is not comparable to the effect of EP. Re-rolling number of shots if you roll a 1 grants you 2,6 more unsaved wounds, which is not comparable to the effect of EP, further you can only re-roll a 1 for the number of shots when you roll a 1 for number of shots, you're mitigating a bad roll. Re-rolling a 1 for the number of shots turn 4 has much less effect on the overall course of the game than doing so turn 1, you want to spend the majority of your CP before turn 3 to start snowballing the game in your direction.

I'm pretty sure your math is off, hit on 3s re-rolling 1s, wound on 5+, save on 5+, d3 damage.
>18/36*28/36*12/36*24*2=6,2222222222222222222222222222222
Vs hit on 3s re-rolling everything, wound on 5s re-rolling everything, save on 5+, d3 damage.
>18/36*32/36*20/36*24*2=11,851851851851851851851851851852
Subtract the initial damage from the EP damage to get the difference.
>11,851851851851851851851851851852-6,2222222222222222222222222222222=5,6296296296296296296296296296297
So the difference (on average) is actually 5,6 wounds rather than 4. 4 damage on a Knight would still be extremely good for 1 CP.

- I never said that you claimed Destroyers were bad, I said the way you frame the situation was unbalanced and doesn't accurately show how good/bad they are.
- You picked a scenario in which I'm shooting at a Knight but not using EP, that's going to happen 1/30 games if I'm using 6, quite often if I'm bringing 18, that's an edge case. You're assuming you'll always be in RF range with your Tomb Blades, that's not always going to happen. Also, what exactly are you accusing me of cheripicking? Sorry if cheripicking wasn't the right word choice, but you still failed to accurately weigh the pros and cons of bringing Destroyers by focussing only on the negatives while ignoring the positives, I was merely highlighting those positives you failed to mention. Also rounding 11,85 down to 11? Are you seriously accusing me of being intellectually dishonest while doing this? Are you trying to drive down the prize of Destroyers on Ebay or something lol?
-I don't know about TEQs, how much of the field they take up. But given that Terminators across the board have been buffed I think we're going to see quite a lot of Terminators. Pretty much every Custodes model is a TEQ, the Shroud Terminators from Deathguard are also pretty strong, Grey Knights Dreadknights have also gotten buffs and they were already the most popular unit in what is admittedly a super weak faction. I think you're quite likely to see Terminators when you go to an event, I don't think we'll be seeing as many TEQs at the top tables as on the bottom tables so perhabs I should steer clear of Destroyer ^^.
- You're forced to Veil in those Lychguard and then you still only have a 40% chance of making it, maybe 60% with another CP for a re-roll 100% if you also want to sacrifice Obyron and Zahndrekh to kill a Knight. Whatever you do you are taking Overwatch and loosing 1 or 2 before you even get in is pretty likely, then you factor in screening and I'm not buying those Scytheguard being as good as Destroyers. If you are placing those Scytheguard out in the open it also will not take long before they get toasted, their low M means they are less likely to be able to hop from cover to out-of LOS to cover like Destroyers sometimes can.

If you wield a dull blade you will at least not cut yourself when you drop it on your neck. I'm sorry if you took me critiquing your review of the effectiveness of Destroyers personally, please just block me, I was just trying to help the discussion by pointing out that Destroyers are still a really solid unit despite not being able to Rapid Fire and despite not being a DDA (which I've already said I think are a mandatory 3-of in every list). It's okay to be wrong and to not mention every scenario and to just pick the ones you think are most relevant, but don't be surprised if someone finds that in their experience what you described does not describe their experience playing the game. You mentioning TEQ being rare is very fair, perhabs I am too coloured by playing Deathwing three times and Custodes twice in twenty games. Sometimes I try and have a bit of fun while posting, I don't mean to ruin your day. I hope everyone can enjoy posting and discussing tactics for our faction and ask for advice or post army lists and battle reports without ridicule but with support and good advice, calling someone out on being wrong about the game or the math they are doign should never be viewed as a personal attack but a chance for growth. If it sounds like I think I know everything then I'm sorry, I'm just moderately good at math and like playing Necrons.

MrPieChee wrote:
With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

A Gauss Immortal core backed by Annihilation barges is worse than Tesla Immortals back by Tomb blades with Gauss Blasters.

The two most immediate threats to Gauss Immortals being taken are the Tomb Blades and the Destroyers, the immobility coupled with their relative ineffectiveness at range 13+ makes them really terrible in some match-ups. I think you should try taking Ghost Arks before Annihilation barges, the ability to stick an HQ in there can be worth VP in certain match-ups. I feel like an army based on Warrior blobs and the Fearless Warlord trait were better than one focussed on Immortals but perhabs the larger decrease on Immortals has changed that. In any case Tomb Blades benefitted as much as Immortals did from that change so I don't really think there is any contest.

I cheated in a game I won against Tyranids, I brought 20 Praetorians I only had room for 16, when I tried to type in 120 in excel for Szeras I typed in 12 instead, I've been too lazy to type all my lists into battle scribe I really need to get it done. I updated my list and replaced those 6 Praetorians with a Ghost Ark and tied in a Maelstrom game against a newb playing a casual Thousand Sons list and won against a casual Tau Empire list. In the first game luck was very back and forth and I unfortunately failed a bunch of rolls on the last turn and the game ended T5 before I could wipe out my opponent completely. Against Tau I had some really crappy targeting because I assumed my opponent had bubble-wrapped two of his Commanders, but only one of them was wrapped so my Deep Striking Destroyers killed one Commander instead of killing both the ones that weren't wrapped.

revisiting old conclusions and rethinking established truths is never wrong, especially not after a change such as CA. I encourage it frenetically. There is absolutely no need for bickering. If lychguard still aren't all that it should be a simple case to argue or demonstrate in game.

Just see how nobody believed in wraiths anymore in the beginning of 8th yet they were a key element om all the consistently best performing mevron tourney lists.

While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.

 Blndmage wrote:
While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.

A DDA is 160, heat cannon pylon is 145 They need to drop another 20-30 points to be worth considering.

 p5freak wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.

A DDA is 160, heat cannon pylon is 145 They need to drop another 20-30 points to be worth considering.

I personally think DDAs are auto includes. Especially when you consider a Ghost ark is 145pts and for 15pts extra you get a Cannon with 2 different weapon profiles.

When I use my DDAs I just delete stuff that's T8+ and once all that is dead I move them to make use of the Gauss Arrays. Playing them as Sautekh also stops the -1 for hitting heavy weapons unless you advance.

