Moosatronic Warrior wrote: I continue to be baffled by the apparent success of triple Doom Scythes. The stratagem doesn't do that much damage as far as I can see (only own 2 so never tested it), like, if you hit most of my lists with that it wouldn't be crippling. I feel like it's got to be a ton of Methodical Destruction/ MWBD Tesla doing the heavy lifting in that list. Move blocking with aircraft still works well despite the FAQ so that helps, and they can screen vs deepstrike assault units.
I find that they give us a good chance against tau, as if they castle up we auto win by using strat on the drones. or if they spread out, its easier to clear threats compared to their normal castle.
considering so many people got nerfed and tau got buffed. im starting to always prepare to play against tau at some point at an event now
In addition to the other points, the triple doom scythes also have the benefit of being -1 to hit. When combined with our current trend of 3 Quantum Shielded DDAs, we end up with a pretty tanky list.
I've posted about a very similar list to the GP one (with the only change being a Lord with Veil plus the third squad being Gauss), and I'm very pleased to see it show results.
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: I continue to be baffled by the apparent success of triple Doom Scythes. The stratagem doesn't do that much damage as far as I can see (only own 2 so never tested it), like, if you hit most of my lists with that it wouldn't be crippling. I feel like it's got to be a ton of Methodical Destruction/ MWBD Tesla doing the heavy lifting in that list. Move blocking with aircraft still works well despite the FAQ so that helps, and they can screen vs deepstrike assault units.
I find that they give us a good chance against tau, as if they castle up we auto win by using strat on the drones. or if they spread out, its easier to clear threats compared to their normal castle.
considering so many people got nerfed and tau got buffed. im starting to always prepare to play against tau at some point at an event now
You mean the +1 to hit strat then? so the teslas do work? (as I don't see the other option, the 3D3 MW being particularly useful against drones)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: I continue to be baffled by the apparent success of triple Doom Scythes. The stratagem doesn't do that much damage as far as I can see (only own 2 so never tested it), like, if you hit most of my lists with that it wouldn't be crippling. I feel like it's got to be a ton of Methodical Destruction/ MWBD Tesla doing the heavy lifting in that list. Move blocking with aircraft still works well despite the FAQ so that helps, and they can screen vs deepstrike assault units.
I feel the same.. I guess I'll finish up my three models and take them to town.
I did try them once against AM, and they did in deed wreck havock (they were also backe by 2 DDAs), but I got to go first and had them for two turns, cripling 2 out of 3 LRBT's in a corner, and then devastating three tightly packed infantry units those two turns. After that the Death rays no the two remaining flyers did nothing and the teslas just plunked off shots here and there, helping with what ever else my army was doing.
But there is certainly a disrupting effect to them. My opponent then tended to reorganize to deal with them in his front yard, rather than move up-field in a well coordinated manner.
Your kidding right? Majority of drone units are 5-6 in each one and have to be 3" away from their target. so the 3d6 gets to go off on 3+ and average of 6 mortal wounds for each unit you can clip.
Then you have 24 tesla shots to start shooting down the rest of the drones which passed their fnp or were out of range of the beam.
managed to get this off and only hit two units of drones, but by the end of the first shooting, there was only one unit of drones left and i managed to shoot my doomsday's directly at some broadsides with no drone protection.
as they had to split their units to avoid me getting a huge hit with my beam it allowed me too take some units down and give me a chance. though if they castled up like most tau players, there would of been no drones left
moonsmite wrote: Your kidding right? Majority of drone units are 5-6 in each one and have to be 3" away from their target. so the 3d6 gets to go off on 3+ and average of 6 mortal wounds for each unit you can clip.
Then you have 24 tesla shots to start shooting down the rest of the drones which passed their fnp or were out of range of the beam.
managed to get this off and only hit two units of drones, but by the end of the first shooting, there was only one unit of drones left and i managed to shoot my doomsday's directly at some broadsides with no drone protection.
as they had to split their units to avoid me getting a huge hit with my beam it allowed me too take some units down and give me a chance. though if they castled up like most tau players, there would of been no drones left
Had similar experience against Tau. He splitted his army in two, and hide behind LoS blocking terrain. The Scythes found a line of sight anyway. His defensive deployment also kinda gave me the board and the objectives.
I don't know if it is a reliable technique against a skilled opponent, and it is kinda first turn dependent, but it certainly put a lot of pressure. The menace of the stratagem is messing with the opponent's deployment and target priority.
I think we are seeing a backlash against stacked buffs on units. Notice that things like the Vindicare assassin and Doomscythe stratagem becoming popular, meaning that you can hit associated support characters.
I played a triple Doomscythe list a few weeks back, and made a big deployment mistake. It's certainly not as easy as, say, slapping a knight on the table and removing everything you point at. But, it's not bad either.
Got massacred today vs blood angels. Made whole bunch of mistakes and top of that dice was ice cold. Mistakes in order>
a) deploying doomsday ark bit too far MIGHT have been mistake. I was preparing for him getting T1(tournament used the altering deployment with first one to finish getting +1 to roll so we useed it) and was leery of death company of bazillion attacks or the librarian dreadnought with his 8"+12"+charge potential. Here though after getting first turn I could only see death company. Librarian dreadnought managed to actually block LOS to the baal predator.
b) taking first turn might have been mistake. My first turn I could pretty much just shoot with tomb blades, doomsday ark(death company with main guns, small guns out of range) and death scythe that raced to his deployment zone to score double vp from behind the enemy lines(the scenario had similar maelstrom thing to tactical gambit).
c) not my mistake per se but this backfired spectacularly when he discarded 2 for 1 and got priority orders and big game hunter. That was whopping 8 vp if his warlord(the sanquinary special character) kills my death scythe. He softened it with banner bearer with fist and when he got 4 past saves I was chanting "kill kill kill" needing 9 wounds but alas he got 8. 100% sure he would have rerolled the 3 wounds had he killed the flier.
d) T1 I charged with wraiths vs death company. While I killed 5 they died in return attack. I def felt lack of h2h counter charge unit later
e) first turn too cautious with movement. Should have moved boldly forward. As it is T2 I was STILL out of range with 24" guns.
f) veiled with immortals to his rear. Bad bad idea. That veil would have been gold later as would have been the warscythe overlord vs those infernal sanquinary guard.
In the end I couldn't deal with sanquinary, the banner bearer, death company, sanquinary guard, some scouts, 3d6 charging assasin etc that were tagging me into close combat. I had to flee and use DDA and tomb blades to do killing which just wasn't enough despite doing fairly well overall. But those 2++ jump pack 2 wound powerfist guys with buffs were just too nasty.
After turn 5 it was like 20-5 and I had dda, overlord and that's about it left.
The other thing to keep in mind with Doom Scythes is in ITC, they make it very easy to pick up Recon and Behind Enemy Lines point on the first few turns. Then your units that are moving up will scoop up the rest in later turns.
Any chance that people who are reporting from Tournaments or games please put their experience (bad and good) into a Spoiler.
People come here to find and discuss tactics. Not to see how some one fudged up a game they played. Especially when its a wall of text with no proper paragraphs to make the reading easier.
I know this is a tactical forum and i'm really sry that my post is not tactic related but i feel you guys are the only people that can rly understand me...
I'm playing with friends in a local group and feel pretty mobbed.
We are house rouling a few things we think don't make much sense like big models provide cover to smaller ones behind them and for the most part i'm totally ok with it. But recently the house rules started to become completly anti necron...
Here are a few of them:
-Can't use the reanimation stratagem on wraith squats larger than 3.
-Max Squat-size for Tomb Blades is 6
-Can't use Vail of Darkness turn 1
-We are using deepstrike rules from 7 edition with scatter 2 D6 pick the lowest and models have to be played in coicentric cirles (which doesn't sound anti necron but im the only one with big unit squads that deepstrike [20x Warriors with Veil]) + you can't deepstrike above ground Level and with the terrain we mostly use this means i can't deepstrike in or near cover (thanks to sqatter rule units get destroyed if the land in a Wall)
-we just got allowed to ignore dmg of 1 with quantum deflection stratagem which got immidatly overrulled...
And a few things that are still being discussed for House rules:
-can't use advance and charge stratagem on wraith squats with more than 3
-using Veil to get out of combat counts as falling Back
I just wanted to get this of my soul. I mean i'm still winning most of my games. U guys don't have to answer this post was mostly for myself.
PS: sry for any spelling fails
PPS: befor you ask. No other fraction don't have any house rules against them
It sounds like your group is full of low tier players that can not think out of a wet paper bag. These "rules" are in no way logical, just passion and fear.
If you are still beating them then they need to play with a handicap for a chance, at least at their poor ability to play the game.
If you want a real game ask for it and if they are too scared then go to a different game shop for one. It might be you are the big fish in your small pond and you have out grown them tactically.
Surtr wrote: I know this is a tactical forum and i'm really sry that my post is not tactic related but i feel you guys are the only people that can rly understand me...
sry and rly are not in the English dictionary, download Grammarly. Whether this is the right place to post depends on what you want? Do you want to whine, do you want help figuring out the social situation you are in or do you want to win? House rules and comps have been a part of at the very least Warhammer Fantasy Battles since way back, I think it's perfectly natural to ask the Necrons 8th ed. tactica thread how to beat a scene that has house rules, ITC is just house rules as well. You already know whether this is fair and this is not the place to ask how to talk to your friends or to whine. Maybe your friends just want casual games and you are too into the competitive side of things, start putting some handicaps on yourself, while the rules technically aren't fair, it isn't fair either if your opponents are bringing fluffy Word Bearers with 20 man CSM blobs and you bring a competitive Necron list. Let us assume that is not the case and you want to continue beating them.
Surtr wrote: I know this is a tactical forum and i'm really sry that my post is not tactic related but i feel you guys are the only people that can rly understand me...Here are a few of them:
You need to post all of them if you want actual help otherwise we can go back and forth and I'll give you 7 different lists that are more powerful than what you are bringing now and you can start pulling my leg by saying "oh that is actually also banned".
-Can't use the reanimation stratagem on wraith squats larger than 3.
-Max Squat-size for Tomb Blades is 6
-Can't use Vail of Darkness turn 1
-We are using deepstrike rules from 7 edition with scatter 2 D6 pick the lowest and models have to be played in coicentric cirles (which doesn't sound anti necron but im the only one with big unit squads that deepstrike [20x Warriors with Veil]) + you can't deepstrike above ground Level and with the terrain we mostly use this means i can't deepstrike in or near cover (thanks to sqatter rule units get destroyed if the land in a Wall)
-we just got allowed to ignore dmg of 1 with quantum deflection stratagem which got immediately overruled...
And a few things that are still being discussed for House rules:
-can't use advance and charge stratagem on wraith squats with more than 3
-using Veil to get out of combat counts as falling Back
With the old DS rules, I'd avoid using 90% of units that DS, Veil of Darkness is still good even if it is useless T1, but if they nerf it so it counts as falling back I'd stop using it. The nerf to Quantum Deflection is perfectly reasonable, whoever wrote that FAQ doesn't know the rules, they were just making gak up on the spot. I think TBs are still fine in units of 3-6, it's no big deal that you cannot use the big squads. I would stop using Warriors because they are gak without the Veil, use them to proxy Tesla Immortals instead. 3x5 Tesla Immortals, Overlord, Lord, Seraptek Heavy Construct, Gauss Pylon, Gauss Pylon. Place the Pylons on the table. Use cardboard cutouts to field your Seraptek Heavy Construct and Gauss Pylons, they'll probably get nerfed next. Now we move on to 3x10 Tesla Immortals, Imotekh, Lord, 3x DDA, 3x Doom Scythe, Tomb Blades and Scarabs to fill out pts. Next, they nerf DDAs and Doom Scythes, so we spam Destroyers, 18 of them, the rest of your army is Tesla Immortals, Tomb Blades and Scarabs. Next they nerf Destroyers and Tesla Immortals, we move on to 18 Novokh Wraiths, we don't use a Cryptek so the Revival Strat is not important and we do not play Nephrekh so Advance and Charge is less important as well, Destroyer Lord with Crimson Haze WL trait, Nightbringer and Scarabs and Tomb Blades to fill out pts. If they nerf Wraiths and Scarabs you quit. I have played in a group with house rules as well and the politics is a nightmare, playing in a competitive group gets rid of most of those problems because all you need is a little bit of common sense and RAW.
White dwarf articles are often index: XXX named so maybe something in white dwarf. If we are super lucky there's some new rules in there. If not just fluff.
If so hopefully actually useful ones and not be giant nerf ala ynnari
Not that specialist det's are likely going to be big game changer for necrons anyway. They generally require cp and necrons aren'"t filled with them. Best case they have very good relic to use taking cp cost to just 2/3 cp(keeping in mind you still want veil likely)
I find the CP detatchments add a bit of bloat to the game but new rules are welcome. I wonder if they'll give us additional strategems or change any datasheets.
Well any new stratagems would be in the special det's almost certainly. So you need to unlock them with CP. Not too bad for chaos, eldar, imperium, orks, tyranids etc with easy 2 battallions+. Harder for necrons.
Surtr wrote: I know this is a tactical forum and i'm really sry that my post is not tactic related but i feel you guys are the only people that can rly understand me...
I don't think there's anything wrong with a small group placing handicaps on one player if they always win, but there are better ways to do it. If you keep house ruling lots of specific things you can end up with a mess. A much more elegant solution would be to impose a points, or power level, handicap on the player who keeps winning. If you get 1250pts vs. your opponents 1500pts, then you can play the rules as they are written, which is much simpler for everyone. If you still always win you can adjust the handicap.
Had a good doubles game at 2k points with 1ksons and my necrons vs admech, blood angels, and assassins.
For once in my life, everything pulled its weight. The destroyers ran shop, immortals killed troops efficiently, and doomsday ark squared off against dunecrawlers, and lived through QS.
Solid showing for the faction in the ITC format. Snagged center-board, and stuck there.
Whats your best way to kill primaris marines? That 2 wounds bit tends to make killing 10 of them very hard to do efficiently Sans using destroyers.
Honestly, just tesla the hell out of them. 3+ save ain't all that. Flayers works too. They're just marine concentrate, they die to the same stuff.
Edit: Wraiths eat them in combat too.
Yeah, pretty much this. Gauss Immortals do it well too if you can get Rapid Fire But Destroyers are your best option
Can anyone refer me to the page # on this thread in which the HQ options were discussed (the search doesn't always work without the right keyword) Or if there hasn't been one, what our your thoughts on Command Barges vs Overlord vs Destroyer lords and the best (if any) Relics/WL traits to give them. Note this assumes you already have a Cryptek or Crypteks
In terms of efficiency, destroyers kill them good at range, and wraiths and scythguard kill them in CC.
Immortals are pretty good too, but I would think gauss is slightly more effective due to their armor pen. With the extra wounds simply trying to overwhelm their saves like with previous ed termies and standard marines might not be that effective.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: In terms of efficiency, destroyers kill them good at range, and wraiths and scythguard kill them in CC.
Immortals are pretty good too, but I would think gauss is slightly more effective due to their armor pen. With the extra wounds simply trying to overwhelm their saves like with previous ed termies and standard marines might not be that effective.
Gauss is better for the AP, but the sheer number of extra shots you can bring down on them with Tesla means it probably evens out (especially with MWBD). But Tesla is better vs everything else so I'd always take it.
So full scenario is 10 man hellblaster brick with the Azreal 4++ invuln, Banner for shooting when they die, full rerolls to hit, and reroll 1s to wound backed by the darkshroud for -1 to hit.
Its a pain to deal with in every game. Usually i use my guns to remove the -1 to hit bubble speeder first, but it tends to take a lot of effort.
Yeah pop the Darkshroud with DDA's/Destroyers. If they have a 4++ then I'd even more strongly recommend just spamming tesla at them or munching them with wraiths.
The Doomscythe strat would also be highly distressing for that castle if you pull it off.
That is a lot of points shoved into one unit to keep it safe. Make him regret it. Deploy defensively and on your turn have Imotek storm them and then use the strat on the 3 Doom Scythes (there is a reason you are seeing them in top lists) 1d6 mortal wounds + 3d3 mortal wounds will bring that squad down to not even worth keeping Asreal + banner Ancient + Dark shroud around.
They will cry unfair! And BS that you don't need line of sight but if they want to put all their tricks into one spot well...
Also like others have said just mass Tesla will get them just make sure to pop the no cover strat.
What I said was no direct quote...at least it wasnt meant that way.
I have no source for GW stating „Necrons are ok“ its more of a „reading between the lines“ thing. They had plenty of time to fix them. And I dont mean just point drops but also datasheet updates and/or rule changes via WhiteDwarf.
This „Index: Necron“ thing they did was just another example of they dont care about it at all OR probably think necrons are ok as they are.
iGuy91 wrote: So full scenario is 10 man hellblaster brick with the Azreal 4++ invuln, Banner for shooting when they die, full rerolls to hit, and reroll 1s to wound backed by the darkshroud for -1 to hit.
Its a pain to deal with in every game. Usually i use my guns to remove the -1 to hit bubble speeder first, but it tends to take a lot of effort.
Don't try to use Veil of Darkness to get in RF range
iGuy91 wrote: So full scenario is 10 man hellblaster brick with the Azreal 4++ invuln, Banner for shooting when they die, full rerolls to hit, and reroll 1s to wound backed by the darkshroud for -1 to hit.
Its a pain to deal with in every game. Usually i use my guns to remove the -1 to hit bubble speeder first, but it tends to take a lot of effort.
Don't try to use Veil of Darkness to get in RF range
I mean, with Gauss that's a bad idea, but with Tesla. MWBD and Mephrit Dynasty.........
For 10 Immortals that's what, ~28 hits average. ~18 Wounds and at 12" you get AP-1 to drop their armour to 4+ (which is where their invul is). That's ALMOST half the unit dead for average rolls (very rough math, mind you). Throw in some Mortal wounds first from Doom Scythes and other sources and a 10-man Immortal unit could be quite effective at cleaning up what's left.
Another advantage to the Doomscythe strat is that you choose order of rolling, so you can try to take out the Ancient first and stop anything else firing back.
Galef wrote: I mean, with Gauss that's a bad idea, but with Tesla. MWBD and Mephrit Dynasty.........
For 10 Immortals that's what, ~28 hits average. ~18 Wounds and at 12" you get AP-1 to drop their armour to 4+ (which is where their invul is). That's ALMOST half the unit dead for average rolls (very rough math, mind you). Throw in some Mortal wounds first from Doom Scythes and other sources and a 10-man Immortal unit could be quite effective at cleaning up what's left.
-
It seems like a good idea, until you remember that if you're in RF range they can use Auspex Scan and kill 9 Immortals or 11 Warriors for 2 CP.
torblind wrote: Yeah, Gauss really wants to be in RF to have a chance against Tesla, but even then they're just barely better.
Outside RF, Tesla is always better, even in cover (with MWBD, without they're on par)
I just realised that gauss blasters Vs tesla carbines is another good example of how poor the internal balance of this codex is. Blasters would literally have to be assault 2 weapons to actually be on par with carbines, yet they're for some reason the same price. And even then tesla is still better balanced because it actually synergises with something else in the codex, massively increasing the value of having an overlord
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hell, I'd even pay 18-19 ppm for assault 2 blaster immortals, since they'd be so much more versatile than they are currently.
But I'm also biased since I hate the way carbines look
While I agree that gauss immorts are too weak for the veil of darkness to RF range gambit... a block of 20 warriors backed by a melee CCB is *not*. Unloading 40 rapid fire shots + a 50/50 charge into the back of your opponent's formation/ command group is simply hilarious. Try it on your friends. You have too many friends, right?
Galef wrote: I mean, with Gauss that's a bad idea, but with Tesla. MWBD and Mephrit Dynasty.........
For 10 Immortals that's what, ~28 hits average. ~18 Wounds and at 12" you get AP-1 to drop their armour to 4+ (which is where their invul is). That's ALMOST half the unit dead for average rolls (very rough math, mind you). Throw in some Mortal wounds first from Doom Scythes and other sources and a 10-man Immortal unit could be quite effective at cleaning up what's left.
-
It seems like a good idea, until you remember that if you're in RF range they can use Auspex Scan and kill 9 Immortals or 11 Warriors for 2 CP.
I might be missing something from an FAQ I can't quite find, but how would they be able to use Auspex Scanner when it requires their target to have arrived from reserves. Veil of Darkness doesn't count as arriving from reserves, so that Strat shouldn't be valid. Invasion Beams and Eternity gate, sure, but not Veil from what I can see But if I'm missing something, please point me to the right FAQ that says otherwise
EDIT: NVM, I found it. 40K Rulebook general questions: "Any rules that are trigger by or apply to units that are 'set up on the battlefield as reinforcements' are also trigger by or apply to the unit when it is set up on the battlefield"
Super lame. Still, you could instead MWBD 2 units of 10 Immortals (either with 2 Overlords or use the Strat) and pew-pew those Hellblasters from max 24" range
Galef wrote: I mean, with Gauss that's a bad idea, but with Tesla. MWBD and Mephrit Dynasty.........
For 10 Immortals that's what, ~28 hits average. ~18 Wounds and at 12" you get AP-1 to drop their armour to 4+ (which is where their invul is). That's ALMOST half the unit dead for average rolls (very rough math, mind you). Throw in some Mortal wounds first from Doom Scythes and other sources and a 10-man Immortal unit could be quite effective at cleaning up what's left.
-
It seems like a good idea, until you remember that if you're in RF range they can use Auspex Scan and kill 9 Immortals or 11 Warriors for 2 CP.
