I'm a little worried about the new reanimation protocols on necron units. Their warriors are now 12pts, Move 5, BS 3+, S4, T4 LD10 and save 4+. Compared with a 13pt tactical marine they seem vastly superior. Their gauss weapons even have a bonus -1 armour pen, and they replenish downed squad members on a 5+ (or a 4+ with a cryptek, which seems like a no-brainer).

Don't get me wrong, I like the new RP rules, and it feels just like necrons should, but for 12pts per warrior it seems pretty crazily strong! I guess their damage output is pretty small, but still superior to tac marines.

If a 20 strong warrior squad is fighting against 20 tac marines at 24 inch range, the tacs will likely NEVER kill the necrons, even if the warriors don't even bother firing their guns... The math says their numbers stabilise around 10 models! I guess you'd have to use your entire army to focus down one squad at a time, but this isn't always possible while the enemy is cutting you down.

I suspect necrons are going to be very strong this edition! I dread to think how hard it'd be to finish off lychguard units. Imagine the pain when you finally reduce a squad to one model, then three more multi-wound models get back up again!

I personally disagree with warriors being BS 3+ and WS 3+ considering they weren't professional soldiers, nor do their bodies perceive surroundings that well, let alone compared to a couple of hundred year old super soldier, but hey ho.

From what I've read, not having the indices myself, the plan for clearing out necron warriors is to focus a unit down one at a time, as their RP can't trigger if the unit is destroyed. This means that yeah, a tactical squad by itself will likely not beat the warriors, but if you destroy the unit entirely using support from the rest of your army (hopefully not requiring an army to kill off a unit) it robs them of their primary strength.
I really hope that it triggers after battleshock, otherwise morale effects helping in wiping out the unit to deny RP will be a rare event

That seems extremely overpowered. You pay less for a unit that is slightly slower, tougher and better at killing things (even when you count in the free/discounted weapons tacticals get). You could say that marines get chapter tactics, but we have no reason to believe necrons won't get those too. And yes, morale triggers first.

Focus firing to trigger catastrophic morale tests seems like the way to go against Warriors. Or you know do what has always worked against Necrons, fight them in close combat.

Well, keep in mind they have no special weapons and a worse armour save, so you're more likely to wipe out the unit and deny their survivability boost than you are for marines.

Necron get <Dynasty>, can't say I know if anything interacts with it at the moment.

CovenantGuardian wrote:
Focus firing to trigger catastrophic morale tests seems like the way to go against Warriors. Or you know do what has always worked against Necrons, fight them in close combat.

Our CC has been given a huge buff, now that if we get the charge off, we can strike first. Warscythe lychguard and big blobs of flayed ones are looking good, especially with the fist turn charges we can get off now.

CovenantGuardian wrote:
Focus firing to trigger catastrophic morale tests seems like the way to go against Warriors. Or you know do what has always worked against Necrons, fight them in close combat.

They were equally survivable in close combat in seventh edition

And a cryptek in a squad of 20 gives a 5++ to shooting, and buffs RP to 4+++....

But i think were fairly balanced overall. All our big guns are very expensive, while our troops are cheap, alot of stuff has gone up in price. Wraiths are even more durable now they have another wound and still a 3++, but tarpits aren't a thing now. Could use them to deny shooting for stuff after falling back I suppose.

We cant spam melta and plasma etc in squads, have to have specalised equipment, making list building very critical.

 Klowny wrote:

CovenantGuardian wrote:
Focus firing to trigger catastrophic morale tests seems like the way to go against Warriors. Or you know do what has always worked against Necrons, fight them in close combat.

Our CC has been given a huge buff, now that if we get the charge off, we can strike first. Warscythe lychguard and big blobs of flayed ones are looking good, especially with the fist turn charges we can get off now.

I was reffering to warriors specifically, very few people ran melee necrons before. I could see the 20 man unit sizes being overpowered, we will see.

Jup that seems quite strong indeed

To everyone complaining Necrons will be OP, especially new players, need to relax a bit. Necrons in 7th edition were OP. This edition they are reverting back to 5th edition RP, but slightly better and worse. It just means you have to focus a unit down. Infantry in this edition is not hard to remove, so warriors won't be a problem for long.

Also characters don't come back, and once they get in melee or get shot at, they'll die easily, so living metal doesn't mitigate that much in the long run.

If anyone cries OP, then let's play a game using my 7th edition Decurion detachment. You'll love 8th edition Necrons then.

 Imperator97 wrote:
Well, keep in mind they have no special weapons and a worse armour save, so you're more likely to wipe out the unit and deny their survivability boost than you are for marines.

Necron get <Dynasty>, can't say I know if anything interacts with it at the moment.

Overlords, crypteks, monoliths, lords and destroyer lords, night scythes and ghost arks all interact with the <dynasty> rule.

 krodarklorr wrote:
To everyone complaining Necrons will be OP, especially new players, need to relax a bit. Necrons in 7th edition were OP. This edition they are reverting back to 5th edition RP, but slightly better and worse. It just means you have to focus a unit down. Infantry in this edition is not hard to remove, so warriors won't be a problem for long.

Also characters don't come back, and once they get in melee or get shot at, they'll die easily, so living metal doesn't mitigate that much in the long run.

If anyone cries OP, then let's play a game using my 7th edition Decurion detachment. You'll love 85th edition Necrons then.

Even if they're less OP, it's still OP dude. Those Warriors can sit still in cover midfield and get a 2+ save that it's not easy for my army to mitigate, they also pump out good firepower and can't be Sweeping Advanced and are still Ld10 in an edition where everyone else's Ld was lowered. They're looking very good indeed.

I'm not saying warriors are bad. A basic infantry gun at AP-1 is awesome. But where are you getting a 2+ save from? Cover is +1, and warriors have always had a 4+ base.

Even if they're less OP, it's still OP dude. Those Warriors can sit still in cover midfield and get a 2+ save that it's not easy for my army to mitigate, they also pump out good firepower and can't be Sweeping Advanced and are still Ld10 in an edition where everyone else's Ld was lowered. They're looking very good indeed.

To get that cover bonus on the large squad sizes it makes sense to field warriors in, I'd have to fit 10+ of them in cover. For me, where we don't play with a large amount of terrain that could fit that size entirely within it, that's going to be hard to claim, but depending on your club, YMMV.
Also, considering cover is no longer a flat save, like an invulnerable, shifting warriors from cover only takes AP-1 to get them back to their normal save, and anything above that, which seems widely available to a lot of the armies, starts hitting them plenty hard.

Isn't RP just back to what it used to be before the ridiculous 7E book? That should be far easier to deal with in general.

CovenantGuardian wrote:

 Klowny wrote:

CovenantGuardian wrote:
Focus firing to trigger catastrophic morale tests seems like the way to go against Warriors. Or you know do what has always worked against Necrons, fight them in close combat.

Our CC has been given a huge buff, now that if we get the charge off, we can strike first. Warscythe lychguard and big blobs of flayed ones are looking good, especially with the fist turn charges we can get off now.

I was reffering to warriors specifically, very few people ran melee necrons before. I could see the 20 man unit sizes being overpowered, we will see.

I ran melee crone in 6th my praetorians took many a head.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Isn't RP just back to what it used to be before the ridiculous 7E book? That should be far easier to deal with in general.

In their older books, it was only at the end of the phase in which they were killed. As in, you got 1 attempt to re animate them. Also, the units could be destroyed in sweeping advance (especially easy because Necrons has I2), which prevented any re-animation. Now you get an attempt for every single dead model every single turn until the parent unit is killled. Also, you obviously can't sweeping advance to destroy a large unit anymore, and Necrons are extremely resistant to morale damage (LD10 when almost everyone else got nerfed leadership). Any models killed by morale can also be reanimated in this way...

Seems pretty strong.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Isn't RP just back to what it used to be before the ridiculous 7E book? That should be far easier to deal with in general.

I totally agree. I played Necrons when RP was 'We'll be Back!" and a common tactic was to just wipe a unit so they couldn't roll at all. That was back in 4E/5E
Firepower has dramatically increased since them AND Warriors only have a 4+ armour now (instead of the 3+ they had then)

It should be quite easy to kill 80% of a unit and let Morale kill the rest. If the unit has 10 models, kill 8-9 and Morale will kill the last 1-2 models. No unit is left, no RP rolls can be made
And since RP is no longer a 'FNP' equivalent, Necrons are much, MUCH easier to kill in the first place.

 Galef wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Isn't RP just back to what it used to be before the ridiculous 7E book? That should be far easier to deal with in general.

I totally agree. I played Necrons when RP was 'We'll be Back!" and a common tactic was to just wipe a unit so they couldn't roll at all. That was back in 4E/5E
Firepower has dramatically increased since them AND Warriors only have a 4+ armour now (instead of the 3+ they had then)

It should be quite easy to kill 80% of a unit and let Morale kill the rest. If the unit has 10 models, kill 8-9 and Morale will kill the last 1-2 models. No unit is left, no RP rolls can be made
And since RP is no longer a 'FNP' equivalent, Necrons are much, MUCH easier to kill in the first place.

This is exactly my point. Necrons are no longer top tier, so people can't really complain now.

krodarklorr wrote:I'm not saying warriors are bad. A basic infantry gun at AP-1 is awesome. But where are you getting a 2+ save from? Cover is +1, and warriors have always had a 4+ base.

Not exactly true. They had a 3+ in 3rd, but that was without Immortals being an option.

Vaktathi wrote:Isn't RP just back to what it used to be before the ridiculous 7E book? That should be far easier to deal with in general.

It's closer to the 3rd Edition than the 5th. 3rd was once per turn, 5th was per Phase. Neither one on its own allowed for bringing them back once the initial attempt was made.

Ah I didnt realize it allowed for multiple attempts, I missed that, that's a bit silly, but it's still hands down more balanced than the 7E incarnation that was (due to detachments) basically always a 4+ and could be taken against every wound (not just casualties) with no negation for wiping the unit.

That said, for multiwound models, do they come back with full wounds or just one? Coming back with full wounds would be silly as well.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Ah I didnt realize it allowed for multiple attempts, I missed that, that's a bit silly, but it's still hands down more balanced than the 7E incarnation that was (due to detachments) basically always a 4+ and could be taken against every wound (not just casualties) with no negation for wiping the unit.

That said, for multiwound models, do they come back with full wounds or just one? Coming back with full wounds would be silly as well.

It doesn't say whether they come back at full wounds. Hopefully will be clarified in an errata.

Asura Varuna wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Ah I didnt realize it allowed for multiple attempts, I missed that, that's a bit silly, but it's still hands down more balanced than the 7E incarnation that was (due to detachments) basically always a 4+ and could be taken against every wound (not just casualties) with no negation for wiping the unit.

That said, for multiwound models, do they come back with full wounds or just one? Coming back with full wounds would be silly as well.

It doesn't say whether they come back at full wounds. Hopefully will be clarified in an errata.

Oh GW...

Yeah what did you expect concise and accurate? Not from this company.

Well, we know that Characters do NOT have RP. They have Living Metal, just like the vehicles. So maybe clarification isn't needed since all the units with RP only have 1-2 wound per model anyway.

-

 Galef wrote:
Well, we know that Characters do NOT have RP. They have Living Metal, just like the vehicles. So maybe clarification isn't needed since all the units with RP only have 1-2 wound per model anyway.

-

Destroyers have 3. X.x

I don't see RP being too much of a problem as long as you mitigate it with focused fire. It'll probably just be enough to offset their 4+ armor save in a typical game.

They basically pay a MEQ price for a MEQ unit, but exchange -1 on their armor save for RP.

If they have 3 groups of 20 warriors, and you reduce each one to 1 model after battleshock, they get to make 57 RP rolls and quite a few of those are going to get back up. If you focus fire and leave them with just one 3-model squad standing instead, they only get to make 17 RP rolls. Plan accordingly.

 Galef wrote:
Well, we know that Characters do NOT have RP. They have Living Metal, just like the vehicles. So maybe clarification isn't needed since all the units with RP only have 1-2 wound per model anyway.

A useless reference. A one model unit has no use for an ability which requires other models in the same unit around in order to work.

Lots of comments in this thread of "Just wipe them out in a turn". It actually takes quite a few shots to kill 20 T4 4+ models in a single turn, especially so where there are no blasts to punish clumping in cover, or any AP4 guns to simply negate their cover saves. Are there going to be many armies that are capable of doing that, especially at lower points levels. Remember also that a CP can be used to auto-pass a morale test, in case you were planning on relying on that to destroy a unit. If you do attempt to clear a unit in a single turn and fail, you're then left with the dilemma of attempting to destroy a fresh unit, or splitting your fire between the diminished one, but leaving yourself with a new half-dead squad to start reanimating. Throughout the battle, your ability to remove entire squads will decrease as well.

Out of interest, what would people's plans be for destroying warriors wholesale? It'd take about 120 bolter/pulse rifle shots to destroy a unit out of cover, and you'd have to find a way to bring all of those to bear on the same target (may be difficult due to line of sight, and range). There are no large blasts to remove models en masse. I'm quite certain my Tau army would struggle to consistently destroy whole squads in a single turn, and that's even ignoring other threats from the Necron list.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Lots of comments in this thread of "Just wipe them out in a turn". It actually takes quite a few shots to kill 20 T4 4+ models in a single turn, especially so where there are no blasts to punish clumping in cover, or any AP4 guns to simply negate their cover saves. Are there going to be many armies that are capable of doing that, especially at lower points levels. Remember also that a CP can be used to auto-pass a morale test, in case you were planning on relying on that to destroy a unit. If you do attempt to clear a unit in a single turn and fail, you're then left with the dilemma of attempting to destroy a fresh unit, or splitting your fire between the diminished one, but leaving yourself with a new half-dead squad to start reanimating. Throughout the battle, your ability to remove entire squads will decrease as well.

Out of interest, what would people's plans be for destroying warriors wholesale? It'd take about 120 bolter/pulse rifle shots to destroy a unit out of cover, and you'd have to find a way to bring all of those to bear on the same target (may be difficult due to line of sight, and range). There are no large blasts to remove models en masse. I'm quite certain my Tau army would struggle to consistently destroy whole squads in a single turn, and that's even ignoring other threats from the Necron list.

The trick is to engage Battleshock as brutally as possible. For some armies that means a lot of good Shooting, and for others it involves a lot of bonking on the head. They are resilient even to this with their higher stat, but that is the answer. If you're doing it right, all RP will do is recover what Battleshock has done to them.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Lots of comments in this thread of "Just wipe them out in a turn". It actually takes quite a few shots to kill 20 T4 4+ models in a single turn, especially so where there are no blasts to punish clumping in cover, or any AP4 guns to simply negate their cover saves. Are there going to be many armies that are capable of doing that, especially at lower points levels. Remember also that a CP can be used to auto-pass a morale test, in case you were planning on relying on that to destroy a unit. If you do attempt to clear a unit in a single turn and fail, you're then left with the dilemma of attempting to destroy a fresh unit, or splitting your fire between the diminished one, but leaving yourself with a new half-dead squad to start reanimating. Throughout the battle, your ability to remove entire squads will decrease as well.

Out of interest, what would people's plans be for destroying warriors wholesale? It'd take about 120 bolter/pulse rifle shots to destroy a unit out of cover, and you'd have to find a way to bring all of those to bear on the same target (may be difficult due to line of sight, and range). There are no large blasts to remove models en masse. I'm quite certain my Tau army would struggle to consistently destroy whole squads in a single turn, and that's even ignoring other threats from the Necron list.

Every way I've found to reliably remove twenty Necron Warriors in one round is 300-400pts. I'm starting to think you fight the Necrons by trying to pin down and blow up the small/elite units, characters, vehicles, etc. (you know, the things that don't resurrect easily) while leaving the big Warrior blocks alone, and I'm entirely okay with the Necrons working that way.

As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

Wraiths are nowhere near as good as they were in the previous editions. In fact, they're worse by a decent margin. And cost roughly the same.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Every way I've found to reliably remove twenty Necron Warriors in one round is 300-400pts. I'm starting to think you fight the Necrons by trying to pin down and blow up the small/elite units, characters, vehicles, etc. (you know, the things that don't resurrect easily) while leaving the big Warrior blocks alone, and I'm entirely okay with the Necrons working that way.

I think you're probably onto something there. Focus the most damaging part of the army first and hope you're not overrun by warriors before you've accomplished that goal. Targeting characters will be neigh-on impossible though unless you have fliers or jump-pack assault infantry. Even then, it'd be pretty sloppy of the Necron player to let that happen.

What sort of 300-400 point solutions did you come up with? As a Tau player I look at 300-400 points and think - that's 1 Riptide or 2 HYMP Broadsides. Neither of those options are going to put much of a dent in a swarm of warriors. Even with Firewarriors, 300-400 points is only netting you 35-50 of them, and you need 120 pulse rifle shots to destroy the unit on average. Obviously this is taking things in a vacuum, which isn't how the game is played, but I'm intrigued by this problem. When it comes to the tabletop, getting all the units in range/in line of sight would make it a completely different ball game as well.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

Wraiths are nowhere near as good as they were in the previous editions. In fact, they're worse by a decent margin. And cost roughly the same.

To be fair, Wraiths were undercosted in 7th, even outside of the Canoptek Harvest.

Wraiths were undercosted going back to their 5E book, that was a unit everyone expected to get nerfed with the 7E book and were all flabbergasted when they got massively buffed

 krodarklorr wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

Wraiths are nowhere near as good as they were in the previous editions. In fact, they're worse by a decent margin. And cost roughly the same.