I know D6 shots and wounds is very whiffy but when you roll that 4-6 for shots and your DMG rolls are 3+ you cant disagree that it feels like 160pts well spent. Especially when it was 203pts back in the index for Heavy D3 shots and only became Heavy D6 if shooting at a unit with 10+ models.

 p5freak wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.

A DDA is 160, heat cannon pylon is 145 They need to drop another 20-30 points to be worth considering.

For me, the benifit of Sentry Pylons is taking units of 3. The most I've run is 6, but my ideal Tomb has 9.
The Teleortatiin Matrix boosts the cost, but having a full unit of 3 drop on someone is wonderful.

 Blndmage wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.

A DDA is 160, heat cannon pylon is 145 They need to drop another 20-30 points to be worth considering.

For me, the benifit of Sentry Pylons is taking units of 3. The most I've run is 6, but my ideal Tomb has 9.
The Teleortatiin Matrix boosts the cost, but having a full unit of 3 drop on someone is wonderful.

If you're teleporting them in in melta range (18"), they barely manage to kill a LRBT, aren't you worried they will be too fragile, they're only 8 wounds? 2 of the 5 remaining LRBTs easily kill off one of them.

What are people's thoughts on the Particle Shredder for Triarch Stalkers? They come in at 115 pts with that loadout and become the Necron version of the Hellveryn (not quite as good, but a boatload cheaper). Worth considering over Gauss?

IanVanCheese wrote:
What are people's thoughts on the Particle Shredder for Triarch Stalkers? They come in at 115 pts with that loadout and become the Necron version of the Hellveryn (not quite as good, but a boatload cheaper). Worth considering over Gauss?

I am a fan of the consistent D2 damage for consistency, and with SIX shots you're guaranteed to get your wanted shooting buff.

It's an option to consider but I want to do the math in it first.

You don't need to hit to get the RR1s buff from the Stalker.

IanVanCheese wrote:
What are people's thoughts on the Particle Shredder for Triarch Stalkers? They come in at 115 pts with that loadout and become the Necron version of the Hellveryn (not quite as good, but a boatload cheaper). Worth considering over Gauss?

It used to be an auto include imo before CA18. But, with the new pts drop to the Stalker and the weapons I would say that the Heat Ray is best weapon to take. With the THGC and P.shredder now being situational (ThGC for dedicated anti tank, P.Shredder for TeQ/MeQ )

The only buff the Shredder has is the flat 6 shots. Having a reliable amount of dakka is always nice. But, with CA18, I would say the Heat Ray is the best option as you get both light anti-tank and a 2d6 S5 -1 flamer.

Blndmage wrote:
For me, the benifit of Sentry Pylons is taking units of 3. The most I've run is 6, but my ideal Tomb has 9.
The Teleortatiin Matrix boosts the cost, but having a full unit of 3 drop on someone is wonderful.

You are dropping 465 pts. on someone ?? First of all you have to wait until turn 2, thats 465 pts. of your army doing nothing turn 1. Second, three pylons are kinda big. You need a lot of space for them. Third, they have no protection. Your opponent can charge them, tie them up with a cheap chaff unit, and render them useless. They cant escape with their tiny 3" movement.

IanVanCheese wrote:What are people's thoughts on the Particle Shredder for Triarch Stalkers? They come in at 115 pts with that loadout and become the Necron version of the Hellveryn (not quite as good, but a boatload cheaper). Worth considering over Gauss?

Its only 24" range, and if you move you get -1 to hit. Triarch units dont benefit from dynasty codes.

Had a Game this week and decided to try out something new :

Sautekh battalion
CCB (Lightning field)
crpytek
Lord
Tesla immortals * 10
Gauss immortal * 5
warriors * 20
Destroyers * 6
Nightbringer (SoFS & AMM)

Novokh outrider
DLord (WL - Crimson Haze) (Veil of darkness)
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Scarabs
10 * Sword and Board Lychguard

this was a CA18 Maelstrom mission and I had a LOT of board control here,

ended in a 16-8 win and a really fun balanced match vs T'au

I had tried to keep the destroyers in LoS away from his heavy shooting .. the C'tan circled with wraith and scarab screens to pick on outriders while pretty much ignoring the riptide
the triple threat wraiths running round just tying stuff up and being mean .. the destroyers circling and then finally the Dlord veiling the LG into the core of the enemy troops and command structure really messed them up.

it wasn't meant to be anything but a hard to kill board control army .. and it worked .. played to the objectives rather than trying to table opponent, and to be honest CA2018 really drives that with the lack of sudden death option.

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Had a Game this week and decided to try out something new :

Spoiler:

Sautekh battalion
CCB (Lightning field)
crpytek
Lord
Tesla immortals * 10
Gauss immortal * 5
warriors * 20
Destroyers * 6
Nightbringer (SoFS & AMM)

Novokh outrider
DLord (WL - Crimson Haze) (Veil of darkness)
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Scarabs
10 * Sword and Board Lychguard

this was a CA18 Maelstrom mission and I had a LOT of board control here,

ended in a 16-8 win and a really fun balanced match vs T'au

I had tried to keep the destroyers in LoS away from his heavy shooting .. the C'tan circled with wraith and scarab screens to pick on outriders while pretty much ignoring the riptide
the triple threat wraiths running round just tying stuff up and being mean .. the destroyers circling and then finally the Dlord veiling the LG into the core of the enemy troops and command structure really messed them up.

it wasn't meant to be anything but a hard to kill board control army .. and it worked .. played to the objectives rather than trying to table opponent, and to be honest CA2018 really drives that with the lack of sudden death option.

Why run the wraiths in groups of 3? Whats the logic for this list?
Just confused.

 iGuy91 wrote:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Had a Game this week and decided to try out something new :

Spoiler:

Sautekh battalion
CCB (Lightning field)
crpytek
Lord
Tesla immortals * 10
Gauss immortal * 5
warriors * 20
Destroyers * 6
Nightbringer (SoFS & AMM)

Novokh outrider
DLord (WL - Crimson Haze) (Veil of darkness)
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Nekkid Wraiths
3 * Scarabs
10 * Sword and Board Lychguard

this was a CA18 Maelstrom mission and I had a LOT of board control here,

ended in a 16-8 win and a really fun balanced match vs T'au

I had tried to keep the destroyers in LoS away from his heavy shooting .. the C'tan circled with wraith and scarab screens to pick on outriders while pretty much ignoring the riptide
the triple threat wraiths running round just tying stuff up and being mean .. the destroyers circling and then finally the Dlord veiling the LG into the core of the enemy troops and command structure really messed them up.

it wasn't meant to be anything but a hard to kill board control army .. and it worked .. played to the objectives rather than trying to table opponent, and to be honest CA2018 really drives that with the lack of sudden death option.