I might be missing something from an FAQ I can't quite find, but how would they be able to use Auspex Scanner when it requires their target to have arrived from reserves. Veil of Darkness doesn't count as arriving from reserves, so that Strat shouldn't be valid. Invasion Beams and Eternity gate, sure, but not Veil from what I can see
But if I'm missing something, please point me to the right FAQ that says otherwise
EDIT: NVM, I found it. 40K Rulebook general questions: "Any rules that are trigger by or apply to units that are 'set up on the battlefield as reinforcements' are also trigger by or apply to the unit when it is set up on the battlefield"
Super lame. Still, you could instead MWBD 2 units of 10 Immortals (either with 1 Overlords or use the Strat) and pew-pew those Hellblasters from max 24" range
-
Hence the "Play Tesla Immortals" rule of this tactica it's almost always better and much more reliable
I personally swear by my Gauss breacher team, but thats just me. I play in a strange way not many will agree with regardless
They've netted me Warlord, Linebreaker, and First Strike on a regular basis, and less often than that they're able to clear an annoying unit of something that would be a pain, wether it be a unit of rangers/reapers in cover or just that skeleton squad of scouts that *were* holding the objective.
As long as you acknowledge you wiull lose them, and the accompanying Overlord can MWBD himself and just go ham with the Voidscythe in the backfield as well. It's a fun little distraction if nothing else
How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss. Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss.
Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
The thing that makes tesla so good is the fact that it's one of few things in the entire codex that has a meaningful synergy with something else, namely MWBD, and in a competitive context there will always be an overlord to buff them. Since taking an HQ is mandatory for any battleforged list, the immortals actually add points efficiency to the overlord, who otherwise isn't very efficient at all, further enforcing the fact that there will be an overlord to buff the timmortals
And in any situation where the overlord isn't available anymore, the immortals are almost certainly expired already
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss.
Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
http://www.dice-hammer.com has this, just change model count and weapon stats, click the tesla checkbox on the weapon and +1 for the unit and you can pick out the Sv 3+ / T4 cell above for damage output. You can also toggle "in cover" up in the top bar.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss. Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
http://www.dice-hammer.com has this, just change model count and weapon stats, click the tesla checkbox on the weapon and +1 for the unit and you can pick out the Sv 3+ / T4 cell above for damage output. You can also toggle "in cover" up in the top bar.
I'm still getting higher numbers with Gauss. 5.56 with Gauss against T4 2+ save and 7.41 against T4 3+ save as opposed to 3.33 against T4 2+ save and 6.67 against T4 3+ save on tesla. Both have MWBD. I compared the results with Mathhammer and it seems to check out.
torblind wrote: Yeah for 2+, or in cover, Gauss is better in rapid fire range , by a small margin.
Well yeah, but why wouldn't you want to get in rapid fire range with gauss? Its also better against 3+ saves at short range too. To me, tesla and gauss are intended to be balanced in that one is good at long range, but the other is better at short ranges. Its why they are the same points cost despite one having better stats overall. It would seem to me that a good composition would be mostly tesla with gauss thrown in to act as can openers / breachers. Something like 2:1 Tesla to gauss.
I still however think the weapon options dont make much sense how they are. I think that Guass should be Assault 2 and then Tesla should be RF1
just makes more sense that way in my head.
but, as for pure numbers, I do think a unit of 10 Gauss Immortals are pretty good for a single-use 'I need this relatively squishy glass cannon thing dead'
Yeah, a return to 3rd ed immortal stats would be nice. Assault 2 Blasters and T5 immortals were great. They were elites too back then though, but nowadays that's not very special for an elite unit, so they can probably stay as troops even with that loadout.
Changing tesla to RF 1 without touching their AP would make them useless though.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss.
Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
Gauss is better against MEQ at close range and a lot better against TEQ at close range. But why would you take Gauss Immortals over Gauss Tomb Blades? If we assume you want Gauss, then the best option is TBs. Tesla Immortals have the benefit of MWBD which makes them a good option compared to Tesla Tomb Blades. It might be that Gauss Immortals are better in a few circumstances compared to Tesla Immortals, but Gauss Tomb Blades are better than Gauss Immortals in almost all cases. Tomb Blades are ideal for bringing RF weapons close to the enemy line, while Gauss Immortals are sitting ducks at best or opportunities for your opponent to take captives and slingshot into your lines at worst.
Tesla multiplies damage by 1 at -1, 1,5 at +0, 1,8 at +1 and 2,2 at +2.
AP-2 multiplies damage output by 1 against 7+ Sv, 1,2 against 6+, 1,5 against 5+, 1,67 against 4+, 2 against 3+, 3 against 2+, 2 against 1+, 0% against 0+.
AP-1 (or AP-2 if your opponent has an invulnerable save 1 pt worse than their Sv) multiplies damage output by 1 against 7+ Sv, 1,2 against 6+, 1,25 against 5+, 1,33 against 4+, 1,5 against 3+, 2 against 2+, 1 against 1+.
The difference between AP- and AP-1 for Mephrit multiplies damage output compared to the difference between AP-2 and AP-3 for Mephrit by 1 against 7+ Sv, 1,2 against 6+, 1,25 against 5+, 1,11 against 4+, 1,20 against 3+, 1,5 against 2+ and 0,5 against 1+. So Mephrit has a bigger impact for Tesla than it does Gauss in all cases except for 1+ Sv.
RF 1 multiplies damage by 0,5 at ranges over 12".
-2 non-RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to -2 Tesla against 3+ Sv or better.
-2 RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to -2 Tesla in ALL CASES.
-1 non-RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to -1 Tesla against 3+ Sv or better.
-1 RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to -1 Tesla in ALL CASES.
+0 non-RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +0 Tesla against 2+ Sv.
+0 RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +0 Tesla against 5+ Sv or better. Or 4+ Sv or better if the unit is Mephrit.
+1 non-RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +1 Tesla in NO CASES.
+1 RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +1 Tesla against 3+ Sv. Or 2+ Sv or better if the unit is Mephrit.
+2 non-RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +2 Tesla in NO CASES.
+2 RF Gauss is equal to or better compared to +2 Tesla against 2+ Sv.
But that's just being equal, with how much better Tesla is against a lot of targets and how rarely Gauss is better there is no real contest in terms of which weapon to put on your Immortals. The only case for Gauss Immortals is in a min-size Battalion/Brigade if you have a tonne of Tesla from Flyers/Lords of War where you need the CP, don't need the anti-GEQ and you need the anti-MEQ/TEQ. Even then, you are probably better off just taking an Outrider with a Cloaktek and some Gauss Tomb Blades instead of taking 3-4 sub-par units just to get 4 CP.
Let's look at the armies where Gauss is better Sisters, Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Custodes, then at the ones where Tesla is better: Astra Militarum, Deathwatch, Tau, Tyranids, Genestealer Cults, Daemons of Chaos, Orks, Knights, Dark Eldar, Eldar, Harlequins, then finally at the ones where they are about equally good which is all the SM and CSM chapters and legions not previously mentioned. Tesla is a bazillion times better for a tournament lists ATM. While Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Custodes and Alpha Legion are things to consider, they simply don't make up a large enough chunk of the meta to be worth sacrificing as much shooting as you will commonly do by taking Gauss against GEQ and often those lists include non-MEQ units anyways. Tesla can output as much as 4x the damage Gauss can, while Gauss at best does twice as much damage as Tesla in RF range, often against units you'd be better off shooting with Destroyers or DDAs anyways.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss. Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
Gauss is better against MEQ at close range and a lot better against TEQ at close range. But why would you take Gauss Immortals over Gauss Tomb Blades?
Well, there are a few reasons I could think of for not taking tomb blades -
>Not enough FA slots > Don't have Tomb Blades at all >Pretty expensive and fragile. Its 30 pts with a 4+ save. There is a -1 to hit penalty against them which is nice, but if one dies its going to be a problem due to its small squad size. Its a similar weakness to destroyers, except they have better defensive stats. Immortals at least have the numbers to have a chance at getting RP and aren't as affected by multi-damage weapons. > Not enough points for Tomb Blades and a 3rd Tesla troop unit > Really hate the model. Seriously, what a terrible design. Who's the git who sculpted it up and thought "yeah, this looks amazing. Let's put it through production"?
IHateNids wrote: I think that Guass should be Assault 2 and then Tesla should be RF1
That's actually not a bad idea, although I might make Gauss Blaster 18" Assault 2, S5 AP-2. Allows them to stay farther back than 24" RF1 Telsa wants to, but not TOO far back.
Short of Destroyers and DDAs, Necrons have always been an "up in your face" army. The changes above would mesh well with that and put both weapons on par with each other.
You take Gauss for the more "reliable" number of shots at a safer range, when Tesla is the more, up in your face pew-pew
I think statistically, RF1 Telsa outside 12" would average just under the same number of hits as Assault 2 Gauss, but within 12" Telsa will easily get more hits, but without AP.
But enough with the proposed rules. As it stands, I agree Tesla is the best option, especially for Mephrit
>Pretty expensive and fragile. Its 30 pts with a 4+ save. There is a -1 to hit penalty against them which is nice, but if one dies its going to be a problem due to its small squad size. Its a similar weakness to destroyers, except they have better defensive stats. Immortals at least have the numbers to have a chance at getting RP and aren't as affected by multi-damage weapons.
?
You can take blades in units of 9, immortals in units of 10, there is a one model difference in max unit size.
Besides, tomb blades have 2 w each and t 5, and can be given shield vanes for a 3+ save, and shadowlooms for a 5++
Furthermore, they're like the only necron unit that can take mixed wargear, so you can give some of them vanes and some of them looms for maximised efficiency
They're one of the most durable non-vehicle units we have, and infinitely more durable than immortals
>Pretty expensive and fragile. Its 30 pts with a 4+ save. There is a -1 to hit penalty against them which is nice, but if one dies its going to be a problem due to its small squad size. Its a similar weakness to destroyers, except they have better defensive stats. Immortals at least have the numbers to have a chance at getting RP and aren't as affected by multi-damage weapons.
? You can take blades in units of 9, immortals in units of 10, there is a one model difference in max unit size. Besides, tomb blades have 2 w each and t 5, and can be given shield vanes for a 3+ save, and shadowlooms for a 5++ Furthermore, they're like the only necron unit that can take mixed wargear, so you can give some of them vanes and some of them looms for maximised efficiency
They're one of the most durable non-vehicle units we have, and infinitely more durable than immortals
Well, with shield vanes they'll be almost as much as 2 immortals, so that sort of balances out. Good point about the T5 though. I made a mistake about that. So they are tougher than immortals by a fair bit, though RP is still a problem if they do take losses unless you max them out. A max squad of blades would cost considerably more than a max squad of immortals. You do get more wounds out of it, however.
Well, with shield vanes they'll be almost as much as 2 immortals, so that sort of balances out.
Good point about the T5 though. I made a mistake about that. So they are tougher than immortals by a fair bit, though RP is still a problem if they do take losses unless you max them out.
A max squad of blades would cost considerably more than a max squad of immortals. You do get more wounds out of it, however.
You also get double the damage output since they have 2 blasters each. A blade with blasters and shield vanes costs 31 points vs 2 immortals at 34. They have an equal amount of wounds and shots. Now, blades are susceptible to multi damage weapons, but they also get T5 and -1 to hit, as well as the fly keyword and almost triple the move characteristic, making them a lot better at the role of getting into rapid fire range and laying down the hurt, while also having a chance at survival.
And if they suffer casualties or get charged, they can zip off 14" to hide and reanimate, whereas the immortals are stuck with a 5" move and the inability to fall back and shoot.
Their force org role is the only thing that warrants taking gauss immortals over tomb blades, really, since they're worse in every single way
Well, with shield vanes they'll be almost as much as 2 immortals, so that sort of balances out.
Good point about the T5 though. I made a mistake about that. So they are tougher than immortals by a fair bit, though RP is still a problem if they do take losses unless you max them out.
A max squad of blades would cost considerably more than a max squad of immortals. You do get more wounds out of it, however.
You also get double the damage output since they have 2 blasters each. A blade with blasters and shield vanes costs 31 points vs 2 immortals at 34. They have an equal amount of wounds and shots. Now, blades are susceptible to multi damage weapons, but they also get T5 and -1 to hit, as well as the fly keyword and almost triple the move characteristic, making them a lot better at the role of getting into rapid fire range and laying down the hurt, while also having a chance at survival.
And if they suffer casualties or get charged, they can zip off 14" to hide and reanimate, whereas the immortals are stuck with a 5" move and the inability to fall back and shoot.
Their force org role is the only thing that warrants taking gauss immortals over tomb blades, really, since they're worse in every single way
I'll take gauss everyday as in my area peeps like to sit in cover with hellblasters all the time a 2 up save is a pita to get though and anything that reduces that is good.
Skullhammer wrote: I'll take gauss everyday as in my area peeps like to sit in cover with hellblasters all the time a 2 up save is a pita to get though and anything that reduces that is good.
Why not spam Destroyers and DDAs? Why not take Tesla Tomb Blades with Nebuloscopes or Gauss Tomb Blades with/without Nebuloscopes? Gauss Immortals aren't really good against Hellblasters in cover, just less bad than Tesla Immortals. If you get into RF range you'll lose almost as many Immortals as you kill Hellblasters just from the Ancient allowing them to shoot you when they die at least if your opponent is taking the RF Plasma which has been my overwhelming experience against Hellblasters.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How are you getting Tesla being more efficient than gauss against multi-wound MEQ/TEQ at close range? I'm getting higher numbers with gauss.
Then again, there's no MWBD option in the Mathhammer site, but is it really fair to compare them with buffs involved? What if you can't buff?
http://www.dice-hammer.com has this, just change model count and weapon stats, click the tesla checkbox on the weapon and +1 for the unit and you can pick out the Sv 3+ / T4 cell above for damage output. You can also toggle "in cover" up in the top bar.
I'm still getting higher numbers with Gauss. 5.56 with Gauss against T4 2+ save and 7.41 against T4 3+ save as opposed to 3.33 against T4 2+ save and 6.67 against T4 3+ save on tesla. Both have MWBD.
I compared the results with Mathhammer and it seems to check out.
Yeah well T4 2+ in rapid fire is pretty much ONLY situation where gauss is better. And that's too small niche. Power armour sucks 8th ed anyway so worrying about 3+ in cover is pointless. And if there's really critical 3+ save unit in cover you need to delete tesla+solar pulse does the trick better. And there's lot more targets out there than 2+ anyway. This is edition of cheap chaff in terms of infantry, not power armour. And against those even tesla immortals struggle nevermind gauss immortals.
torblind wrote: Yeah for 2+, or in cover, Gauss is better in rapid fire range , by a small margin.
Well yeah, but why wouldn't you want to get in rapid fire range with gauss? Its also better against 3+ saves at short range too.
To me, tesla and gauss are intended to be balanced in that one is good at long range, but the other is better at short ranges. Its why they are the same points cost despite one having better stats overall.
It would seem to me that a good composition would be mostly tesla with gauss thrown in to act as can openers / breachers. Something like 2:1 Tesla to gauss.
Because you don't get automatically into rapid range just like that. Only semi reliable way is veil but that costs relic, chance to use it to bail out of combat without fall back, is vulnerable to chaff screens preventing(have fun veiling'g within 12" of...IG troopers. Mighty good provide!).
On foot you are looking at 1-2 turns outside of rapid so you aren't comparing gaus in rapid fire. You are comparing something like 3 rounds at full strenght for tesla vs 2 rounds at half strength and 1 round at full strength for gaus. That's extra round of shooting for tesla..
But sure if you have enemy rushing into rapid fire range without charging gauss is good Pretty unusual opponent though
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Skullhammer wrote: I'll take gauss everyday as in my area peeps like to sit in cover with hellblasters all the time a 2 up save is a pita to get though and anything that reduces that is good.
Presumably gaus tomb blades? Because frankly immortals have no way to get into RF range reliably. Veil can be blocked by chaff and even if not you'll get round of fire from hellblasters in your face before you shoot. Boom. No more gauss immortals. The auspex scan is pain for that. And if they have banner nearby any kills your survivors might do cause you to lose rest anyway.
I dont like doom scythes, but against knights they look useful. They block their movement, use the 1CP strat to try to deal 3D3 MW. Destroyers deepstrike and try to kill a knight with MD. Scarabs hold objectives (if any).
Used the Doom Scythe strat to great effect over the weekend, scoring max mortal wounds against one unit of aggressors and 5 mortal wounds against another.
I'm not familiar enough with the Space Marines codex to know what 12 Aggessors costs in points but I know a huge chunk of my opponents firepower got blown away and probably won me the game straight off the bat.
So, last weekend was a local tourney, came 4th out of 24. In spoilers is my list plus a few footnotes I sent to another social group I'm part of, so pardon the formatting.
Unfortunate Curbstomp (Black Templars, siezed + flattened), Close game with a player we discovered later was cheating, but this did not affect our game (Sisters, won the roll-off & struggled but it was a close game), 2 & a half hours of literally feth all (Daemon Soup. Nurgle Battleline, 1kSons Supreme Command, and a khorne patrol. Siezed again).
Some key points: This is all in ragard to the doomscythes btw
Game 1: Siezed, flattened a squad of crusaders and a squad of hellblasters with the flyers between the strat and the guns, and scraped the paint on a vidicator (only did 3 MWs)
Game 2: Went first by wrote. Baked the Warlord, 7/10 Retributors & a Vindicare with the flyer strat, and nothing else happened all game
Game 3: Siezed again. nuked a Khorne DP plus 1 of 2 Tzeentch DPs with the flyer strat again. I hate Plaguebearers.
MVP to the doom scythes.
I also appeal for some Hive Mind Guideance.
If you could only have DDAs or Doom Scythes working under Sautekh codes thanks to TO houserules, which is better to take? I'm leaning towards Doom Scythes, but this is a narrow lead...
Context:
The tourney I was in is part of a championship, and the next round is in august so I have time to get more things painted.
The local store prefers people to have their different factions presented in different colours, which is perfectly understandable. (Note - not dictated to be WYSIWYG. I frequently fight some Alpha-Night Legion-Lords, or my personal favourite Farsight T'au Sept)
I recently came into some 80% done Sautekh-scheme infantry. I can finish these as Sautekh, and I have my own custo scheme which my DDAs are currently sitting pretty in (Commision Jobs, because I'm not very good at paitning that much)
I also have 2 unpainted and one half finished (and therefore easily redactable) Doom Scythes.
I ask:
Would it be better to paint up the 3 unfinished DSs to create a Sautekh Battalion+Air Wing (inc Imotekh), allowing me to use the rest of my models with my own scheme (Novokh Inspired, but not locked) to create a multi-faction Dynamic
Or
Just commit to the one faction, and make do?
Not quite sure what would be better for me at this point.
For additional context - my one outstanding purchase in the foreseeable couple of months is going to be a Tesseract Ark, which will be painted in Sautekh pretty much regardless.
Any help would be appreciated. Feel free to ask for clarification if I botched this question, which I probably did...
sure, they're "only" lascannon, but they reroll 1s to hit, arte immune to movement penalties, and can use Extermination if something just absolutely needs to die
x3 HDs are actually on average, about as dangerous damage-wise as a DDA, 3 shots vs avg 3.5 shots, but are more accurate (reroll 1s to hit naturally). However, they are not nearly as durable. 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 14 T6 4+ QS wounds. Similar price point too.
The original goal of the list was to have a non-Eldar Xenos opponent list for my 2 sons' Marines. I also wanted to have all the "classic" Necrons, which is why the Immortals in the list are actually modeled as Warriors (pre-5th only Troops choice and had 3+ armour at the time) and why I have Scarabs, Destroyers and the Monolith.
But if I wanted to add to the list to bring it up in power a bit (as my boys now each have 1500pts of UM and Salamanders including Plasma Inceptors, Hellblasters and plenty of Intercessors), what would you add?
Maybe a Command Barge lord and split the 3 FAs into an Outirider?
Triarch Stalker? Wraiths?
tneva82 wrote: Dda. You have huge at lack so any vehicle has just to deal with 3 destroyers and that's it. Also bumb immortals to 10
Yeah, fair enough. We don't use many vehicles, so the only things the list would face is 2-3 Dreads. Probably not going to expand at all since at 1500pts, we use Eldar as the main Marine opponent, but I'd like to get some ideas just in case.
With what I have already, do you think Mephrit is the best Dynasty, or would you go with something else. The plan is to leave the 6-bot Immortals in cover near back-to-mid field Objectives, while the Monolith and Veiled 10-bot Immortal unit moves forward. I figure at ~1000pts, 10 MWBD Tesla Immortals with AP-1 (Mephrit) should be enough to take care of big threats early.
Using the Monolith as an LoS blocker for the Destroyers and 10 Immortals turn 1. Scarabs move as harassment/tarpits for less threatening targets near the 10 Immortal unit
Dreadnoughts can be big nuisance if they get to your lines though...
Guess mephrit works well enough. I\m fan of nephrek though. Mobility! Especially as it ensures I can be in range on T1 for sure.
Be carefull, very carefull, with that veil thingie. If marines have any good shooter units auspex scan can make hell of a dent. Especially big unit of hellblasters will mulch your immortals before they get to shoot.
Monolith isn't that big that it will cover destroyers from multiple angles well so that's a worry.
tneva82 wrote: Monolith isn't that big that it will cover destroyers from multiple angles well so that's a worry.
In general, I agree, but with the size games we play, we are only on a 4x4 table and it is easy to combine with terrain to put the Monolith just shy of center to make a good LoS blocking area. At any rate, the Monolith is a big target in small games that can't be ignored forever and I only need them blocked if the Necrons don't go first
I'm also thinking of bumping all 3 Destroyers to be Heavy to face the Dreads, which will have Twin-Las/ML. They seem to be the only realy threat to the Monolith, so if I can pop them early, it will be a challenge for the rest of the Marines. But I don't want it to be TOO challenging, since the Dreads are some of my boys favorite models
Mephrit is a trap. Necrons are too slow to get the real advantage out of it (though it can be useful if you use a lot of SUA)
Nephrekh is great for mobility, Sautekh is great for their Strategem (which works well with Tesla Immortals. 10 Tesla Immortals firing with MWBD firing at a unit that's been pegged with Methodical Destruction ends up hitting on 2+, with exploding hits on 4+.