Good.

300-400pts was things like twelve-ish Purifiers (shoot, then charge; using Incinerators and halberds), and 45 Guardians (difficult to get within 12", to be sure, but they'll do the job for 360pts if you do).

Best result so far was Harlequins, about twelve to fifteen of them will do it for around 250pts.

 EnTyme wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

Wraiths are nowhere near as good as they were in the previous editions. In fact, they're worse by a decent margin. And cost roughly the same.

To be fair, Wraiths were undercosted in 7th, even outside of the Canoptek Harvest.

Not really. They were thunderwolf cavalry that were worse in CC. That's it. Without the formation they weren't stupid durable, and they've never hit exceptionally hard. They tarpit, and that's it.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I'm not saying warriors are bad. A basic infantry gun at AP-1 is awesome. But where are you getting a 2+ save from? Cover is +1, and warriors have always had a 4+ base.

Always? I take it you didn't play them 13 years ago.
Before the warddex they had 3+ armor, an immortals were T5 elites.

I laugh at this thread, when the only option to destroy something is to focus fire it down and hope you battleshock it to death then there is a problem.

In the real game what is likely to happen you get maybe 2 squads of 10 in range. Let's assume Marines in rapid fire range with just bolters 40 shots. ~27hits ~14wounds 7die 50% chance something dies to battleshock. Approximately 2 models get back up leaving you with about 13-15 warriors.

I appreciate this example isn't exact or anything.

 krodarklorr wrote:

This is exactly my point. Necrons are no longer top tier, so people can't really complain now.

A little early to be calling tier lists Also I don't know if you've noticed but every faction has a post about how 8th ed ruined their army. A few samples

Gladius are gone how will SM compete?
They nerfed the wraithknight so eldar are trash now.
They made LRBT awful which ruined guard.
Do orks seem weak to you guys as well?
Necron repair protocols ruined the army.

It's the internet being the internet, everyone needs to take a deep breath, relax, and get out there and get some games in before they come to any shocking conclusions.

As for RP it's a mixed bag, in 7th ed RP made individuals more resistant to incoming damage, over 8 times as resistant as models with similar stat lines on rez orb rounds near a lord. This was very frustrating to fight, I had several occasions where a lychstar took and armies worth of fire and lost one or two guys. If your dice went hot you could ruin someones day, and this was the reason for the RP change, it was a super annoying mechanic to fight, and that was why so much salt was sent the necrons way.

In 8th ed Necrons are no more resistant to incoming fire than any model with a similar statline, so now you can put necrons down fairly easy, and anyone who fought necrons in 7th ed will say that's a large improvement. 8th ed adds a new feature to the equation, the ability to bypass repair protocols, it takes concentrated fire, but it's doable. Not even in 5th ed was it this easy to bypass RP, since RP worked as long as there was another unit near the completely downed unit, now if you ever wipe a unit out in a turn they are gone for good.

The ability to bypass RP is compounded by the fact 7th ed RP was frontloaded, you got all of your advantages as soon as you were hit, in 8th ed it's back loaded, so it's much easier to wipe out a unit. If it took 10 unsaved wounds to kill a warrior squad, 7th ed RP would make that 20, but 8th ed would still take only 10. Even the res orb mechanic has been nerfed, it used to make a unit up to 9 times more resistant to incoming fire, now at best it gets you an extra 25% of your casualties back.

To prevent this from being a gutting nerf, they added the ability to keep rolling in subsequent rounds. I don't know if this will balance out in practice, my suspicion is that smart opponents will focus fire to avoid RP, but that has it's own trade offs. Lacking oracular powers, and tactics being hard to mathhammer, we will just have to wait and see how it plays out. the nice thing about a living ruleset like 8th ed is that if it's too much or too little they can adjust points to bring them into line.

Ok so yes...warriors on mass will be difficult to deal with but not(as in 7th ed) almost unstoppable. As someone who has played since the rt era i can say that focussing firepower will be the downfall of the army. Saying that, they know you will be trying to do this and will plan accordingly.

Try to get out of the way of thinking that leads to..."well i failed to destroy that unit this turn so my stufff must be awful".

Necrons are tough. It's their reason to exist so to speak but.....the transition to the original rules for what was called "we'll be back" combined with the new morale rules will see them actually falling to small arms fire (given enough of it).

The main issue i have with the last few editions of 40k is the mindset that if a unit can't totally obliterate something in one round then it is bad. This is not a fun experience for either player.

Necron players want their troops to be hard to kill, and they will be. But no longer will they have multiple redundancies to fall back on (and its looking like their characters will be nowhere near hard enough to kill if isolated) so its going to come down to strategy.

As a tyranid player i see nothing here that makes me curse as much as i did when i first read the decurion for 7th.

Always remember....both players want to feel their chosen army is effective.....something that 7th singularly failed to do.

To sum up..this wil be a learing curve for everybody..try and have some fun.

It seems like necron troops are pretty durable. What else is strong? Crypteks seem good, and Monoliths can get the slow but survivable Warriors. Are Destroyers viable?

I personally don't mind Necrons being tough and getting back up. The problem is they also have good shooting 3+ to hit with ap-1 weapons.
If they were like 4+ or 5+ BS them not dying wouldn't really be an issue.

Has anyone read the rules under matched play yet? It explicitly states, "Sometimes a psychic power or ability will allow you to add units to your army, or ]replace units that have been destroyed". pg 214 (emphasis added) It then says that you need to put points aside for this. There is a chance that this includes reanimation protocols, which would really hurt the Necrons in match play as they are basically losing an ability that is common among their forces. Now the rules says units not models, but if I was a Necron player I would certainly want GW to answer that before I spent a lot on money on warriors to take advantage of Reanimation. Also I am not saying it should be one way or the other, just that it would not be shocking if there was an FAQ that screwed you on this.

As bad as it may seem, and as much I dislike Necrons, I have to say this isn't nearly as bad as 7th. In 7th, RP could have been made multiple times (as it was a save). Now, RP can only be made once before the model is finally removed. The -1AP weapons with SM levels of shooting is where it gets good, especially for such a cheap model. That's where I would be most worried, but it isn't so bad, I'm sure they suffer in other places. Necrons seem to have translated nicely into 8th, at least much better than some other armies (Deathwatch, Orks).

Yes, you will be concentrating far more than their own points on them in order to wipe them out in a single turn. That's because one-turn wipeouts ain't cheap, units in 40k aren't balanced around one-turn wipeouts, but they are effective. Making sure one unit is good and dead in a single turn is inherently more valuable than putting a dent in several units, because dead units don't shoot back.

You're not changing your army composition, only your target priority. It's just like fighting a multi-wound model (except not as bad, because RP only brings back 1/3 of the firepower they lost, not all of it). If you know you can expect to inflict 12 wounds this round, do you take 3 wounds off 4 different 12-wound models, or do you concentrate your fire to make sure one of those models dies even though that means shooting at that one model with 4x its points value?

 Boniface wrote:
I personally don't mind Necrons being tough and getting back up. The problem is they also have good shooting 3+ to hit with ap-1 weapons.
If they were like 4+ or 5+ BS them not dying wouldn't really be an issue.

We got the -1 AP to make up for losing our Gauss special rule, outside of that our shooting is the same as ever. We had gauss in 7th ed because we don't have special weapons in our squads, so our gauss weapons need of be jack of all trades. A -1 AP seems a fair way to accomplish that though I was hoping for a different solution personally.

xeen wrote:
Has anyone read the rules under matched play yet? It explicitly states, "Sometimes a psychic power or ability will allow you to add units to your army, or ]replace units that have been destroyed". pg 214 (emphasis added) It then says that you need to put points aside for this. There is a chance that this includes reanimation protocols, which would really hurt the Necrons in match play as they are basically losing an ability that is common among their forces. Now the rules says units not models, but if I was a Necron player I would certainly want GW to answer that before I spent a lot on money on warriors to take advantage of Reanimation. Also I am not saying it should be one way or the other, just that it would not be shocking if there was an FAQ that screwed you on this.

Nope. That rule says UNITS. Reanimation protocol adds MODELS. Just like Space Marine Apothecaries. But if you are adding an entire unit (like summoning demons) or replacing an entire unit (as some missions did in 7th edition) then you have to pay with reserve points.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
As I dove through the indexes yesterday, the only things that really jumped out at me as being probably a bit too good for their point cost are a few necron units (especially canoptek wraiths, holy god...) and imperial assassins.

Wraiths are nowhere near as good as they were in the previous editions. In fact, they're worse by a decent margin. And cost roughly the same.

Are we looking at the same data sheet? I've gone through all the indexes now, and canoptek wraiths look balls out amazing for their points in matched play. Adding a 3rd wound, keeping their awesome statline and movement, keeping the amazing 3++ in an edition where good invuln saves are amazing, and an extremely competitive point cost. If there was a nerf other than just them losing access to formations, I'm not seeing it.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Boniface wrote:
I personally don't mind Necrons being tough and getting back up. The problem is they also have good shooting 3+ to hit with ap-1 weapons.
If they were like 4+ or 5+ BS them not dying wouldn't really be an issue.

We got the -1 AP to make up for losing our Gauss special rule, outside of that our shooting is the same as ever. We had gauss in 7th ed because we don't have special weapons in our squads, so our gauss weapons need of be jack of all trades. A -1 AP seems a fair way to accomplish that though I was hoping for a different solution personally.

I know, i just think they should always have been 4+ BS. They need to have some drawback, which is clearly not the cost.

Compared to a marine the Necron seems significantly better and cheaper

Should be formidable....

 docdoom77 wrote:

xeen wrote:
Has anyone read the rules under matched play yet? It explicitly states, "Sometimes a psychic power or ability will allow you to add units to your army, or ]replace units that have been destroyed". pg 214 (emphasis added) It then says that you need to put points aside for this. There is a chance that this includes reanimation protocols, which would really hurt the Necrons in match play as they are basically losing an ability that is common among their forces. Now the rules says units not models, but if I was a Necron player I would certainly want GW to answer that before I spent a lot on money on warriors to take advantage of Reanimation. Also I am not saying it should be one way or the other, just that it would not be shocking if there was an FAQ that screwed you on this.

Nope. That rule says UNITS. Reanimation protocol adds MODELS. Just like Space Marine Apothecaries. But if you are adding an entire unit (like summoning demons) or replacing an entire unit (as some missions did in 7th edition) then you have to pay with reserve points.

Also, you're not replacing them. It specifically says that the original models are coming back to life.

 Boniface wrote:
I know, i just think they should always have been 4+ BS. They need to have some drawback, which is clearly not the cost.

Compared to a marine the Necron seems significantly better and cheaper

I disagree. If they are to have a failing, let it match their fluff and be like the Tau. Necrons and Tau both see the ranged game as the best and most honorable way of fighting a battle, which means they should both be more fumble fingers in close combat. This would allow the Lychguard and Flayed Ones to have a more unique setup which emphasizes the close combat over the ranged.

 gnome_idea_what wrote:
It seems like necron troops are pretty durable. What else is strong? Crypteks seem good, and Monoliths can get the slow but survivable Warriors. Are Destroyers viable?

I think so. They are really expensive, but they do well against most targets, are pretty mobile, tough, can be buffed (unlike praetorians), and are a good source of multiple damage.
You can also add a heavy destroyer to their squad, which makes them really good at hunting vehicles.

As somone who plays with, and against crons, I am incredibly happy the old FNP mechanic is gone - it was incredibly frustrating to play against.

The new rule? same as older dex - just wipe out the unit.

Crons are still severely limited in what they can take where - and still have a lot of limitations (notice the new and improved monolith is bs3 now?).

I play crons and marines (and more) and honestly can say I am not worried about crons at all.
(I am giddy for my marine bikes, and my nids however!).

Yeah, the grass is always greener - it will be fine.

Close combat seems like the way to go here, right?

1) Warriors are much more dangerous at range than in CC, especially against things with decent saves.

2) CC specialists tend to be able to do more damage more quickly than equivalent points in ranged models, so you'll get through the squad faster.

3) Either you get to fight them a second time on their turn, killing them faster, or they Fall Back and don't do anything with their reanimated models anyway.

4) If you can surround the Warriors your consolidation at the end of the fight can make it impossible for dead models to reanimate. Note that reanimated models have to be placed in coherency with models that did not reanimate in the same turn, so this doesn't have to be perfect -- you can leave room to replace one or two models without having to worry about them replacing many more in coherency with those.

But yeah, naked basic Troops choices are really durable for their cost. Good luck shifting 240 points of naked Guardsmen in just a turn or two without a dedicated assault unit.

Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

I really just don't expect Necrons to be that bad. Especially since 8e seems to really be favoring infantry hordes, and that just isn't something Necrons do if they want to field anything other than Warriors.

Necrons aren't going to be OP unless your own list is critically under-supplied with dakka (in which case you're also going to have problems with 'Nids, Guard, and Orks) or you're really bad at focusing fire (in which case you might have a problem with superheavy lists, and all the wound regeneration that AdMech can bring).

Both of those are problems that can generally be corrected by optimizing your list and putting some thought into making your shots count.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

Ehh, i don't think were that bad. We've always excelled at killing elite armies, with our high quality, but low quantity attacks. We can still do this, and have gotten even better at it. Our basic weapons will shred marines, especially in the number of shots that will be going down range, and we can also obliterate them in CC with 1st turn Scytheguard charges striking first being a thing now. Seriously, our CC has been given an enormous buff, with most of our CC being super mobile, and the rest being able to deepstrike/be moved about the board by other units very faste. Our tesla is back to being strong again, and our vehicles are now hilariously tough to crack compared to what they used to be.

Sure some stuff has taken a nerf (FO and TB) due to being very expensive, but overall the majority of our index has been buffed.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

I would actually be really interested to see what that tier list shakes out to be, and his logic behind it, because you rarely learn something from people you agree with.

Also, everyone else is starting their 8th ed threads, why not make this one ours. There is something amusing about taking over a complaint thread and making it our place to have a good discussion of the 8th ed changes.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

 Klowny wrote:

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

I agree with your comments - in fact, I think you are kind of agreeing? Not sure.

Crons are good, but they are no where near to being "a bit too good for their points". There are a lot of inherent limitations built into the army.
(even our "beatstick" CCB, is no where near as tough as a abbadon, or a swarmlord - we have nothing in that class).

Oh, and as a fellow Necron enthusiast - did you notice our glorious monliths, while they can now shoot, sadly - its at BS3


Basically, crons are decent, have similar strengths and weaknesses - but are no means OP or broken.



Going to take some clever play and positioning to get the most of them.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

that and humans like to rank stuff, even if the differance between armies is 0.00000001% people'll still rank em by that differance

 ross-128 wrote:
I really just don't expect Necrons to be that bad. Especially since 8e seems to really be favoring infantry hordes, and that just isn't something Necrons do .

Lol, you would be supersized how many necron players do just that and have been doing that since they started their army years ago.

davethepak wrote:

 Klowny wrote:

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

I agree with your comments - in fact, I think you are kind of agreeing? Not sure.

Crons are good, but they are no where near to being "a bit too good for their points". There are a lot of inherent limitations built into the army.
(even our "beatstick" CCB, is no where near as tough as a abbadon, or a swarmlord - we have nothing in that class).

Oh, and as a fellow Necron enthusiast - did you notice our glorious monliths, while they can now shoot, sadly - its at BS3


Basically, crons are decent, have similar strengths and weaknesses - but are no means OP or broken.



Going to take some clever play and positioning to get the most of them.

Haha, I'm not sure whats going on I thought you were saying that we were "not good for our points" rather than "a bit too good for our points". Both statements I think are false.

I feel we are pretty well balanced. Sure we dont have any crazy CC HQ's like abbadon or a swarmlord, but we never have, and its not how our army plays. Comparing our HQ's to them is redundant. Swarmlord is crazy in CC, but our shooting is 1000x above theirs. Its a trade off we have to make to have our army play our way.

I personally dont see many armies that are broken OP? The top has been brought down and the bottom up, each army seems fairly even overall. As you said, there are a lot of inherent limitations built into every army.

Tyranids are terrifying, but I like the meta changing.

And yea, the monolith hits on 4's base, 3 with a stalker (I think the way they have changed it is vastly improved its useability). But it can gate in troops, is a solid brick that the army can hide behind, does mortal wounds when charged on top of all its overwatch etc etc. I cannot wait to use it, its 10000000000000000 times better than it was in 7th.

Aside from some first turn shenanigans Necrons are a very slow army with mostly very short range in an edition where everything is moving very fast and assault can be devastating . The game is 5 turns long so many necrons will being playing for objectives from turn one. A good player will take out fast or ranged units quickly and criple necrons ability to fight back.

Everyones talking like you have to kill the whole a unit of 20 warriors or don't bother. Knocking them down a few models is still going to help your CC mowers get close and wipe them. If they are close enough to get bonuses from characters it'll leave those characters extremely vulnerable to consolidation moves.

An exclusive picture on how a 8E Necron army will look:

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
An exclusive picture on how a 8E Necron army will look:

Cant exalt this enough. How did you do it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nebulas1 wrote:
Aside from some first turn shenanigans Necrons are a very slow army with mostly very short range in an edition where everything is moving very fast and assault can be devastating . The game is 5 turns long so many necrons will being playing for objectives from turn one. A good player will take out fast or ranged units quickly and criple necrons ability to fight back.

Everyones talking like you have to kill the whole a unit of 20 warriors or don't bother. Knocking them down a few models is still going to help your CC mowers get close and wipe them. If they are close enough to get bonuses from characters it'll leave those characters extremely vulnerable to consolidation moves.