Why run the wraiths in groups of 3? Whats the logic for this list?
Just confused.

few reasons

a) I was low on CP and wasn't going to waste 2 on RP on the wraiths, so rather than making a big 6 squad target, I made MSU to get enemy to split fire or focus and not be able to kill stuff
b) they weren't really my killing force, they were running interference and tying up stuff in CC that can't fly (Broadsides)
c) or picking on things like fireblade cadres and ethereals for easy assassinates.
d) opponent sees wraiths on the table and 99% of the time panic and they draw a load of fire away from my other stuff ... 3++ generally helps them stick around a while.
e) they won me the game by camping a last turn objective for Domination - D3+3 VP

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:

few reasons

b) they weren't really my killing force, they were running interference and tying up stuff in CC that can't fly (Broadsides)
c) or picking on things like fireblade cadres and ethereals for easy assassinates.

How do you get to your opponent's Broadsides, Fireblade and Ethereal with Wraiths? I don't see the Shooting in your list that enables you to get through screens. Does your opponent just run min-size Fire Warrior squads and hides them? How about Overwatch? Are you able to find positions were you can remain out of LOS without losing too much Movement on your charge?

I won an Eternal War game against a casual Tau list with my Anarakyr Szeras Balanced list. Both of my 20-man Warrior blobs got T5 so my opponent had a tough time removing them, even though we were about even on killing eachother I won easily on objectives. My Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers performed very poorly, they were all easily sniped by fusion weapons, which were otherwise meh against the rest of the choices in my army. If I cut the 9 Destroyers in my list I would just need another 30 pts to get 3 DDAs, which would have been much stronger against this match-up because he had 20 fusion guns and no Riptides. I played extremely poorly this game, I chose to Advance my Destroyers out of LOS turn 1, wasting their shooting for... reasons. I basically didn't shoot one of my Warrior squads turn 1 when I could have Veiled them into RF range and blown up my opponent's Fire Warriors T1. I should have just played far more aggressively, although playing passively and picking up objectives did work out in the end.

IanVanCheese wrote:
What are people's thoughts on the Particle Shredder for Triarch Stalkers? They come in at 115 pts with that loadout and become the Necron version of the Hellveryn (not quite as good, but a boatload cheaper). Worth considering over Gauss?

A few people did some math earlier in the thread, and the general consensus was that HGC and the Heat Ray were the better options for Anti-Tank, and the Heat Ray close range was pretty good at dealing with MEQ and GEQ. The HGC had the advantage of it's range.

I think the main slight against the particle shredder, is that it isn't as good against vehicles as the other two options and we have better options in the dex for the targets that the particle shredder is better at.

It's not bad by any means though.

 vict0988 wrote:

Spoiler:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:

few reasons

b) they weren't really my killing force, they were running interference and tying up stuff in CC that can't fly (Broadsides)
c) or picking on things like fireblade cadres and ethereals for easy assassinates.

How do you get to your opponent's Broadsides, Fireblade and Ethereal with Wraiths?

I don't see the Shooting in your list that enables you to get through screens. Does your opponent just run min-size Fire Warrior squads and hides them? How about Overwatch? Are you able to find positions were you can remain out of LOS without losing too much Movement on your charge?

you chew through screens with wraiths and if any survive / don't run away even better - wraiths can fallback and charge and fly over intervening screens to attack from the rear.
and that's if the MWBD advancing Sautekh tesla immortals and destroyers have left anything standing in the way

looking at about 15 wounds from Tesla alone on troops ..

 vict0988 wrote:

I won an Eternal War game against a casual Tau list with my Anarakyr Szeras Balanced list. .

 vict0988 wrote:

Advance my Destroyers out of LOS turn 1 ... I usually hide them if I can and choose to lose first turn letting stuff come closer into range

... I usually hide them if I can and choose to lose first turn letting stuff come closer into range then jump out and gank something

 vict0988 wrote:

didn't shoot one of my Warrior squads turn 1 when I could have Veiled them into RF range and blown up my opponent's Fire Warriors

nice to sometimes save those tricks for later rounds rather than try for the alpha strike, let the enemy over extend

 vict0988 wrote:

I should have just played far more aggressively, although playing passively and picking up objectives did work out in the end.

yup, I'm slowly learning to play the objectives these days rather than rush to kill everything on the table ... I try to survive the Riptides and stuff as best I can.

Also target selection is key .. T'au really rely on marker lights.. I know it sounds like a dick move move you kill the pathfinders and his entire army loses re-roll 1's and some +1 BS ... it really gimps them.

Consequently, Tesla Immortals are exceedingly good at killing Pathfinders and Shield Drones by weight of dice.

 iGuy91 wrote:
Consequently, Tesla Immortals are exceedingly good at killing Pathfinders and Shield Drones by weight of dice.

Indeed, disabling the support structure is the way to go against Tau, especially for us. Just pray you don't get Hammer and Anvil.

I have never played against Tau personally, but as far as disabling support goes, I've been pleased with the performance of Deathmarks after taking them for the first time recently. They one shot Yvrainne in my first game and took out the support buffing a unit of Bullgryns in their second.

It's funny as well how quickly someone's target priorities shift once their psykers start getting shot at.

dapperbandit wrote:
I have never played against Tau personally, but as far as disabling support goes, I've been pleased with the performance of Deathmarks after taking them for the first time recently. They one shot Yvrainne in my first game and took out the support buffing a unit of Bullgryns in their second.

It's funny as well how quickly someone's target priorities shift once their psykers start getting shot at.

It is indeed key to take out path finders (and any drones that shoot marker lights)

Also remember - drones don't easily get cover as they're not infantry.

torblind wrote:

dapperbandit wrote:
I have never played against Tau personally, but as far as disabling support goes, I've been pleased with the performance of Deathmarks after taking them for the first time recently. They one shot Yvrainne in my first game and took out the support buffing a unit of Bullgryns in their second.

It's funny as well how quickly someone's target priorities shift once their psykers start getting shot at.

It is indeed key to take out path finders (and any drones that shoot marker lights)

Also remember - drones don't easily get cover as they're not infantry.

All true, aggressive, high ROF shots are needed to reach them most times, but if you can get first turn and neuter markerlight forces, you're in a good way, taking away reroll 1s, and +1 BS is huge.

What Dynasty are you running your deathmarks with? How many do you run?