That DOUBLES your damage from Tesla without buffs. That's 8 dead marines in a single salvo (not counting whatever you shot it with to trigger MD in the first place),
Still will require a few units of them shooting to do this to a Knight, but if your "tagging" unit is a Stalker, RR1s trigger BEFORE the die rolls are modified +2, so that gives you a whole pile more hits.
This is the real reason to go Sautekh. Well, this and Imotekh or Zahndrekh/Obyron teleport-shenanigans.
There's certain things Mephrit isn't a trap for. IMO if you're using the now cheap, fast, efficient Annihilation Barge, bumping all of them shots to AP-1 has worked well for me. Again, theres still better choices in the heavy spot (DDAs) but thats an example of what I like Mephrit for.
And just because Sautek with the strat is better for Immortals doesn't mean mephrit tesla immortals are bad. Using the mephrit strat and MWBD on a 10man squad means something is dying.
iGuy91 wrote: x3 HDs are actually on average, about as dangerous damage-wise as a DDA, 3 shots vs avg 3.5 shots, but are more accurate (reroll 1s to hit naturally). However, they are not nearly as durable. 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 14 T6 4+ QS wounds. Similar price point too.
Key word here is average. DDA's may have a 3.5 average but they also have a tendancy to roll a 1 when your pants are down.
Your also underselling heavy D's a bit.
-They are easier to hide
-Gain benefits from your characters
-Are infantry, meaning they gain cover super easy
-Have access to one of the best strats in the game
3 HD'd are also more durable then your letting on. They can either be off world as nephrek or hidden behind terrain preferably in all other cases. At minimum in terrain thats 9 T5 wounds with a 2+ save where if any wounds remaine, your gaining 3-6 wounds back at a time with RP. They are no where near as durable verse high AP/damage AT weapons, but are far more durable verse high volume fire.
I often waste a CP on rerolling the number of shots on my DDA and wishing I had it for damage. HD's have multiple paths to rerolls for hits and wounds so you can easily bang out 3d6 damage with a reroll for damage if you need it.
I am not trying to suggest DDA are bad, or that HD's are better. But HD's certainly are not bad at all and have a place at the table. They are just different.
Skullhammer wrote: Heavy destroyers can also benifit from a crypteks crono giving them an 5+invun at deployment if there close enough.
Which isnt really important when you deploy them in cover. They get a 2+ sv, and with an AP-3 weapon its also a 5+ sv. There arent many AP-4 weapons in the game.
We are in an edition of mostly MSU squads (mostly 5man).
How do you split your Immortal fire power? Lets say T3/4 3+/4+
Vs marines without MWBD you will cause 4.444444 if they are in open so don't bother splitting. Vs marines in cover don't bother splitting fire. Only with MWBD vs open you could consider splitting but even then you are only losing 1.6666 casualties and if you they have special weapons them surviving can be bigger issue easily.
Vs 10 strong IG squads without MWBD you average 8.88 so with morale squad wiped. With splitting half 4.4444 and maybe extra casualty from each to morale. Again any surviving special/heavy weapons is problem though. With MWBD you average 13.3333 so here splitting half and half is worth it.
Generally you want to finish up squads though rather than hurt couple units for kill points, maelstrom cards etc reasons so splitting isn't that big of a thing. You really need to fire vs IG guys in open with MWBD before you are starting to get serious overkill. Or min sized firewarrior squads
We are in an edition of mostly MSU squads (mostly 5man).
How do you split your Immortal fire power? Lets say T3/4 3+/4+
Spray and pray! More liberally at first, more conservatively at the end, starting with the unit that has the fewest targets in range and LOS. Split it two ways against units of 5 Warriors or 10 Guardsmen, split it three ways if I need to finish off a small third squad 4/4/2 or 5/4/1. Even if the first unit whiffs and does very little to two squads you can still error correct with any later squads by diverting firepower into those squads. I usually end up firing a single Carbine into a bunch of 1-man squads over the course of a game, sometimes it fails, sometimes it works. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. If your opponent doesn't have a special weapon in a squad it's not worth risking overkill just to ensure they die, especially if they can fail Morale. A unit of 1x1+1x4 Fire Warriors is not a bigger threat than 1x5 Fire Warriors. Of course, everything changes when there are objectives and Stratagems involved. Against big units like Knights I'll sometimes just pool the dice from multiple units and shoot them all at once, sort of the opposite of splitting.
vict0988 wrote: Of course, everything changes when there are objectives and Stratagems involved. Against big units like Knights I'll sometimes just pool the dice from multiple units and shoot them all at once, sort of the opposite of splitting.
Of course here at least objectives are always used plus kill points etc. So having unit dead for sure a) gives you kill point(rather than allow opponent to hide nearly dead unit and deny you vp) b) when you have multiple units you can score multiple objectives easily c) whole bunch of maelstrom cards also have kill unit triggers.
The immortals just aren't such a "vaporize everything" that they will be overkilling much.
tneva82 wrote: Dda. You have huge at lack so any vehicle has just to deal with 3 destroyers and that's it. Also bumb immortals to 10
Yeah, fair enough. We don't use many vehicles, so the only things the list would face is 2-3 Dreads. Probably not going to expand at all since at 1500pts, we use Eldar as the main Marine opponent, but I'd like to get some ideas just in case.
With what I have already, do you think Mephrit is the best Dynasty, or would you go with something else. The plan is to leave the 6-bot Immortals in cover near back-to-mid field Objectives, while the Monolith and Veiled 10-bot Immortal unit moves forward. I figure at ~1000pts, 10 MWBD Tesla Immortals with AP-1 (Mephrit) should be enough to take care of big threats early.
Using the Monolith as an LoS blocker for the Destroyers and 10 Immortals turn 1. Scarabs move as harassment/tarpits for less threatening targets near the 10 Immortal unit
-
In addition to the above, you may consider maximize the unit of Destroyers, (i.e. take 5 normal destroyers and 1 heavy destroyer in a unit). that could increase the efficiency of stratagem, and increase the unit's survivability.
Neophyte2012 wrote: In addition to the above, you may consider maximize the unit of Destroyers, (i.e. take 5 normal destroyers and 1 heavy destroyer in a unit). that could increase the efficiency of stratagem, and increase the unit's survivability.
Too true. It's just too bad they are so friggin expensive (in real money). I really wish GW would come out with a new kit that "slightly" tones down their size, includes 3 Gauss cannons AND 3 Heavy Gauss cannons AND bits for 1 Destroyer Lord. That would be worth $60 per box. But as-is, the box should be less than $50, but isn't.
Galef wrote: Too true. It's just too bad they are so friggin expensive (in real money). I really wish GW would come out with a new kit that "slightly" tones down their size, includes 3 Gauss cannons AND 3 Heavy Gauss cannons AND bits for 1 Destroyer Lord. That would be worth $60 per box. But as-is, the box should be less than $50, but isn't.
-
Agreed. It's a surprisingly expensive kit for what you get. I'm also not a fan of the model design in general, but that's a different topic.
I swapped some heads onto mine to add variety. Destroyers with scythe pilot heads and deathmark heads are actually pretty creepy looking. But yea that kit is ancient. I am OK with that though since it's super easy to build, its like 1/3 the parts as a tomb blade (Who the feth thought 33 pieces made sense lol) But the cost is pretty high. Ebay has boxes discounted at least.
Funny story but a few of my Destroyers have defects in the platform armour panels. When I bought them back in, I don't know, 2006 maybe, I just assumed that was part of the design because I didn't know any better. Anyone else get any like that?
Red Corsair wrote: I swapped some heads onto mine to add variety. Destroyers with scythe pilot heads and deathmark heads are actually pretty creepy looking. But yea that kit is ancient. I am OK with that though since it's super easy to build, its like 1/3 the parts as a tomb blade (Who the feth thought 33 pieces made sense lol) But the cost is pretty high. Ebay has boxes discounted at least.
Ugh, Tomb Blades. I just finished building a bunch of those, and it was a nightmare. So many pieces per model. I'm dreading painting them, and I regret not painting before I built them.
Red Corsair wrote: I swapped some heads onto mine to add variety. Destroyers with scythe pilot heads and deathmark heads are actually pretty creepy looking. But yea that kit is ancient. I am OK with that though since it's super easy to build, its like 1/3 the parts as a tomb blade (Who the feth thought 33 pieces made sense lol) But the cost is pretty high. Ebay has boxes discounted at least.
Ugh, Tomb Blades. I just finished building a bunch of those, and it was a nightmare. So many pieces per model. I'm dreading painting them, and I regret not painting before I built them.
Luckily, Contrast Paint (tm) is about to come out! One thick coat!
Cynista wrote: Funny story but a few of my Destroyers have defects in the platform armour panels. When I bought them back in, I don't know, 2006 maybe, I just assumed that was part of the design because I didn't know any better. Anyone else get any like that?
I found my DD Ark edge highlighting to be really easy (very hard edges) but time consuming. Just throw some Dan Carlin's podcast on about history on it seems to go by really fast.
So, Saturday I have a game, unknown specifically the opponent, but it's 2k doubles (1k per player). Theme is "design around a centrepiece unit that you love", whether it's for the paint job or for it being iconic or for it's gameplay role.
Well, I decided to lean in, and having just finished my Monolith, which took a LOT of green stuff my god (see link in my signature), I wanted to design a list around it. I tried to make a "classic Necron" army. My biggest question I guess is: which is more worth it, 5 Gauss Immortals and the Scarabs, or 10 more Warriors? 99% sure everyone is going to say "immortals and scarabs, duh why even ask", but it's the only uncertainty in the list. I don't expect to do WELL though. I'm hoping Nihilakh will make up for being footsloggers, allow me to hold back objectives. Unlikely I'll deep-strike the Monolith, but if the enemy doesn't seem to have much chaff I might, and hold back the Immortals as well because I've never done that before.
Spoiler:
Nihilakh Battalion
Cryptek w/ Chronometron
Lord w/ Hyperphase Sword
Overlord w/ Resurrection Orb, W [Immortal Pride], Voidreaper
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
5 Immortals w/ Gauss
10 Warriors
Cryptek w/ Chronometron
Lord w/ Hyperphase Sword
Overlord w/ Resurrection Orb, W [Immortal Pride], Voidreaper
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
5 Immortals w/ Gauss
10 Warriors
4 Scarabs
Monolith
Get rid of the Cryptek, the Chronometron isn't worth that many pts in your list and your units are too small to benefit from his ability. I didn't read through your blog in its entirety, but I'd go with two HQs no matter what preferably Overlord + Cryptek w/ Cloak, 3 is not worth it in 1k pts. If you don't mind your Overlord being modelled with an Orb but not having one I'd get rid of that as well, it's not worth unless you have multiple units of Lychguard or Destroyers.
2x10 Tesla Immortals would be ideal in terms of competitiveness. With the Phaeron's Will Stratagem you can hit 2x10 Tesla Immortals with your Overlord, but it doesn't fit squarely into the theme of your list due to Tesla Immortals not existing back then. I used a double Monolith old-school list in one game and I went the whole mile with no Tesla Immortals, Overlords or Crypteks, but that's obviously not the greatest idea.
Cynista wrote: Funny story but a few of my Destroyers have defects in the platform armour panels. When I bought them back in, I don't know, 2006 maybe, I just assumed that was part of the design because I didn't know any better. Anyone else get any like that?
Cynista wrote: Funny story but a few of my Destroyers have defects in the platform armour panels. When I bought them back in, I don't know, 2006 maybe, I just assumed that was part of the design because I didn't know any better. Anyone else get any like that?
Do you have pictures of these?
Huh. I see the flaw. Could probably be painted up to look intentional. (Go to imgur, and on the picture, click the arrow down to get the share links, find the bbcode one, or forum something, then it should be right)
Cynista wrote: Funny story but a few of my Destroyers have defects in the platform armour panels. When I bought them back in, I don't know, 2006 maybe, I just assumed that was part of the design because I didn't know any better. Anyone else get any like that?
Do you have pictures of these?
Huh. I see the flaw. Could probably be painted up to look intentional. (Go to imgur, and on the picture, click the arrow down to get the share links, find the bbcode one, or forum something, then it should be right)
Cryptek w/ Chronometron
Lord w/ Hyperphase Sword
Overlord w/ Resurrection Orb, W [Immortal Pride], Voidreaper
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
5 Immortals w/ Gauss
10 Warriors
4 Scarabs
Monolith
Get rid of the Cryptek, the Chronometron isn't worth that many pts in your list and your units are too small to benefit from his ability. I didn't read through your blog in its entirety, but I'd go with two HQs no matter what preferably Overlord + Cryptek w/ Cloak, 3 is not worth it in 1k pts. If you don't mind your Overlord being modelled with an Orb but not having one I'd get rid of that as well, it's not worth unless you have multiple units of Lychguard or Destroyers.
2x10 Tesla Immortals would be ideal in terms of competitiveness. With the Phaeron's Will Stratagem you can hit 2x10 Tesla Immortals with your Overlord, but it doesn't fit squarely into the theme of your list due to Tesla Immortals not existing back then. I used a double Monolith old-school list in one game and I went the whole mile with no Tesla Immortals, Overlords or Crypteks, but that's obviously not the greatest idea.
I’d love to have more Immortals, but that’s all I own. I could drop the Cryptek and the Gauss Kmmortals to throw in a whole pile more Warriors or only a handful of Warriors and up the scarab count?
So the alternative as I see it is drop 1 scarab, the Cryptek, the resurrection orb, and the gauss immortals and replace with a block of 20 Warriors?
Cryptek w/ Chronometron
Lord w/ Hyperphase Sword
Overlord w/ Resurrection Orb, W [Immortal Pride], Voidreaper
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
5 Immortals w/ Gauss
10 Warriors
4 Scarabs
Monolith
I’d love to have more Immortals, but that’s all I own. I could drop the Cryptek and the Gauss Immortals to throw in a whole pile more Warriors or only a handful of Warriors and up the scarab count?
So the alternative as I see it is drop 1 scarab, the Cryptek, the resurrection orb, and the gauss immortals and replace with a block of 20 Warriors?
I forgot to say but you should definitely get the Veil of Darkness instead of the Voidscythe. I like the idea of replacing the Gauss Immortals and the Cryptek with a block of Warriors. That should give you a bunch more offence, defence and board control compared to what you've got. If you have Destroyers those might actually be the best choice, either they'll draw fire from the Monolith and maybe let it survive to a point where you've whittled down your enemy enough that it becomes an actual threat. So Cryptek, Lord, 3x5 Immortals, 6 Destroyers, Monolith. It's still within the theme of the list since Destroyers were in the 3rd ed Codex, otherwise, I'd say 2xDDA + 1xMonolith all the way.
Alas I'm pretty limited model-wise. No DDAs, and only 2 destroyers and 1 heavy destroyer, and only the heavy is painted up in my scheme, the others are secondary market. I definitely want to keep the Lord around to show off my new conversion, but we'll see whether I want to go with the more characters, or with the larger warrior block. Good call on the veil, though I can't say I've figured out how to use it well. It always feels like a waste to send my big Teslammortal unit out without an Overlord, and WITH the Overlord is a large points cost that'll die in a turn. 20 warriors is hard to place, and anything else I have dies after a single turn and again costs me an HQ. I know it's the right thing to do, I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: Alas I'm pretty limited model-wise. No DDAs, and only 2 destroyers and 1 heavy destroyer, and only the heavy is painted up in my scheme, the others are secondary market. I definitely want to keep the Lord around to show off my new conversion, but we'll see whether I want to go with the more characters, or with the larger warrior block. Good call on the veil, though I can't say I've figured out how to use it well. It always feels like a waste to send my big Teslammortal unit out without an Overlord, and WITH the Overlord is a large points cost that'll die in a turn. 20 warriors is hard to place, and anything else I have dies after a single turn and again costs me an HQ. I know it's the right thing to do, I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.
Use it to take objectives, get RF units into RF range and then charge and tie up multiple shooting units, most importantly use it to get out of combat. You can still shoot with a unit that was in combat when it was Veiled out. I haven't used any of the offensive Relics more than once, I like my Destroyer Lords as tough as possible and if I'm bringing an Overlord I'm bringing the Veil. Even just keeping your WL out of harms way when he gets into trouble can be worth the Relic slot. T5 and you're in trouble? Veil into a corner out of LOS or use the Resurrection Protocols to come back to life after Shooting and keep your opponent from getting Slay the Warlord.
My Veil uses are typically not carefully planned. You keep it around for any number of uses, as said above, and when the right moment comes, you beam away.
That moment might not come, and the Veil probably isn't turning the tide of a losing battle on its own, but it's a very useful flexibility to have at hand.
Red Corsair wrote: The FAQ nerfed it though, since you now are considered to have fallen back if you veil out of assault.
Still useful though.
Incorrect.
BRB rulebook update 1.5
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic
powers), and are then set back up again on the battlefield?
A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up, the
following rules apply to that unit:
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back when it is set back up on the battlefield.
Where is that FAQ? It's not in the Necron Codex FAQ, and the main rulebook FAQ says for "a unit ... removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up ... if that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does NOT count as having Fallen Back" (emphasis added).
Anyhow, I went with the VoD and the extra 20-warrior blob. Taking with me a 1500 pt version as well, with the cryptek, an extra scarab, some wraiths and tomb blades and a night scythe as well. Night scythe is weak I know, but it'll let me more safely have a unit 'embarked' if I want.
Red Corsair wrote: The FAQ nerfed it though, since you now are considered to have fallen back if you veil out of assault.
Still useful though.
Wrong. 4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back when it is set back up on the battlefield.
Hey guys,
I've been battlescribing a few lists and mathhammering some things and had a few questions that I would pose to everyone:
1. All in on methodological destruction? Particularly with the newer (and older!) Big model meta? I mean all in with all Sautek, double MWBD telsa immortals (either with Imotek or the strat), a stalker and even annihilation barges?
2. Is this what the winning lists are doing any how with the doom scythes and DDAs?
3. Have we mathed out the lord buff on 2 units of tesla immortals fully buffed vs big units like bullgryn or blightlords or magnus or morty? Is it worth the points?
Bulgryns are typically 2+ , I'm not sure if I'd throw my tesla at that.
You could always punch the numbers, reroll 1 to hit and wound, +1 or +2, at http://www.dice-hammer.com (but you'd have to divide the unit cost to get damage per point yourself, for now) (disclaimer - I wrote the tool)
Don't buy into the +2 Tesla hype. Remember they're already maxed their BS at +1. The real magic happens when going from nothing to +1.
+2 is partly a waste in that regard. But if you are doing MD anyway and shooting your teslas at that then why not.
Brymm wrote: Hey guys, I've been battlescribing a few lists and mathhammering some things and had a few questions that I would pose to everyone:
1. All in on methodical destruction? Particularly with the newer (and older!) Big model meta? I mean all in with all Sautekh, double MWBD telsa immortals (either with Imotek or the strat), a stalker and even annihilation barges?
2. Is this what the winning lists are doing any how with the doom scythes and DDAs?
3. Have we mathed out the lord buff on 2 units of tesla immortals fully buffed vs big units like bullgryn or blightlords or magnus or morty? Is it worth the points?
1. Your meta is your meta, with that I mean that I can't tell you what's going on at your local scene in Nebraska or Brazil. Knowing what terrain is going to be at a tournament and what mission rules will be in use as well as looking at tournament lists for tournaments in the area will help you determine what meta is at a tournament. MWBD increases the firepower of your Immortals by 100% if they are at -1, 50% if they are at +0, 22% if they are at +1. Mephrit increases the firepower of your immortals by 100% against 2+ Sv units, 50% against 3+, 33% against 4+, 25% against 5+, 17% against 6+. I don't think any Necron list is better for my meta than 58 Teslamortals, Imotekh, Zahndrekh, Obyron, Overlord w/ Veil, Triarch Stalker w/ Gauss, 3 DDAs. That list just shreds Knights and lightly armoured Infantry extremely quickly. 2. I don't think so they don't use Triarch Stalkers and I imagine they rely more on the Doomscythe Strat than Methodical Destruction, although no doubt MD still an important Stratagem for them. 3. Don't take a Lord for 2 units of Tesla Immortals, at least not if you aren't getting CP for taking him. Destroyer Lords are the only HQs we have that are really worth taking in anything but a Battalion, our HQs are pretty weak. The best part of the MWBD Teslamortal combo is the Teslamortal, even our "most powerful" combo HQ is meh in terms of buff effectiveness. 20 Stalker Methodical MWBD Teslamortals will do 9 wounds to a -1 Primarch, 6 to a -2 Primarch. I've never played against Bullgryn, but they are just a Distraction Carnifex, ignore them as best you can. You could them with several units from different sides ensuring they have to split their attacks, maybe you can survive through Reanimation Protocols. Focus them down when your opponent runs out of CP and they fail their +1 to Svs/-1 to hit power on them, shoot with your AP shooting until they take wounds on the ones with brute shields, finish of the brute shields with Tesla.