All our fast units have gone up in durability. 2W praets, 3 wound wraiths, 3 wound destroyers. The maths done already has a unit of 3 wraiths being the most resilient thing in our army.... more than the 20w monolith.

Also if everything is so fast, wont have to worry about our short range then.

7th ed speed cron's was a very viable choice.

Nothing is different in 8th.

I dont think we are OP, nor nerfed into the ground. We look pretty balanced at the outset.

 Klowny wrote:

Cant exalt this enough. How did you do it?

So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yup. Seems a bit... odd. But hey, I'm not complaining!

 Freddy Kruger wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yup. Seems a bit... odd. But hey, I'm not complaining!

It actually makes a lot of sense if you think of it as the shield from Dune; it blocks powerful attacks but isn't effective against slower, weaker attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yeah. So use missile launchers and plasma instead.

 WarbossDakka wrote:
As bad as it may seem, and as much I dislike Necrons, I have to say this isn't nearly as bad as 7th. In 7th, RP could have been made multiple times (as it was a save). Now, RP can only be made once before the model is finally removed. The -1AP weapons with SM levels of shooting is where it gets good, especially for such a cheap model. That's where I would be most worried, but it isn't so bad, I'm sure they suffer in other places. Necrons seem to have translated nicely into 8th, at least much better than some other armies (Deathwatch, Orks).

Ummm. Isn't it now reverse? In 7th ed if you failed the RP after last wound that's it, gone. Okay you got it for every wound which helped for multi wound but for 1 wound guys it was one roll and if failed you are done. Now until squad is wiped out every turn you get to make the 5+ roll to come back to life.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yeah. So use missile launchers and plasma instead.

Nah to Missiles, too risky to roll high damage (can't believe I just said that)

Most Necron Vehicles are T6, so we are looking for S7... So Autocannons?

or even Battle Cannon type weapons that are d6 shots with d3 damage each.

tneva82 wrote:
Ummm. Isn't it now reverse? In 7th ed if you failed the RP after last wound that's it, gone. Okay you got it for every wound which helped for multi wound but for 1 wound guys it was one roll and if failed you are done. Now until squad is wiped out every turn you get to make the 5+ roll to come back to life.

4+ with Technomancy

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

Replace word miracle with supernatural laws of physic breaking archievement. It's flat out impossible. So there are tiers out there. Question is just what are what and how big differences.

Tiers are always out there in point level systems.

Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

Autocannon is always 2 damage

Krak Missile is d6 damage btw

 Talamare wrote:
Most Necron Vehicles are T6, so we are looking for S7... So Autocannons?

or even Battle Cannon type weapons that are d6 shots with d3 damage each.

Yeah autocannons and battle cannons are probably best weapons to deal with necron vehicles funnily enough.

Volcano is funnily enough one of the worst Average roll 0 damage!

Tiers will always be a thing. But there is a hell of a difference between tiers in Malifaux where they might give you a slight edge, and tiers in 7th 40k, where tiers mean you're not playing the same game.

Of course tiers will be a thing. I don't think anyone has ever argued that 8th will bring perfect balance to 40k. I think we should be happy that they're just trying to get some balance at all, and expect that this first try will fail pretty badly. But not as bad as 7th did.

It will be unbalanced, but the promises now is that it will be addressed as we trot along, unlike how GW has worked up until now.

 Talamare wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

Autocannon is always 2 damage

Krak Missile is d6 damage btw

Huh, really? I could have sworn its d3 damage.
Yeah, autocannons could work then. You'll want a weapon that inflicts 2-3 damage to try to get around shielding, while keeping the amount of firepower required low.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

33%. You need to roll below damage to block it. He rolls 3 for damage, you need 1 or 2 to block it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
It will be unbalanced, but the promises now is that it will be addressed as we trot along, unlike how GW has worked up until now.

Of course with GW's style being wild swings, side steps and all sort of weird stunts I'm expecting just shifting broken thing from another equally broken things. Much like 8th ed so far.

That is true. I keep forgetting that it's under the damage value, not under or equal to -_-.
So yeah, 33% to negate damage 3, 50% to negate damage 4, 66% to negate damage 5, and 83% to negate damage 6, 100% to negate damage 7+
Funnily enough, that would mean damage 1 would always get through, as you can't roll below one.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

I hope you mean GW.
There is nothing like balancing in a game with a complex rule set. I think here the problem is NP hard but I havent proved it.

I can't believe people even think Necrons are going to be in the top 10 armies, let alone OP. Every single Imperium faction army, even if they stick to a single faction, outguns Necrons. S4 AP-1 bolters don't make up for the loss of special weapons in an edition where most tanks are T7 W10 3+. Necrons cannot deal with vehicles at all; where guard can take 6 lascannons for just over 150 points, Necrons can take 2 - and that's their best possible anti-tank option. Against combat MCs, there is literally no good way to deal with them in the entire Necron index.

Necrons have an army gutted of units good against any large models, with poor combat, middling shooting at best, low range and no options. There are scarier feather dusters.

Eyjio wrote:
I can't believe people even think Necrons are going to be in the top 10 armies, let alone OP. Every single Imperium faction army, even if they stick to a single faction, outguns Necrons. S4 AP-1 bolters don't make up for the loss of special weapons in an edition where most tanks are T7 W10 3+. Necrons cannot deal with vehicles at all; where guard can take 6 lascannons for just over 150 points, Necrons can take 2 - and that's their best possible anti-tank option. Against combat MCs, there is literally no good way to deal with them in the entire Necron index.

Necrons have an army gutted of units good against any large models, with poor combat, middling shooting at best, low range and no options. There are scarier feather dusters.

This is just flat out incorrect. Tanks being T7 means nothing, our weapons still wound on 5s. As far as firepower, Tomb Blades kick out 24 AP-2 shots at 12" from 6 dudes, are fast and durable, and will hurt anything they shoot at pretty well. Immortals (both variants) are extremely potent and solid. Destroyers are as good as ever, especially backed up by a Destroyer Lord. 10 shots with rerolls at AP-3 doing D3 damage a piece for 200 points on a durable, regenerating, fast unit is good.

And poor combat? Flayed Ones are still ridiculous, because they can deep strike and charge, and can be backed up by My Will Be Done and Imotekh. Lychguard, the Warscythe variant, are solid alone with how melee works now, because they can Night Scythe their way into the board and charge, doing 2 damage per hit at AP-4, and can be further buffed by Anrakyr. Wraiths are still good. Not as OP as they were, but plenty of AP-1 attacks on fast durable models is scurry. Than praetorians. They're still moderately deadly. Then you have Ctan shards...

Necrons aren't the scariest thing out there, no. But you are highly under selling them, good sir.

I don't get that math on Wraiths. They don't have RP or LM. Sure, they have a 3+ Inv, but that's it. When you can buff RP to twice a round on a 4+ I can't figure out how the wraiths match that, never mind exceed it. What am I missing?

 krodarklorr wrote:
This is just flat out incorrect. Tanks being T7 means nothing, our weapons still wound on 5s. As far as firepower, Tomb Blades kick out 24 AP-2 shots at 12" from 6 dudes, are fast and durable, and will hurt anything they shoot at pretty well. Immortals (both variants) are extremely potent and solid. Destroyers are as good as ever, especially backed up by a Destroyer Lord. 10 shots with rerolls at AP-3 doing D3 damage a piece for 200 points on a durable, regenerating, fast unit is good.

And poor combat? Flayed Ones are still ridiculous, because they can deep strike and charge, and can be backed up by My Will Be Done and Imotekh. Lychguard, the Warscythe variant, are solid alone with how melee works now, because they can Night Scythe their way into the board and charge, doing 2 damage per hit at AP-4, and can be further buffed by Anrakyr. Wraiths are still good. Not as OP as they were, but plenty of AP-1 attacks on fast durable models is scurry. Than praetorians. They're still moderately deadly. Then you have Ctan shards...

Necrons aren't the scariest thing out there, no. But you are highly under selling them, good sir.

It is absolutely correct. Tanks being T7 makes a huge difference. You raise Tomb Blades - with Gauss Blasters and assuming rapid fire range (the best possible situation for them), you would need 17 of them at 42 points a head to kill a 100 point Razorback - 714 points in total. Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers. Neither of these is a realistic option at all. Meanwhile, Guard HWT lascannons need 11 units to kill that same tank, at 264 points total. Even if the IG player decides they particularly hate themselves and fires plasma guns from Scions at tanks at 24" range, they still only need 354 points worth of units to kill a Razorback. You could take 6 full 10 man units of Scions with plasma guns for the cost of those 17 Tomb Blades, and they would be over twice as good.

Are you going to deep strike flayed ones then try and make a 9" charge? I can't imagine deploying next to an enemy and taking a ~27.8% chance to make a charge is a good idea myself. You can't deep strike in Imotekh, so he's going to have to walk across the board or take an expensive transport option to get anywhere near close enough to the Flayed Ones. Lychguard are not favoured in any 1 on 1 combat, and you can't beam Anrakyr down with them. That's ignoring the fact that all of these units are still poor against vehicles for their cost, and won't touch vehicles at all if the enemy knows the first things about bubble wrapping.

So no, I'm not underselling them at all. They cannot deal with large models with any kind of efficiency. They are poor in combat, one of the worst factions in the game for it. They have low range. Their shooting is not in any way impressive compared to almost any army. They have limited options to do anything beyond spamming bolters. They are outgunned, outlived, outnumbered and outfought by the vast majority of armies. They are not going to be a good army in 8th edition, at least until their points are drastically changed.

Eyjio wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
This is just flat out incorrect. Tanks being T7 means nothing, our weapons still wound on 5s. As far as firepower, Tomb Blades kick out 24 AP-2 shots at 12" from 6 dudes, are fast and durable, and will hurt anything they shoot at pretty well. Immortals (both variants) are extremely potent and solid. Destroyers are as good as ever, especially backed up by a Destroyer Lord. 10 shots with rerolls at AP-3 doing D3 damage a piece for 200 points on a durable, regenerating, fast unit is good.

And poor combat? Flayed Ones are still ridiculous, because they can deep strike and charge, and can be backed up by My Will Be Done and Imotekh. Lychguard, the Warscythe variant, are solid alone with how melee works now, because they can Night Scythe their way into the board and charge, doing 2 damage per hit at AP-4, and can be further buffed by Anrakyr. Wraiths are still good. Not as OP as they were, but plenty of AP-1 attacks on fast durable models is scurry. Than praetorians. They're still moderately deadly. Then you have Ctan shards...

Necrons aren't the scariest thing out there, no. But you are highly under selling them, good sir.

It is absolutely correct. Tanks being T7 makes a huge difference. You raise Tomb Blades - with Gauss Blasters and assuming rapid fire range (the best possible situation for them), you would need 17 of them at 42 points a head to kill a 100 point Razorback - 714 points in total. Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers. Neither of these is a realistic option at all. Meanwhile, Guard HWT lascannons need 11 units to kill that same tank, at 264 points total. Even if the IG player decides they particularly hate themselves and fires plasma guns from Scions at tanks at 24" range, they still only need 354 points worth of units to kill a Razorback. You could take 6 full 10 man units of Scions with plasma guns for the cost of those 17 Tomb Blades, and they would be over twice as good.

Are you going to deep strike flayed ones then try and make a 9" charge? I can't imagine deploying next to an enemy and taking a ~27.8% chance to make a charge is a good idea myself. You can't deep strike in Imotekh, so he's going to have to walk across the board or take an expensive transport option to get anywhere near close enough to the Flayed Ones. Lychguard are not favoured in any 1 on 1 combat, and you can't beam Anrakyr down with them. That's ignoring the fact that all of these units are still poor against vehicles for their cost, and won't touch vehicles at all if the enemy knows the first things about bubble wrapping.

So no, I'm not underselling them at all. They cannot deal with large models with any kind of efficiency. They are poor in combat, one of the worst factions in the game for it. They have low range. Their shooting is not in any way impressive compared to almost any army. They have limited options to do anything beyond spamming bolters. They are outgunned, outlived, outnumbered and outfought by the vast majority of armies. They are not going to be a good army in 8th edition, at least until their points are drastically changed.

My apologies, I forgot the most important rule: don't feed the trolls.

You do you, buddy. We'll see how awful Necrons are on the tabletop.

 krodarklorr wrote:
My apologies, I forgot the most important rule: don't feed the trolls.

You do you, buddy. We'll see how awful Necrons are on the tabletop.

Great, jump straight to the personal insults.

I've provided the maths and the facts of the matter. You've called me names. For some reason, I remain unconvinced. But sure, we'll see how people are feeling in 3 months after they've underperformed at the BAO and NOVA.

I think this thread is done.

Some people are thinking the crons are too good.
Some think they are balanced.

Lots of things have changed for ALL armies.

Honestly, the grass is always greener. Really.
That is why it is a cliche.

I suggest to everyone, to actually play multiple armies.
It helps.

Can we end this now? Thanks.

Eyjio wrote:
I can't believe people even think Necrons are going to be in the top 10 armies, let alone OP. Every single Imperium faction army, even if they stick to a single faction, outguns Necrons. S4 AP-1 bolters don't make up for the loss of special weapons in an edition where most tanks are T7 W10 3+. Necrons cannot deal with vehicles at all; where guard can take 6 lascannons for just over 150 points, Necrons can take 2 - and that's their best possible anti-tank option. Against combat MCs, there is literally no good way to deal with them in the entire Necron index.

Necrons have an army gutted of units good against any large models, with poor combat, middling shooting at best, low range and no options. There are scarier feather dusters.

I think Necrons will be in the Top 10, Top 10 is a pretty large margin.

Top 10 is already like mid tier stuff.

Um, yeah, most people are now talking about how the army actually works, with a few holdouts on the OP/Nerf convo. Nothing wrong with talking about the list in general.

Personally, I love the potential to stack buffs on the RP. 20 Warriors with a Crypek and a Ghost Ark is really tough. Rolling RP on a 4+ twice a turn? Yikes. Sure it's pricey, but it also puts out 60 dice at close range, so it's all defensive. Really, an army build around that would probably start with two warrior squads at 20, two Crypteks, and one Ghost Ark. Multiple Arks is silly expensive.

*edit* wait, 1 Cryptek would be lots. I was thinking the buff was for one unit not both...

I'm also liking the Ghostwalk Mantle a lot. Paired with Lychguard or Flayed ones and you can wreak havoc in the backfield.

Oh, and Annihilation Barges at 150-ish points each? That's a great deal IMO.

Eyjio wrote:
Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers.

Actually, Destroyers are 63pts a head.

 Fenris-77 wrote:
Um, yeah, most people are now talking about how the army actually works, with a few holdouts on the OP/Nerf convo. Nothing wrong with talking about the list in general.

Personally, I love the potential to stack buffs on the RP. 20 Warriors with a Crypek and a Ghost Ark is really tough. Rolling RP on a 4+ twice a turn? Yikes. Sure it's pricey, but it also puts out 60 dice at close range, so it's all defensive. Really, an army build around that would probably start with two warrior squads at 20, two Crypteks, and one Ghost Ark. Multiple Arks is silly expensive.

*edit* wait, 1 Cryptek would be lots. I was thinking the buff was for one unit not both...

I'm also liking the Ghostwalk Mantle a lot. Paired with Lychguard or Flayed ones and you can wreak havoc in the backfield.

Oh, and Annihilation Barges at 150-ish points each? That's a great deal IMO.

Yeah, a lot of our buffs actually affect multiple units, so you just need one HQ to make the most of its buffs.
The only exceptions I could see is the Overlord specific buff which only affects one unit, and the CCB's wave of Command.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers.

Actually, Destroyers are 63pts a head.

Yeah, they are going to have to clarify on the list building; it seems really odd that some units have to pay for their basic equipement.
Consider the void raven; since they are only unit who has void lances, void lances cost 0 points. But what if other units could take void lances? Would they still be 0? It doesn't really seem consistent.
If points per model column was named "excluding wargear options" that would have been much clearer, as that would indicate that you don't pay extra for what the model comes with, only for any options that you decide to give it.

Is it ok to ask them about that on Facebook? Not sure if we can, due to our info stemming from leaks.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Yeah, they are going to have to clarify on the list building; it seems really odd that some units have to pay for their basic equipement.
Consider the void raven; since they are only unit who has void lances, void lances cost 0 points. But what if other units could take void lances? Would they still be 0? It doesn't really seem consistent.

But they can't. And if they make one that can, they'll cost it properly so that it still costs 0 for that unit. What's your point?

I agree to some extent that it seems a bit disassembled, like I'm being given an IKEA unit instead of a standard unit to build on, but they've clearly done this for consistency, and it took me one read-through to get used to. It's not that bad.

Models don't seem to actually *come* with anything. If you accept that, it's easier to accept the rest. The Sydonian Dragoon now has all its three options listed. But I'm not gonna run them with both a lance, a rifle and a pistol. I run them either with lances or with rifles, pistols are the extra on either of those two builds. I pick the things I want on them, and pay for that.

I'm not sure what it is you want to ask about on Facebook?

 vipoid wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers.

Actually, Destroyers are 63pts a head.

Whoops, I blanked and though they were 23 points base for a minute there - much too used to the 7e points. So, even worse then - 1512 points to kill a Razorback.

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Yeah, they are going to have to clarify on the list building; it seems really odd that some units have to pay for their basic equipement.
Consider the void raven; since they are only unit who has void lances, void lances cost 0 points. But what if other units could take void lances? Would they still be 0? It doesn't really seem consistent.