I ran them as Mephrit. Just one unit of 10 but I'm contemplating more than that. The mortal wounds output is entirely unreliable but sometimes you get like 5 or 6 and it makes you wonder about using them to focus down beefy units with invuln saves

Is there ever a need for Gauss Immortals or are Tesla Immortals just flat out better? I keep thinking the -2AP might be nice against 2+ or 3+ armor saves, but I haven't done the math to see if the increased number of hits with Tesla compensates for lack of AP. I don't want to commit to building my third Immortal unit as Gauss if it should be Tesla like the first two.

wisetiger7 wrote:
Is there ever a need for Gauss Immortals or are Tesla Immortals just flat out better? I keep thinking the -2AP might be nice against 2+ or 3+ armor saves, but I haven't done the math to see if the increased number of hits with Tesla compensates for lack of AP. I don't want to commit to building my third Immortal unit as Gauss if it should be Tesla like the first two.

I'm currently running the numbers, as I've found the 1d4chan chart to be highly misleading.

In addition to acting as if GEQ has a 6+ save and not 5+ (making Tesla seem far more appealing), it also doesn't account for -1 to hits, which are extremely common in the current meta.

I should be done in the next few hours, depending on the demand at work.

Edit: It also lists Transports as having a 4+, when Rhinos have a 3+. What the hell, chart-maker.

 Werekill wrote:

wisetiger7 wrote:
Is there ever a need for Gauss Immortals or are Tesla Immortals just flat out better? I keep thinking the -2AP might be nice against 2+ or 3+ armor saves, but I haven't done the math to see if the increased number of hits with Tesla compensates for lack of AP. I don't want to commit to building my third Immortal unit as Gauss if it should be Tesla like the first two.

I'm currently running the numbers, as I've found the 1d4chan chart to be highly misleading.

In addition to acting as if GEQ has a 6+ save and not 5+ (making Tesla seem far more appealing), it also doesn't account for -1 to hits, which are extremely common in the current meta.

I should be done in the next few hours, depending on the demand at work.

Edit: It also lists Transports as having a 4+, when Rhinos have a 3+. What the hell, chart-maker.

1D4chan is basically always misleading. They defended Rubric Marines last edition and that's all you really need to know.

We've run the math a whole lot of times, long story short...
Gauss is better than tesla, against 2+ and 3+ armor, but ONLY when in rapid fire range.

Tesla is better in all other cases, 4+, 5+, 6+.

dapperbandit wrote:I have never played against Tau personally, but as far as disabling support goes, I've been pleased with the performance of Deathmarks after taking them for the first time recently. They one shot Yvrainne in my first game and took out the support buffing a unit of Bullgryns in their second.

It's funny as well how quickly someone's target priorities shift once their psykers start getting shot at.

It all changes when the supporting characters become T4, or even higher. Against T5 deathmarks are pretty much useless, just like any other casual sniper, like SM scouts, or AM ratlings.

 iGuy91 wrote:
We've run the math a whole lot of times, long story short...
Gauss is better than tesla, against 2+ and 3+ armor, but ONLY when in rapid fire range.

Tesla is better in all other cases, 4+, 5+, 6+.

Either way, more peer review for numbers is good. I'd prefer to go ahead and do it to see what happens, even if the same conclusion is reached.

Image 1 is the base numbers, along with amount gained through MWBD. I picked Drones as a decent 4+ save example. Image 2 is a collection of comparisons that are a bit easier to parse.


The conclusion is that base Tesla only beats rapid fire Gauss against GEQ and weaker (I forgot to run the numbers for 6+, apologies. It's a larger gap though). MWBD gives Tesla a new, sizable lead, but it still loses in every other category against RF Gauss. However, it has a large lead between it and regular Gauss when not RF.

Gauss gets fewer damage benefits from MWBD as well, but that was fairly obvious.


Tesla has a massive drop in damage when faced with a -1 to hit, but I just realized that I messed up. I never calculated Gauss's damage against a similar -1 to hit. Crap. I'll take care of it later, along with adding 6+ save numbers.


Either way, the numbers show that Tesla is inferior to RF Gauss unless against GEQ or weaker, but the issue remains getting those Gauss units into RF range. I lean towards the Tesla's range making it overall the more effective choice, but Gauss isn't bad at all. Even when forced to not use RF, it can deal reasonable damage. Tesla just gets way too good of a buff from MWBD.

Regarding Deathmarks, they should either be Assault 2 or have a longer range Rapid Fire gun. Most players shield their important Characters with lesser units making them hard to reach by standard Necron range. Most other units that are used in Deep Strike tend to have Toughness higher than 4, which again makes Deathmarks pretty bad. I can see them being viable against Tau Drones, but other than that, pretty bad.

Playing 1500pts vs Eldar in a few days against a person I never played before so need help making an "all comers list" as they could literally bring anything.

I came up with 2 lists but not sure on their viability.

Anyone able to give some input?

List 1


List 2

Personally i think the barge is a waste of points.

I would probably run a mix of both - a battalion and 3 dda spearhead with stalker.

It gives you both balance and power.

I dont know much about eldar, but you should ignore a hemlock wraith fighter, as it can stack -3 to hit, making it nearly impossible to kill, unless you can auto hit it, or put a lot of MW on it. And even then the fighter can get a 6+ FNP against that.

COLD CASH wrote:
Personally i think the barge is a waste of points.

I would probably run a mix of both - a battalion and 3 dda spearhead with stalker.

It gives you both balance and power.

This is about right

 p5freak wrote:
I dont know much about eldar, but you should ignore a hemlock wraith fighter, as it can stack -3 to hit, making it nearly impossible to kill, unless you can auto hit it, or put a lot of MW on it. And even then the fighter can get a 6+ FNP against that.

Aye, our only option is, if they fly close by to our lines, is to send a C'tan to deal with it in melee. It will have -1 to hit at maximum there and it being T6 makes all C'tan somewhat capable of damaging it. The problem is:
-It's deadly overwatch.
-It's auto-hitting weapons means damaging it won't be good enough.

Doctoralex wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I dont know much about eldar, but you should ignore a hemlock wraith fighter, as it can stack -3 to hit, making it nearly impossible to kill, unless you can auto hit it, or put a lot of MW on it. And even then the fighter can get a 6+ FNP against that.

Aye, our only option is, if they fly close by to our lines, is to send a C'tan to deal with it in melee. It will have -1 to hit at maximum there and it being T6 makes all C'tan somewhat capable of damaging it. The problem is:
-It's deadly overwatch.
-It's auto-hitting weapons means damaging it won't be good enough.