*A Lord provides a 7/6=17% increase in damage to all <DYNASTY> INFANTRY units within 6". *A Lord costs around 75 pts, we can divide his cost by the benefit of his aura, so 75/0,17=265. That means over the course of his lifespan you'll want an average of 265 pts worth of <DYNASTY> INFANTRY within 6" for him to make his pts back just with his aura. *10 Teslamortals are worth 150pts. *10 MWBD Teslamortals are worth 225 pts. *10 Methodical MWBD Teslamortals are worth 275 pts. *10 Stalker Methodical MWBD Teslamortals are worth 320 pts. *Let's say on average you expect to have 150 pts worth of relevant guys in range, that means you need him to be worth 50 pts just off his durability and damage output, that's not going to happen. *How about when you are keeping effectively 1800 pts worth of Teslamortals in range turn 1? That's when the Lord becomes a really good option and when your army becomes worth more than the sum of its parts. *I value a CP at 25/20/15 pts if I have 3-6/7-9/10+ CP. Usually, a 3 HQ Battalion is never worth it, cut an HQ and put in more Fast Attack. If the Lord is giving you 1 CP from a Vanguard or something and you expect to have 150 pts in range of his Aura on average you just need to get him to do 30 pts worth of work with his weapon, that's doable, but not really great. Ideally, the aura pays for the Lord, his durability is only high enough for holding up shooting units in melee and his damage output is low enough that he'll need help to finish them off. *Lords are better than Crypteks for Immortals since you'll see the light of Reanimation Protocols so rarely.
Ah my bad, for some reason I read point 4 as the count as falling back. In my defense I own 8 armies so whenever these FAQ's hit it is a chore reading through for every change
Well that's great then, since the veil was my most used relic for escaping assault with immortals.
Brymm wrote: Hey guys,
I've been battlescribing a few lists and mathhammering some things and had a few questions that I would pose to everyone:
1. All in on methodical destruction? Particularly with the newer (and older!) Big model meta? I mean all in with all Sautekh, double MWBD telsa immortals (either with Imotek or the strat), a stalker and even annihilation barges?
2. Is this what the winning lists are doing any how with the doom scythes and DDAs?
3. Have we mathed out the lord buff on 2 units of tesla immortals fully buffed vs big units like bullgryn or blightlords or magnus or morty? Is it worth the points?
1. Your meta is your meta, with that I mean that I can't tell you what's going on at your local scene in Nebraska or Brazil. Knowing what terrain is going to be at a tournament and what mission rules will be in use as well as looking at tournament lists for tournaments in the area will help you determine what meta is at a tournament. MWBD increases the firepower of your Immortals by 100% if they are at -1, 50% if they are at +0, 22% if they are at +1. Mephrit increases the firepower of your immortals by 100% against 2+ Sv units, 50% against 3+, 33% against 4+, 25% against 5+, 17% against 6+. I don't think any Necron list is better for my meta than 58 Teslamortals, Imotekh, Zahndrekh, Obyron, Overlord w/ Veil, Triarch Stalker w/ Gauss, 3 DDAs. That list just shreds Knights and lightly armoured Infantry extremely quickly.
2. I don't think so they don't use Triarch Stalkers and I imagine they rely more on the Doomscythe Strat than Methodical Destruction, although no doubt MD still an important Stratagem for them.
3. Don't take a Lord for 2 units of Tesla Immortals, at least not if you aren't getting CP for taking him. Destroyer Lords are the only HQs we have that are really worth taking in anything but a Battalion, our HQs are pretty weak. The best part of the MWBD Teslamortal combo is the Teslamortal, even our "most powerful" combo HQ is meh in terms of buff effectiveness. 20 Stalker Methodical MWBD Teslamortals will do 9 wounds to a -1 Primarch, 6 to a -2 Primarch. I've never played against Bullgryn, but they are just a Distraction Carnifex, ignore them as best you can. You could them with several units from different sides ensuring they have to split their attacks, maybe you can survive through Reanimation Protocols. Focus them down when your opponent runs out of CP and they fail their +1 to Svs/-1 to hit power on them, shoot with your AP shooting until they take wounds on the ones with brute shields, finish of the brute shields with Tesla.
*A Lord provides a 7/6=17% increase in damage to all <DYNASTY> INFANTRY units within 6".
*A Lord costs around 75 pts, we can divide his cost by the benefit of his aura, so 75/0,17=265. That means over the course of his lifespan you'll want an average of 265 pts worth of <DYNASTY> INFANTRY within 6" for him to make his pts back just with his aura.
*10 Teslamortals are worth 150pts.
*10 MWBD Teslamortals are worth 225 pts.
*10 Methodical MWBD Teslamortals are worth 275 pts.
*10 Stalker Methodical MWBD Teslamortals are worth 320 pts.
*Let's say on average you expect to have 150 pts worth of relevant guys in range, that means you need him to be worth 50 pts just off his durability and damage output, that's not going to happen.
*How about when you are keeping effectively 1800 pts worth of Teslamortals in range turn 1? That's when the Lord becomes a really good option and when your army becomes worth more than the sum of its parts.
*I value a CP at 25/20/15 pts if I have 3-6/7-9/10+ CP. Usually, a 3 HQ Battalion is never worth it, cut an HQ and put in more Fast Attack. If the Lord is giving you 1 CP from a Vanguard or something and you expect to have 150 pts in range of his Aura on average you just need to get him to do 30 pts worth of work with his weapon, that's doable, but not really great. Ideally, the aura pays for the Lord, his durability is only high enough for holding up shooting units in melee and his damage output is low enough that he'll need help to finish them off.
*Lords are better than Crypteks for Immortals since you'll see the light of Reanimation Protocols so rarely.
Golly! What a bunch of great replies!
I was curious because so many other armies, especially chaos and imperial ones, rely on characters to do so much heavy lifting. I knew the necrons ones were much more underwhelming but wanted to know if their auras were ever efficient enough to take. Warriors, even though you can get 20 a brick, don't benefit from +2 to hit like tesla. Thanks for the analysis.
Does our Solar Strat remove cover from Prepared Positions? I read it over and it appears to only affect one unit anyways.
Brymm wrote: Does our Solar Strat remove cover from Prepared Positions? I read it over and it appears to only affect one unit anyways.
It does, it's easy to get carried away with using it though, if your opponent doesn't have a 3+ Sv and if you aren't shooting with a full squad of Teslamortals I don't think the Solar Strat is worth it, although it can be hard to turn down extra firepower T1 to use an extra Stratagem turn 3/4. I used it against CSM today and it helped me deal an extra wound or two, not really worth it.
I also tried the Amalgamated Targeting Data Stratagem for the first time, the Stratagem destroyed 140 pts worth of basic Marines, I thought it was a little underwhelming but my opponent thought Dscythes were the gak. We rolled some dice after my opponent surrendered T1 and I would have only dealt 2 damage to one of his Dreadnoughts if I had fired normally, so the 1CP was good return on investment. My opponent was also forced to spread himself really thinly to avoid the Stratagem knowing that I'd go first 5/6 times, I'm not sure how much that mattered. I still feel like they'll be too squishy against Tau which is where I feel like I need them. They also seem gak against Castellans' main weapon which is otherwise useless against QS vehicles and Infantry. It might be unfair to bring 3 DScythes to casual games, but I thought it was made up for by spamming Deathmarks instead of DDAs or Destroyers.
Brymm wrote: Does our Solar Strat remove cover from Prepared Positions? I read it over and it appears to only affect one unit anyways.
It does, it's easy to get carried away with using it though, if your opponent doesn't have a 3+ Sv and if you aren't shooting with a full squad of Teslamortals I don't think the Solar Strat is worth it, although it can be hard to turn down extra firepower T1 to use an extra Stratagem turn 3/4. I used it against CSM today and it helped me deal an extra wound or two, not really worth it.
I also tried the Amalgamated Targeting Data Stratagem for the first time, the Stratagem destroyed 140 pts worth of basic Marines, I thought it was a little underwhelming but my opponent thought Dscythes were the gak. We rolled some dice after my opponent surrendered T1 and I would have only dealt 2 damage to one of his Dreadnoughts if I had fired normally, so the 1CP was good return on investment. My opponent was also forced to spread himself really thinly to avoid the Stratagem knowing that I'd go first 5/6 times, I'm not sure how much that mattered. I still feel like they'll be too squishy against Tau which is where I feel like I need them. They also seem gak against Castellans' main weapon which is otherwise useless against QS vehicles and Infantry. It might be unfair to bring 3 DScythes to casual games, but I thought it was made up for by spamming Deathmarks instead of DDAs or Destroyers.
How did spamming deathmarks work out?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ah you didnt play beyond turn 1
What works against eldar? Faced super friendly list with no psykers and apart from few sain hann no craftworld traits but stood no chance. 20-30 shots from multiple units s5-s6 shredded infantry and vehicles alike. Quantum shield was useless. Anything that was visible died, if i was behind los was being hit by indirect anyway and hard to cover every angle anyway when minimum move was like 14". And if i broke los cover had hardly anything in range and got blasted to bits anyway.
tneva82 wrote: What works against eldar? Faced super friendly list with no psykers and apart from few sain hann no craftworld traits but stood no chance. 20-30 shots from multiple units s5-s6 shredded infantry and vehicles alike. Quantum shield was useless. Anything that was visible died, if i was behind los was being hit by indirect anyway and hard to cover every angle anyway when minimum move was like 14". And if i broke los cover had hardly anything in range and got blasted to bits anyway.
Damn i hate scatter laser and shuriken cannon
I think you were just unlucky or less skilled than your opponent. DDAs are always good and Teslamortals are good if your opponent isn't playing Alaitoc and/or flyer spam. Warriors, Doomscythes, TBs and Destroyers are decent. Ditch any Flayed Ones, Triarch Praetorians and Lychguard you have going on, at least if your opponent isn't running Scorpions, Banshees or something similarly silly. Without Psykers they have no good way to deal with Titanic units so a couple of Vaults or a Seraptek Stalker should work even though it's normally pretty bad because of Doom and Jinx.
Tesla immortals could be nice except they ran into issue of range. At best i have to advance with them(and against real eldar army that's -2 to hit) and even then irange is not quaranteed when you are dealing with 36" range guys that move 14". And if they are where those see them 30+ shots that wounds on 3+ vaporizes them.
Dda was only unit that did anything(11 wounds to fireprism) but 4+ and useless qs(no good when you face like 20 saves...from 1 unit) makes thosn pops fast. With 3 would survive 1 round with some survivors.
Issun was i had no range to anything(except with dda) without first exposing to round of fire when anything that's exposed facing firepower enough to wipe multiple units. And this with deliberate weakening of list by eldar. With rerolls to wound, -1 to hit and -1 for my saves it would be worse
9 times scatter laser for example sends 36 S6 shots. You don't need high S weapons. And you don't need one weapon generating 20 shot when you can field big piles of them. Piles and piles and piles of scatter lasers on multiple units. I dread to imagine what would happen when they also get to reroll to wounds and I get -1 for my saves.
tneva82 wrote: 9 times scatter laser for example sends 36 S6 shots. You don't need high S weapons. And you don't need one weapon generating 20 shot when you can field big piles of them. Piles and piles and piles of scatter lasers on multiple units. I dread to imagine what would happen when they also get to reroll to wounds and I get -1 for my saves.
It sounds like you didn't play a mission with gradual scoring so you could take objectives and win the game while your opponent was shooting you or maybe you did not have enough terrain to mitigate shooting.
I recommend Gauss Pylon, Cloaktek, 3x6 Destroyers, 2x Dda, Gauss Stalker. That should give you enough mobility to catch up and firepower to annihilate any number of bikes and tanks. It sucks against hordes but it should murder a scat bike spam/3x prism list.
tneva82 wrote: 9 times scatter laser for example sends 36 S6 shots. You don't need high S weapons. And you don't need one weapon generating 20 shot when you can field big piles of them. Piles and piles and piles of scatter lasers on multiple units. I dread to imagine what would happen when they also get to reroll to wounds and I get -1 for my saves.
That's 24 hits and 12 wounds, assuming they stayed still.
Unless they're the Craftworld that ignores Heavy penalty on bikers (which is NOT Alatioc) they aren't using their big movement stat.
So to put us back on track why do you think Destroyers have seemingly left all lists we see?
I still think they are our hardest hitting unit that does not need to be in half range to do it. With Fly and the F-ing Infantry keyword for all the shenanigans In cover they are 2+ T5 so all the mass body armies and out of line of sight shooting is pretty ineffective and with the strat we can deep strike them so we have a guaranteed (unless you plop them down to be Forewarned and such) one turn of shooting out of them.
With our best Stratagem by far putting them into one of the few units in the game that live up to there name why have they fallen?
So to put us back on track why do you think Destroyers have seemingly left all lists we see?
I still think they are our hardest hitting unit that does not need to be in half range to do it. With Fly and the F-ing Infantry keyword for all the shenanigans In cover they are 2+ T5 so all the mass body armies and out of line of sight shooting is pretty ineffective and with the strat we can deep strike them so we have a guaranteed (unless you plop them down to be Forewarned and such) one turn of shooting out of them.
With our best Stratagem by far putting them into one of the few units in the game that live up to there name why have they fallen?
The prevalence of multi-damage, high strength, good AP weapons has made them particularly, surprisingly squishy. I usually still run mine, but they are always, always public enemy number 1 for my opponents, and in fact are usually their first-blood targets. (Regardless of if they are successful or not). You can use them, and they hit like a freight train, but you need to use the VERY carefully in order to get good mileage out of them.
So to put us back on track why do you think Destroyers have seemingly left all lists we see?
I still think they are our hardest hitting unit that does not need to be in half range to do it. With Fly and the F-ing Infantry keyword for all the shenanigans In cover they are 2+ T5 so all the mass body armies and out of line of sight shooting is pretty ineffective and with the strat we can deep strike them so we have a guaranteed (unless you plop them down to be Forewarned and such) one turn of shooting out of them.
With our best Stratagem by far putting them into one of the few units in the game that live up to there name why have they fallen?
They haven't. I saw a list that did really well at a big tournament recently and it had Destroyers, I actually think two of the four lists I saw had Destroyers but at least one of them had a unit of 6. I think Nephrekh is a mistake, I'd rather run them as Sautekh and I think the list I saw did as well. Nephrekh is cool, but then you are also running a wasteful HQ and 2x3 Scarabs, that's 25% of your firepower gone turn 1 compared to just running a DDA and 6 Sautekh Destroyers and hiding the Ds as best you can. On top of that you get the Craftworld Auspex scan not having a 12" range limit and maybe you forget to ask whether your opponent has an Auspex Scan and then you lose a couple of Ds to it. So don't go pulling out your Destroyers and thinking they are suddenly a fluffy choice, but I'd recommend you go with Sautekh if the rest of your list is also Sautekh. Nephrekh is probably the best way to field Destroyers if you are running a Mephrit Battalion.
I'll always have Destroyers in my list, more so than Wraiths. Having 9 Tomb Blades and 6 Destroyers with a Canoptek Cryptek sounds really good to me. A force that can move rapidly across the board is something I really need.
Regular ITC Missions 3, 4, and 1; I played against 5 Eldar Flyers (but no Hemlocks....), won 33-12; against Custodes Bikes, won 25-13; against the Don Hooson Discolords + FW Chaos Dreads Purge list, won 35-13.
First time I'd broken out the Destroyers in almost a year, and I'm really glad I did. I think they definitely still suffer from being incredibly soft targets in certain match-ups for their cost, but with the cost cuts to the other stuff in the list there is about enough threat overload now, and other units have enough of a reputation, that players will not necessarily target them right off the bat. If you can hide them and then jump them into a good position you can still get a lot of mileage out of them before they die and they're just as good with MWBD/Extermination Protocols as they ever were.
They shot Crimson Hunters out of the sky, killed whole units of Praetors, and blew away Deredeos. I was able to move them around in ways that largely protected them from being shot by the stuff that would kill them quickly, and leave my opponents distracted trying to kill the arks or blades instead.
Yeah, it's pretty great overall now. Plenty is still just bad or overpriced but honestly every book has a lot of units like that so from that perspective things aren't awful any more. Only thing I really wish is that I could get more MWs out of the army.
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow, Power of the C'tan: Transdimensional Thunderbolt
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire
++ Air Wing Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [33 PL, 450pts] ++
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow, Power of the C'tan: Transdimensional Thunderbolt
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars
Transcendent C'tan [12 PL, 200pts]: Fractured Personality: Cosmic Tyrant, Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire
++ Air Wing Detachment +1CP (Necrons) [33 PL, 450pts] ++
Not denying your point (we can spam mortal wounds), but Death Guard can still kick out more MW than anyone in the game by a country mile. It's difficult to pull off, but the blight bombardment combo is disgusting.
Not sure I would think of death guard first when I think of mortal wounds being pumped out.
Off the top of my head I would worry more about thousand sons, eldar or wrath of mars combos. Probably even Nids too. I get what your saying about the upper threshold of blight bombardment, but it has to be one of the easiest combos to avoid in the game.
Dynas wrote: What are the reasons pros/cons/ math to mix saves on Tomb Blades to get a 3+/5++
I can see running a unit of 9, maybe 5 with shieldvanes for 3+; and the other 4 at a 4+/5++
You can pick and choose how to allocate wounds, much Like IG does with Bullgryns on ther 2+/4++
The benefit of these upgrades are increased survivability, this only matters when you get shot, if it makes the difference between RP and no RP, then it's very worth it. The downside is the loss of firepower in relation to the pts spent on the unit.
3+ vs 4+ multiplies durability per point invested by 1,35 vs AP-, 1,20 vs AP-1, 1,13 vs AP-2, 1,08 vs AP-3, 0,90 vs AP-4 at the cost of your firepower being multiplied by 0,90.
4+/5++ vs 4+ multiplies durability per point invested by 0,85 vs AP-, 0,85 vs AP-1, 1,06 vs AP-2, 1,27 vs AP-3, 1,27 vs AP-4 at the cost of your firepower being multiplied by 0,85.
Let's say you have that unit with 5 3+ and 4 4+/5++ at best you will multiply the durability per point invested of the 5 with 3+ by 1,35 and the 4 with 4+/5++ by 1,27 so 1,31 on average. Your opponent will have spent 32% more firepower than he would have on the same number of pts worth of basic TBs.
1,13 vs all AP-, 1,05 vs all AP-1, 1,10 vs all AP-2, 1,17 vs all AP-3, 1,07 vs all AP-4 at the cost of your firepower being multiplied by 0,88. If we assume firepower and durability are worth an even amount you'd need an increase in durability of 1,14 to make up for the loss in firepower.
The average if we assume you get all AP- one game, all AP-1 the next game and so on up to AP-4 is a 1,10 multiplication in durability. Or 1,11 if we ignore AP-4.
If we change the split from 5/4 to 2/7 you get an average of 1,08 (1,05 ignoring AP-4) and your firepower is multiplied by 0,86, 4/5 you get 1,09 (1,09) and your firepower is multiplied by 0,87, 7/2 you get 1,11 (1,15 ignoring AP-4) and your firepower is multiplied by 0,89.
If you take a 6/0/3 spit between 3+, 4+/5++ and 4+ you get an average of 1,09 (1,13 ignoring AP-4) and your firepower is multiplied by 0,935483871.
Tl;dr: mixing and matching 5++ and 3+ is a bad idea, unless you know your opponent is going to use a variety of weapons to take your TBs down. Take them naked, put 5++ on some of them or put 3+ but don't mix and match. I don't even want to touch the math of putting both on a single model because Dynas already knows it's a bad idea.
Red Corsair wrote: Not sure I would think of death guard first when I think of mortal wounds being pumped out.
Off the top of my head I would worry more about thousand sons, eldar or wrath of mars combos. Probably even Nids too. I get what your saying about the upper threshold of blight bombardment, but it has to be one of the easiest combos to avoid in the game.
If they get close in your face can pump out them decently. One unit can cause 4 mortals in average in combat and allow lots of his units to give you two 4+ tests in combat to take mortal wound so in 75% times 1 or 2 mortal wounds per round of combat.
Also they can have dreadnought that pumps out 2d3 shots hitting on 2+ for mortal wound with 24" range. My poor stompa faced trio of those last time I fielded it(and no he had not tuned up specifically vs stompa as nobody knew I would be taking stompa and we just agreed game as neither had arranged game in advance)
Red Corsair wrote: Not sure I would think of death guard first when I think of mortal wounds being pumped out.
Off the top of my head I would worry more about thousand sons, eldar or wrath of mars combos. Probably even Nids too. I get what your saying about the upper threshold of blight bombardment, but it has to be one of the easiest combos to avoid in the game.
I mean yes and no. In a normal list, it's easy to avoid but you can build a list around it. Plaguebearers out front, Plague marine blob in behind marching up behind, cloud of flies to cover them. Your opponent has to chew threw the plaguebearer wall and if they come anywhere near, they'll get grenaded off the planet. I think it's actually an interesting choice for Death Guard, as the big problem with Plaguebeaer spam is they lack offensive output.
Anyway, back on topic. We have plenty of ways to deal out MW with necrons, they're just usually attached to not great units. Vault was sweet until it got nerfed, C'Tan are OK but expensive for what they do, Deathmarks suck etc.
Yeah, I wasn't so much saying Necrons "have no way to produce an appreciable amount of Mortal Wounds" as I was saying they "have a hard time producing a decent baseline (like, say, 2-3 Smite's-worth) without spending excessively on particular units."
And I was speaking specifically about the list I used, i.e. Doomcrons. I've messed around with adding a Nightbringer or trying to find space for a Transcendent but I don't like what I lose. There's the Abyssal Staff, which is always second to the Veil for me, and there's the Doomscythe ATD strat, which I get to use maybe one game in six since everyone works their ass off to kill a Flyer immediately. And not having any MW production can hurt a lot if your opponent just starts to get hot on invulnerable saves.
Of course, just the Doomscythe ATD strat can really explode for massive damage sometimes. So the MW production is just very swingy. It's often non-existent, but I played a practice NOVA mission last night against a Bobby G/FW Dreadnought list and seized on the guy, then it did a whopping 39 Mortal Wounds top of turn one. Then a DDA caused a Leviathan to explode and that dealt around 8 more.... So that was fun.