But they can't. And if they make one that can, they'll cost it properly so that it still costs 0 for that unit. What's your point?

I agree to some extent that it seems a bit disassembled, like I'm being given an IKEA unit instead of a standard unit to build on, but they've clearly done this for consistency, and it took me one read-through to get used to. It's not that bad.

The problem is that in the case of destroyers you have a unit who has to pay for the weapons they come with, just because that exists as an option for other units. Which means that a destroyer is effectively 63 points. That's a pretty steep price ofr a single model.
Now, it could be that its 43 points base are totally reasonable given it's stats. That's a possibility. It's just at a first glance it seems to be pretty high for what you're getting.
That's why I think they should clarify if the points per model listed include their base weapons.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Yeah, they are going to have to clarify on the list building; it seems really odd that some units have to pay for their basic equipement.
Consider the void raven; since they are only unit who has void lances, void lances cost 0 points. But what if other units could take void lances? Would they still be 0? It doesn't really seem consistent.

But they can't. And if they make one that can, they'll cost it properly so that it still costs 0 for that unit. What's your point?

I agree to some extent that it seems a bit disassembled, like I'm being given an IKEA unit instead of a standard unit to build on, but they've clearly done this for consistency, and it took me one read-through to get used to. It's not that bad.

The problem is that in the case of destroyers you have a unit who has to pay for the weapons they come with, just because that exists as an option for other units. Which means that a destroyer is effectively 63 points. That's a pretty steep price ofr a single model.
Now, it could be that its 43 points base are totally reasonable given it's stats. That's a possibility. It's just at a first glance it seems to be pretty high for what you're getting.

You're not actually being serious? You think they just forgot about the weapon cost and costed them like a fully kitted unit? Whether or not they did a good job costing them, the fact that they had to pay for their base weapon clearly played a part in the decision to cost them like they did. If the weapon cost was embedded in the unit, it would have said 63 points. That should be completely blindingly obvious.

The example I gave, Sydonian Dragoons, they are the only ones with access to lances and their specific rifles in the game and they still have a cost. Maybe because they know that those weapons could very well be shared by others later, and they're planning for that? But right now, I'm adding points for no real reason.

Alright, fair enough. I guess it's pretty clear then.
I'll try running destroyers and see how they perform.
As I said, it could be that their base stats alone are worth 43 points in practice.

The Destoryer is a 3W T5 model with self healing, BS 3+ and rr1's to hit with a gun that's S5, -3, D3. I don't think 63 is at all out of line in the context of 8th.

An attack Bike with HB is worse in pretty much every regard at costs 55pts.

As a Necron player, let me tell you... I think the new Reanimation Protocols are actually a bit of a restriction on us.

Early playtesting has shown that RP doesn't do much for say 10-Warrior squads, as has been the norm in the past. Once most are killed, you can even Morale the rest away. Overall, the estimated pickup (on a 5+, = 1/3 of dead units) just isn't much when the unit is being focused. Thus, the only choice for Necron players to efficiently take advantage of the new RP system is to use 20-warrior squads. We pretty much HAVE to use large squads to get efficient use out of RP. This means that we have a LOT of points already spoken for. It also hurts a lot of other units. For instance, I don't see much point in putting a 10-Warrior squad inside of a Ghost Ark when the RP just isn't as good as on a 20-Warrior squad.

Reanimation Protocols is a pivotal ability for Necrons. Without it, we're just on-par troops with little Heavy defense. RP is what pulls Necrons up. Now, in order to utilize it, we have to lock down points and maximize unit sizes.

The new rule seems flavourful, but I think the lack of any equivalent rule on characters will really hurt.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Lots of comments in this thread of "Just wipe them out in a turn". It actually takes quite a few shots to kill 20 T4 4+ models in a single turn, especially so where there are no blasts to punish clumping in cover, or any AP4 guns to simply negate their cover saves. Are there going to be many armies that are capable of doing that, especially at lower points levels. Remember also that a CP can be used to auto-pass a morale test, in case you were planning on relying on that to destroy a unit. If you do attempt to clear a unit in a single turn and fail, you're then left with the dilemma of attempting to destroy a fresh unit, or splitting your fire between the diminished one, but leaving yourself with a new half-dead squad to start reanimating. Throughout the battle, your ability to remove entire squads will decrease as well.

Out of interest, what would people's plans be for destroying warriors wholesale? It'd take about 120 bolter/pulse rifle shots to destroy a unit out of cover, and you'd have to find a way to bring all of those to bear on the same target (may be difficult due to line of sight, and range). There are no large blasts to remove models en masse. I'm quite certain my Tau army would struggle to consistently destroy whole squads in a single turn, and that's even ignoring other threats from the Necron list.

This right here is the truth. Saying "just wipe them out" is a bit misleading. Using most or all of a turn to wipe a unit out is possible sure, but that's still a tactical loss to waste that much firepower. This new animation protocols is more powerful than current, not less. It's like getting your old FNP, but every turn for the rest of the game.

Eyjio wrote:

It is absolutely correct. Tanks being T7 makes a huge difference. You raise Tomb Blades - with Gauss Blasters and assuming rapid fire range (the best possible situation for them), you would need 17 of them at 42 points a head to kill a 100 point Razorback - 714 points in total. Destroyers fare worse still - you would need 24 of them at 43 points a head, or 1043 points in just destroyers. Neither of these is a realistic option at all. Meanwhile, Guard HWT lascannons need 11 units to kill that same tank, at 264 points total. Even if the IG player decides they particularly hate themselves and fires plasma guns from Scions at tanks at 24" range, they still only need 354 points worth of units to kill a Razorback. You could take 6 full 10 man units of Scions with plasma guns for the cost of those 17 Tomb Blades, and they would be over twice as good.

Are you going to deep strike flayed ones then try and make a 9" charge? I can't imagine deploying next to an enemy and taking a ~27.8% chance to make a charge is a good idea myself. You can't deep strike in Imotekh, so he's going to have to walk across the board or take an expensive transport option to get anywhere near close enough to the Flayed Ones. Lychguard are not favoured in any 1 on 1 combat, and you can't beam Anrakyr down with them. That's ignoring the fact that all of these units are still poor against vehicles for their cost, and won't touch vehicles at all if the enemy knows the first things about bubble wrapping.

So no, I'm not underselling them at all. They cannot deal with large models with any kind of efficiency. They are poor in combat, one of the worst factions in the game for it. They have low range. Their shooting is not in any way impressive compared to almost any army. They have limited options to do anything beyond spamming bolters. They are outgunned, outlived, outnumbered and outfought by the vast majority of armies. They are not going to be a good army in 8th edition, at least until their points are drastically changed.

It only take 300 points of heavy destroyer to kill a razorback in a round, 300 points of lychguard with scythe will do it as well with room to spare. Bring the right tool for the job and all of that. Also that 11 man 264 point unit is way more fragile than either of the two necron options for the same task, a 120 points of scarabs is all it takes to turn them into chalk outlines.

You talk about efficiency but don't seem to understand it very well, so let me let you in on a little secret, everything in 8th ed has a counter, and that counter will be very efficient against the targets it was designed to be used on. Also Every army has access to every style of counter. This means battles in 8th ed will be less about the army and more about the comp used and how it compares to your opponents comp. Army is flavor and perhaps a few units that are really good at their specialty, and perhaps a few that aren't. That is also why I'm skeptical of tier list in 8th ed, the army matters but comp will completely eclipse it, and because comp is dependent on your opponents comp their won't be one "TOP" list for each faction, because you will have to change your comp to deal with your local meta.

 Grimgold wrote:

It only take 300 points of heavy destroyer to kill a razorback in a round, 300 points of lychguard with scythe will do it as well with room to spare. Bring the right tool for the job and all of that. Also that 11 man 264 point unit is way more fragile than either of the two necron options for the same task, a 120 points of scarabs is all it takes to turn them into chalk outlines.

You talk about efficiency but don't seem to understand it very well, so let me let you in on a little secret, everything in 8th ed has a counter, and that counter will be very efficient against the targets it was designed to be used on. Also Every army has access to every style of counter. This means battles in 8th ed will be less about the army and more about the comp used and how it compares to your opponents comp. Army is flavor and perhaps a few units that are really good at their specialty, and perhaps a few that aren't. That is also why I'm skeptical of tier list in 8th ed, the army matters but comp will completely eclipse it, and because comp is dependent on your opponents comp their won't be one "TOP" list for each faction, because you will have to change your comp to deal with your local meta.

Actually is more than 400 points, not 300. Heavy destroyers hit with 7/9, damage with 2/3,pointso 7/2 wounds and needs 10 wounds to destroy the razordback. You'll need and average of 5'5 heavy destroyers to destroy a razordback, 75 point apiece, nearly 415 points.

Talking about eficiency, for an imperial a láser canon cost about 40-50 points, devastators, centurións and several vehicles are costed in this way, eldar lances, on a warwalker are in the same point brake, dark lance drukari are even better, at 34 points the unir, 7 of them kill a razordback on average, at a mere 240 points. Tau crisis with 3 fusión and deep strike are good, you need 3 at 18" to destroy a razordback, again 300 points (comander with 4 fusión are even better).

The best antivehicle necron unir, for the points, are the heavy destroyers, and at 75 points they are not as efficient at killing vehicles as their counterparts.

Before 8th, the necron was probably the best army to destroy vehicles thanks to the gauss rule. Now we are good against elite infantry, inmortals are one of the best units for that in the whole game with a cheap RF F5 AP-2 for just 17 points. But against vehicles and monstruous creatures, for now, there is no necron efficient units, there a lots of them that can put the pain, of course, but none at a efficient points cost, at least compared with other shooty armys as the imperial pones, tau or eldars.

 Kaeldran wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

It only take 300 points of heavy destroyer to kill a razorback in a round, 300 points of lychguard with scythe will do it as well with room to spare. Bring the right tool for the job and all of that. Also that 11 man 264 point unit is way more fragile than either of the two necron options for the same task, a 120 points of scarabs is all it takes to turn them into chalk outlines.

You talk about efficiency but don't seem to understand it very well, so let me let you in on a little secret, everything in 8th ed has a counter, and that counter will be very efficient against the targets it was designed to be used on. Also Every army has access to every style of counter. This means battles in 8th ed will be less about the army and more about the comp used and how it compares to your opponents comp. Army is flavor and perhaps a few units that are really good at their specialty, and perhaps a few that aren't. That is also why I'm skeptical of tier list in 8th ed, the army matters but comp will completely eclipse it, and because comp is dependent on your opponents comp their won't be one "TOP" list for each faction, because you will have to change your comp to deal with your local meta.

Actually is more than 400 points, not 300. Heavy destroyers hit with 7/9, damage with 2/3,pointso 7/2 wounds and needs 10 wounds to destroy the razordback. You'll need and average of 5'5 heavy destroyers to destroy a razordback, 75 point apiece, nearly 415 points.

Talking about eficiency, for an imperial a láser canon cost about 40-50 points, devastators, centurións and several vehicles are costed in this way, eldar lances, on a warwalker are in the same point brake, dark lance drukari are even better, at 34 points the unir, 7 of them kill a razordback on average, at a mere 240 points. Tau crisis with 3 fusión and deep strike are good, you need 3 at 18" to destroy a razordback, again 300 points (comander with 4 fusión are even better).

The best antivehicle necron unir, for the points, are the heavy destroyers, and at 75 points they are not as efficient at killing vehicles as their counterparts.

Before 8th, the necron was probably the best army to destroy vehicles thanks to the gauss rule. Now we are good against elite infantry, inmortals are one of the best units for that in the whole game with a cheap RF F5 AP-2 for just 17 points. But against vehicles and monstruous creatures, for now, there is no necron efficient units, there a lots of them that can put the pain, of course, but none at a efficient points cost, at least compared with other shooty armys as the imperial pones, tau or eldars.

It takes 2.8 stalker with heat rays to kill a razorback that's 327 points if i am not mistaken.

If you really think Necrons were the best army at destroying tanks at any point, you've never done the math for it.

Last edition the efficiency was around when tanks were above 100 points, and those are the ones nobody took outside Knights. Anything lower and Gauss wasn't very good.

 Kaeldran wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

It only take 300 points of heavy destroyer to kill a razorback in a round, 300 points of lychguard with scythe will do it as well with room to spare. Bring the right tool for the job and all of that. Also that 11 man 264 point unit is way more fragile than either of the two necron options for the same task, a 120 points of scarabs is all it takes to turn them into chalk outlines.

You talk about efficiency but don't seem to understand it very well, so let me let you in on a little secret, everything in 8th ed has a counter, and that counter will be very efficient against the targets it was designed to be used on. Also Every army has access to every style of counter. This means battles in 8th ed will be less about the army and more about the comp used and how it compares to your opponents comp. Army is flavor and perhaps a few units that are really good at their specialty, and perhaps a few that aren't. That is also why I'm skeptical of tier list in 8th ed, the army matters but comp will completely eclipse it, and because comp is dependent on your opponents comp their won't be one "TOP" list for each faction, because you will have to change your comp to deal with your local meta.

Actually is more than 400 points, not 300. Heavy destroyers hit with 7/9, damage with 2/3,pointso 7/2 wounds and needs 10 wounds to destroy the razordback. You'll need and average of 5'5 heavy destroyers to destroy a razordback, 75 point apiece, nearly 415 points.

Talking about eficiency, for an imperial a láser canon cost about 40-50 points, devastators, centurións and several vehicles are costed in this way, eldar lances, on a warwalker are in the same point brake, dark lance drukari are even better, at 34 points the unir, 7 of them kill a razordback on average, at a mere 240 points. Tau crisis with 3 fusión and deep strike are good, you need 3 at 18" to destroy a razordback, again 300 points (comander with 4 fusión are even better).

The best antivehicle necron unir, for the points, are the heavy destroyers, and at 75 points they are not as efficient at killing vehicles as their counterparts.

Before 8th, the necron was probably the best army to destroy vehicles thanks to the gauss rule. Now we are good against elite infantry, inmortals are one of the best units for that in the whole game with a cheap RF F5 AP-2 for just 17 points. But against vehicles and monstruous creatures, for now, there is no necron efficient units, there a lots of them that can put the pain, of course, but none at a efficient points cost, at least compared with other shooty armys as the imperial pones, tau or eldars.

It takes 2.8 stalkers with heat rays to kill a razorback that's 327 points if i am not mistaken.

As I see it you would need three stalkers to take out a razorback in one go on average dice.

This is 513 points - so hardly that efficient.

Go with the twin assault cannon option. For the same points as about 8 marines you get a gun with 12 shots at strength 6 and -1 AP, 10 wounds over 8 and T7 vs T4. Plus movement 12 vs movement 6 and smoke launchers. I guess the heavy effect makes it slightly weaker if you have to drive around rather than hunker down somewhere but depending on objectives that may not be necessary.

I struggle to see what Necrons have that is very efficient. RP seems to be upsetting people across the web but to my mind its only really good in hypothetical 240 points vs 240 point match ups. In a real game its going to be relatively easy to kill 20 warriors in two turns even with a round of RP.

Not 20. necrons have L10, is good, but it isn't inmunity. 15 warriors killed in a round (probably 14 is enought) and the whole unit is destroyed before any RP. 6 crisis with triple flammer will destroy a full 20 warrior blob, 3 more crisis for a inmortal blob, for example.

One can see that Necrons have been a bit downgraded when compared with the 7th ed.
Nevertheless, I'd wait to see what the new meta is. Shooty, cc, a combination of both, or whatnot.

 Kaeldran wrote:
Not 20. necrons have L10, is good, but it isn't inmunity. 15 warriors killed in a round (probably 14 is enought) and the whole unit is destroyed before any RP. 6 crisis with triple flammer will destroy a full 20 warrior blob, 3 more crisis for a inmortal blob, for example.

So you're telling me...

That over 400 points of Tau the Shooting Kings using a Shooting weapon... one they probably don't even want to be using since it gets them too close to melee... will wreck a squad that costs half as much?

Tyel wrote:
As I see it you would need three stalkers to take out a razorback in one go on average dice.

This is 513 points - so hardly that efficient.

Go with the twin assault cannon option. For the same points as about 8 marines you get a gun with 12 shots at strength 6 and -1 AP, 10 wounds over 8 and T7 vs T4. Plus movement 12 vs movement 6 and smoke launchers. I guess the heavy effect makes it slightly weaker if you have to drive around rather than hunker down somewhere but depending on objectives that may not be necessary.

I struggle to see what Necrons have that is very efficient. RP seems to be upsetting people across the web but to my mind its only really good in hypothetical 240 points vs 240 point match ups. In a real game its going to be relatively easy to kill 20 warriors in two turns even with a round of RP.

You're right. I forgot the Heat ray.

 Kaeldran wrote:
Not 20. necrons have L10, is good, but it isn't inmunity. 15 warriors killed in a round (probably 14 is enought) and the whole unit is destroyed before any RP. 6 crisis with triple flammer will destroy a full 20 warrior blob, 3 more crisis for a inmortal blob, for example.

Someone brought this up before but, just to reiterate, this is a terrible plan. The Necron player will use 2 CP to auto-pass the morale check, then ~5 of the 15 Warriors will stand back up. With the right buffs (and if the Necron player is bringing 20-man Warrior squads to take advantage of RP this is likely) you might instead expect ~11 to stand back up, and you'll have put your much more fragile crisis suits in great danger in order to kill 4 Warriors and burn 2 CP (and if you don't wipe out the squad on your next turn, even after your Crisis team gets taken out, the ones that stayed down might still get back up).