If you have a C'TAn, you likely also have scarabs to screen it. Let them take the overwatch, they also Fly. As for the other problem, I don't know. Bring two C'Tans?

Could bring the Transcendent C'tan and let it use 2 power and the Nightbringer? Not really sure if the Deceiver would help out.

Man, it's hard trying to list around Eldar. The speed, pysker powers and cheap good units is a very hard counter for us.

So, I had a very silly list idea which I think could be fun, running a c'tan bomb.

Specifically, running a deceiver, nightbringer, and a cosmic transcendent ctan, with a 9 man unit of scarabs.

The deceiver takes the other c'tan and scarabs, and places them all 12 inches away, they then move into range (they cannot charge but thats ok), and barrage the enemy with mortal wounds, using the ctan power strategem to add another power, with 27 ablative scarab wounds to get through before you can harm the big guys. Some of those powers would be devastating against tightly packed bubble armies.

Paired with Nephrek wraiths for a turn 1 charge, could give someone a lot of threats to think about in a semi-casual game.

Question would be then, which ctan powers should I use for maximum damage against a fresh army?

I'm thinking Sky of Falling Stars, Cosmic Fire, and Antimatter Meteor. Then use the star god wrath strategem to get another random power.

Any merit to this?

 iGuy91 wrote:
So, I had a very silly list idea which I think could be fun, running a c'tan bomb.

Specifically, running a deceiver, nightbringer, and a cosmic transcendent ctan, with a 9 man unit of scarabs.

The deceiver takes the other c'tan and scarabs, and places them all 12 inches away, they then move into range (they cannot charge but thats ok), and barrage the enemy with mortal wounds, using the ctan power strategem to add another power, with 27 ablative scarab wounds to get through before you can harm the big guys. Some of those powers would be devastating against tightly packed bubble armies.

Paired with Nephrek wraiths for a turn 1 charge, could give someone a lot of threats to think about in a semi-casual game.

Question would be then, which ctan powers should I use for maximum damage against a fresh army?

I'm thinking Sky of Falling Stars, Cosmic Fire, and Antimatter Meteor. Then use the star god wrath strategem to get another random power.

Any merit to this?

Wraiths are key, giving them more to worry about, otherwise they will quite easily chew through those scarabs and start blowing up the ctans

elook wrote:
Regarding Deathmarks, they should either be Assault 2 or have a longer range Rapid Fire gun. Most players shield their important Characters with lesser units making them hard to reach by standard Necron range. Most other units that are used in Deep Strike tend to have Toughness higher than 4, which again makes Deathmarks pretty bad. I can see them being viable against Tau Drones, but other than that, pretty bad.

Either Assault 2, an inmate AP-1, or longer range.

Or even some combination of the above as long as the points are correct.

 iGuy91 wrote:
So, I had a very silly list idea which I think could be fun, running a c'tan bomb....

What if you roll a 1 for the deceiver, and you re-roll for another 1 or 2 ? Lets say you roll to get a 3, and you can redeploy two ctans and a scarab screen unit. They can do two ctan powers, and a third random one for 2 CP. Doesnt sound very exciting to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

elook wrote:
Regarding Deathmarks, they should either be Assault 2 or have a longer range Rapid Fire gun. Most players shield their important Characters with lesser units making them hard to reach by standard Necron range. Most other units that are used in Deep Strike tend to have Toughness higher than 4, which again makes Deathmarks pretty bad. I can see them being viable against Tau Drones, but other than that, pretty bad.

Either Assault 2, an inmate AP-1, or longer range.

Or even some combination of the above as long as the points are correct.

Infantry should always be wounded on 3+, with MW on 5+ against them. They have fething sniper rifles, they should be a real threat. Every sniper rifle in the entire game should have that rule. Right now snipers are a joke.

@p5freak

Quite possible. If that happens, we deploy what we can out of LOS, and make due, if I get 2, I'll work with it, 1...that would be very problematic. Again, sort of a silly gimmick list.

 Werekill wrote:
Either way, the numbers show that Tesla is inferior to RF Gauss unless against GEQ or weaker, but the issue remains getting those Gauss units into RF range. I lean towards the Tesla's range making it overall the more effective choice, but Gauss isn't bad at all. Even when forced to not use RF, it can deal reasonable damage. Tesla just gets way too good of a buff from MWBD.

What is reasonable damage? You are losing damage against 90% of targets at range 13-24" when using, often more than 50% of your damage output, that's not decent at all. Once your Gauss Immortals are locked against a mob of Boyz you are out of luck, your RF won't help you get out of that one. Meanwhile, Tesla Immortals have done a much more signifigant amount of damage before getting locked in combat. With how little better Gauss is and against how few targets it is better, Gauss Immortals are never the right choice. Tomb Blades with Gauss, Destroyers, DDAs, Ghost Arks, Tesseract Arks are all better. There are only two correct Troops choices, those are Tesla Immortals and Warriors. Warriors are only the right choice if you are doing an army with no models with a 3+ Sv and you are expecting lots of MWs and/or close combat. I don't think there is a single list where I would say that taking a unit of Immortals was the best thing for that list after having done the math for all the different things you can shoot at.

 Odrankt wrote:
Could bring the Transcendent C'tan and let it use 2 power and the Nightbringer? Not really sure if the Deceiver would help out.

Man, it's hard trying to list around Eldar. The speed, pysker powers and cheap good units is a very hard counter for us.

Go all-in on Shooting, melee is terrible against most Aeldari lists.

 iGuy91 wrote:
So, I had a very silly list idea which I think could be fun, running a c'tan bomb.

Specifically, running a deceiver, nightbringer, and a cosmic transcendent ctan, with a 9 man unit of scarabs.

The deceiver takes the other c'tan and scarabs, and places them all 12 inches away, they then move into range (they cannot charge but thats ok), and barrage the enemy with mortal wounds, using the ctan power strategem to add another power, with 27 ablative scarab wounds to get through before you can harm the big guys. Some of those powers would be devastating against tightly packed bubble armies.

Paired with Nephrek wraiths for a turn 1 charge, could give someone a lot of threats to think about in a semi-casual game.

Question would be then, which ctan powers should I use for maximum damage against a fresh army?

I'm thinking Sky of Falling Stars, Cosmic Fire, and Antimatter Meteor. Then use the star god wrath strategem to get another random power.

Any merit to this?