Deathmarks are a unit I really want to make work. I keep writing lists with two units of ten, ready to Deep Strike in as soon as a mob of Boyz or Lootaz use Da Jump, or as soon as some GSC show up, or whatever. I think they could be fun and actually do work in specific match-ups, tho they're patently bad most of the time.
Red Corsair wrote: Not sure I would think of death guard first when I think of mortal wounds being pumped out.
Off the top of my head I would worry more about thousand sons, eldar or wrath of mars combos. Probably even Nids too. I get what your saying about the upper threshold of blight bombardment, but it has to be one of the easiest combos to avoid in the game.
If they get close in your face can pump out them decently. One unit can cause 4 mortals in average in combat and allow lots of his units to give you two 4+ tests in combat to take mortal wound so in 75% times 1 or 2 mortal wounds per round of combat.
Also they can have dreadnought that pumps out 2d3 shots hitting on 2+ for mortal wound with 24" range. My poor stompa faced trio of those last time I fielded it(and no he had not tuned up specifically vs stompa as nobody knew I would be taking stompa and we just agreed game as neither had arranged game in advance)
Soul burners are rubbish for their cost. WAY to pricey, and anything taking a soul burner isn't a death guard specific unit anyway.
I am not saying death guard are bad, or that they don't have access to MW output. What I am saying is they are not even close to the top of the list of things I'd worry about in that regard.
Red Corsair wrote: Not sure I would think of death guard first when I think of mortal wounds being pumped out.
Off the top of my head I would worry more about thousand sons, eldar or wrath of mars combos. Probably even Nids too. I get what your saying about the upper threshold of blight bombardment, but it has to be one of the easiest combos to avoid in the game.
I mean yes and no. In a normal list, it's easy to avoid but you can build a list around it. Plaguebearers out front, Plague marine blob in behind marching up behind, cloud of flies to cover them. Your opponent has to chew threw the plaguebearer wall and if they come anywhere near, they'll get grenaded off the planet. I think it's actually an interesting choice for Death Guard, as the big problem with Plaguebeaer spam is they lack offensive output.
Anyway, back on topic. We have plenty of ways to deal out MW with necrons, they're just usually attached to not great units. Vault was sweet until it got nerfed, C'Tan are OK but expensive for what they do, Deathmarks suck etc.
Plague bearers are on 32mm bases. Grenades have a 6" range. If they want to hide a blob of PM behind plague bearers then I'll let them. Again, it's so horrendously telegraphed and on a very slow unit with a 6" range per model. If your opponent manages to get this to work, they out played you or you were unaware because it requires a lot of CP and support ot pull off and it takes multiple turns to set up. Death guard lists generally aren't rolling in CPbtw. I am more concerned by demon princes and blote drones behind plague bearer screens then plague marines.
Automatically Appended Next Post: BTW I am not being dismissive, blight bombardment is a sweet strat and I enjoy it on either end and am aware of the damage it can do, but as a person that's played VS a lot of competitive DG armies I can tell you it is way trickier to do then one might assume.
Also interestingly enough I think necrons are actually really well equiped for facing plague bearer spam. With all the bonuses we can stack to hit and units like destroyers and telsa immortals we can chew through them a lot faster then most other armies.
sieGermans wrote: It’s really interesting how much more we can fit into lists since CA2018.
Still not enough compared to how much other factions can field for the same points.
I think if all of our HQ's cost were reduced by 50%, as well as the units that weren't touched in CA, then it could be interesting.
I agree to a point. Our HQs are probably our weakest slot, followed up by the elites. (Propped up by the ctan shards).
They all need about a 15 point cut, and a 4th melee attack. Anrakyr is about 60 points overpriced.
Honestly I wouldn't mind the HQs and Elites being overpriced if they got some direct buffs. I understand that they are trying to account for reanimation, but it's kinda rough.
IMO the Cryptek is the worst offender by far. It's just so so overpriced for what you get, especially the Chronotek. Both variants should legit be no more than 50 points including the staff.
The lack of buffs, and the limits of those we have, are ridiculous. I believe necrons are the only faction in the entire game who dont have access to +1 to wound, while others can get +2 to wound.
p5freak wrote: The lack of buffs, and the limits of those we have, are ridiculous. I believe necrons are the only faction in the entire game who dont have access to +1 to wound, while others can get +2 to wound.
sieGermans wrote: It’s really interesting how much more we can fit into lists since CA2018.
Still not enough compared to how much other factions can field for the same points.
I think if all of our HQ's cost were reduced by 50%, as well as the units that weren't touched in CA, then it could be interesting.
Tbh, I'd be more or less okay with the current price of an overlord if MWBD was a normal aura that affected every unit within 6". And maybe give them a 4th melee attack
sieGermans wrote: It’s really interesting how much more we can fit into lists since CA2018.
Still not enough compared to how much other factions can field for the same points.
I think if all of our HQ's cost were reduced by 50%, as well as the units that weren't touched in CA, then it could be interesting.
Tbh, I'd be more or less okay with the current price of an overlord if MWBD was a normal aura that affected every unit within 6". And maybe give them a 4th melee attack
That's a big change though. That's like baking in 1-2 CP into his ability every turn. At least 3 CP over the course of an average game. That's as big a buff as cutting his pts by 25 or 35 pts, the biggest buff would be that you wouldn't be able to forget it though. I still maintain that Overlords should have had the Lord's Will and Lords should have My Will Be Done. It would just make a tonne more sense that you spam the lieutenants rather than the generals. But same with the change to cover GW didn't fully consider how crunch affects army-building and how army building should reflect fluff. Instead, here I am with my 3 Overlords and 1 Lord because having more than 1 Lord essentially just means I'm not using the one I have to his full potential. It is the same thing with Crypteks really, it should've just worked like the Res Orb does and then Res Orbs could be the aura effect or work like they currently do, just something to promote taking more than 1 Cryptek and more than 1 Lord.
I do think cutting the cost of our HQs by 50% is completely absurd, we'd be getting the best HQs in the game if that was the case. I want a 10-15 pts drop across our HQs, maybe 25 pts on the Overlord if Tesla was changed to work on flat 6s rather than 6+. Just enough that they don't drag down the rest of a list or are only worth it when they provide at least 1 CP, just enough to make Supreme Command Detachments worth it, considering Necrons are the most fluffy faction to use SCDs I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead we see trios of Captains with jump packs and trios of Custodes HQs on bikes, but an Overlord and his entourage? Unthinkable!
I do think cutting the cost of our HQs by 50% is completely absurd, we'd be getting the best HQs in the game if that was the case.
Except that really isn't the case. Let's say closer to 40% than 50% which is still a lot more than 10-15 points reduction (which would be nowhere near enough IMO). A Cryptek at 40-50 points is still pretty average, just not ridiculously costed. Same with a Destroyer Lord at 80 points. I fail to see how pricing our extremely mediocre HQ's fairly would make them the "best in the game". They'd simply stop being an unwanted tax.
I know a few of you dislike directly comparing our units to similar ones from other factions, but frankly I don't care and I think it's absolutely fair. And when you do that you realise how obnoxiously overcosted all of our HQ's really are.
CCB - Disco Lord
Destroyer Lord - Smash Captain
Cryptek - Tech Priest Enginseer
If you want to know how to price our HQ's, then look at their (generally better) equivalents in other armies.
I do think cutting the cost of our HQs by 50% is completely absurd, we'd be getting the best HQs in the game if that was the case.
Except that really isn't the case. Let's say closer to 40% than 50% which is still a lot more than 10-15 points reduction (which would be nowhere near enough IMO). A Cryptek at 40-50 points is still pretty average, just not ridiculously costed. Same with a Destroyer Lord at 80 points. I fail to see how pricing our extremely mediocre HQ's fairly would make them the "best in the game". They'd simply stop being an unwanted tax.
I know a few of you dislike directly comparing our units to similar ones from other factions, but frankly I don't care and I think it's absolutely fair. And when you do that you realise how obnoxiously overcosted all of our HQ's really are.
CCB - Disco Lord
Destroyer Lord - Smash Captain
Cryptek - Tech Priest Enginseer
If you want to know how to price our HQ's, then look at their (generally better) equivalents in other armies.
To be fair, it's been stated many times that different armies are costed differently. Maybe Necrons aren't intended to have strong HQs like some other armies do.
Eldar? They're psykers and force multipliers
Demon Princes? Beat Sticks and Multipliers
Company Commanders? Cheap, expedible force multipliers
Ours....have such little utility...they can barely protect themselves with a meagre '3' attacks, have tiny auras....and cost way more than what other codexes pay for something demonstratively better. What gives?
iGuy91 wrote: Every army's HQs are built for a purpose.
Eldar? They're psykers and force multipliers Demon Princes? Beat Sticks and Multipliers
Company Commanders? Cheap, expedible force multipliers
Ours....have such little utility...they can barely protect themselves with a meagre '3' attacks, have tiny auras....and cost way more than what other codexes pay for something demonstratively better. What gives?
They have higher strength and toughness values than average, have good melee weapons and can regenerate 1 health per turn. That's...about it. The designers seem to think that's enough for some reason.
It seems we largely comprise, and are geared towards, elitish infantry.
I mean we have easy access to AP-2 and -3, in various forms and shapes.
However in a meta where elite infantry is not very prominent, that hurts us. It's about schaff or T7/T8, and little middle ground. And it's about speed in an even bigger picture.
We're like most other non-tshirt infantry, only tougher. that seems to be our intended strength. Only theres little room for units like that this edition, other than in a marginal support capacity. This also makes our normal HQs not very impressive. To make this work, you can't also have a flimsy on-or-off RP, you need something FNP like in 7th (I like current RP best, it just has issues, well discussed elsewhere)
I do think cutting the cost of our HQs by 50% is completely absurd, we'd be getting the best HQs in the game if that was the case.
Except that really isn't the case. Let's say closer to 40% than 50% which is still a lot more than 10-15 points reduction (which would be nowhere near enough IMO). A Cryptek at 40-50 points is still pretty average, just not ridiculously costed. Same with a Destroyer Lord at 80 points. I fail to see how pricing our extremely mediocre HQ's fairly would make them the "best in the game". They'd simply stop being an unwanted tax.
I know a few of you dislike directly comparing our units to similar ones from other factions, but frankly I don't care and I think it's absolutely fair. And when you do that you realise how obnoxiously overcosted all of our HQ's really are.
CCB - Disco Lord
Destroyer Lord - Smash Captain
Cryptek - Tech Priest Enginseer
If you want to know how to price our HQ's, then look at their (generally better) equivalents in other armies.
I absolutely agree that you should be able to compare units between codices, the fact that the designers and playtesters of previous editions haven't done so enough is the reason why previous editions had gak balance, the more it is done the better balance gets. On the other hand there is valid critisism to be made. I think the best way to do things is to figure out a scenario where your unit should be bad and set a minimum balanaced pts level so it doesn't become crazy OP and then find a situation where your unit should do well and make sure it isn't a completely useless unit (like the Monolith was during the index).
CCBs are 8 W, Lord Discordant on Hellstalker is 10+, they are not comparable. A better comparison would be a Daemon Prince of Nurgle at 170 pts, which really should be 185 or 190 pts. It has a better support ability, it hits quite a bit harder, it's slightly more durable, the psyker ability is about on par with a gauss cannon. CCBs would be as OP as DPs of Nurgle at 130 pts, with a 15 pts drop CCBs are also very good at around 140 pts it would be on par with a 185 pt DP of Nurgle.
Smash Captains have to get nerfed, they are also 124 pts, they probably belong around 140-150. That being said, an 80 pt DLord is far stronger than a 124 pt Smash Captain, more than strong enough to litter battlefields with groups of them. I'd say a DLord is about on-par with a Smash Captain in terms of power level, maybe slightly weaker. At the absolute least a DLord would be 105 pts with a warscythe, so a 15 pt drop and then he's very good.
Cloaktek at 75 compared to a Tech Priest Dominus at 90 pts. The Tech Priest Dominus is better at healing and has a maybe slightly better aura abilty, so maybe we can say a 55 pt Cryptek base and a 5 pt increase to the cloak's price, oh look that's 15 pts from his current cost.
50% is insanity, there is no unit in the game that needs more than a 40% cut in pts and less than 2% of units need more than 30% unless you want to centre balance around the very tippy top of competitive play and never nerf anything ever again.
I absolutely agree that you should be able to compare units between codices, the fact that the designers and playtesters of previous editions haven't done so enough is the reason why previous editions had gak balance, the more it is done the better balance gets. On the other hand there is valid critisism to be made. I think the best way to do things is to figure out a scenario where your unit should be bad and set a minimum balanaced pts level so it doesn't become crazy OP and then find a situation where your unit should do well and make sure it isn't a completely useless unit (like the Monolith was during the index).
CCBs are 8 W, Lord Discordant on Hellstalker is 10+, they are not comparable. A better comparison would be a Daemon Prince of Nurgle at 170 pts, which really should be 185 or 190 pts. It has a better support ability, it hits quite a bit harder, it's slightly more durable, the psyker ability is about on par with a gauss cannon. CCBs would be as OP as DPs of Nurgle at 130 pts, with a 15 pts drop CCBs are also very good at around 140 pts it would be on par with a 185 pt DP of Nurgle.
Smash Captains have to get nerfed, they are also 124 pts, they probably belong around 140-150. That being said, an 80 pt DLord is far stronger than a 124 pt Smash Captain, more than strong enough to litter battlefields with groups of them. I'd say a DLord is about on-par with a Smash Captain in terms of power level, maybe slightly weaker. At the absolute least a DLord would be 105 pts with a warscythe, so a 15 pt drop and then he's very good.
Cloaktek at 75 compared to a Tech Priest Dominus at 90 pts. The Tech Priest Dominus is better at healing and has a maybe slightly better aura abilty, so maybe we can say a 55 pt Cryptek base and a 5 pt increase to the cloak's price, oh look that's 15 pts from his current cost.
50% is insanity, there is no unit in the game that needs more than a 40% cut in pts and less than 2% of units need more than 30% unless you want to centre balance around the very tippy top of competitive play and never nerf anything ever again.
So your defence here is "ohh well everything else is OP and needs to be nerfed so it doesn't count". Lol sorry pal but it does count and they won't get nerfed. How about we just buff our stuff instead, eh?
A smash captain is objectively better than a D.Lord and is easily worth 40 more points. Even just the 3++ by itself is worth 10-15 points. Yet they cost pretty much the same currently.
CCB and Lord Disco are absolutely comparable regardless of one being over 10 wounds because it's still hard to kill. They have similar battlefield roles, both are a lord riding what is effectively a chariot. But one is again just objectively better in every way. You prefer to compare it to a Demon Prince but then go on to admit that the DP is just better than a CCB. Other than "other stuff should be nerfed" what's your point here? Demon Princes don't need to be nerfed. That is a slippery road my friend, if they are too cheap then so are three quarters of HQ's in the game. Better to just bring Necrons in line than the opposite.
Note that I said Tech Priest Enginseer not Dominus, which is 30 points and has a very similar statline and battlefield role to a Cryptek (and is actually better in combat) at a third of the cost. Please read properly before you get sarcy
The only insanity here is you claiming a 10-15 point drop for our HQ's would make them as good as their counterparts
Cynista wrote: So your defence here is "ohh well everything else is OP and needs to be nerfed so it doesn't count". Lol sorry pal but it does count and they won't get nerfed. How about we just buff our stuff instead, eh?
A smash captain is objectively better than a D.Lord and is easily worth 40 more points. Even just the 3++ by itself is worth 10-15 points. Yet they cost pretty much the same currently.
CCB and Lord Disco are absolutely comparable regardless of one being over 10 wounds because it's still hard to kill. They have similar battlefield roles, both are a lord riding what is effectively a chariot. But one is again just objectively better in every way. You prefer to compare it to a Demon Prince but then go on to admit that the DP is just better than a CCB. Other than "other stuff should be nerfed" what's your point here? Demon Princes don't need to be nerfed. That is a slippery road my friend, if they are too cheap then so are three quarters of HQ's in the game. Better to just bring Necrons in line than the opposite.
Note that I said Tech Priest Enginseer not Dominus, which is 30 points and has a very similar statline and battlefield role to a Cryptek (and is actually better in combat) at a third of the cost. Please read properly before you get sarcy
The only insanity here is you claiming a 10-15 point drop for our HQ's would make them as good as their counterparts
"unless you want to centre balance around the very tippy top of competitive play and never nerf anything ever again."
Read what I write. If you buff every unit that is worse than the top 5% of units then you will overbuff units and some units will once again compose the new top 5% of units, you create a new round of buffs for the bottom 95% of units to match the new level. There is no end to this way of creating balance, it creates the problem of power creep, with pts being worth less and less as you continually buff every unit.
To avoid power creep and make pts worth a similar amount of value across factions and time you buff the bottom 20% and aim for them to make up the new bottom 40%, nerf the top 10% so they go down to the top 30%. You will never be happy if your only metric of success is whether our bad units become broken. Daemon Princes not needing to be nerfed sounds silly to me, why were people taking 6 or 9 of them if they were not broken? You view of which things are balanced is totally off and comparing a 12 wound character to an 8 wound character is like comparing apples to oranges, sure, we can compare Rhinos and Ghost Arks, but they are hugely different and therefore difficult to compare. A Destroyer Lord for example is 140% more durable when it comes to AP- S3 attacks compared to a Smash Captain, keep living in your dream world where all your HQs are 100% overcosted and applaud your opponents for playing their fair and balanced Dawneagle trio.
There is a very significant aspect of necron HQs that I don't believe you're taking into account, and this is the fact that our auras only affect infantry.
This makes, for instance, a lord massively less versatile and effective than a lieutenant. If I could place a lord next to my DDAs to grant them re-rolls it would be an absolutely fine HQ choice, but I can't. Likewise, an overlord can't grant MWBD on tomb blades or doom scythes, and this fact along with the general abysmal 3" ranges we have make our HQs turbo gak, when compared to almost everything else in the game.
I think MWBD affecting everything in range is totally fair, since the overlord is already too expensive for what he does and it can only affect infantry anyway
Automatically Appended Next Post: Besides, just points adjustments won't make the necron codex well-written and balanced
sieGermans wrote: It’s really interesting how much more we can fit into lists since CA2018.
Still not enough compared to how much other factions can field for the same points.
I think if all of our HQ's cost were reduced by 50%, as well as the units that weren't touched in CA, then it could be interesting.
Tbh, I'd be more or less okay with the current price of an overlord if MWBD was a normal aura that affected every unit within 6". And maybe give them a 4th melee attack
It's strange because I feel like the opposite is needed. I think the necron HQ's encourage more thought, well at least the overlords ability, maybe not the others. I actually think everyone elses HQ's need to be more like orders and not just passive bubbles. It takes way more skill when you need to determine who gets the perk for the turn rather then everything within range of Gulliman is 200% more efficient and I didn't even need to make a decision.
Dynas wrote: What are the reasons pros/cons/ math to mix saves on Tomb Blades to get a 3+/5++
I can see running a unit of 9, maybe 5 with shieldvanes for 3+; and the other 4 at a 4+/5++
You can pick and choose how to allocate wounds, much Like IG does with Bullgryns on ther 2+/4++
The benefit of these upgrades are increased survivability, this only matters when you get shot, if it makes the difference between RP and no RP, then it's very worth it. The downside is the loss of firepower in relation to the pts spent on the unit.
...
Let's say you have that unit with 5 3+ and 4 4+/5++ at best you will multiply the durability per point invested of the 5 with 3+ by 1,35 and the 4 with 4+/5++ by 1,27 so 1,31 on average. Your opponent will have spent 32% more firepower than he would have on the same number of pts worth of basic TBs.
Thats a very detail response. And I think i follow it, but perhaps not. This line is what confuses me. Here it looks like a 5/4 split with 3+ & 4+/5++ is shown to increase the amount of Firepower the enemy has to commit by a third (32%). How is that not making it more survivable?
I ask, because I do this with bullgryns on the 2+/4++; Is it because the additional save? The toughness of the unit? Point cost per model?
With shieldvanes at 3 pts, thats 15 extra points. Shadowloom at 5 points, that 20 points.
So for the cost of essentially 1 tomb blade (35 points total) you are getting an increase survivalibilty of 33% to the unit of 9. That seems good to me.
What am I missing? Why are you saying it isn't good?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kahi the Uncertain wrote: There is a very significant aspect of necron HQs that I don't believe you're taking into account, and this is the fact that our auras only affect infantry.
This makes, for instance, a lord massively less versatile and effective than a lieutenant. If I could place a lord next to my DDAs to grant them re-rolls it would be an absolutely fine HQ choice, but I can't. Likewise, an overlord can't grant MWBD on tomb blades or doom scythes, and this fact along with the general abysmal 3" ranges we have make our HQs turbo gak, when compared to almost everything else in the game.
I think MWBD affecting everything in range is totally fair, since the overlord is already too expensive for what he does and it can only affect infantry anyway
Automatically Appended Next Post: Besides, just points adjustments won't make the necron codex well-written and balanced
Agreed.
6" Range.
Imotekh needs to buff warrior and immortals as well. Even if they have to raise his points. He needs to have a bigger and better aura. He is our Bobby G equivelent. I would like the named dynasty removed and just mad <Dynasty> as well.
Praetorians need DYNASTY keyword.
Dynas wrote: What are the reasons pros/cons/ math to mix saves on Tomb Blades to get a 3+/5++
I can see running a unit of 9, maybe 5 with shieldvanes for 3+; and the other 4 at a 4+/5++
You can pick and choose how to allocate wounds, much Like IG does with Bullgryns on ther 2+/4++
The benefit of these upgrades are increased survivability, this only matters when you get shot, if it makes the difference between RP and no RP, then it's very worth it. The downside is the loss of firepower in relation to the pts spent on the unit.