You absolutely have to kill all 20 to deal with the unit.

It's hard to find an efficient answer to basic troops. The Dark Eldar Voidraven stands out as a unit that expects to kill just over 10 Warriors in a single turn, using its one-shot bomb. Many armies will probably prefer to just throw a trash unit into CC with the Warriors to make them lose a turn while positioning to try to deal with the squad or its supporting characters.

So I got in a game with the new rules last night. 2000 points, Necrons vs. My buddy's Tau. I'll give a rundown for those interested. The lists looked broadly like this.

Tau

Riptide with ion accelerator
Riptide with heavy burst cannon
Breachers
Fire warrior strike team x2
Skyray
Devilish
Broadside with HYMP
Coldstar commander
Shadowsun
Tau bomber

Necrons

Nightbringer
Overlord with staff of light and res orb
Cryptk
20 warriors x2
10 Gauss and 10 tesla immortals
10 sword and board Lychguard
Annihilation barge
Ghost ark

Both battleforged, relatively casual lists. 6 command points total, playing Only war. (wasn't a narrative game, it was just the basic game we chose)

As far as Necrons go, I split my forces down each board edge. My warrior squad backed up by a ghost ark And cryptek, even with poor rolls (and I'm talking on average failing 5 out of 6 4+ saves very often), he got me down to about 4 models, and about 10 came back each turn. Then he lost firepower because the Nightbringer is ridiculous, and then more kept coming back because he couldn't keep them down. Shadowsun hit a ghost ark with melta, and quantum shielding negated it, and the 4 other wounds it was dealt were reduced to 1 by the end of the game. Lychguard and immortals on the opposite side of the board took heavy loses, ending the game with only 2 dead Lychguard and 3 dead immortals. Also I would like to note that half a riptides health was dealt by a ghost ark And 16 warriors shooting. -1 AP is dope.

The rules are awesome in general, and I can definitely see this being an infantry heavy edition. Necrons are actually pretty solid, and I haven't even tried all their other shenanigans yet. Nightbringer and Gauss are especially gross now.

While Necrons might not have massive damage output (Though it isn't terrible) they are extremely survivable if you stack character buff.

Character buffs seem to be the way to make armies and units go from mediocre to pretty good. As someone pointed out, a Cryptek, Ghost Ark and Lord with Res Orb will make two or three units pretty tough closeby.

Also, Necron vehicles laugh at Meltas and Lascannons. Quantum Shielding is amazing for high damage weapons, alright their general stats are pretty low but they have to be to compensate for Quantum Shielding otherwise thry would all cost silly points.

Lastly, Deathmarks, they ruin any Deepstriking Characters day. You can drop in after them within 12" (rapid fire range) and unleash 20 shots any 6s to wound cause an additional mortal wound. I know if I saw them I wouldn't be Deepstriking any important characters which leaves them foot slogging.

 Talamare wrote:

 Kaeldran wrote:
Not 20. necrons have L10, is good, but it isn't inmunity. 15 warriors killed in a round (probably 14 is enought) and the whole unit is destroyed before any RP. 6 crisis with triple flammer will destroy a full 20 warrior blob, 3 more crisis for a inmortal blob, for example.

So you're telling me...

That over 400 points of Tau the Shooting Kings using a Shooting weapon... one they probably don't even want to be using since it gets them too close to melee... will wreck a squad that costs half as much?

Crysis armor can fly so they can disengage of melee, and with his new stats in 8°ed they do well against non specialist melee units. But a unit with 18 flammers? This is a overwatch of 18 flammers, nobody will charge something like that with infantry first, they have no problem in being close to the enemy.
I think we will see the triple flammer armor some times, and if it isn't the next tau big thing is because the flammers haven't enought range to shoot the same turn they arrive in deepstrike.

But yes, a 420 point very good unit can destroy a 240 blob of necron warriors, there is no sky falling here, I just pointed that in the case of necrons, you should considera that an opossing force justo need to kill 15 warriors to cancelado RP in 20 blob.

I got in a smallish game at the weekend (1500 points) against Tyranids with a very unoptimised army.

In comparison to my Blood Angels, who I also used against the same army, there's a definite lack of multi-wound weapons available to Necrons and that does hurt them a bit. However, the basic shooting from Necron infantry is very powerful with -1AP and all the buffs you can get from things like characters and Stalkers. Necron vehicles are also pretty solid thanks to Quantum Shielding.

I think Necrons will be a shooting focussed army in this edition and screening troops to protect your infantry will be important. Scarabs and Wraiths are pretty good at that and it looks like Praetorians or Lych Guard will be pretty efficient at finishing off wounded units but I wouldn't say they're that great against completely healthy targets.

Slipspace wrote:
I got in a smallish game at the weekend (1500 points) against Tyranids with a very unoptimised army.

In comparison to my Blood Angels, who I also used against the same army, there's a definite lack of multi-wound weapons available to Necrons and that does hurt them a bit. However, the basic shooting from Necron infantry is very powerful with -1AP and all the buffs you can get from things like characters and Stalkers. Necron vehicles are also pretty solid thanks to Quantum Shielding.

I think Necrons will be a shooting focussed army in this edition and screening troops to protect your infantry will be important. Scarabs and Wraiths are pretty good at that and it looks like Praetorians or Lych Guard will be pretty efficient at finishing off wounded units but I wouldn't say they're that great against completely healthy targets.

Well, we make up for the lack of multi damage weapons by threatening everything with every weapon. I took off almost a half of a riptidrd wounds from warriors alone. Considering how good infantry are this edition, that's solid.

Anyone have ideas for the best way to move our sweet HQ buffs across the map?

It seems pretty points intensive to buy them a personal Nightscythe or a Ghost Ark, and trickling one unit out of a Monolith a turn sounds pretty slow.

I really like the auras from our HQs, but just not sure how to get they anywhere except 5" at a time.

Well...you can't. Necrons actually lost a few mobility options this time around. You just have to hoof it.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well...you can't. Necrons actually lost a few mobility options this time around. You just have to hoof it.

Is there a reason you can't take a night scythe? Because I'm definitely considering it.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well...you can't. Necrons actually lost a few mobility options this time around. You just have to hoof it.

Is there a reason you can't take a night scythe? Because I'm definitely considering it.

A nightscythe is certainly viable, but pricy. You also have to move at least 20", which make precision dropping a little tricky, and I don't think you can embark on it. It is probably the best option necrons have for rapid transport though.

So I just started my necrons, I started with a box of Warriors, then got my Start collecting box.

To go to 1k points I'm going to add 3 Heavy Destroyers and then another 10 warriors so I'll look like this

Overlord /w Sycthe + Orb

3 x 10 Warriors

1 x 4 Scarabs
1 x 3 Scarabs

1 x Triarch Stalker
1 x 3 Heavy Destroyers.

Once the above is painted I am going for 2k, adding 30 more warriors for 3 blobs of 20, a cryptek or two and a c'tan of the nightbringer because i reallllyyyy want to paint one.

From there I am undecided what I'll round my 2k off with.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well...you can't. Necrons actually lost a few mobility options this time around. You just have to hoof it.

Is there a reason you can't take a night scythe? Because I'm definitely considering it.

A nightscythe is certainly viable, but pricy. You also have to move at least 20", which make precision dropping a little tricky, and I don't think you can embark on it. It is probably the best option necrons have for rapid transport though.

I mean, an example could be moving up 60" and dropping off imotekh, and flayed ones coming down right beside him, then next turn the night scythe turns and drops off a unit of scytheguard or something. All while chucking out 8 Tesla shots and being a relative pain to shoot down. Seems worth the points to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AaronWilson wrote:
So I just started my necrons, I started with a box of Warriors, then got my Start collecting box.

To go to 1k points I'm going to add 3 Heavy Destroyers and then another 10 warriors so I'll look like this

Overlord /w Sycthe + Orb

3 x 10 Warriors

1 x 4 Scarabs
1 x 3 Scarabs

1 x Triarch Stalker
1 x 3 Heavy Destroyers.

Once the above is painted I am going for 2k, adding 30 more warriors for 3 blobs of 20, a cryptek or two and a c'tan of the nightbringer because i reallllyyyy want to paint one.

From there I am undecided what I'll round my 2k off with.

All of that will be what you round your list off with at 2k. Warriors and the ctan are expensive. Lol

Adding 30 warriros (360 c'tan) C'tan (225) and maybe 1-2 crypteks will leave me with 250-300ish to spend. I think I'll look for some more heavy hitting, maybe a lychguard unit

 krodarklorr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well...you can't. Necrons actually lost a few mobility options this time around. You just have to hoof it.

Is there a reason you can't take a night scythe? Because I'm definitely considering it.

A nightscythe is certainly viable, but pricy. You also have to move at least 20", which make precision dropping a little tricky, and I don't think you can embark on it. It is probably the best option necrons have for rapid transport though.

I mean, an example could be moving up 60" and dropping off imotekh, and flayed ones coming down right beside him, then next turn the night scythe turns and drops off a unit of scytheguard or something. All while chucking out 8 Tesla shots and being a relative pain to shoot down. Seems worth the points to me.

Thanks for this! You gave me the idea to use either a Nightscythe or the Monolith to beam out Nemesor Zahndrekh at the beginning of the movement phase, then use Vargard Obyron's ghostwalk mantle to bring himself and a squad with him to Nemesor at the end of the movement phase!
It still might be a little too points expensive to be super viable, but at least its a HQ (two actually) arriving with a squad of guys all in the same turn.

(small notes: in your plan imotekh must be dropped of at the beginning of turn 2, and the flayed ones must be set 9" away from enemy models. Then the scytheguard will be 20" away from Imotekh at the beginning of turn 3)

unbaraki wrote:

Thanks for this! You gave me the idea to use either a Nightscythe or the Monolith to beam out Nemesor Zahndrekh at the beginning of the movement phase, then use Vargard Obyron's ghostwalk mantle to bring himself and a squad with him to Nemesor at the end of the movement phase!
It still might be a little too points expensive to be super viable, but at least its a HQ (two actually) arriving with a squad of guys all in the same turn.

(small notes: in your plan imotekh must be dropped of at the beginning of turn 2, and the flayed ones must be set 9" away from enemy models. Then the scytheguard will be 20" away from Imotekh at the beginning of turn 3)

Scratch that, yeah I just realized that whole strategy is pointless and would lose you the game.

I don't know why, but the more I read over the index, the more salty I become. I'm noticing so many useless models now.

Yeah, the match play restriction on reserves really puts a damper on necron reserve shenanigans. Not sure why they restricted it to 3 turns, but there's probably a good reason.
It basically means that you should only have 1 unit in reserve per transport. Otherwise you run the risk of that transport getting blown up and losing everything. Nightscythes and monoliths can "share" their cargo though, so that does give some breathing room.

Hopefully in the codex we'll get another teleport gate thing. Maybe something ground based this time.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, the match play restriction on reserves really puts a damper on necron reserve shenanigans. Not sure why they restricted it to 3 turns, but there's probably a good reason.
It basically means that you should only have 1 unit in reserve per transport. Otherwise you run the risk of that transport getting blown up and losing everything. Nightscythes and monoliths can "share" their cargo though, so that does give some breathing room.

Hopefully in the codex we'll get another teleport gate thing. Maybe something ground based this time.

Forcing turn 3 as the latest is necessary with guaranteed reserves, otherwise I can hold a small squad until the last turn and drop them right on an objective, or trickle in kill points etc. It like removal of null deploy makes you actually have your units participate in the game to be effective.

...wait.

You lose all the Necron troops if they have no Monolith to come onboard?

This reminds me of the "always loses" 40k army Chaos Marines could take in 4e. One Lord, 2 5-man Marine units, nothing but lesser Daemons, and no Icons.

Come turn 2, you lose all your army except the basic HQ and troops.

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, the match play restriction on reserves really puts a damper on necron reserve shenanigans. Not sure why they restricted it to 3 turns, but there's probably a good reason.
It basically means that you should only have 1 unit in reserve per transport. Otherwise you run the risk of that transport getting blown up and losing everything. Nightscythes and monoliths can "share" their cargo though, so that does give some breathing room.

Hopefully in the codex we'll get another teleport gate thing. Maybe something ground based this time.

Forcing turn 3 as the latest is necessary with guaranteed reserves, otherwise I can hold a small squad until the last turn and drop them right on an objective, or trickle in kill points etc. It like removal of null deploy makes you actually have your units participate in the game to be effective.

Yeah, ok that makes sense. Can you walk onto the table at least? Apparently necrons can't; if all scythes and monoliths are destroyed, then so are any necron in reserve.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...wait.

You lose all the Necron troops if they have no Monolith to come onboard?

This reminds me of the "always loses" 40k army Chaos Marines could take in 4e. One Lord, 2 5-man Marine units, nothing but lesser Daemons, and no Icons.

Come turn 2, you lose all your army except the basic HQ and troops.

Only if they are in reserve. You don't have to take a monolith, lol.
The rule is that if you have a night scythe or monolith in the army, you can choose to have several infantry squads in reserve and have them arrive on the table through the scythe / monolith. However, if all monoliths / scythes are destroyed, then so will everything in reserve.
So as a necron player, you really have to get those reserves out ASAP, before turn 4 and before the transports get shot down.

I think I remember that army comp in 4th. It was funny.
Not as good as that one time a guy placed his whole White Scars army in reserve, but then lost turn 1 because his kroot opponent infiltrated and stopped him from coming onto the table. It was during a tournament too

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, the match play restriction on reserves really puts a damper on necron reserve shenanigans. Not sure why they restricted it to 3 turns, but there's probably a good reason.
It basically means that you should only have 1 unit in reserve per transport. Otherwise you run the risk of that transport getting blown up and losing everything. Nightscythes and monoliths can "share" their cargo though, so that does give some breathing room.

Hopefully in the codex we'll get another teleport gate thing. Maybe something ground based this time.

Forcing turn 3 as the latest is necessary with guaranteed reserves, otherwise I can hold a small squad until the last turn and drop them right on an objective, or trickle in kill points etc. It like removal of null deploy makes you actually have your units participate in the game to be effective.

Yeah, ok that makes sense. Can you walk onto the table at least? Apparently necrons can't; if all scythes and monoliths are destroyed, then so are any necron in reserve.

.

Most reserve units have some sort of specific arrival method other than walking on. Those that "outflank" effectively can, because it just says board edge, which your own edge is a board edge (all outflankers can come off your opponents board edge), but deep strikers cannot.

For things needing to teleport from a vehicle I would imagine wanting them on as soon as possible.

I would definitely want back up to one of these because otherwise they are pretty risky. I also would probably only put one unit in reserve for every 2 of these units (or 1 each for the case 2 monoliths). Doing that will likely ensure you always get your unit onto the table. My inclination would be position portal turn 1, deploy unit turn 2. It is unlikely for 2 such units to die in a single turn of shooting.

Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

Well, I'm sure this will diffuse the situation.

 vipoid wrote:

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

Well, I'm sure this will diffuse the situation.

I've seen this in every edition. They will calm down eventually after they get some new buffed toys.

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

There wouldn't be complaints if necrons actually paid the appropriate points cost for their durability.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, the match play restriction on reserves really puts a damper on necron reserve shenanigans. Not sure why they restricted it to 3 turns, but there's probably a good reason.
It basically means that you should only have 1 unit in reserve per transport. Otherwise you run the risk of that transport getting blown up and losing everything. Nightscythes and monoliths can "share" their cargo though, so that does give some breathing room.

Hopefully in the codex we'll get another teleport gate thing. Maybe something ground based this time.

Forcing turn 3 as the latest is necessary with guaranteed reserves, otherwise I can hold a small squad until the last turn and drop them right on an objective, or trickle in kill points etc. It like removal of null deploy makes you actually have your units participate in the game to be effective.

Yeah, ok that makes sense. Can you walk onto the table at least? Apparently necrons can't; if all scythes and monoliths are destroyed, then so are any necron in reserve.

Basically the idea is that the necron units can't come in without the night scythe/monolith because they're off planet; little hard to walk onto the battlefield when you're still back at the Tomb World.

 Traditio wrote:

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

There wouldn't be complaints if necrons actually paid the appropriate points cost for their durability.

It's not just about points. They also pay in being slower, having no special or heavy weapons in their squads and you can't take a cheap vet serg to buff their cc ability.

Necrons are tough, that is their thing but it comes at a cost of being totally inflexible. Necron Warriors have basically 2 tactics. Walk slowly towards a target or objective while shooting at it or sitting on an objective and shooting at what comes near them.

People tend to fixate on one aspect of a unit when doing these kind of comparisons which misses the bigger picture.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

There wouldn't be complaints if necrons actually paid the appropriate points cost for their durability.

It's not just about points. They also pay in being slower, having no special or heavy weapons in their squads and you can't take a cheap vet serg to buff their cc ability.

Necrons are tough, that is their thing but it comes at a cost of being totally inflexible. Necron Warriors have basically 2 tactics. Walk slowly towards a target or objective while shooting at it or sitting on an objective and shooting at what comes near them.

People tend to fixate on one aspect of a unit when doing these kind of comparisons which misses the bigger picture.

You seem to have forgotten about one of the best transports in the game, ghost arcs.

Danny slag wrote:


You seem to have forgotten about one of the best transports in the game, ghost arcs.

You mean best support vehicle. It might as well not be a transport.