I have posted a number of battle reports on the subject. My most succesful go at it was using a Tesseract Vault, Deceiver and Nightbringer, it was incredibly powerful when going first with all three C'tan going into my opponent's face and all using Cosmic Fire. I also tried it with just the Nightbringer and the Deceiver that also worked pretty well, but not amazingly. I would advise against taking a single Transcendent C'tan and instead take 0 or 2, if you have 3 small C'tan you are forced to take each power once which is pretty terrible. If you take two you can have two powers twice, creating the possibility of having Cosmic Fire twice at the start of the game and using a CP to change out a power on a third C'tan so you can use Cosmic Fire three times on the first turn, that is an incredibly devastating tactic. Otherwise sticking with 1 lets you still use Cosmic Fire twice by replacing one of the Nightbringer's powers for 1 CP. Another thing I will say is that you should never pay 2 CP to use an extra power with a small C'tan, it's almost always a waste. It's an incredible Stratagem on the Tesseract Vault (especially when it lets you use Cosmic Fire a fourth time), but not on the Deceiver/Nightbringer. A thing to remember is that you can use Powers of the C'tan after advancing, so feel free to Advance to just over 1" away and then blast away with Cosmic Fire. One last thing is that you can Heroically Intervene at the end of your opponent's Charge phase even if your opponent did not declare a charge, so get your C'tan to within 3" of a model with a Heavy weapon and watch your opponent's face drop as they realise they are getting "charged" without being allowed to Overwatch because they chose to stay still and shoot.

I won a 1k game against a noob Tyranid player with my illegal quad C'tan list. I moved forward turn 1 and plinked a couple of wounds off his guys, on my opponent's first turn he attempted to charge but failed with a number of units. On my second turn I turned up the heat being in range with everything and then I charged and killed a third of his army. My opponent surrendered at this point. I randomly generated everything so I wasn't going super hard on my opponent, but I think I need to stick with min-size units more in the future for games with people who have played less than 5 games. I realised during the writing of this that my list was illegal, 1 HQ, 2 Elites, 1 FA, 2 HS. I should have replaced my Scarabs with a HS or an Elites choice.

That heroically intervene trick was nice. Is it set in stone that you get to do this.without him declaring any charges

torblind wrote:
That heroically intervene trick was nice. Is it set in stone that you get to do this.without him declaring any charges

Yes it is. BRB update 1.3 :

Q: Can you perform Heroic Interventions in your opponent’s
charge phase even if they did not declare any charges
that phase?
A: Yes.

Q: Can you ever perform a Heroic Intervention during your
own turn?
A: No.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Either way, the numbers show that Tesla is inferior to RF Gauss unless against GEQ or weaker, but the issue remains getting those Gauss units into RF range. I lean towards the Tesla's range making it overall the more effective choice, but Gauss isn't bad at all. Even when forced to not use RF, it can deal reasonable damage. Tesla just gets way too good of a buff from MWBD.

What is reasonable damage? You are losing damage against 90% of targets at range 13-24" when using, often more than 50% of your damage output, that's not decent at all. Once your Gauss Immortals are locked against a mob of Boyz you are out of luck, your RF won't help you get out of that one. Meanwhile, Tesla Immortals have done a much more signifigant amount of damage before getting locked in combat. With how little better Gauss is and against how few targets it is better, Gauss Immortals are never the right choice. Tomb Blades with Gauss, Destroyers, DDAs, Ghost Arks, Tesseract Arks are all better. There are only two correct Troops choices, those are Tesla Immortals and Warriors. Warriors are only the right choice if you are doing an army with no models with a 3+ Sv and you are expecting lots of MWs and/or close combat. I don't think there is a single list where I would say that taking a unit of Immortals was the best thing for that list after having done the math for all the different things you can shoot at.

"Reasonable damage" is exactly that: reasonable damage for the points. Tesla and RF Gauss just happen to be extremely powerful in comparison.

I even said that Tesla is more than likely the most optimal choice, given the range and massive buff from MWBD. I apologize if that wasn't clear.

Had a game against ultramarines where I managed to get the deceiver in range of an imperial castle (7 units hit by cosmic fire), used star god wrath, rolled cosmic fire again randomly, and dealt something like 15 mortal wounds in a phase, shooting phase then caused most of the vehicles to chain react explode, killing his characters and vehicles...a lot of what was left was then killed by the ctan itself exploding when charged by a contemptor which barely survived. Game ended bottom of turn 2. Ouch.

Minus the absurd stroke of luck it was neat trying out a new ctan power in a perfect storm situation.

 iGuy91 wrote:
Had a game against ultramarines where I managed to get the deceiver in range of an imperial castle (7 units hit by cosmic fire), used star god wrath, rolled cosmic fire again randomly, and dealt something like 15 mortal wounds in a phase, shooting phase then caused most of the vehicles to chain react explode, killing his characters and vehicles...a lot of what was left was then killed by the ctan itself exploding when charged by a contemptor which barely survived. Game ended bottom of turn 2. Ouch.

Minus the absurd stroke of luck it was neat trying out a new ctan power in a perfect storm situation.

Sounds absolutely hilarious, great play!

Anybody got info on how necrons are doing post CA ?

To me it seemed like we would be better off but we just have to spam DDAs Wraiths, maybe 1 2 Stalkers

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:
Anybody got info on how necrons are doing post CA ?

To me it seemed like we would be better off but we just have to spam DDAs Wraiths, maybe 1 2 Stalkers

At least we saved 30pts for taking 3 squad of 10 Immortals, or 40pts for taking 2 20 strong warrior squad.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:
Anybody got info on how necrons are doing post CA ?

To me it seemed like we would be better off but we just have to spam DDAs Wraiths, maybe 1 2 Stalkers

At least we saved 30pts for taking 3 squad of 10 Immortals, or 40pts for taking 2 20 strong warrior squad.

Fun thing is:

I actually really appreciate the drops as now we can play 2 battalions. 13CP are always nice.

Sadly I still dont play my Crons as I think they got kinda boring? Just spam DDAs, Wraiths. Maybe Destroyers. 1 or 2 10x Immortals. And very little variation.

The most fun thing is probably a TombBlades list but I dont have that many Blades for it sadly

I just realized that you can combine talent for annihilation and extermination protocols, if you have mephrit destroyers. 18 shots, re-rolling all failed hit rolls, maybe getting even more 6s, which generate more shots, which can also be re-rolled.

 p5freak wrote:
I just realized that you can combine talent for annihilation and extermination protocols, if you have mephrit destroyers. 18 shots, re-rolling all failed hit rolls, maybe getting even more 6s, which generate more shots, which can also be re-rolled.

I feel like it was already discussed, and the conclusion is that it's great but the Nephrekh really helps with surviving so much it's hard to give up.