...
Let's say you have that unit with 5 3+ and 4 4+/5++ at best you will multiply the durability per point invested of the 5 with 3+ by 1,35 and the 4 with 4+/5++ by 1,27 so 1,31 on average. Your opponent will have spent 32% more firepower than he would have on the same number of pts worth of basic TBs.
Thats a very detail response. And I think i follow it, but perhaps not. This line is what confuses me. Here it looks like a 5/4 split with 3+ & 4+/5++ is shown to increase the amount of Firepower the enemy has to commit by a third (32%). How is that not making it more survivable? I ask, because I do this with bullgryns on the 2+/4++; Is it because the additional save? The toughness of the unit? Point cost per model? With shieldvanes at 3 pts, thats 15 extra points. Shadowloom at 5 points, that 20 points.
So for the cost of essentially 1 tomb blade (35 points total) you are getting an increase survivalibilty of 33% to the unit of 9. That seems good to me.
What am I missing? Why are you saying it isn't good?
It's only good when your opponent is mixing firepower between AP-3 and AP-, Bullgryns don't have a third option I can recommend. IMO you are losing out on too much firepower in return for your increase in durability given that it only increases your durability per point invested around 8% if your opponent isn't mixing up the AP values of units that shoot at your TBs, while you lose more than 8% worth of firepower from the unit having fewer models. That's why I say stick with shields and put a couple of naked ones in there, at least if your opponent isn't throwing everything and the kitchen sink at them, you will in my estimation be better off with more firepower given the unit is fairly durable regardless of upgrades just because of their -1 to hit at range.
Kahi the Uncertain wrote: There is a very significant aspect of necron HQs that I don't believe you're taking into account, and this is the fact that our auras only affect infantry.
This makes, for instance, a lord massively less versatile and effective than a lieutenant. If I could place a lord next to my DDAs to grant them re-rolls it would be an absolutely fine HQ choice, but I can't. Likewise, an overlord can't grant MWBD on tomb blades or doom scythes, and this fact along with the general abysmal 3" ranges we have make our HQs turbo gak, when compared to almost everything else in the game.
I think MWBD affecting everything in range is totally fair, since the overlord is already too expensive for what he does and it can only affect infantry anyway
Besides, just points adjustments won't make the necron codex well-written and balanced
Marine vehicles don't have Chapter Tactics and they are generally pretty bad, in my world that isn't ideal but it does make SM more reliant on their HQ castles to be worth anything while our vehicles generally do fine on their own. Tau Empire Cadre Fireblades don't affect many different types of units, Harlequin Shadowseers only affect Infantry, Chaos Daemons of Nurgle Poxbringers, Sloppity Bilepipers and Spoilpox Scriverners are all severely limited by the units they can buff. All these units are good and have powerful limits on what they can do. Tau Empire Commanders can only collectively use their command ability once per game, yes it does affect vehicles, but it's still only once per game even if you have 3 Commanders, which you probably do.
I have good news Lords' and Overlords' abilities have 6" range and CCBs 12". The only 3" model we have is the Cryptek and Apothecaries have the exact same range. I have also described earlier how you can cheat this range by having a unit within 6", roll Reanimation one at a time and when you pass the first one you place that model at the edge of coherency just within 3" of your Cryptek, now the rest of your rolls are made on 4+, on average you waste very few Reanimation rolls doing this, especially if you have a Ghost Ark/Resurrection Orb to pick up stragglers.
Points will absolutely balance anything, whether their fair cost lies at 30%, 50%, 80% or 150% of their current cost there is a balanced cost for everything, especially given that you don't need to get things 100% right, just right enough that every datasheet and option has situations where it shines. I've said before that I don't like the way the Necron index and codex were written, but things are what they are and the Codex is much better compared to the Index, at least the Lord does something other than effectively just adding +1 to Ld, not to mention Lords and many of our gakky Unique HQs got buffs in CA2018.
The fact that I've seen ten times the number of Company Commanders compared to Platoon Commanders on the battlefield this edition is sad, given the fact that they used to out outnumber Company Commanders 3/1. I read a thread yesterday where someone was seriously suggesting adding a Platoon Commander to the game, I imagine he hasn't played the one game I have against Platoon Commanders. Clearly, there are a handful of HQs that are either flying rodent gak insane with how much value they add (Company Commander) or are so strong in shooting or melee that they don't even need their support abilities to be good (Tau Commanders and Daemon Princes) that need to get taken down a peg, if you measure your HQs to these units you lose. I don't need my CCBs to be Lord Discordants on Helstalkers, I played that edition, where two Crypteks took down a Land Raider in a shooting phase and CCBs where among the top units in the game.
Marine vehicles don't have Chapter Tactics and they are generally pretty bad, in my world that isn't ideal but it does make SM more reliant on their HQ castles to be worth anything while our vehicles generally do fine on their own. Tau Empire Cadre Fireblades don't affect many different types of units, Harlequin Shadowseers only affect Infantry, Chaos Daemons of Nurgle Poxbringers, Sloppity Bilepipers and Spoilpox Scriverners are all severely limited by the units they can buff. All these units are good and have powerful limits on what they can do. Tau Empire Commanders can only collectively use their command ability once per game, yes it does affect vehicles, but it's still only once per game even if you have 3 Commanders, which you probably do.
I have good news Lords' and Overlords' abilities have 6" range and CCBs 12". The only 3" model we have is the Cryptek and Apothecaries have the exact same range. I have also described earlier how you can cheat this range by having a unit within 6", roll Reanimation one at a time and when you pass the first one you place that model at the edge of coherency just within 3" of your Cryptek, now the rest of your rolls are made on 4+, on average you waste very few Reanimation rolls doing this, especially if you have a Ghost Ark/Resurrection Orb to pick up stragglers.
Points will absolutely balance anything, whether their fair cost lies at 30%, 50%, 80% or 150% of their current cost there is a balanced cost for everything, especially given that you don't need to get things 100% right, just right enough that every datasheet and option has situations where it shines. I've said before that I don't like the way the Necron index and codex were written, but things are what they are and the Codex is much better compared to the Index, at least the Lord does something other than effectively just adding +1 to Ld, not to mention Lords and many of our gakky Unique HQs got buffs in CA2018.
The fact that I've seen ten times the number of Company Commanders compared to Platoon Commanders on the battlefield this edition is sad, given the fact that they used to out outnumber Company Commanders 3/1. I read a thread yesterday where someone was seriously suggesting adding a Platoon Commander to the game, I imagine he hasn't played the one game I have against Platoon Commanders. Clearly, there are a handful of HQs that are either flying rodent gak insane with how much value they add (Company Commander) or are so strong in shooting or melee that they don't even need their support abilities to be good (Tau Commanders and Daemon Princes) that need to get taken down a peg, if you measure your HQs to these units you lose. I don't need my CCBs to be Lord Discordants on Helstalkers, I played that edition, where two Crypteks took down a Land Raider in a shooting phase and CCBs where among the top units in the game.
Except Fireblades, Shadowseers and the daemon characters are expressly specialised to buff the particular units they buff, whereas our characters are not.
The fact that T'au commanders can only enact their command ability once per game is balanced out quite well by the fact that they are an otherwise exceptional unit that can pull its weight through the damage it can deal on its own, whereas our characters, once again, can not.
The Overlord is so tremendously unbalanced that his aura is exceptionally strong, but only if it's used on timmortals. On any other unit it is about on par with that of a captain, except for the fact that he can only buff a single unit. Since you have to take HQs in a battleforged list, this almost forces you to play tesla+OL because it's so vastly superior to any other configuration of HQ+troop. This is a fundamentally flawed character, that tbh won't be well-balanced no matter his points since he creates a mandatory core for an army. Points changes can make him very good, but can't make him balanced. If they put MWBD on Lords then it would at least be fluffy, I agree with you there.
Kahi the Uncertain wrote: Except Fireblades, Shadowseers and the daemon characters are expressly specialised to buff the particular units they buff, whereas our characters are not.
The fact that T'au commanders can only enact their command ability once per game is balanced out quite well by the fact that they are an otherwise exceptional unit that can pull its weight through the damage it can deal on its own, whereas our characters, once again, can not.
The Overlord is so tremendously unbalanced that his aura is exceptionally strong, but only if it's used on timmortals. On any other unit it is about on par with that of a captain, except for the fact that he can only buff a single unit. Since you have to take HQs in a battleforged list, this almost forces you to play tesla+OL because it's so vastly superior to any other configuration of HQ+troop. This is a fundamentally flawed character, that tbh won't be well-balanced no matter his points since he creates a mandatory core for an army. Points changes can make him very good, but can't make him balanced. If they put MWBD on Lords then it would at least be fluffy, I agree with you there.
Points don't solve rules issues.
I think Necron HQs are the same way, the writer of Index Necrons wanted to move Necrons away from the heavily mechanized route Matt Ward took the Necrons and back to their roots of Lords and Warriors. That's why our HQs buff only Infantry, by forcing us to take at least 1 HQ (unless you just take 4 LoW the rules writer is incentivising us to take Infantry in our lists, I think this is further pushed by Ghost Arks not being open-topped, an idea I also had, the writer pushed Necrons away from CCBs and Warriors in Ghost Arks to Warriors on the field, supported by CCBs and Ghost Arks behind them. I personally vastly prefer the 2x20 Warriors+10 Teslamortals list supported by a GA, CCB and a Cryptek to what used to be 1xCCB, 3x GA and 3x10 Warriors that you hoped never saw the light of day.
The answer is to make tesla carbines more expensive on Immortals than on TBs, something GW has done with for example Thunderwolf Cavalry and Stormshields. This way it becomes so that Warriors and Gauss Immortals are a fair choice and can be taken with or without an Overlord and be decent and Tesla Immortals are bad on their own but good with an Overlord. This would be the best way to open up the most possible avenues of list building with pts. It's a problem of combos and it's not really something you can get rid of.
The same can be said with transports, you cannot make a transport equally viable for an elite unit and a chaff unit, protecting elite units is more valuable than protecting chaff. The only exception to this rule I can think of is the Astra Militarum Chimera which benefits from having a chaff unit embarked. SM Assault Squads without jump packs benefit less from being inside a Stormraven Gunship than Vanguard Veterans without jump packs for example. So if you want Stormraven Gunships carrying Assault Squads to be viable, then Vanguard Veterans inside Stormraven Gunships will either be OP or Vanguard Veterans outside Stormraven Gunships will be UP. I actually think it would be very fluffy if the Lord had MWBD because Lords in the fluff like to surround themselves with Immortals so I could totally see them benefitting Tesla Immortals disproportionately as being fluffy.
I agree with what others are saying here, as well as some possible points adjustments I would like to see the following 2 changes:
1) Lords given the single unit MWBD instead of to wound aura and Overlords given a range aura of some kind
2) Gauss given its special rule back in the form of a 6 to wound becomes a mortal wound (not in addition like deathmarks) maybe improving or reducing deathmarks cost in some other way
Also a stratagem added to allow rp for a unit that has been wiped out - this would fully or near enough solve the rp issue
If their intent was to move away from mechanised lists they handled that very poorly by not making an iteration of the gauss rule in 8th. That was the backbone of the necron army that really made silver tide work. DDAs or Doom Scythes are essentially mandatory now, in any list.
I managed 4 wins out of 5 games at last weekend's Northern UKETC 2 day team event. There wasn't actually a limit of 1 type of each detachment so this was the first tournament where I decided to ditch the battalion altogether. I have to say it worked great, I could really focus on taking the best units possible. This was the first time I've ran Tomb Blades in tournament and I thought they were excellent, pretty much all of our Fast Attack choices are really good. I think it's quite easy to play the army with a budget amount of CP, next tournament in August is ITC so I'll be running Air Wing and ditching the battalion again. For the first time in a while there was actually another necron player in the field as well. I think he also did okay so we're slowly starting to represent again
listylist88 wrote: I managed 4 wins out of 5 games at last weekend's Northern UKETC 2 day team event. There wasn't actually a limit of 1 type of each detachment so this was the first tournament where I decided to ditch the battalion altogether. I have to say it worked great, I could really focus on taking the best units possible. This was the first time I've ran Tomb Blades in tournament and I thought they were excellent, pretty much all of our Fast Attack choices are really good. I think it's quite easy to play the army with a budget amount of CP, next tournament in August is ITC so I'll be running Air Wing and ditching the battalion again. For the first time in a while there was actually another necron player in the field as well. I think he also did okay so we're slowly starting to represent again
List looks great, but I have to ask, why Imotekh? Other than his storm (and the extra CP), you can't really benefit from his other abilities. Seems like you could cut him down to an overlord/lord and fit a couple more tomb blades in. I guess the storm and CP could be worth the trade off though.
It's also worth it noting that when you MWBD your destroyers you deteriorate the hit rate ever so slightly with Extermination Protocols as you will reroll some of those hits into misses.
(2s are misses before modifiers and would trigger a reroll, which sometimes give you a one.)
It happens to fractions of a dice each time, and there is an overwhelming net gain due to the rerolls to wound, but worth making a mental note of, as it's easily forgotten.
Did you factor the ETC missions into your list? Why do you feel like Teslamortals underperform for their pts? Do you get tied up in combat often?
Consider one of the following: *Cut Imotekh and re-organize your list into a Nihilakh Spearhead and a Nephrekh Outrider. You get less CP, no Storm, no MWBD on Destroyers. Instead you get Nihilakh on DDAs which I'd argue is better than Sautekh and you get 160 pts. *Change the second Outrider to Sautekh. No Deep Striking Destroyers, but you can Advance and shoot, not to mention trigger or benefit from Methodical Destruction. The Sautekh Cryptek would also be able to baby-sit 1-3 DDAs depending on deployment. *Cut Wraiths, Scarabs and a Cryptek and re-organize your list into a Sautekh Battalion with Teslamortals like everybody else.
I think something like 3xDDA, Doom-Wing, 1-3xDestroyers sounds pretty good. Alternatively, instead of Destroyers consider a Tesseract Vault, someone came in third at a big tournament recently with 3xDDA, the Doom-Wing and a Vault. Not putting in the pts for a Battalion and the Deceiver to power up and protect a Vault seems like a mistake now that it is so expensive though, taking a Vault seems like a mistake in the first place, I especially don't really see the benefit of pairing it with the Doom-Wing. You should be seeing diminishing returns on your aura damage effects. If you kill a couple of units in a castle in the Movement phase with your Vault you should see less damage coming out of the Doom-Wing Stratagem. Seeing the Vault have success again is kind of nice, I thought for sure it'd be dead competitively, I guess it was before the nerf to the Castellan.
torblind wrote: It's also worth it noting that when you MWBD your destroyers you deteriorate the hit rate ever so slightly with Extermination Protocols as you will reroll some of those hits into misses. (2s are misses before modifiers and would trigger a reroll, which sometimes give you a one.)
It happens to fractions of a dice each time, and there is an overwhelming net gain due to the rerolls to wound, but worth making a mental note of, as it's easily forgotten.
2+ re-rolling 1s and 2s is better than 2+. But I never knew I had to re-roll those 2s, good to keep in mind.
3+ is 24/36 2+ is 30/36 3+ re-rolling 1s is 28/36 3+ re-rolling 1s and 2s is 32/36 2+ re-rolling 1s is 35/36 2+ re-rolling 1s and 2s is 34/36
torblind wrote: It's also worth it noting that when you MWBD your destroyers you deteriorate the hit rate ever so slightly with Extermination Protocols as you will reroll some of those hits into misses.
(2s are misses before modifiers and would trigger a reroll, which sometimes give you a one.)
It happens to fractions of a dice each time, and there is an overwhelming net gain due to the rerolls to wound, but worth making a mental note of, as it's easily forgotten.
Do you have to reroll all failed hit rolls if you have an ability that grants rerolls? I feel like I remember this being mentioned in an faq at some point, but can't remember how it was ruled
torblind wrote: It's also worth it noting that when you MWBD your destroyers you deteriorate the hit rate ever so slightly with Extermination Protocols as you will reroll some of those hits into misses.
(2s are misses before modifiers and would trigger a reroll, which sometimes give you a one.)
It happens to fractions of a dice each time, and there is an overwhelming net gain due to the rerolls to wound, but worth making a mental note of, as it's easily forgotten.
Do you have to reroll all failed hit rolls if you have an ability that grants rerolls? I feel like I remember this being mentioned in an faq at some point, but can't remember how it was ruled
In case of EP you have no choice. It doesnt say you can, like similiar abilities, e.g. novokhs dynasty code says you can re-roll failed hit rolls. EP says you re-roll failed hit and wound rolls.
Cynista wrote: So your defence here is "ohh well everything else is OP and needs to be nerfed so it doesn't count". Lol sorry pal but it does count and they won't get nerfed. How about we just buff our stuff instead, eh?
A smash captain is objectively better than a D.Lord and is easily worth 40 more points. Even just the 3++ by itself is worth 10-15 points. Yet they cost pretty much the same currently.
CCB and Lord Disco are absolutely comparable regardless of one being over 10 wounds because it's still hard to kill. They have similar battlefield roles, both are a lord riding what is effectively a chariot. But one is again just objectively better in every way. You prefer to compare it to a Demon Prince but then go on to admit that the DP is just better than a CCB. Other than "other stuff should be nerfed" what's your point here? Demon Princes don't need to be nerfed. That is a slippery road my friend, if they are too cheap then so are three quarters of HQ's in the game. Better to just bring Necrons in line than the opposite.
Note that I said Tech Priest Enginseer not Dominus, which is 30 points and has a very similar statline and battlefield role to a Cryptek (and is actually better in combat) at a third of the cost. Please read properly before you get sarcy
The only insanity here is you claiming a 10-15 point drop for our HQ's would make them as good as their counterparts
"unless you want to centre balance around the very tippy top of competitive play and never nerf anything ever again."
Read what I write. If you buff every unit that is worse than the top 5% of units then you will overbuff units and some units will once again compose the new top 5% of units, you create a new round of buffs for the bottom 95% of units to match the new level. There is no end to this way of creating balance, it creates the problem of power creep, with pts being worth less and less as you continually buff every unit.
To avoid power creep and make pts worth a similar amount of value across factions and time you buff the bottom 20% and aim for them to make up the new bottom 40%, nerf the top 10% so they go down to the top 30%. You will never be happy if your only metric of success is whether our bad units become broken. Daemon Princes not needing to be nerfed sounds silly to me, why were people taking 6 or 9 of them if they were not broken? You view of which things are balanced is totally off and comparing a 12 wound character to an 8 wound character is like comparing apples to oranges, sure, we can compare Rhinos and Ghost Arks, but they are hugely different and therefore difficult to compare. A Destroyer Lord for example is 140% more durable when it comes to AP- S3 attacks compared to a Smash Captain, keep living in your dream world where all your HQs are 100% overcosted and applaud your opponents for playing their fair and balanced Dawneagle trio.
You keep posting yet still haven't once made a solid argument, you're just creating strawmen.
It's not just the "top 5%" of units that are miles better than our HQ's in terms of being cost effective. Literally every other HQ in the game is more cost effective than, say, a Cryptek. I gave you the example of the Tech Priest Enginseer which only costs 30 points and is very similar to a Cryptek. Guess what? It's nowhere near a top tier character. In fact, almost nobody uses it.
A smash captain is only a top tier wrecking ball when you make him your warlord, give him a relic and spend a ton of CP on him. If you don't do all that you are left with a good but reasonably priced character - not the OP death machine in every list that you paint him to be
But hey keep thinking that everyone else is the problem if it makes you feel better I guess
IanVanCheese wrote: I agree with the sentiment that it's everyone else that needs toning down, rather than Necrons that need buffing up. In theory.
But it's much easier to buff the power of one book than nerf everyone else, so yeah, our HQs need to come down in points and be better.
This is literally the crux of it. When you look around and almost every other faction has its HQ's as the mvp's, what do you do; nerf upwards of 30 individual powerful datasheets across multiple ranges, or simply buff the datasheets from the one struggling faction? I know which is easier and which I'd do.
So maybe HeroHammer is exactly what GW intended. The only army without the necessary tools are Necrons
torblind wrote: It's also worth it noting that when you MWBD your destroyers you deteriorate the hit rate ever so slightly with Extermination Protocols as you will reroll some of those hits into misses.
(2s are misses before modifiers and would trigger a reroll, which sometimes give you a one.)
It happens to fractions of a dice each time, and there is an overwhelming net gain due to the rerolls to wound, but worth making a mental note of, as it's easily forgotten.
2+ re-rolling 1s and 2s is better than 2+. But I never knew I had to re-roll those 2s, good to keep in mind.
Remember, for Destroyers the alternative is 2+ rerolling 1s, not plain 2+.
A smash captain is only a top tier wrecking ball when you make him your warlord, give him a relic and spend a ton of CP on him. If you don't do all that you are left with a good but reasonably priced character - not the OP death machine in every list that you paint him to be
Not true. People play multiple smash captains, because they are glass cannons. His warlord trait is only one of many buffs.
A smash captain is only a top tier wrecking ball when you make him your warlord, give him a relic and spend a ton of CP on him. If you don't do all that you are left with a good but reasonably priced character - not the OP death machine in every list that you paint him to be
Not true. People play multiple smash captains, because they are glass cannons. His warlord trait is only one of many buffs.
I didn't say some people don't play multiple smash captains. But only the one with all the tacked-on advantages that I stated is a killing machine.