The truth through the last few editions and continues to hold through 8th is that necrons beat marines. Sure we get eaten by tyranids (serious hard counters now) and are outmaneuvered by Eldar and out shot by Tau but because little Timmy can't beat the androids with his smurfs we always get called cheesy.

Danny slag wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

 Nadir wrote:
Once again, a smurf player is complaining that their puny sphess mahrine is weaker then a Necron Warrior...

There wouldn't be complaints if necrons actually paid the appropriate points cost for their durability.

It's not just about points. They also pay in being slower, having no special or heavy weapons in their squads and you can't take a cheap vet serg to buff their cc ability.

Necrons are tough, that is their thing but it comes at a cost of being totally inflexible. Necron Warriors have basically 2 tactics. Walk slowly towards a target or objective while shooting at it or sitting on an objective and shooting at what comes near them.

People tend to fixate on one aspect of a unit when doing these kind of comparisons which misses the bigger picture.

You seem to have forgotten about one of the best transports in the game, ghost arcs.

Not really. It's only T6 with a 4+ save and a transport capacity of 10 warriors. That's all it can carry, warriors or characters. And you're going to want more than 10 warriors because of RP.
You can't even shoot out it. Its hardly the best transport.
Its better suited following blocks of warriors, giving them those RP rerolls.

Necrons shouldn't ride around in vehicles like meatsacks anyway. They should teleport. Which is why the loss of the veil is sad, because that was an iconic necron teleportation item.
Monoliths lost their ability to draw necrons to their gate too, which is something they had for 5 editions. At least they can now be deepstruck, I guess. As they should be.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:



Monoliths lost their ability to draw necrons to their gate too, which is something they had for 5 editions. At least they can now be deepstruck, I guess. As they should be.

What do you mean by that? Necrons can still use Monolith to enter the battlefield. It's like a drop pod now.

I really like the 8th necrons more than the 7th. except for maybe the Spyder which is to expensive now for what is does and can be kill with just 3.1 las cannon shots. in 7th it took 5.5 to kill it and it was 35% cheaper.

nordsturmking wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:



Monoliths lost their ability to draw necrons to their gate too, which is something they had for 5 editions. At least they can now be deepstruck, I guess. As they should be.

What do you mean by that? Necrons can still use Monolith to enter the battlefield.

I really like the 8th necrons more than the 7th. except for maybe the Spyder which is to expensive now for what is does and can be kill with just 3.1 las cannon shots. in 7th it took 5.5 to kill it and it was 35% cheaper.

I wasn't talking about entering from reserves, I was talking about how the monolith used to summon a unit on the table to its gate.
From 3rd ed until now, the monolith had an ability where you would select a unit on the table within a certain distance from the monolith, and place them infront of the monolith's gate. That is how necrons used to, and should, get around. Its not the same as using the monolith to enter the field from reserves.
Now it doesn't do that anymore, and that's a bit of flavor and utility lost.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:



Monoliths lost their ability to draw necrons to their gate too, which is something they had for 5 editions. At least they can now be deepstruck, I guess. As they should be.

What do you mean by that? Necrons can still use Monolith to enter the battlefield.

I really like the 8th necrons more than the 7th. except for maybe the Spyder which is to expensive now for what is does and can be kill with just 3.1 las cannon shots. in 7th it took 5.5 to kill it and it was 35% cheaper.

I wasn't talking about entering from reserves, I was talking about how the monolith used to summon a unit on the table to its gate.
From 3rd ed until now, the monolith had an ability where you would select a unit on the table within a certain distance from the monolith, and place them infront of the monolith's gate. That is how necrons used to, and should, get around. Its not the same as using the monolith to enter the field from reserves.
Now it doesn't do that anymore, and that's a bit of flavor and utility lost.

Ah ok my bad you're right. I now what you mean. I havent used a monolith for a while i forgot about that ability.

In 3rd edition, the Monolith notably had the ability to pull Necron units that were in melee out of melee. Units that went through a gate could reroll failed WBB rolls.

Which led to hilarity like the Wraithwing comedy lists but that was a rather silly era.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
In 3rd edition, the Monolith notably had the ability to pull Necron units that were in melee out of melee. Units that went through a gate could reroll failed WBB rolls.

Which led to hilarity like the Wraithwing comedy lists but that was a rather silly era.

Yeah, I remember that. That was a fun ability. I kind of understand why they dropped the withdraw from melee aspect, because that was a pretty potent power, though with the new fallback rule they can probably bring it back.
I wouldn't want the rerolls back, because the ghost ark and res orb already do that now; having 3 sources of RP rerolls would be excessive.

Agreed. Really, the more I think of it, the more I really appreciate the design of 3rd ed Necrons. They had very little variety but the army was very focused in purpose. Little things, from Immortals being your "Fire Support" Elite to Pariahs being your troubleshooter (Fearless but no WBB), to Tomb Spyders letting you have Necrons from a wiped-out unit potentially join another identical unit...

All in all it led to an army that was definitely more than the sum of its parts.

sorry if this has been asked but what happens when a multi wound model is returned via reanimation, does it come back with full wounds?

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
sorry if this has been asked but what happens when a multi wound model is returned via reanimation, does it come back with full wounds?

No one really knows. Its not actually clear, as usually GW specifies if they come back with all wounds or not.
I'm assuming that they come back with all wounds, as there is no specification, but it could be an oversight on their part.

it would seem odd to have a bunch of single wound models reappear to mix in with other multi wound models.

this one is a definite ugh...!

Yes, TAC marines cannot kill Necrons at full strength without battleshock.

It actually goes further than this.

10 terminators firing storm bolters at rapid fire range into Necron warriors that don't fight back, also can't kill the Necrons unless there are godawful rolls on the Necron player's part.

The Necrons in this case stabilize around 7 warriors.

If we continue going up, if everyone rolls over time at the expected value, 58 boltgun or equivalent are needed to kill the necrons. Basically that's where you get your casualties per turn to be above 9.49.

If we just *set* the casualties per turn to 10 - you just snap your fingers and 10 necrons die - it would take you an expected 5 turns of finger snapping to eliminate a squad of 20 necrons.

And this is about 58 boltgun shots.

Are necrons broken? who knows. if they're not affected by battleshock and can reanimate on 4s, hell yes. this is absurd.

 Marmatag wrote:
Yes, TAC marines cannot kill Necrons at full strength without battleshock.

It actually goes further than this.

10 terminators firing storm bolters at rapid fire range into Necron warriors that don't fight back, also can't kill the Necrons unless there are godawful rolls on the Necron player's part.

The Necrons in this case stabilize around 7 warriors.

If we continue going up, if everyone rolls over time at the expected value, 58 boltgun or equivalent are needed to kill the necrons. Basically that's where you get your casualties per turn to be above 9.49.

If we just *set* the casualties per turn to 10 - you just snap your fingers and 10 necrons die - it would take you an expected 5 turns of finger snapping to eliminate a squad of 20 necrons.

And this is about 58 boltgun shots.

Are necrons broken? who knows. if they're not affected by battleshock and can reanimate on 4s, hell yes. this is absurd.

Some people read that math and think "Necrons are broken". I read it and think "guess I shouldn't try to table Necrons". Our mobility isn't great. Play the mission.

edit: and that was not necessarily directed at you, Marmatag. Just general advice to anyone complaining that my armies is hard to kill. Yeah. We know. That's kind of our thing. It's like saying Orks have a lot of models on the table or Tau are good at shooting. That's kind of the point.

I also looked at warrior math.
A tac squad armed with the best loadout for fighting them in a shootout against equivalent points of warriors (15) with no aura buffs, ie grav cannon, plasma gun, and combi plas, will die in 3 turns even if the marines get to shoot first. The warriors end up winning turn 3 with 8 standing.

a squad with plasma pistol power sword sarge and nothing else charging into combat lasts quite a bit longer, but doesn't even get the equivalent 12 warriors to fall below 8 at any point. The crons will also outnumber the marines at all times, which means they will control any objective the squads are squabbling over.

That doesn't mean they're better in all situations, but in a direct competition, even when loaded out efficiently for the job, the tacs cannot beat their own point value of warriors.

Although it is hard for me to say they're not better in all situations when they have much higher LD, better durability, and a better gun, while being cheaper.

Obviously the way to beat a squad of warriors is to overwhelm it with excessive force, IE other units, but that brings up the question of exactly what the rest of the necron army is doing.

After playing a bit against a necron friend who is also a tourney player like me, I've come to the conclusion that if the crons are played carefully, and no squad is left isolated, with no repercussions to the opponent attacking that squad, the cron army is a wee bit strong for its points.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
I also looked at warrior math.
A tac squad armed with the best loadout for fighting them in a shootout against equivalent points of warriors (15) with no aura buffs, ie grav cannon, plasma gun, and combi plas, will die in 3 turns even if the marines get to shoot first. The warriors end up winning turn 3 with 8 standing.

a squad with plasma pistol power sword sarge and nothing else charging into combat lasts quite a bit longer, but doesn't even get the equivalent 12 warriors to fall below 8 at any point. The crons will also outnumber the marines at all times, which means they will control any objective the squads are squabbling over.

That doesn't mean they're better in all situations, but in a direct competition, even when loaded out efficiently for the job, the tacs cannot beat their own point value of warriors.

Although it is hard for me to say they're not better in all situations when they have much higher LD, better durability, and a better gun, while being cheaper.

Obviously the way to beat a squad of warriors is to overwhelm it with excessive force, IE other units, but that brings up the question of exactly what the rest of the necron army is doing.

After playing a bit against a necron friend who is also a tourney player like me, I've come to the conclusion that if the crons are played carefully, and no squad is left isolated, with no repercussions to the opponent attacking that squad, the cron army is a wee bit strong for its points.

Would you mind posting the math you used? I'd be interested to see it, and it would add to the discussion

Necrons suffer battle shock just like everyone else, and RP on 4's only happen when they are within 3" of a cryptek.

Also at 10 warriors dead a round battle shock is getting another 3.5, so it would actually take 3 turns to kill a warrior blob. The cutoff for RP to be a loosing battle is 7 dead a turn, or 8 with a cryptek nearby.

Once again though you can completely bypass this, by doing around 14 casualties and letting battle shock finish the job. We are not talking about 7th ed crons where you would figure out the amount of bullets required and then double it, we are talking about units as difficult to kill as a scout marine in the open. The amount of effort you are spending on this thread seems disproportionate to the actual challenge of dealing with the problem on the game board.

 Grimgold wrote:
Necrons suffer battle shock just like everyone else, and RP on 4's only happen when they are within 3" of a cryptek.

Also at 10 warriors dead a round battle shock is getting another 3.5, so it would actually take 3 turns to kill a warrior blob. The cutoff for RP to be a loosing battle is 7 dead a turn, or 8 with a cryptek nearby.

Once again though you can completely bypass this, by doing around 14 casualties and letting battle shock finish the job. We are not talking about 7th ed crons where you would figure out the amount of bullets required and then double it, we are talking about units as difficult to kill as a scout marine in the open. The amount of effort you are spending on this thread seems disproportionate to the actual challenge of dealing with the problem on the game board.

Necron handbook page 1 paragraph 1 line 1
Thou shalt not spend command points except to save units from dying to morale, and shattering the enemy's plan after he can no longer do anything about it.

in other words, your clever plan doesn't work.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EnTyme wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
I also looked at warrior math.
A tac squad armed with the best loadout for fighting them in a shootout against equivalent points of warriors (15) with no aura buffs, ie grav cannon, plasma gun, and combi plas, will die in 3 turns even if the marines get to shoot first. The warriors end up winning turn 3 with 8 standing.

a squad with plasma pistol power sword sarge and nothing else charging into combat lasts quite a bit longer, but doesn't even get the equivalent 12 warriors to fall below 8 at any point. The crons will also outnumber the marines at all times, which means they will control any objective the squads are squabbling over.

That doesn't mean they're better in all situations, but in a direct competition, even when loaded out efficiently for the job, the tacs cannot beat their own point value of warriors.

Although it is hard for me to say they're not better in all situations when they have much higher LD, better durability, and a better gun, while being cheaper.

Obviously the way to beat a squad of warriors is to overwhelm it with excessive force, IE other units, but that brings up the question of exactly what the rest of the necron army is doing.

After playing a bit against a necron friend who is also a tourney player like me, I've come to the conclusion that if the crons are played carefully, and no squad is left isolated, with no repercussions to the opponent attacking that squad, the cron army is a wee bit strong for its points.

Would you mind posting the math you used? I'd be interested to see it, and it would add to the discussion

Just standard shooting math. I did round at the end of turns for casualties, just because I hate mathing out that ".33 of a marine also shoots." But the result was one-sided enough that rounding a quarter or third of a casualty couldn't make a difference.

As a side benefit, I found that, at least in this situation, a combi-plasma double-firing at -1 to hit is actually SLIGHTLY better than just firing the plasma. Like .89 wounds from a plasma gun and .92 from a combi double firing with penalty, so EXTREMELY slight.

Insane bravery is expensive, and I've only seen it delay the inevitable. Beyond that you only get to spend command points once per player turn, so if I rerolled a die earlier in the turn I'd be out of luck.

How about this - without doing the math beforehand, come up with what you believe is the optimal loadout for a squad of 10 TAC to fight a squad of 20 Necron Warriors. Or, just pick another squad. It doesn't have to be TACs. The ideal marine unit to engage and win a fight against necrons.

I will do the math and share the results.

If it's any range, Heavy bolter, Flame thrower, combi flamer.

 Marmatag wrote:
How about this - without doing the math beforehand, come up with what you believe is the optimal loadout for a squad of 10 TAC to fight a squad of 20 Necron Warriors.

How about three options from someone who was lurking on this thread:
Option 1
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-plasma
- Plasma gun
- Plasma Cannon

Option 2
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Heavy Bolter

Option 3
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Missile Launcher

I rather like the look of spyders with the repair claws healing d3 wounds to squishy(ish) necron vehicals as it could really keep out fire power going and maybe chucking out scarabs to replenish a unit nearby which can act as bubble wrap against assault on the armour. Sure there 80ish pts each(&only heal once per turn) but if you have a vehical heavy list could prove useful.

BunkhouseBuster wrote:Option 2
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Heavy Bolter

Option 3
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Missile Launcher

Options 2 and 3 aren't viable.

You have to be within 8 inches to use a flamer, and flamers only deal 1d6 S4, no rend hits.

Which means that the marines will already have had to have weathered necron gunfire.

And then there's the problem:

Do we charge the necrons or not?

1. If we charge the necrons, then we can't do sufficient damage to ensure that necrons don't get back up. And point for point, we are at a disadvantage. We're using a more expensive unit to tie up a less expensive unit.

2. If we don't charge the necrons, then not only do we lose more models to necron guns, but we likely get charged anyway.

No. The only viable way to put necrons down is at range, but we can't put out enough shots to matter.

 Grimgold wrote:
Insane bravery is expensive, and I've only seen it delay the inevitable. Beyond that you only get to spend command points once per player turn, so if I rerolled a die earlier in the turn I'd be out of luck.

Incorrect. You may use EACH stratagem once per PHASE. pg 215 box under the mission tables detailing matched play rules.

Really, what is consistently infuriating to me, as a marine player, about necrons, is that necrons and marines basically both pay for the same thing: durability.

Marines pay their points cost for the 4s on their statline and that 3+ armor save.

Necrons are even MORE durable and have better basic guns than marines, but consistently are undercosted relative to marines.

 Traditio wrote:

BunkhouseBuster wrote:Option 2
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Heavy Bolter

Option 3
Tactical Squad
- Sgt. w/ Combi-Flamer
- Flamer
- Missile Launcher

Options 2 and 3 aren't viable....

It is a perfectly viable option, and I have seen players (and myself) take those Tactical Marine loadouts before. It is possible that the target Necron unit was focusing on other targets, or the Marines made all of their saves on their way into range, or the Marines just disembarked out of a Rhino that protected them until they got within range. There are many variable that can take place that can change the situation.

 Marmatag wrote:
How about this - without doing the math beforehand, come up with what you believe is the optimal loadout for a squad of 10 TAC to fight a squad of 20 Necron Warriors. Or, just pick another squad. It doesn't have to be TACs. The ideal marine unit to engage and win a fight against necrons.

I will do the math and share the results.

I did it already for tacs. it's grav cannon plasmagun combi-plasma. On t4 w1 the GC's greater number of shots than a plasma cannon makes it strictly better in this situation. (both wounding on 3's no save, and the GC is 4 shots.)

It did not turn out well for the tacs.

You could try a quad grav cannon dev squad with combi plasma sarge and full compliment of meat shields? That's 257 points.

 Grimgold wrote:
Insane bravery is expensive, and I've only seen it delay the inevitable. Beyond that you only get to spend command points once per player turn, so if I rerolled a die earlier in the turn I'd be out of luck.

Its once per phase not player turn...

Let's start with flamer, heavy bolter, combi-flamer.

I've not seen all the rules, so correct me if i make a mistake in my assumptions.

Assumptions:
1. The combi-flamer sergeant fires both the flamer and the combi-gun.
2. The heavy bolter does not move, and hits on 3s.
3. Flamers are strength 4, -0AP, 1 wound, with D6 hits.
4. All boltguns are in rapid fire range.
5. The rapid fire combi-flamer boltgun portion hits on 4s.
6. The TAC squad shoots first.
7. The Necrons are not allowed to fire Rapid Fire, and fire 1 shot per Necron.
8. The Marines are in cover.
9. I will round up in favor of the marines, and against the Necrons. (for example, necrons dealing 1.67 wounds means 1 wound).
10. Necrons only reanimate on their turn.
11. The Necron player horribly misplays and doesn't charge the marines, which would take away their cover & heavy/special weapon advantages in this scenario.