I know I had a hard time giving up Deep Strike.

Yea but with the new reserve restrictions I think it's got more merit then before. I am generally not a fan of mephrit but maybe I will give them another go but my go to has been Imotekh.

Mephrit Gauss Immortals pair well with the deceiver. Instantly get them in RF on a flank...No much survives 60 STR 5 AP -3 shots

Outside Daemons and Imperial Guard which survive the same.

So far I haven't had a ton of fun playing with my Necrons. I've basically been playing "I'm gonna try and shoot you before you assault me". Here's what I have been using for the most part:

DDA
20 Warriors
10 Immortals
5 Destroyers
20 scarabs
AB
Night Scythe
Doom Scythe
Lord and 2 Crypteks

I have these models painted but haven't used them much:
3 Wraiths
3 Spiders

I'm looking to finish collecting/painting my Necron army before summer. I was thinking of getting some Tomb Blades and another DDA as my final additions, but realized that there are some models that I haven't even considered.

I was wondering what people thought of these units, and how I could work them in with what I have:
C'tan Shards
Lychguard
Preatorians

They might help make the battles a little more interesting, but do I really want go in the melee direction with Necrons? Any insight would be appreciated.

Discodoggy wrote:

Spoiler:

So far I haven't had a ton of fun playing with my Necrons. I've basically been playing "I'm gonna try and shoot you before you assault me". Here's what I have been using for the most part:

DDA
20 Warriors
10 Immortals
5 Destroyers
20 scarabs
AB
Night Scythe
Doom Scythe
Lord and 2 Crypteks

I have these models painted but haven't used them much:
3 Wraiths
3 Spiders

I'm looking to finish collecting/painting my Necron army before summer. I was thinking of getting some Tomb Blades and another DDA as my final additions, but realized that there are some models that I haven't even considered.

I was wondering what people thought of these units, and how I could work them in with what I have:
C'tan Shards
Lychguard
Preatorians

They might help make the battles a little more interesting, but do I really want go in the melee direction with Necrons? Any insight would be appreciated.

In a competitive environment Lychguard and Praetorians are not that viable. C'tan can be good. Just depends which one you bring. The Deceiver is possibly the best C'tan due to Grand Illusion. The other 2 are also good but don't see that much use on the table top from my experience.

From your original list you are field a few lack luster units if I'm being honest. Anni barges are only okay. Even with CA18 making them cheaper. Same can be said for the N scythe and Doom Scythe. Warriors can be okay. But are only viable if your Warlord is using Immortal pride for auto pass morale and if backed by a ChromoCryptek.

Depending on your Meta and your play style. I would definitely get Tomb Blades and 2 more DDAs. I would also recommend you get 2-3 Tesseract Arks and 1 Triarch Stalker.

Going melee crons isn't a bad idea but only if your playing Novokh and if your playing a friendly game. Otherwise, just stay as gun line and do as you stated. Shoot stuff off the table before getting assault.

A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

elook wrote:
A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

I believe yes.

Unless it explicitly says they cannot, they still can.

elook wrote:
A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

Yes. The only thing you can't do is charge during your 1st turn.

Discodoggy wrote:
So far I haven't had a ton of fun playing with my Necrons. I've basically been playing "I'm gonna try and shoot you before you assault me". Here's what I have been using for the most part....

One DDA is not worth using, you need at least two. I would also suggest to get a triarch stalker with twin HGC. Get 3 more wraith. 3x10 tesla immortals are good with an overlord. Dont use spyders and scythes. I usually play overlord, cryptek, tesla immortals, DDAs, triarch stalker, destroyers, wraith, scarabs, tomb blades.

 p5freak wrote:
I just realized that you can combine talent for annihilation and extermination protocols, if you have mephrit destroyers. 18 shots, re-rolling all failed hit rolls, maybe getting even more 6s, which generate more shots, which can also be re-rolled.

Rerolls combine very nicely with exploding 6es.

I had the great misfortune to play against Novokh Wraiths once. They were accompanied by a Warlord Comand Barge with the Novokh exploding 6es aura in CC.

The wraiths would then charge, reroll all hits, any 6es gave more hits. rerolling those hits too. It was massive!

I've been following the discussion very closely and I have to say I really like the work you guys are putting in this. Cheers to everyone for such a nice read and very good ideas/ thoughts.

Besides that, I've started a trend with the my list building. Well, I have 3 Arks ( I use the same model for both variants) and up to this point I was pretty sure I'd only ever play 3x Doomsday Ark. But, I started making this battalion every time I made lists the last week.



which I'll mostly likely support with 2 DDAs and C'tan Deceiver.

So for example a 2k points list with that core would be something like:



So, essentially I want to make sure I get it right, because rules HAVE changed and I'm not sure I got it right, because I'm biased from previous editions. So, is it possible to stick my Lord and Cryptek in the Ghost ark and create a pretty huge fuckin bubble for my warriors to benefit from Fearless, 5++, rerolls and improved RP?

AKA, if I stick the buffing HQ's in a transport, does the transport then become the beacon of the aura, effectively improving the range of the bubble or is that older editions thinking?

Also, I'm up for any comments on that list!

 Odrankt wrote:

elook wrote:
A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

Yes. The only thing you can't do is charge during your 1st turn.

However, if you move and advance your GI’ed characters to within 3” of enemy models, they can Heroic Intervention themselves into combat and attack normally that turn.

sieGermans wrote:

 Odrankt wrote:

elook wrote:
A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

Yes. The only thing you can't do is charge during your 1st turn.

However, if you move and advance your GI’ed characters to within 3” of enemy models, they can Heroic Intervention themselves into combat and attack normally that turn.

This does not work, as you can only use Heroic Intervention after the enemy has finish their charges. And they cant do this on a turn they cant charge.

moonsmite wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

 Odrankt wrote:

elook wrote:
A question regarding The Deceiver's Grand Illusion. Can units and The Deceiver still move/advance after using Grand Illusion, just not charge?

Yes. The only thing you can't do is charge during your 1st turn.

However, if you move and advance your GI’ed characters to within 3” of enemy models, they can Heroic Intervention themselves into combat and attack normally that turn.

This does not work, as you can only use Heroic Intervention after the enemy has finish their charges. And they cant do this on a turn they cant charge.

Furthermore you can never Heroically Intervene in your own turn. But it opens up for possiblities in his turn, certainly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 necr0n wrote:
I've been following the discussion very closely and I have to say I really like the work you guys are putting in this. Cheers to everyone for such a nice read and very good ideas/ thoughts.