It's not the best idea to put all eggs in one basket. It makes more sense to give one smash captain angels wings, another gets the hammer of baal, and a third one gets a warlord trait.
listylist88 wrote: I managed 4 wins out of 5 games at last weekend's Northern UKETC 2 day team event. There wasn't actually a limit of 1 type of each detachment so this was the first tournament where I decided to ditch the battalion altogether. I have to say it worked great, I could really focus on taking the best units possible. This was the first time I've ran Tomb Blades in tournament and I thought they were excellent, pretty much all of our Fast Attack choices are really good. I think it's quite easy to play the army with a budget amount of CP, next tournament in August is ITC so I'll be running Air Wing and ditching the battalion again. For the first time in a while there was actually another necron player in the field as well. I think he also did okay so we're slowly starting to represent again
List looks great, but I have to ask, why Imotekh? Other than his storm (and the extra CP), you can't really benefit from his other abilities. Seems like you could cut him down to an overlord/lord and fit a couple more tomb blades in. I guess the storm and CP could be worth the trade off though.
P.s. what did you face?
I had my reservations about Imotekh as well but after 10 games or so I've got no plans to swap him out. As you mentioned Call the Storm and +1 CP are good benefits especially because I don't build lists with a lot of CP. His shooting attack and survivability are also reasonable. He MWBDs the Nephrekh destroyers so that's something. Overlords do f-all apart from MWBD and for someone who isn't using troops like me the Overlord is just tax-crap. If I switched to a Nihilakh spearhead instead I would probably use a Canoptek Cryptek to at least get the D3 heal but I doubt it.
==
It's important to mention I luckily managed to avoid some of the more extreme gimmick lists which were popular at the event. There were a lot of 7+ flyer Eldar lists or 200+ model horde lists which I never ran into.
I think Necrons are still viewed as somewhat of a soft-touch so perhaps that helped in the match-ups I got. That said, I would've actually liked to go toe-to-toe with the flyer stuff but my opponents always declined the match-up in the team selection and I was matched with someone else. If anyone's ever played ETC team format you'll be familiar with how it works.
1st Game was a Tau double Riptide and double Broadside build. Destroyers ruin Broadsides and Call The Storm was useful against his castle. Close game though, the 3++ Riptide ability is actually stupid!?!? They pretty much did whatever they wanted all game. Glad it ended on Turn 5 as he was in the ascendancy but he couldn't catch my point tally in time. Close Win, v happy he was a good player.
2nd Game was against Cadia mass Tank Commander + Pask + Assassins. Just kill the flat 3 damage Emperor's Fist battle Cannon and this game would've been very winnable but I learned my lesson for next time and enjoyed it. I made far too many mistakes, this match-up should actually have been quite straight-forward for Necron but fair play to my opponent. Close Loss.
3rd Game was a gimmick mass drop pod (?) + assassins and blood angel smash captain list. Needless to say it was an interesting experience. It was a strange game but I pulled too far ahead on kill points and got a close-ish/good win.
4th Game Blood Angel with Centurions and Aggressors castle and Smash Captains + Assassins. It was Destroyers vs elite infantry and Centurion lascannons vs Quantum Shielding. He conceded turn 3. Heavy Win.
5th Game was Deathwatch, despite the result I thought this list was the most brutal, he'd won all his previous 4 and I could see why. He chose Fast Attack (obviously) as the Mission tactic and his veterans shredded pretty much anything except the DDAs with ease. He killed 3 Wraiths on overwatch alone. Even mass storm shield can't withstand extermination protocols though and the tomb blades Str5 weight of fire also kicked-ass. Close win.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
Yeah our boy Storm Lord keeps in my lists beacuse of the storm and extra CP. His Storm means that even on turn one way out of range he can do SOMETHING other than just My Will Be Done like other OLords. That is a lot of points for just MWBD most of the game. This is another reason I have started to shy away from Crypteks if someone decides to go after something else besides my Immortals he as dead weight. So min costed Lord seems to be a better use of points for me.
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
I find the DArks plus HD's can bracket a Knight in one round so that's something.
So you keep the lord back there with them then?
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
Keep in mind that Lord only buff Infantry
EDIT : maybe you were talking of buffing the H Destroyers, my bad.
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
I find the DArks plus HD's can bracket a Knight in one round so that's something.
So you keep the lord back there with them then?
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
That's not really how the math goes. It's the exact opposite in fact.
The more important question is "50% of what", and "17% of what", ie deal with absolutes and not relatives.
RP is already quite weak, 1/3 chance improved to 1/2 chance, but how many rolls will they get to make through the course of a game?
The HDs will do a very different type of roll. Improving their scores by 17% could be huge, they're one of your main sources of anti tank, and there's the variance/luck aspcet of it, not just the average. Reviving the odd tomb blade is likely a quite marginal affair in comparison.
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
I find the DArks plus HD's can bracket a Knight in one round so that's something.
So you keep the lord back there with them then?
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
That's not really how the math goes. It's the exact opposite in fact.
The more important question is "50% of what", and "17% of what", ie deal with absolutes and not relatives.
RP is already quite weak, 1/3 chance improved to 1/2 chance, but how many rolls will they get to make through the course of a game?
The HDs will do a very different type of roll. Improving their scores by 17% could be huge, they're one of your main sources of anti tank, and there's the variance/luck aspcet of it, not just the average. Reviving the odd tomb blade is likely a quite marginal affair in comparison.
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
I find the DArks plus HD's can bracket a Knight in one round so that's something.
So you keep the lord back there with them then?
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
I think you mixed things up, you get a 17% increase in damage output for Infantry units within 6" of a Lord and a 50% increase in RP for units within 3" of a Cryptek. A Cryptek would be able to help with the Heavy Destroyers' and TBs' RP and heal the DDAs while the Lord only provides that modest boost in firepower to the Heavy Destroyers. The list would be quite a bit better with a third DDA and a Cloaktek replacing the Heavy Destroyers and Lord, Nihilakh does nothing for Heavy Destroyers which makes the list kind of irksome to look at from an optimization standpoint, it's not the biggest deal if you like your HDs or don't have a third DDA, but it seems like a clear mistake from a purely competitive perspective.
If you wanted to continue with the current number and kinds of models I'd suggest running the Wraiths, Destroyers and TBs in a Nephrekh Outrider led by your Destroyer Lord and putting the Heavy Support into your Battalion and changing it to be Sautekh or Mephrit as this would make the Lord far more useful, it would also make the Heavy Destroyers rather than the Destroyers benefit from your Cryptek and would allow you to get more use out of your Warriors while they are on the table, which I'd argue is better than using CP to DS them and then having a Code that can only be used when you Advance and therefore don't shoot with them. I'd also go with one unit of 20 Warriors and one unit of 16, maybe see if you can trade someone for another 4 Warriors since running more than 9 Scarabs and more than 40 Warriors is terribly unpopular, but running 40 Warriors can be very fun. Replacing the Wraiths with Scarabs would probably be best, they provide an adequate amount of damage and way more board presence, a 4-man Wraith squad isn't that scary, it'll very quickly be reduced to 2 models and be unable to surround a model in combat and prevent it from escaping, a key to making melee units more effective IMO and trying to have your TBs assist in taking captives won't necessarily end well.
Werekill wrote: To be fair, that's slightly misleading. It's a 50% buff to the percent chance, yes, but it's not an additional 50% reanimated.
It's a base of 33.3% chance increased to 50% chance, an increase of 17% more units resurrected. Percentages can be a bit tricky to talk about.
No a Cryptek will Reanimate 17% of the dead models in nearby units. Nearby units will pass 50% more RP rolls when near a Cryptek. The math often looks pretty terrible for Crypteks outside of armies that make heavy use of RP like Warrior blobs, big squads of TBs or Destroyers and even then Lords will still usually perform better if you ignore the Chronometron or Canoptek Cloak, but that's half the reason to take a Cryptek, which speaks ill of how poor the naked Cryptek is.
A Lord has nothing to do with 50%, he will never increase your firepower by 50%. If you have 100 pts worth of relevant units close to a Lord he will provide 17 pts worth of shooting. His real strength lies in how he combines with other buffs, if those 100 pts worth of shooting is multiplied to 200 pts worth of shooting by other means then the Lord will provide 34 pts worth of shooting.
v0iddrgn wrote: Just wanted to share this list with you all. I'm liking the full Heavy Destroyer unit as it can be pretty mobile and reroll 1's to hit and wound.
Tomb Blades [14 PL, 264pts] . Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
. Tomb Blade: Nebuloscope, Shieldvanes
. . Two Tesla Carbines: 2x Tesla Carbine
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 160pts]
Heavy Destroyers [9 PL, 150pts] . 3x Heavy Destroyer: 3x Heavy Gauss Cannon
I find the DArks plus HD's can bracket a Knight in one round so that's something.
So you keep the lord back there with them then?
Yes, he provides rerolling 1's to wound PLUS backfield counter assault AND he's cheaper than a Cryptek. I've flirted with running a Cloaktek with the TB's instead but I'd rather get the 50% buff to wound rather than a 17% buff for RP.
I think you mixed things up, you get a 17% increase in damage output for Infantry units within 6" of a Lord and a 50% increase in RP for units within 3" of a Cryptek. A Cryptek would be able to help with the Heavy Destroyers' and TBs' RP and heal the DDAs while the Lord only provides that modest boost in firepower to the Heavy Destroyers. The list would be quite a bit better with a third DDA and a Cloaktek replacing the Heavy Destroyers and Lord, Nihilakh does nothing for Heavy Destroyers which makes the list kind of irksome to look at from an optimization standpoint, it's not the biggest deal if you like your HDs or don't have a third DDA, but it seems like a clear mistake from a purely competitive perspective.
If you wanted to continue with the current number and kinds of models I'd suggest running the Wraiths, Destroyers and TBs in a Nephrekh Outrider led by your Destroyer Lord and putting the Heavy Support into your Battalion and changing it to be Sautekh or Mephrit as this would make the Lord far more useful, it would also make the Heavy Destroyers rather than the Destroyers benefit from your Cryptek and would allow you to get more use out of your Warriors while they are on the table, which I'd argue is better than using CP to DS them and then having a Code that can only be used when you Advance and therefore don't shoot with them. I'd also go with one unit of 20 Warriors and one unit of 16, maybe see if you can trade someone for another 4 Warriors since running more than 9 Scarabs and more than 40 Warriors is terribly unpopular, but running 40 Warriors can be very fun. Replacing the Wraiths with Scarabs would probably be best, they provide an adequate amount of damage and way more board presence, a 4-man Wraith squad isn't that scary, it'll very quickly be reduced to 2 models and be unable to surround a model in combat and prevent it from escaping, a key to making melee units more effective IMO and trying to have your TBs assist in taking captives.
The Heavy Destroyers are there for MOBILE anti-tank. The DArks are static and can be hidden from. The reason I like running Nephrekh battalion is so that the slowest elements of the army can teleport or advance to advantageous positions easily. I'm not a fan of Sautekh outside of Doom Scythes, so Im happy to take rerolling 1's from a Nihilakh Spearhead instead.
Just got back from an event called the Cleveland Chainsword Championship, a 50-person GT at a Dave and Busters (awesome venue, highly recommend getting out there for it next year if you can!). I went 5-1 and took 2nd Overall with the following list:
I flip-flop a lot about taking the Nephrekh Battalion or just using Imotekh and all Sautekh but I really liked the extra movement this weekend. I have to decide if I think an Overlord is worth it just to buff Destroyers (virtually never used it on anything else). Otherwise it's pretty much "the list" right now, but always cool to take Necrons far in a bigger event! Only person who finished ahead of me was TJ Lanigan, who's 2nd overall in ITC right now and has won like 4-5 GTs in a row.
Just got back from an event called the Cleveland Chainsword Championship, a 50-person GT at a Dave and Busters (awesome venue, highly recommend getting out there for it next year if you can!). I went 5-1 and took 2nd Overall with the following list:
I flip-flop a lot about taking the Nephrekh Battalion or just using Imotekh and all Sautekh but I really liked the extra movement this weekend. I have to decide if I think an Overlord is worth it just to buff Destroyers (virtually never used it on anything else). Otherwise it's pretty much "the list" right now, but always cool to take Necrons far in a bigger event! Only person who finished ahead of me was TJ Lanigan, who's 2nd overall in ITC right now and has won like 4-5 GTs in a row.
Just got back from an event called the Cleveland Chainsword Championship, a 50-person GT at a Dave and Busters (awesome venue, highly recommend getting out there for it next year if you can!). I went 5-1 and took 2nd Overall with the following list:
Congrats ! I am a little surprised you have no scarabs. Also surprised you mentioned MWBD on destroyers. I usually never MWBD them, i use EP on them every turn until they die. Which happens pretty fast. You could remove the sautekh spearhead, get rid of the cryptek, add the TBs and DAs to the nephrekh battalion, make it sautekh, and use the cryptek leftover points to replace the overlord with imotekh.
I'm running something similar for ATC, except a few more immortals and Wraiths instead of tomb blades. It's been 3-0 in the few test games I've gotten in so far. It's a tough call though between the movement and more CPs. I usually lean towards having the movement because I can be pretty thrifty with CP and board control is a thing.
@vict0988: If I get some time later in the week I may produce a summary for you guys. I showed some Irond Hands Primaris the meaning of Weak Flesh round one, then I played a Daemon/Thousand Sons Soup list, a Daemons/Flawless Host Discolord list, and three Imperial Soup lists of various sorts.
@p5freak: Your suggestion to dump the Spearhead, etc., is the alternate version of this list I go to when I'm in the mood for extra Mortal Wounds. Like I said, I go back and forth between the two builds.
As for a lack of Scarabs, they aren't really necessary, but they do have uses. I have a third list I haven't tried yet but am curious to give a run out, which ditches the Battalion altogether, and runs as follows:
My one loss on the weekend happened because Immortals got locked in combat and I couldn't shoot important targets off objectives for two turns. Two turns in a row where my opponent outscored me on the primaries, and I lost by 3pts. So I'm now even more interested in a list with 100% Fly keyword, lol.
I know the ETC format is not very popular here, but the 2019 lists have been released and there is some necrons in some rosters. Usually Sautekh tesla spam with a Doomwing, but not always (one list has 3 Annihilation Barges).
Remember that it is a team tournament, with only one codex representation for 8 players.
It's interesting that some team decided to take necrons in the roster, and in my opinion it is here to be a counter for some list (Doomwing is scary against Castle Tau).
Is there any world in which the Annihilation Barge can be justified? A squad of immortals costs about the same, and has far more firepower.
The tesla destructor is one of the worst guns in the game at this point. No AP, and 1 damage limit it to shooting chaff, which we already have higher ROF shooting to handle.
I've got several of the things, and they've seen use once this edition. I was not impressed.
iGuy91 wrote: Is there any world in which the Annihilation Barge can be justified? A squad of immortals costs about the same, and has far more firepower.
The tesla destructor is one of the worst guns in the game at this point. No AP, and 1 damage limit it to shooting chaff, which we already have higher ROF shooting to handle.
I've got several of the things, and they've seen use once this edition. I was not impressed.
You'd have to compare it to 3 or 4 Tesla blades, but even then it's a tough sale.
What it has going for it:
- higher T
- smaller unit footprint
- higher S
- different FOC slot
- does not "bracket" with damage (tomb blades drop a model and corresponding damage output every two wounds, the barge is still at maximum output with only a single wound left)
- QS
If any of the above is relevant to your meta, then you might consider it
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and it's a cool model!
Sautekh Anni Barges are like 2 Tesla Tomb Blades and a Destroyer taped together.
Anni Barge with GC is 120. 2 Tomb blades + Destroyer are 112.
There's lots of little differences between them but you get similar firepower, speed, and durability for a similar amount of points.
ABs aren't the most efficient option but they're not terrible. I've never been disappointed when fielding a trio (I only have so many TBs and Destroyers).
Shaelinith wrote: I know the ETC format is not very popular here, but the 2019 lists have been released and there is some necrons in some rosters. Usually Sautekh tesla spam with a Doomwing, but not always (one list has 3 Annihilation Barges).
Remember that it is a team tournament, with only one codex representation for 8 players.
It's interesting that some team decided to take necrons in the roster, and in my opinion it is here to be a counter for some list (Doomwing is scary against Castle Tau).
Check out team Greece Necrons and if you got any questions on my list go ahead and ask! It might look like a very weird list, but it is a list I've been playing and evolving since January (In January I began playing 3 DDA, 3 DS, Imotekh, 3x5 Immortals Sautekh with tb spam) and I think I can talk about it a lot! I'm very glad more countries decided to bring Necrons, especially some of the stronger ones, like USA and Germany.
iGuy91 wrote: I have to ask, what is the intent of the Ghost Ark? There are no warriors to support it, so i have to assume its to hide characters from snipers?
The ghost ark is taken as a solo piece. I have played with including 1 unit of warriors a lot, but I just didn't get enough value. The reason I included a ghost ark is because it is cheap (145pts), fast, durable, flying and most importantly long model.
The way I use it is I screen in melee heavy matchups, like Orks, GSC and Chaos with the 8" long model with fly. The added bonus is that it might not even die in a single round of combat. It gives me very, very good trades. Aka, a unit of 250pts fighting twice to kill one. It can move block very well, especially combined with the flyers. 2 Flyers in front and 1 ghost ark right behind them can stop 3 knights from moving, it's incredible.
The way I use it in shooting matchups like TAU, IG etc. is an assault threat. I try to assault stuff from the get go. Deploy it aggressively, move 12" and try to "tag" stuff. Sometimes it works, other times it just draws fire. Let me tell you that for 145pts it's very durable, so drawing shooting on it instead of my DDAs or the rest of my list is generally a good reason to have it. I'll say in a LOT of my matches it's the first thing to die (except maybe a flyer).
Sometimes, it will also proc MD. Also, in the ETC format where you have to "Secure Objective X" etc. and board control is very important the long model with 12" movement (possible advance with sautekh) and fly is very, very comfortable scoring. If I didn't include it, I'd go for more Tesla Tomb Blades in my list, but I've played a lot of games with it (and a lot of games with 2 of them too) and I've really found there's a lot of perks, plays and tactics you can employ by just having 1.
EDIT: And to further answer your question, I've never put my characters in the Ghost Ark even in games versus 2-3 Vindicaires. I really need the MWBD and that's the entire reason I'm going 2 OLs, so I just BLoS on them, it's usually not very hard. I guess there could be a niche situation where it might be worth it, but I just haven't met it yet.
Plus the damage output in shooting is a full 10 warrior squad, which is 120 pts. So you're getting the extra movement, board control, fly, and durability, all for an extra 25 pts.
Shaelinith wrote: I know the ETC format is not very popular here, but the 2019 lists have been released and there is some necrons in some rosters. Usually Sautekh tesla spam with a Doomwing, but not always (one list has 3 Annihilation Barges).
Remember that it is a team tournament, with only one codex representation for 8 players.
It's interesting that some team decided to take necrons in the roster, and in my opinion it is here to be a counter for some list (Doomwing is scary against Castle Tau).
Saw one guy brought 3 ABs instead of the Doom Wing, I'm not a huge fan of the Doom Wing, but 3 ABs is borderline trolling, they are only 5 pts cheaper because of the Cryptek tax. Austria's list lacks the obligatory 3 Doomsday Arks and just spams FA and Troops and the now very common Doom Wing which is... interesting. I find the lack of Gauss Pylons and Seraptek Constructs as a dedicated Knight counter list to be confusing, I feel like Necrons possess the best anti-Knight counters in the game between tesla carbines and the aforementioned Titanic anti-Titanic units. 1 Seraptek, 1 Gauss Pylon and 1 Tesseract Vault would make quick work of a Knights list. One thing that confuses and annoys me is the TWO people bringing a unit of 4 Destroyers.
Check out team Greece Necrons and if you got any questions on my list go ahead and ask! It might look like a very weird list, but it is a list I've been playing and evolving since January (In January I began playing 3 DDA, 3 DS, Imotekh, 3x5 Immortals Sautekh with tb spam) and I think I can talk about it a lot! I'm very glad more countries decided to bring Necrons, especially some of the stronger ones, like USA and Germany.
One of which is you. Why not cut the Ghost Ark and fill out the Destroyers or cut something, anything. Why bring 4 Destroyers? Bring 0 or 6, this half-assed BS is so weird, and why are two teams bringing the same stupid squad of 4 Destroyers? JK btw, I just fine it curious. I think the Ghost Ark is decent but it's far less effective than a Triarch Stalker or Immortals IMO. 4 MWBD Immortals output 12 S5 hits, while a Ghost Ark outputs 7/13 S4 AP-1 hits at long/RF range. You are bringing your 3 Doomsday Arks though, so it's not slowed or anything, just a tech choice more than anything.
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: Plus the damage output in shooting is a full 10 warrior squad, which is 120 pts. So you're getting the extra movement, board control, fly, and durability, all for an extra 25 pts.
110, Necrons Warriors also bring CP and are Infantry and therefore benefit from our HQ's buffs. Nobody is really bringing Warriors, except maybe a squad of 20 for screening, in general it's very clear that teslamortals are by far the best troops choice we have.
Shaelinith wrote: I know the ETC format is not very popular here, but the 2019 lists have been released and there is some necrons in some rosters. Usually Sautekh tesla spam with a Doomwing, but not always (one list has 3 Annihilation Barges).
Remember that it is a team tournament, with only one codex representation for 8 players.
It's interesting that some team decided to take necrons in the roster, and in my opinion it is here to be a counter for some list (Doomwing is scary against Castle Tau).
Saw one guy brought 3 ABs instead of the Doom Wing, I'm not a huge fan of the Doom Wing, but 3 ABs is borderline trolling, they are only 5 pts cheaper because of the Cryptek tax. Austria's list lacks the obligatory 3 Doomsday Arks and just spams FA and Troops and the now very common Doom Wing which is... interesting. I find the lack of Gauss Pylons and Seraptek Constructs as a dedicated Knight counter list to be confusing, I feel like Necrons possess the best anti-Knight counters in the game between tesla carbines and the aforementioned Titanic anti-Titanic units. 1 Seraptek, 1 Gauss Pylon and 1 Tesseract Vault would make quick work of a Knights list. One thing that confuses and annoys me is the TWO people bringing a unit of 4 Destroyers.