We'll be looking at expected values.

This TAC squad expects to do 4.78 wounds per shooting phase. Let's round this to 5.

TAC Marine Volley 1: The Necrons are dropped to 15.

Necron Volley 1: Necrons deal 1.67 wounds, for a total of 1 marine dead. It kills a bolter marine. Necrons reanimate 5/2 = 2, for a strength of 17.

TAC Marines Volley 2: Necrons are dropped to 12. The expected wounds is 4.44, which we round to 5.

Necron Volley 2: Necrons deal 1.34 wounds, for a total of 1 marine dead. It kills a bolter marine. Necrons reanimate 8/2 = 4, putting their total at 16.

TAC Marines Volley 3: Deal 4.11 expected wounds. We'll round this to 5. Drops necron total to 11.

Necron Volley 3: Kills 1 more bolter marine. 9/2 = 4. Total necrons =15.

Marine Volley 4: Now they're only killing 4 necrons. Dropped back to 11.

Necron Volley 4: Kills 1 more bolter marine. 9/2 = 4 total necrons 15.

Marine Volley 5: 3.44 expected wounds, we'll say they kill 4. Necrons back to 11.

At this point we're at a stable state where the wounds expected by the necrons is less than or equal to what they will heal. Over time, Necrons win this fight, even with the assumptions totally favorable for marines.

If Necrons are allowed to rapid fire in this edition they slay the marines horribly. Further if you take away the cover save of the marines this is a joke.

BunkhouseBuster wrote:It is a perfectly viable option, and I have seen players (and myself) take those Tactical Marine loadouts before. It is possible that the target Necron unit was focusing on other targets, or the Marines made all of their saves on their way into range, or the Marines just disembarked out of a Rhino that protected them until they got within range. There are many variable that can take place that can change the situation.

"...the marines made all of their saves on their way into range"?

No.

That's not how you measure whether or not something is viable. The exception is not the statistical norm.

The fact that it was technically possible to kill a flyrant in one turn with boltguns in 7th edition did not make boltguns a viable answer to flyrants.

It's true that rhinos can be part of the equation, but then we're not dealing with a tactical squad. We're dealing with a tactical squad IN ADDITION TO a 70+ point vehicle.

Which means that the load-out is even LESS viable, because we're talking about spending hundreds of points to MAYBE (not guaranteed) deal with a much less expensive unit.

Now, let's redo this with some more realistic assumptions:

Assumptions:
1. The combi-flamer sergeant fires both the flamer and the combi-gun.
2. The heavy bolter does not move, and hits on 3s.
3. Flamers are strength 4, -0AP, 1 wound, with D6 hits.
4. All boltguns are in rapid fire range.
5. The rapid fire combi-flamer boltgun portion hits on 4s.
6. The TAC squad shoots first.
7. The Necrons are allowed to fire Rapid Fire, and fire 2 shots each.
8. No one is in cover
9. I will round normally.
10. Necrons only reanimate on their turn.

Turn 1 Marines. Marines deal 5 wounds.
Turn 1 Necrons: Necrons deal 5 wounds, and regenerate to 17.
Turn 2 Marines: Marines deal 3 wounds.
Turn 2 Necrons: Necrons deal 4.67 wounds. We'll call it 4. Necrons regenerate to 17.

marines are basically dead.

 Marmatag wrote:
Now, let's redo this with some more realistic assumptions:

Assumptions:
1. The combi-flamer sergeant fires both the flamer and the combi-gun.
2. The heavy bolter does not move, and hits on 3s.
3. Flamers are strength 4, -0AP, 1 wound, with D6 hits.
4. All boltguns are in rapid fire range.
5. The rapid fire combi-flamer boltgun portion hits on 4s.
6. The TAC squad shoots first.
7. The Necrons are allowed to fire Rapid Fire, and fire 2 shots each.
8. No one is in cover
9. I will round normally.
10. Necrons only reanimate on their turn.

Turn 1 Marines. Marines deal 5 wounds.
Turn 1 Necrons: Necrons deal 5 wounds, and regenerate to 17.
Turn 2 Marines: Marines deal 3 wounds.
Turn 2 Necrons: Necrons deal 4.67 wounds. We'll call it 4. Necrons regenerate to 17.

marines are basically dead.

Try the grav cannon devs + combi plasma sarge and meat shields. I think it's a lot closer of a match if the crons don't charge, like if they don't want to leave an objective.

Also I think you can assume the cron player is willing to spend at least 2 cp on the squad once, out of his easily obtained 6 or probably higher.

Failing that I don't think any of the standard infantry units in marines have a prayer without a character.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Now, let's redo this with some more realistic assumptions:

Assumptions:
1. The combi-flamer sergeant fires both the flamer and the combi-gun.
2. The heavy bolter does not move, and hits on 3s.
3. Flamers are strength 4, -0AP, 1 wound, with D6 hits.
4. All boltguns are in rapid fire range.
5. The rapid fire combi-flamer boltgun portion hits on 4s.
6. The TAC squad shoots first.
7. The Necrons are allowed to fire Rapid Fire, and fire 2 shots each.
8. No one is in cover
9. I will round normally.
10. Necrons only reanimate on their turn.

Turn 1 Marines. Marines deal 5 wounds.
Turn 1 Necrons: Necrons deal 5 wounds, and regenerate to 17.
Turn 2 Marines: Marines deal 3 wounds.
Turn 2 Necrons: Necrons deal 4.67 wounds. We'll call it 4. Necrons regenerate to 17.

marines are basically dead.

Try the grav cannon devs + combi plasma sarge and meat shields. I think it's a lot closer of a match if the crons don't charge, like if they don't want to leave an objective.

Failing that I don't think any of the standard infantry units in marines have a prayer without a character.

Grav cannon dev squad fires 12 boltgun shots and 16 grav cannon shots per round. The expected wounds this deals to the Necron warriors is 9.

Assuming the Necron player doesn't fire back because he just doesn't even care to.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 4 necrons (15 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 7 necrons (13 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 8 necrons (11 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)

stable state.

So the expected outcome is that the grav dev squad is unable to kill 20 warriors.

Again, I don't know how battleshock affect Necrons & their RP

And, again, if the Necrons fire first, they're going to win even against grav dev squad handily.

it's also worth pointing out that it would really be 40 necron warriors equivalent to cost of the grav squad, lol.

Yep, so they need a character buff to win off probability.

They can get reasonably close enough that a bit of a statistical deviation can hand them a victory though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Now, let's redo this with some more realistic assumptions:

Assumptions:
1. The combi-flamer sergeant fires both the flamer and the combi-gun.
2. The heavy bolter does not move, and hits on 3s.
3. Flamers are strength 4, -0AP, 1 wound, with D6 hits.
4. All boltguns are in rapid fire range.
5. The rapid fire combi-flamer boltgun portion hits on 4s.
6. The TAC squad shoots first.
7. The Necrons are allowed to fire Rapid Fire, and fire 2 shots each.
8. No one is in cover
9. I will round normally.
10. Necrons only reanimate on their turn.

Turn 1 Marines. Marines deal 5 wounds.
Turn 1 Necrons: Necrons deal 5 wounds, and regenerate to 17.
Turn 2 Marines: Marines deal 3 wounds.
Turn 2 Necrons: Necrons deal 4.67 wounds. We'll call it 4. Necrons regenerate to 17.

marines are basically dead.

Try the grav cannon devs + combi plasma sarge and meat shields. I think it's a lot closer of a match if the crons don't charge, like if they don't want to leave an objective.

Failing that I don't think any of the standard infantry units in marines have a prayer without a character.

Grav cannon dev squad fires 12 boltgun shots and 16 grav cannon shots per round. The expected wounds this deals to the Necron warriors is 9.

Assuming the Necron player doesn't fire back because he just doesn't even care to.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 4 necrons (15 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 7 necrons (13 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 8 necrons (11 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)

stable state.

So the expected outcome is that the grav dev squad is unable to kill 20 warriors.

Again, I don't know how battleshock affect Necrons & their RP

And, again, if the Necrons fire first, they're going to win even against grav dev squad handily.

it's also worth pointing out that it would really be 40 necron warriors equivalent to cost of the grav squad, lol.

The crons are ld10 and respond to morale just like everyone else. However the cron player is exceedingly likely to use 2 cp to stop a unit from losing more than a dude or two, or especially the last of a unit. Any battleforged army can be expected to have at least 6 cp, or more if they have important uses for them like this.

And their RP responds to "fleeing" models exactly as if they died....somehow.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Yep, so they need a character buff to win off probability.

They can get reasonably close enough that a bit of a statistical deviation can hand them a victory though.

We're talking about killing a 240 point unit.

If I send a fully loaded 10 man devastator squad, a rhino AND a captain (who will need ANOTHER rhino if he wants to accompany that 10 man devastator squad) to MAYBE kill one 240 point unit, was it really worth it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Really, the only answer I can see as a marine player is "play to the objectives."

Kill the transports early. Force the necrons to footslog 5 inches at a time. Deny them their 24 inch range. And hold the objectives.

Somehow, that strikes me as deeply unsatisfying.

to be fair, the grav squad is 242 without handing the sarge any gear, which it doesn't look like he math'd in the combi-plas that I suggested, so that's actually a very close matchup that could be nudged over by a cp reroll or slightly above/below average rolls.

Also we're looking at marines.

How do you think Orks will fare against Necrons? Or Imperial Guard?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
to be fair, the grav squad is 242 without handing the sarge any gear, which it doesn't look like he math'd in the combi-plas that I suggested, so that's actually a very close matchup that could be nudged over by a cp reroll or slightly above/below average rolls.

Also assuming the marine squad fires first, doesn't pay a penalty for moving the grav devs, and doesn't get charged by the Necrons, who can move without penalty.

If the Necrons fire first from outside rapid fire, that's expected 3.34 marines dead, drops them to 7, leadership of 7 means if you roll a 5 or 6, the marine player is losing additional models to battleshock. Let's assume he passes.

The grav devs would fire back and kill 7 necrons. If their LDR is 10, then that means they're losing 1 necron on a 4, 2 on a 5, and 3 on a 6. let's say they roll a 6. Drops the loss to 10.

Necrons advance further. At this point, they should be in rapid fire range. That's 20 shots. 3 more marines die, dropping their strength to 4, just the grav devs, no sergeant. Necrons would regenerate to 15.

Grav devs kill 7. Necrons lose 3 more. Drops them to 5.

Necrons fire 10 shots, killing 2 grav devs. Why they wouldn't charge at this point I don't know.

Again, theorycraft, but the necrons are the better unit.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
to be fair, the grav squad is 242 without handing the sarge any gear, which it doesn't look like he math'd in the combi-plas that I suggested, so that's actually a very close matchup that could be nudged over by a cp reroll or slightly above/below average rolls.

And the captain is a minimum 72 points.

So it's 314 vs. 240.

And again, do you expect the grav squad to walk?

72 points EACH minimum for 2 rhinos (one for the captain; one for the grav squad).

458 points vs. 240, and even then, the necrons still probably won't die.

Just admit it, niv-mizzet:

GW dropped the ball on this one.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

And their RP responds to "fleeing" models exactly as if they died....somehow.

Phase out is back, it seems.
The justification for phase out was that once the necron army detects that it has no chance of winning, it will determine the most logical course of action is to retreat to save on repairs.
You can use the same rationale here, that some necrons logic circuits determine that its irrational to continue fighting, so they just go home.

 Traditio wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Yep, so they need a character buff to win off probability.

They can get reasonably close enough that a bit of a statistical deviation can hand them a victory though.

We're talking about killing a 240 point unit.

If I send a fully loaded 10 man devastator squad, a rhino AND a captain (who will need ANOTHER rhino if he wants to accompany that 10 man devastator squad) to MAYBE kill one 240 point unit, was it really worth it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Really, the only answer I can see as a marine player is "play to the objectives."

Kill the transports early. Force the necrons to footslog 5 inches at a time. Deny them their 24 inch range. And hold the objectives.

Somehow, that strikes me as deeply unsatisfying.

I've been playing against them. (As somehow every other person I've ever gotten into the game freakin' loves necrons.)
Good times come up when they split up units and you can pounce with deep strikers/mobile guys plus long range shooters and focus the isolated units down without suffering a return offensive on your compromised positions from his other forces...

...HOWEVER, if the mission just doesn't force him to split up, there's not a lot you can do. Have your entire force plow into two-ish units, try to survive the counter, plow into the next ones, and then hope you can deal those all important last wounds to units before you run out of dudes yourself.

God help you if you're playing kill point mission though. Their mechanics make it so that they will have a low unit count, which means two things: They will almost always have first turn (except against like...knights,) and kill points is a big advantage for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Traditio wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
to be fair, the grav squad is 242 without handing the sarge any gear, which it doesn't look like he math'd in the combi-plas that I suggested, so that's actually a very close matchup that could be nudged over by a cp reroll or slightly above/below average rolls.

And the captain is a minimum 72 points.

So it's 314 vs. 240.

And again, do you expect the grav squad to walk?

72 points EACH minimum for 2 rhinos (one for the captain; one for the grav squad).

458 points vs. 240, and even then, the necrons still probably won't die.

Just admit it, niv-mizzet:

GW dropped the ball on this one.

Uh what are you talking about? Scroll up to my previous posts. I've been saying that they're a bit too good already.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

And their RP responds to "fleeing" models exactly as if they died....somehow.

Phase out is back, it seems.
The justification for phase out was that once the necron army detects that it has no chance of winning, it will determine the most logical course of action is to retreat to save on repairs.
You can use the same rationale here, that some necrons logic circuits determine that its irrational to continue fighting, so they just go home.

I was more referring to how they flee/warp away etc, and then those guys reanimate. I guess they walk back or telly back in?

For the record:

I want to point out that while necrons are 12 ppm, dire avengers are 17 ppm.

Ponder that.

Reanimation in its current form should never be better than 5+. it should be base 6+, and enhanced to 5+.

Edit: code had a bug and the results here are not accurate

I agree with the general principle that you want to be thinking more about expected outcomes than rare possibilities, and I also suspect that you're really just not going to find something that beats a 20-man Necron blob for the same price. But: it is probably important to consider probability distributions rather than just averages when we're talking about this sort of back-and-forth firefight, especially with the Necrons standing up again each turn. Because the number of Necrons that go down in the first volley affects the number that get to shoot back at the Marines and affects the number that stand back up, etc., there's the potential for massive noise amplification. Ultimately what the marines are looking for is a bad RP roll for the Necrons and then a lucky round of shooting to hopefully wipe the squad.

I also wonder if Marines might not do better trying to get into CC quickly. In trying to deal with RP what you really need is to do damage quickly, and in CC marines get 3 attacks per game round, including their pistol. I just did a quick simulation of 18 naked Marines exchanging rapid fire volleys with a 20-man Warrior blob with 5+ RP, and the Marines win about 15% of the time. If you round up to 19 Marines they win 25% of the time. This is up from 8% and 13% if they're standing at 24". I guess this breaks the "outfit only a single 10-man tac squad" rule but it's equal points. I'm going to see how CC looks.

Also Marmatag - you're using 50% for RP, right? Are we just assuming a Cryptek?

If a cryptek is involved use snipers. Sniper rifles actually act like sniper rifles this edition, and they inflict mortal wounds AND normal damage as well. So a wound roll of a 6 actually deals 1 wound + 1 potential wound.
Crypteks only have a 4+ save, 5+ invul and 4 wounds, with no RP.
Warrior shooting is still more painful than their melee, so engaging them in CC would be a good idea.

Dionysodorus wrote:I also wonder if Marines might not do better trying to get into CC quickly.

Even assuming that the marines are only armed with bolters, it would still be a Pyrrhic victory at best, because it means that you've used a more expensive unit to tie up a less expensive unit.

At current necrons model cost, it's just not worth it.

Also, falling back is a thing now.

The marines that charged are going to get shot to pieces on the next player turn.

Dionysodorus wrote:
I agree with the general principle that you want to be thinking more about expected outcomes than rare possibilities, and I also suspect that you're really just not going to find something that beats a 20-man Necron blob for the same price. But: it is probably important to consider probability distributions rather than just averages when we're talking about this sort of back-and-forth firefight, especially with the Necrons standing up again each turn. Because the number of Necrons that go down in the first volley affects the number that get to shoot back at the Marines and affects the number that stand back up, etc., there's the potential for massive noise amplification. Ultimately what the marines are looking for is a bad RP roll for the Necrons and then a lucky round of shooting to hopefully wipe the squad.

I also wonder if Marines might not do better trying to get into CC quickly. In trying to deal with RP what you really need is to do damage quickly, and in CC marines get 3 attacks per game round, including their pistol. I just did a quick simulation of 18 naked Marines exchanging rapid fire volleys with a 20-man Warrior blob with 5+ RP, and the Marines win about 15% of the time. If you round up to 19 Marines they win 25% of the time. This is up from 8% and 13% if they're standing at 24". I guess this breaks the "outfit only a single 10-man tac squad" rule but it's equal points. I'm going to see how CC looks.

Also Marmatag - you're using 50% for RP, right? Are we just assuming a Cryptek?

Oh hey that's a good catch. I didn't notice he was using 50% RP and not 33.

That most likely means that the grav spam squad would win the fire fight without characters on either side. T4 4+ save is of course one of grav's sweetest targets.