Besides that, I've started a trend with the my list building. Well, I have 3 Arks ( I use the same model for both variants) and up to this point I was pretty sure I'd only ever play 3x Doomsday Ark. But, I started making this battalion every time I made lists the last week.

Spoiler:

Cryptek (Chronometron)
Lord ( Hyperphase sword)

20 Warriors
20 Warriors
5 - 10 Immortals (Tesla)

Ghost Ark

which I'll mostly likely support with 2 DDAs and C'tan Deceiver.

So for example a 2k points list with that core would be something like:

Spoiler:

Cryptek (Chrono)
Lord (Staff of light)

7 Tesla Immortals
20 Warriors
20 Warriors

Ghost Ark

C'tan shard of the Deceiver

6 Wraiths

6 Destroyers

Doomsday Ark
Doomsday Ark

I really don't know which dynasty I should go for with this list

So, essentially I want to make sure I get it right, because rules HAVE changed and I'm not sure I got it right, because I'm biased from previous editions. So, is it possible to stick my Lord and Cryptek in the Ghost ark and create a pretty huge fuckin bubble for my warriors to benefit from Fearless, 5++, rerolls and improved RP?

AKA, if I stick the buffing HQ's in a transport, does the transport then become the beacon of the aura, effectively improving the range of the bubble or is that older editions thinking?

Also, I'm up for any comments on that list!

Character auras don't work when they are in a transport. But it is a nice way to bring the HQ's to within reach of your forward deployed Warriors.

I did something similar once, but had 10 warriors as my 3rd option and stuck those in the ghost ark. And I supported that with a fast tomb blade wing (outrider with 2x6 TBs + destroyer lord + scrabs)

50 Mephrit warriors in RF range, do quite some AT heavy lifting, at least plucking off, but more importantly his tanks don't really have that many tanks to shoot at at your side (of course the Ghost Ark is gonna get it)

Not competitive, sure, but still fun. (And better now with point drops)

Discodoggy wrote:
So far I haven't had a ton of fun playing with my Necrons. I've basically been playing "I'm gonna try and shoot you before you assault me". Here's what I have been using for the most part:

DDA
20 Warriors
10 Immortals
5 Destroyers
20 scarabs
AB
Night Scythe
Doom Scythe
Lord and 2 Crypteks

I have these models painted but haven't used them much:
3 Wraiths
3 Spiders

I'm looking to finish collecting/painting my Necron army before summer. I was thinking of getting some Tomb Blades and another DDA as my final additions, but realized that there are some models that I haven't even considered.

I was wondering what people thought of these units, and how I could work them in with what I have:
C'tan Shards
Lychguard
Preatorians

They might help make the battles a little more interesting, but do I really want go in the melee direction with Necrons? Any insight would be appreciated.

I would get a sixth Destroyer for sure. Lychguard and Praetorians are among our weakest choices, C'tan can be cool in the right lists.

Only way i know to make lychguard work without being cost prohibitive is with the deceiver and a night scythe.

GI the Night Scythe up. Lychguard 'teleport' onto the battlefield from the scythe, disembarking 3, moving 5, make a 4 inch charge.

The thing with the Deceiver/Night Scythe strategy is that it rapidly becomes more and more expensive.

Deceiver is 225
Lychguard are 280 I believe,
135 for a Night Scythe

The bear minimum to get one unit into combat turn one and it's more expensive than a full battalion of immortals. That's before you bolt on more Lychguard or another Night Scythe for survivability and the whole thing becomes 1000 points or more.

Which isn't to say it could be worth it in certain matchups, it can wreak havoc on castles and I think Lychguard with Scythes are still one of our most point efficient units for killing Knights.

dapperbandit wrote:
The thing with the Deceiver/Night Scythe strategy is that it rapidly becomes more and more expensive.

Deceiver is 225
Lychguard are 280 I believe,
135 for a Night Scythe

The bear minimum to get one unit into combat turn one and it's more expensive than a full battalion of immortals. That's before you bolt on more Lychguard or another Night Scythe for survivability and the whole thing becomes 1000 points or more.

Which isn't to say it could be worth it in certain matchups, it can wreak havoc on castles and I think Lychguard with Scythes are still one of our most point efficient units for killing Knights.

Eh, forget the 2nd scythe, you can just use the strategem to ensure they get out safely.
The deceiver with cosmic fire would be brutal against a castle.
The scythe is the only real dead weight. Certainly more efficient than the monolith, or Zandrekh/Oby combo

 iGuy91 wrote:

dapperbandit wrote:
The thing with the Deceiver/Night Scythe strategy is that it rapidly becomes more and more expensive.

Deceiver is 225
Lychguard are 280 I believe,
135 for a Night Scythe

The bear minimum to get one unit into combat turn one and it's more expensive than a full battalion of immortals. That's before you bolt on more Lychguard or another Night Scythe for survivability and the whole thing becomes 1000 points or more.

Which isn't to say it could be worth it in certain matchups, it can wreak havoc on castles and I think Lychguard with Scythes are still one of our most point efficient units for killing Knights.

Eh, forget the 2nd scythe, you can just use the strategem to ensure they get out safely.
The deceiver with cosmic fire would be brutal against a castle.
The scythe is the only real dead weight. Certainly more efficient than the monolith, or Zandrekh/Oby combo

Did we ever get an official okay to use invasion beams as if they are disembarking from the get go, or is it beam in from reserves, then treated as disembarking?

The FAQ updated wording has the "counts as having disembarked from a transport" only after they have been setup, and since they are being setup from reserves they are still restricted to turn two, even with the stratagem.

I've read some rules lawyering about using emergency invasion beams turn one. Not sure how credible it is, personally I detest RAI/RAW debates but I do like to play legally.

But as you say, a Night Scythe is a good way to crash land some Lychguard up close, bearing in mind you're going to be spending 1/2CP if you've taken two units of Lychguard

Personally dont believe they should be able to. that said, with all the debate around it, if someone wanted to do it to me i wouldn't stop it. but same time I avoid using the tactic as dont want to play incorrectly

They are really strict on deploying models from off the board turn 1, to the level that I'd expect a very clear wording if it were to be allowed.

If you consider how long ago the beta rule about deep striking came in, and only how recently we received any wording changes by FAQ at all for Night Scythes/Monoliths and how ambiguous that wording remains, I think it's likely that if the wording isn't there it's because it's neglected not deliberately omitted

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Outside Daemons and Imperial Guard which survive the same.

Prepared positions and take cover would be used on the guard, so it's still worth it there. Sure demons wouldn't care, well except for the 60 S 5 shots anyway lol.