Warriors are still really impressive for their points though.

 Traditio wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:I also wonder if Marines might not do better trying to get into CC quickly.

Even assuming that the marines are only armed with bolters, it would still be a Pyrrhic victory at best, because it means that you've used a more expensive unit to tie up a less expensive unit.

At current necrons model cost, it's just not worth it.

A warrior unit is at least 120 points. 10 warriors is fairly easy to eliminate, so it will usually be more than 120.
A tac squad is at most 130.
Don't you mean a less expensive unit to tie up an expensive unit? Can tac squads be taken in blobs of 20?

CthuluIsSpy wrote:A warrior unit is at least 120 points.
A tac squad is at most 130.
Don't you mean a less expensive unit to tie up an expensive unit? Can tac squads be taken in blobs of 20?

It's simple math. Marines are 13 ppm without upgrades. Necron warriors are 12 ppm, and have a pretty decent gun.

Point for point, it's just not worth it.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

Oh hey that's a good catch. I didn't notice he was using 50% RP and not 33.

That most likely means that the grav spam squad would win the fire fight without characters on either side. T4 4+ save is of course one of grav's sweetest targets.

Warriors are still really impressive for their points though.

Oh, Warriors only have a 4+ save. I remembered the -1 AP on their weapons but not that.

In that case if they're standing there rapid-firing each other, and the Marines go first, 18 Marines win about 65% of the time and 19 win about 75% of the time, up from 45% and 58% standing at 24". So, highly artificial obviously and not a real situation, but in "stand and shoot at each other" world Marines actually do expect to win for cost if they go first.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh wow. Nevermind, I had a stupid bug and the Necrons weren't actually reanimating. Now it's 2% with 19 Marines rapid-firing.

Dionysodorus wrote:

In that case if they're standing there rapid-firing each other, and the Marines go first, 18 Marines win about 65% of the time and 19 win about 75% of the time, up from 45% and 58% standing at 24". So, highly artificial obviously and not a real situation, but in "stand and shoot at each other" world Marines actually do expect to win for cost if they go first.

Can you check this math or share how you did it? because this massively conflicts with my findings that i shared earlier.

 Marmatag wrote:

Can you check this math or share how you did it? because this massively conflicts with my findings that i shared earlier.

Yes, sorry, I caught the bug pretty quick but it was too late. They weren't reanimating. I get about 2%.

Did you find that the tooled up one from 24" was better than just firing bolters? I may try to simulate that if you haven't already, to see how often it can pull out a win.

 Marmatag wrote:

Grav cannon dev squad fires 12 boltgun shots and 16 grav cannon shots per round. The expected wounds this deals to the Necron warriors is 9.

Assuming the Necron player doesn't fire back because he just doesn't even care to.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 4 necrons (15 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 7 necrons (13 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 8 necrons (11 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)

stable state.

So the expected outcome is that the grav dev squad is unable to kill 20 warriors.

Again, I don't know how battleshock affect Necrons & their RP

And, again, if the Necrons fire first, they're going to win even against grav dev squad handily.

it's also worth pointing out that it would really be 40 necron warriors equivalent to cost of the grav squad, lol.

Your math is way off here.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 3 necrons (14 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 5 necrons (10 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 6 necrons (7 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)
Necrons are wiped out.

Remember that (without character support) Necrons only revive 1/3 of their lost models - not half as your math would seem to indicate.


That aside, what strikes me here is that these scenarios basically rely on the marine player playing completely into his opponent's strength. There was an old saying - you don't use 250pts of your army to kill 250pts of your opponent's army - you use 500pts of your army to kill 250pts of your opponent's army.

In essence, you don't just have each squad in your army shoot a different unit in your opponent's army. Instead, you focus on taking down just a few units with the whole of your army. This is true against most armies, but even more so against Necrons.

 Traditio wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:A warrior unit is at least 120 points.
A tac squad is at most 130.
Don't you mean a less expensive unit to tie up an expensive unit? Can tac squads be taken in blobs of 20?

It's simple math. Marines are 13 ppm without upgrades. Necron warriors are 12 ppm, and have a pretty decent gun.

Point for point, it's just not worth it.

You are missing the point that warriors HAVE to be taken in squads of 10. You have to pay 120 points to field them minimum.
Marines can be fielded in squads of 5 minimum. You have to have pay 65 points to field them minimum.
The marine squad will usually be cheaper than the warrior squad in practice.

You also seem to be forgetting that necron warriors have a 4+ save. In a shooting match, 10 warriors against 10 marines, they should come out even because they are using fighting against the same stat line effective, and that's assuming bolters only with no grenades or special / heavy weapons.
In combat though marines have the advantage, as that -1 to their armor save does not apply.

Also, do you want to know what you're paying that extra point for? You're paying it for a sergeant, frag, krak grenades and a pistol.
So this is what they can do that necron warriors can't with base equipment
- Get an extra attack in CC from the sergeant
- Give the sergeant a better CC weapon for free
- Get D6 S3 shooting attacks
- Get a S6 AP-1 D3 damage attack
- Shoot in CC

You aren't just paying for resilience, you're paying for utility. They can do a lot more than warriors.

RPs strength comes from the persistent turn after turn rolls more than it being 4+ instead of 5+, they still stabilize the lower you get them. The part that's unrealistic though is that a giant necron blob will just be hit by a set damage every turn forever without ever being focused down. The more common order of events will be the 2 armies approach each other (slowly in the case of the necrons) dropping a couple guys from a couple units then as shorter range weapons come into play multiple units will focus down all 15-17 remaining warriors in a unit rather than try to 1v1 each unit separately. The untouched warrior units will do damage back on their turn, because it is a game with 2 sides and they are allowed to roll dice too, and at the end of the game you will count things and declare one player the winner.

Getting in a short range firefight battle of attrition with the unit that is probably the best in the game at short range firefight battles of attrition is a bad idea. Running at genestealers is also normally a bad idea.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:You are missing the point that warriors HAVE to be taken in squads of 10. You have to pay 120 points to field them minimum.
Marines can be fielded in squads of 5 minimum. You have to have pay 65 points to field them minimum.
The marine squad will usually be cheaper than the warrior squad in practice.

Why would you throw a footslogging 5 man marine squad at a necron squad? That would be suicidal.

No, let's compare something closer:

5 man tactical squad (with bolters) + rhino (137 points) vs. 10 man warrior squad (120 points).

Assuming dawn of war deployment and that rhino and warriors are at the closest possible deployment to each other and are directly opposite to each other with no terrain intervening, here's how that plays out:

Turn 1A: rhino charges and advances 15 inches (roughly 9 inches from the necrons). Rhino throws up smoke.

Turn 1B: footslogging warriors retreat 3 inches and rapid fire at the rhino, dealing it, on average, about 2 wounds.

Turn 2A: marines deploy and move about 3 inches from the necrons. Rhino moves to a little over an inch away from the warriors. Both squads fire on warriors, knocking down, on average, two warriors. Rhino charges warriors, sustaining on average, in between 0-1 wounds to overwatch. Marines then charge. Rhino and marines strike first. Rhino likely misses. Marines knock down, on average, one additional warrior. Necron warriors cannot possibly lose any models to leadership (6+3=9). In turn, necron warriors, on average, deal 0-1 wounds to the marines in close combat. At the end of the turn, assuming no buffs to RP, one necron warrior gets back up.

Rhino now has 7 wounds and marine squad is at full strength. Necron warriors still have 8 models left.

Understand that the rhino rush is the best case scenario. If marines don't disembark, rapidfire and charge, marines fare much worse.

In fact, if the necron warriors, instead of retreating to the 12 inch mark, approach the rhino, rapidfire, and charge, the rhino and marines fare less well off.

Again, it's just not worth it.

 Marmatag wrote:
Also we're looking at marines.

How do you think Orks will fare against Necrons? Or Imperial Guard?

I think Orks might have it better. 40 slugga boys. You will probably lose about half on the way in but once they connect they will start doing a number on the Necrons.

I think though the conclusion is that Necron Warriors are hard to kill in 240 points vs 240 points. I am not sure this is a major issue though because on their own they are not that lethal.
In a regular game you will more easily be able to focus a larger amount of points and kill them in a turn or two.

Did you use just bolters, or did you use the krak grenade that all tac squads are equipped with? Or the frag grenade?
You still killed more warriors then they killed marines, they are now stuck in combat and if they fallback they can't shoot leaving you to shoot them again. And even if they don't fallback you can still shoot them in your turn. Those warriors are now stuck there for about 2-3 turns, possibly longer because of the rhino.
RP is done at the beginning of the necron turn, btw.

 Marmatag wrote:
Also we're looking at marines.

How do you think Orks will fare against Necrons? Or Imperial Guard?

Uhh... Manticores and Conscripts?

Big Blob o' Conscripts [150], Platoon Commander [20], Commissar [30] vs. 20 Necrons:
Conscripts fire: 11 wounds. Battleshock for 4 more.
Necrons Re-animate, regain 5.
Necrons fire: 8 wounds. Battleshock for 1 more.
Conscripts fire, 9 wounds, Battleshock for 2 more,
No more Necrons.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Also we're looking at marines.

How do you think Orks will fare against Necrons? Or Imperial Guard?

Uhh... Manticores and Conscripts?

Big Blob o' Conscripts [150], Platoon Commander [20], Commissar [30] vs. 20 Necrons:
Conscripts fire: 11 wounds. Battleshock for 4 more.
Necrons fire: 1 wound. Battleshock for 0 more.
Necrons Re-animate, regain 5.
Conscripts fire, 11 wounds. No More Necrons.

Well that just doesn't seem right to me. (My basic "mathhammer" says more likely 5 ish.
So I doubt all the numbers there

Jbz` wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Also we're looking at marines.

How do you think Orks will fare against Necrons? Or Imperial Guard?

Uhh... Manticores and Conscripts?

Big Blob o' Conscripts [150], Platoon Commander [20], Commissar [30] vs. 20 Necrons:
Conscripts fire: 11 wounds. Battleshock for 4 more.
Necrons fire: 1 wound. Battleshock for 0 more.
Necrons Re-animate, regain 5.
Conscripts fire, 11 wounds. No More Necrons.

Well that just doesn't seem right to me. (My basic "mathhammer" says more likely 5 ish.
So I doubt all the numbers there

I corrected it. It's 8.

The point is academic though, considering that the conscipts and their support is 40 points less than the 'crons.

if the Tac marine is to be the measure of all things, lots of units are going to need nerfing.

 Grimgold wrote:
if the Tac marine is to be the measure of all things, lots of units are going to need nerfing.

Tacs and warriors are directly comparable. They fit basically the same army role.

 Traditio wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
if the Tac marine is to be the measure of all things, lots of units are going to need nerfing.

Tacs and warriors are directly comparable. They fit basically the same army role.

Tac's have better support options. Units don't fight in a vacuum.

 Traditio wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
if the Tac marine is to be the measure of all things, lots of units are going to need nerfing.

Tacs and warriors are directly comparable. They fit basically the same army role.

Why not compare them to immortals then? Those are also troop choices.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Did you use just bolters, or did you use the krak grenade that all tac squads are equipped with? Or the frag grenade?

5 rapidfiring boltguns and 1 rapid firing stormbolter.

You still killed more warriors then they killed marines

1. Only because the marines hid in the rhino long enough to jump out, rapidfire and then charge

2. The necrons still deal, on average, 3 wounds to the rhino, a 72 point model. That amounts to about a 22 point loss compared to the 24 on the part of the necrons.

And the marine damage to the necrons is unsustainable.

Because now the necrons have two choices:

1. They can tactically withdraw and allow another unit of warriors to move in and slaughter the 5 marines

or

2. They can remain in combat and face minimal casualties. Even assuming the rhino lives and zero marines die, the marines and rhino are only dealing around 2 wounds per turn once they get stuck in combat, and that's not even accounting for reanimation protocols.

Why on earth would the necron player want to leave combat? He's using a 120 point unit to tie up 137 points of models. By all accounts, that's a win.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Even here, the best case scenario is playing to the objectives. If the rhino charges the necrons and the marines jump out and sit on an objective, then point for point, the marines are better off.

But this only works with objectives, and this doesn't feel very satisfying, does it?

Astartes have a super efficient way of dealing with warriors. What with how close combat weapons are now insanely cheap. Take some vanguard, give them jump packs and power swords, lightning claws, relic blades (the ap-3 stuff) then delete the unit. If my at-a- glance math isnt terribly off, 20 warriors is 240 points. 10 vanguard vets with jump packs, give the dudes a bunch of power swords, give the sarge a relic blade&storm shield. 242 points. I'm willing to bet, with how devastating assault is now, that those vanguard are going to deal with those pesky warriors in short order.

Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

 DoomMouse wrote:
I'm a little worried about the new reanimation protocols on necron units. Their warriors are now 12pts, Move 5, BS 3+, S4, T4 LD10 and save 4+. Compared with a 13pt tactical marine they seem vastly superior. Their gauss weapons even have a bonus -1 armour pen, and they replenish downed squad members on a 5+ (or a 4+ with a cryptek, which seems like a no-brainer).

Don't get me wrong, I like the new RP rules, and it feels just like necrons should, but for 12pts per warrior it seems pretty crazily strong! I guess their damage output is pretty small, but still superior to tac marines.

If a 20 strong warrior squad is fighting against 20 tac marines at 24 inch range, the tacs will likely NEVER kill the necrons, even if the warriors don't even bother firing their guns... The math says their numbers stabilise around 10 models! I guess you'd have to use your entire army to focus down one squad at a time, but this isn't always possible while the enemy is cutting you down.

I suspect necrons are going to be very strong this edition! I dread to think how hard it'd be to finish off lychguard units. Imagine the pain when you finally reduce a squad to one model, then three more multi-wound models get back up again!

Bring scout snipers instead 140 points for 10 scouts with sniper rifles can sit 36" away kill the cryptek in 1 turn and put 3-4 wounds on the Warriors per turn.

The best setup for RP will cost Necrons around 300 points (Cryptek and Ghost Ark). Cryptek is T4 W4 4+ save hes super easy to kill. Ghost Ark is the same for a vehicle 14 wounds T6 and 4+ save. Overcharged plasma will do that thing in quick. Just dont shoot melta at it. Quantum Sheilding prevents damage based on a die roll if you roll lower then the damage done the damage is negated. But then S4 with a AP -2 would have a decent shot at bring it down.

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

I am pretty excited for crons in 8th. Everything seems to have a place, I am currently working on buying 1 box at a time so I currently only have 636 points. The plan is to buy and build a box one at a time, my 2k list goal looks like this.

Necrons - 2K - Batallion Detachment

Illuminor Szevas - 143
Cryptek - 104
Destroyer Lord, Warscythe,Phylactery - 150

20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240

C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230

5 Canoptek Wraiths, Particle Caster on 4 - 206

3 Heavy Destroyers, Heavy Guass Cannon - 225

Doom Scythe - 220

Pretty happy with it, has a nice mix of low arms firepower mixed with some heavy dakka and faster units.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

 AaronWilson wrote:
I am pretty excited for crons in 8th. Everything seems to have a place, I am currently working on buying 1 box at a time so I currently only have 636 points. The plan is to buy and build a box one at a time, my 2k list goal looks like this.

Necrons - 2K - Batallion Detachment

Illuminor Szevas - 143
Cryptek - 104
Destroyer Lord, Warscythe,Phylactery - 150

20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240

C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230

5 Canoptek Wraiths, Particle Caster on 4 - 206

3 Heavy Destroyers, Heavy Guass Cannon - 225

Doom Scythe - 220

Pretty happy with it, has a nice mix of low arms firepower mixed with some heavy dakka and faster units.

Looks decent, but the Doom Scythe is a rather poor choice imo. The doomsday ark is roughly the same cost and more durable.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

D3 auto mortal wounds, if that offs the Psyker it spreads D3 auto mortal wounds to every unit within six inches, the spell itself auto fails and can't be attempted again by any of your Psykers for the rest of the turn and that's every spell bar Smite which can still be attempted again, not a sliding scale of risk and reward.
The Templars have the right of it "Suffer not the Witch to live".

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

D3 auto mortal wounds, if that offs the Psyker it spreads D3 auto mortal wounds to every unit within six inches, the spell itself auto fails and can't be attempted again by any of your Psykers for the rest of the turn and that's every spell bar Smite which can still be attempted again, not a sliding scale of risk and reward.
The Templars have the right of it "Suffer not the Witch to live".

If he has 4 wounds he can't be offed by it, and if he's on a single wound just make sure no one (except the enemy) is within 6". It really doesn't sound that bad, and there's only what, a 1/18 chance of it happening?

 krodarklorr wrote:
To everyone complaining Necrons will be OP, especially new players, need to relax a bit. Necrons in 7th edition were OP. This edition they are reverting back to 5th edition RP, but slightly better and worse. It just means you have to focus a unit down. Infantry in this edition is not hard to remove, so warriors won't be a problem for long.

Also characters don't come back, and once they get in melee or get shot at, they'll die easily, so living metal doesn't mitigate that much in the long run.

If anyone cries OP, then let's play a game using my 7th edition Decurion detachment. You'll love 8th edition Necrons then.

My best 7th Edition moment was fighting a Necron player, I drove a Chaos Sorcerer on a Bike right in the middle of his formation, cast enhanced Sunburst, BOOM, 11 hits per model, wiped out half the army in one spell

No more of that in this edition, but yeah that was pretty nonsensical, but the randomness in 7th had it's charm, but you had way less control than you do now, which is an improvement