In ETC Gauss Pylons and Seraptek Constructs are not allowed, as Forgeworld is not allowed. Hence the lack of forgeworld. (Even though, personally, I don't think FW works for singles necron lists, maybe in team tournaments)
I cannot speak for the person with the 3 ABs, that truly is odd, but besides that, I find all other Necron lists have merit.
I'm one of the two people who bring the 4 man destroyer squad and I know why Team USA did it too, as it was not my idea. The idea is that they are easy to hide, will probably die in return fire anyway, are perfect for alpha strike VoD (playing first against knights and teleporting the 4 man, should net you a turn 1 kill with the Big 6, even if tesla is out of range) and will roughly on average kill a Crimson Hunter Exarch (at +0, bearing in mind MWBD/MD) and a Lord Discordant. Which are 2 weaknesses the list cannot very well handle alone. ( The 3 Crimson Hunter Exarchs being able to shoot an entire necron army dead in 3 turns and destroyers being the only unit that can remove some reliably, and Lord Discordant having 2+ save). They also help with Broadsides a lot.
5 is sometimes overshooting and I feel kind of reluctant to VoD turn 1 alphastrike sacrifice them. 6 Destroyers is 300pts in 1 squad and losing them hurts too much.
Check out team Greece Necrons and if you got any questions on my list go ahead and ask! It might look like a very weird list, but it is a list I've been playing and evolving since January (In January I began playing 3 DDA, 3 DS, Imotekh, 3x5 Immortals Sautekh with tb spam) and I think I can talk about it a lot! I'm very glad more countries decided to bring Necrons, especially some of the stronger ones, like USA and Germany.
One of which is you. Why not cut the Ghost Ark and fill out the Destroyers or cut something, anything. Why bring 4 Destroyers? Bring 0 or 6, this half-assed BS is so weird, and why are two teams bringing the same stupid squad of 4 Destroyers? JK btw, I just fine it curious. I think the Ghost Ark is decent but it's far less effective than a Triarch Stalker or Immortals IMO. 4 MWBD Immortals output 12 S5 hits, while a Ghost Ark outputs 7/13 S4 AP-1 hits at long/RF range. You are bringing your 3 Doomsday Arks though, so it's not slowed or anything, just a tech choice more than anything.
4 Destroyers unit is talked about above, so I'll go on about the Ghost Ark. I did try the T.Stalker and it just make my castle harder. Screening for it is bad and tiring and you can easily make mistakes. It gets tied very easily due to it lacking a base (just need 3 bois to touch its front leg). I liked having it, but it wasn't the difference between killing 1 knight first turn or not and it made screening my castle way harder. 4 Arks for 20 immortals and my jetbikes is a lot more reasonable, especially since I expect to lose 1-2 before all the deepstrikes/teleports happen. I did not get the Ghost Ark for its shooting and if it was 40 points less and did not have weapons, I might have used 2. Although, very conveniently it has AP -1 weapons, to also cover my weakness for 2+ saves. (not hugely cover, but help)
In ETC Gauss Pylons and Seraptek Constructs are not allowed, as Forgeworld is not allowed. Hence the lack of forgeworld. (Even though, personally, I don't think FW works for singles necron lists, maybe in team tournaments) I cannot speak for the person with the 3 ABs, that truly is odd, but besides that, I find all other Necron lists have merit.
I'm one of the two people who bring the 4 man destroyer squad and I know why Team USA did it too, as it was not my idea. The idea is that they are easy to hide, will probably die in return fire anyway, are perfect for alpha strike VoD (playing first against knights and teleporting the 4 man, should net you a turn 1 kill with the Big 6, even if tesla is out of range) and will roughly on average kill a Crimson Hunter Exarch (at +0, bearing in mind MWBD/MD) and a Lord Discordant. Which are 2 weaknesses the list cannot very well handle alone. ( The 3 Crimson Hunter Exarchs being able to shoot an entire necron army dead in 3 turns and destroyers being the only unit that can remove some reliably, and Lord Discordant having 2+ save). They also help with Broadsides a lot. 5 is sometimes overshooting and I feel kind of reluctant to VoD turn 1 alphastrike sacrifice them. 6 Destroyers is 300pts in 1 squad and losing them hurts too much.
I totally forgot about the FW ban, that's interesting. That has to hurt CSM and SM quite a lot, I think the dakka flyer AM gets is FW as well. Especially for Custodes it has a big impact, but then it probably isn't fair if beta rules get used to dominate a team tournament, especially when maybe not every country is able to field the new Custodes units.
I think your reason for fielding a unit of 4 Destroyers is extremely poor, you are spending the MWBD, VoD, HQ and Extermination Protocols anyways, the 100 pts is too good to pass up, just have them shoot something other than the Lord Discordant on Helstalker if you are worried about overkill, I'd be far more worried about underkill, especially if First Strike is a thing.
If you take 6, you can use 4 of them to pop a Crimson Hunter and the remaining two to trigger MD on another Crimson Hunter. Triggering MD can be a bit of a pain with Doomsday Arks, between rolling low on the number of shots and hitting on 6s (assuming your opponent doesn't waste LFR on the Destroyer target) you might never even trigger MD before you have nothing left to shoot with. I feel like you sound very casual about using the Veil to go up and shoot a Crimson Hunter, I personally find the Veil to be a little underwhelming against CE because of the Farseer's ability to have a unit shoot you after you veil.
I did not get the Ghost Ark for its shooting and if it was 40 points less and did not have weapons, I might have used 2.
I love the idea that you value having a big brick so much, it's too bad the Monolith can't do that job. With you using Veil aggressively with your Destroyers it makes a lot of sense that you need to screen with your Ghost Ark and it has to be one of our best units for that role so I applaud you for finding a unit that fits your playstyle but isn't widely recognized for being awesome.
I'm one of the two people who bring the 4 man destroyer squad and I know why Team USA did it too, as it was not my idea. The idea is that they are easy to hide, will probably die in return fire anyway, are perfect for alpha strike VoD (playing first against knights and teleporting the 4 man, should net you a turn 1 kill with the Big 6, even if tesla is out of range) and will roughly on average kill a Crimson Hunter Exarch (at +0, bearing in mind MWBD/MD) and a Lord Discordant. Which are 2 weaknesses the list cannot very well handle alone. ( The 3 Crimson Hunter Exarchs being able to shoot an entire necron army dead in 3 turns and destroyers being the only unit that can remove some reliably, and Lord Discordant having 2+ save). They also help with Broadsides a lot.
5 is sometimes overshooting and I feel kind of reluctant to VoD turn 1 alphastrike sacrifice them. 6 Destroyers is 300pts in 1 squad and losing them hurts too much.
What do you consider strong and poor matchup for you list, against what are you confident ? The return necron list in multiple strong teams is not a coincidence, but i'm not sure why. In France the faction is still not considered strong enough to take a spot (even in qualifiers for the French Team they were almost no necrons if i remember correctly). Playing similar list i found it strong, but i clearly don't play at the same level that those guys so i'm curious.
In ETC Gauss Pylons and Seraptek Constructs are not allowed, as Forgeworld is not allowed. Hence the lack of forgeworld. (Even though, personally, I don't think FW works for singles necron lists, maybe in team tournaments)
I cannot speak for the person with the 3 ABs, that truly is odd, but besides that, I find all other Necron lists have merit.
I'm one of the two people who bring the 4 man destroyer squad and I know why Team USA did it too, as it was not my idea. The idea is that they are easy to hide, will probably die in return fire anyway, are perfect for alpha strike VoD (playing first against knights and teleporting the 4 man, should net you a turn 1 kill with the Big 6, even if tesla is out of range) and will roughly on average kill a Crimson Hunter Exarch (at +0, bearing in mind MWBD/MD) and a Lord Discordant. Which are 2 weaknesses the list cannot very well handle alone. ( The 3 Crimson Hunter Exarchs being able to shoot an entire necron army dead in 3 turns and destroyers being the only unit that can remove some reliably, and Lord Discordant having 2+ save). They also help with Broadsides a lot.
5 is sometimes overshooting and I feel kind of reluctant to VoD turn 1 alphastrike sacrifice them. 6 Destroyers is 300pts in 1 squad and losing them hurts too much.
I totally forgot about the FW ban, that's interesting. That has to hurt CSM and SM quite a lot, I think the dakka flyer AM gets is FW as well. Especially for Custodes it has a big impact, but then it probably isn't fair if beta rules get used to dominate a team tournament, especially when maybe not every country is able to field the new Custodes units.
I think your reason for fielding a unit of 4 Destroyers is extremely poor, you are spending the MWBD, VoD, HQ and Extermination Protocols anyways, the 100 pts is too good to pass up, just have them shoot something other than the Lord Discordant on Helstalker if you are worried about overkill, I'd be far more worried about underkill, especially if First Strike is a thing.
Speaking of underkill, 4 Destroyers is too few to delete a Crimson Hunter.
*4*3/36*32/36*20/6*5*2=9,88
*12-9,88>0
*6/4*9,88=14
*12-14<0
If you take 6, you can use 5 of them to pop a Crimson Hunter and the remaining one to trigger MD on another Crimson Hunter. Triggering MD can be a bit of a pain with Doomsday Arks, between rolling low on the number of shots and hitting on 6s (assuming your opponent doesn't waste LFR on the Destroyer target) you might never even trigger MD before you have nothing left to shoot with. I feel like you sound very casual about using the Veil to go up and shoot a Crimson Hunter, I personally find the Veil to be a little underwhelming against CE because of the Farseer's ability to have a unit shoot you after you veil.
It's not a matter of right or wrong and I appreciate your view. I've thought about this for a very long time and I ended up playing a 4man destroyer unit that will be hard to ever RP and has less value from EP and I'm also running a squad of 5 TBs, which also are hard to RP, but they are the result of a lot of playtesting and mature, considerate thought. I did not understand quite what you did with your math, the math is quite simple for 4 destroyers with EP on Crimson Hunter Exarchs:
12 shots * (8/9) to hit * (3/4) to wound * (5/6) save * 2 damage = 13.333 unsaved wounds for a +0 modifier
and 12 * (2/3) * (3/4) * (5/6) * 2 = 10 unsaved wounds for a -1 modifier
The trick with the destroyers in the eldar matchup is to try and make the flyers move out of their screen (be it wave serpents, war walkers, support platforms or fireprisms/nightspinners) so that the Destroyers can VoD within 12", which some good opponents will screen for a long time. Forewarned is not a huge deal, because it needs a shooting unit within 6" of a farseer and they both need LoS to your unit. Some times, keeping the destroyers hidden for a turn and then VoDing them on the flyers is a smart choice. Though, usually you don't want to let the CHE ruin your entire army. Also, bear in mind, if the destroyers are shooting (which means they VoDed), I'm also bringing 3 flyers within 12" of the CHEs. MD proc is feasible even with the Tesla Destructors and you also get 3 Death Rays with only a -1.
The Crimson Hunter Exarch is the only flyer/thing that you need to kill in the eldar matchup as best as you can and opponents who know this can make it super hard.
What do you consider strong and poor matchup for you list, against what are you confident ? The return necron list in multiple strong teams is not a coincidence, but i'm not sure why. In France the faction is still not considered strong enough to take a spot (even in qualifiers for the French Team they were almost no necrons if i remember correctly). Playing similar list i found it strong, but i clearly don't play at the same level that those guys so i'm curious.
Eldar in general, but specifically Crimson Hunter Exarchs is a problem. Just less than 500pts (for 3 CHEs) can table my entire army in 4~ turns and I as a return have only a few solutions that a very good eldar player might not let me employ to full strength. I consider my list a very good all comers tool, it has a lot of different little things it can adopt and do in different matchups. The eldar matchup is probably the worst, at least for me, even though I've seen other Necrons do very well against them. I just find good eldar players with 3 Crimson Hunter Exarchs to be a pain in the ass. Besides that, the good matchups are orks, gsc, chaos hordes. Knights are mostly a good matchup (so triple knights that are not Taranis), especially if going first. A list with 4~ knights, Crusaders with Rapidfire cannons (no thermals) and Taranis house trait + maybe tank commanders that goes first is probably not in my favor(But that is rare, most knights list go for Triple Crusader with Thermal Cannons and I think can handle that). Going first against list that are heavy on broadsides/drones should be an auto-win just purely thanks to the flyer stratagem. Going second, trying to outrange his 36" with the flyers, not letting him kauyon and making him shoot inefficiently will also work, but it's not an auto-win. Thank god we're very good at killing drones with tesla. Lord Discordants + Mortarion + Epitome + DPs + PGBS (Geoff's list) I've lost to, but I generally feel like I have the tools to be able to deal with it. Learning how to use terrain to its absolute max is very important and, obviously, protecting flyers from the Epitome. Deathwatch can be very tricky. If it's less than 4 squads and less than 3 terminators in each squad, you can probably blow to pieces. If it's 5-6 squads and 4 terminators in each squad, things start to get difficult, although DW lacks teeth against us and going that heavy on veterans means there's not a lot of Blood Angels supporting, but it probably should be able to outscore me. DE is kind of a hard matchup depending on the DE list, I think I can handle wracks/grots. Venom spam is why MWBD/Tesla is so good, but they have the better range, more mobility and more units to score with. Tomb Blades are obviously vulnerable to Dissies, but their -1 and T5 means it takes 24 shots to kill them (them only being 5 and everything). I think I covered some of the basic, if you have more questions shoot.
The math is quite simple for 4 destroyers with EP on Crimson Hunter Exarchs:
12 shots * (8/9) to hit * (3/4) to wound * (5/6) save * 2 damage = 13.333 unsaved wounds for a +0 modifier and 12 * (2/3) * (3/4) * (5/6) * 2 = 10 unsaved wounds for a -1 modifier
My math was off, I was thinking it was T7. I guess 4 is enough for the job you want them to do.
Check out team Greece Necrons and if you got any questions on my list go ahead and ask! It might look like a very weird list, but it is a list I've been playing and evolving since January (In January I began playing 3 DDA, 3 DS, Imotekh, 3x5 Immortals Sautekh with tb spam) and I think I can talk about it a lot! I'm very glad more countries decided to bring Necrons, especially some of the stronger ones, like USA and Germany.
EDIT: Attached my list for reference.
Thanks for sharing! I find your analysis fascinating.
I can totally see the use of an empty Ghost Ark for screening, and just to shut down units by ramming into them. It's also the last thing anyone wants to have to shoot at due to it's durability, but if it's going to start shutting down units in HtH, they don't have a choice!
I do find the 4 man Destroyer unit a little harder to get on board with. 6 makes more efficient use of the buffs (MWBD, VoD, EP), and overkill isn't an issue if you split fire (1 or 2 would be ideal for triggering MD on a second target). They are also very good vs Terminators, which you mention causing you trouble. However your reasoning is not without merit, and gives me something interesting to think about.
I would like to ask you (or people in general) about your Doom Scythes. I only have 2 so can't trigger the strat, but have started to use them to see what the fuss us about. Their firepower doesn't seem amazing for the points, but I've found the ability to find targets that are trying to hide very valuable.
How often do you use the ATD stratagem for them? Do you think they are worth it without that?
Also, you don't like Imotekh?
I hope you come back and let us know how you got on.
I'd been struggling with Necrons for months, then finally succumbed to using a variation on "the build". I now have reasonable games against good players and deliver thrashings against new players.
100 S5 Tesla shots
24 S7 Tesla shots
3D3 Deathray shots
3D6 Doomsday cannon shots
60 Gauss Flayer shots
The Doomscythe strategem and Immo have a "chilling effect" on enemy deployment, making the spread out their castles. So even if you never use them, they are still worthwhile.
Massive amounts of Tesla, combined with MWBD and/or MD is just brutal, and the combination of them can focus down a really tough target when you desperately need something dead.
DDAs can provide a massive wall against hordes (against which the mass-Tesla really shines), and as noted above the flyers can snipe characters quite well.
In general, your infantry is very good anti-infantry, and your vehicles are very good anti-vehicle. Their anti-vehicle will struggle against ours (-1 to hit, or quantum shielding), and our infantry is quite resilient at range.
Finally, I find often times after having used the strategem, I would have been better off just firing the death-rays at juicy targets instead, so it's a double-edged sword in that regard.
Check out team Greece Necrons and if you got any questions on my list go ahead and ask! It might look like a very weird list, but it is a list I've been playing and evolving since January (In January I began playing 3 DDA, 3 DS, Imotekh, 3x5 Immortals Sautekh with tb spam) and I think I can talk about it a lot! I'm very glad more countries decided to bring Necrons, especially some of the stronger ones, like USA and Germany.
EDIT: Attached my list for reference.
Thanks for sharing! I find your analysis fascinating.
I can totally see the use of an empty Ghost Ark for screening, and just to shut down units by ramming into them. It's also the last thing anyone wants to have to shoot at due to it's durability, but if it's going to start shutting down units in HtH, they don't have a choice!
I do find the 4 man Destroyer unit a little harder to get on board with. 6 makes more efficient use of the buffs (MWBD, VoD, EP), and overkill isn't an issue if you split fire (1 or 2 would be ideal for triggering MD on a second target). They are also very good vs Terminators, which you mention causing you trouble. However your reasoning is not without merit, and gives me something interesting to think about.
I would like to ask you (or people in general) about your Doom Scythes. I only have 2 so can't trigger the strat, but have started to use them to see what the fuss us about. Their firepower doesn't seem amazing for the points, but I've found the ability to find targets that are trying to hide very valuable.
How often do you use the ATD stratagem for them? Do you think they are worth it without that?
Also, you don't like Imotekh?
I hope you come back and let us know how you got on.
I think having 2 flyers is not advisable. I don't use ATD in more than half my games and not because my flyer dies. There's a lot of matchups where it just won't work (Knights, eldar, etc.) . Then again, I would not play the flyers without this stratagem (hence, I wouldn't play 2 flyers), because of the threat it poses, the choices it forces you to make and the fact that it really ruins TAU. The stratagem alone gives you some matchups that are not necessarily already good matchups, like tau castles, heavy DW veterans, character heavy pgb and weirder stuff like paladin builds and even bullgryns. The other thing that is VERY important about the flyers is that they are both our "indirect fire" and our "snipers". Killing nurglings in weird terrain, scouts, guardsmen that are scoring is very hard with necrons, due to our lack of indirect fire and flyers help mitigate that with their amazing tesla destructors. We have 0 sniping capabilities as an army and the flyers also give us that. They have sniped for me so many characters, both with ATD and just by flying on characters and shooting them and that's just something we really need. So, while I don't use ATD often, I really like the flyer wing for the stratagem threat and the indirect/sniping shooting. And even after the FAQ, they can screen/moveblock pretty well, especially when paired with Ark(s) behind them.
EDIT: I really like Imotekh. I include him in every build where I'm going 3 squads of Immortals + destroyers. Right now, I've chosen to play 2 full squads of Immortals and use the 6 man, outside MWBD range for scoring or baiting/screening discolords/mortarion, etc. (except of course castle scenarios where all immortals are screened) If I would play Imotekh, it would probably be Imotekh + Lord or OL with VoD (depending on how many MWBD I need). I don't really like crypteks, especially since I'm not running large squads of jetbikes. Right now, 2 OLs is a very cheap HQ tax for 9 CP, but also provides me with a rock solid weapon with 2 (or 3 for 1 CP) MWBD per turn and I've got 2 units of 10 immortals and a destroyer squad to consume those. I wouldn't really need more MWBD, and if I included Imotekh I'd need to cut points from my jetbikes. It also doesn't force me to play my 2 immortal squads together (so that I can MWBD both with Imotekh), which is problematic in case you get caught somehow in melee. I don't really value the Storm, but it's a very nice gimmick to have. I played him religiously before the FAQ, but with the nerf to Lootas and Ynnari Reapers the Storm just doesn't have superb value every game anymore.
It isnt true that we have 0 sniping capabilities. A mephrit CCB with merciless tyrant can snipe characters from 30" with tesla cannon, and staff of light from 18". Deathmarks also can snipe characters, but arent viable.
C'tan can snipe as well, Imotekh and Transdimensional Thunderbolt will put a wound on a Character on occasion and if your opponent fails to screen then two or three C'tan with Cosmic Fire will usually kill at least one character in a castle. I used a Mephrit Doom Wing the other day and because they had nowhere to hide but the corner of the table they were the only target for my opponent, so I lost 2 before my first round. The last one was able to snipe a character and force my opponent to discard a Defend Objective because of the mission rules, so they weren't too bad. Losing 300 pts isn't really too much, but my counterpunch was too weak because I had 400 pts in reserves and I rolled low on the Advance roll for one of my Immortal Squads.
Characters arent protected from ctan powers, because those happen at the end of the movement phase. The character protection rule only applies in the shooting phase. Transdimensional thunderbolt says you can only a choose a CHARACTER if he is the closest enemy unit, or has more than 10 wounds. Its the only power who has this limitation about characters.
There was some questions upthread about the Annihilation Barge, the usual reason is being Mephit. They shoot from within half range most rounds, and the -1 makes the tesla incredibly damaging.
Oh yeah, a pair of Mephrit Barges rocking all tesla supported by a Cloaktek actually approaches dangerous levels of anti-elite-infantry and monsters
I used them in a local Patrol-Only event recently and went 2-1 for a 5th/22 finish, including a game against another Necron player and against some Power Armour
but, if im being completely fair with myself and all of you who care to read, I still rate the Barge quite highly, it's just factually not high enough to make to a "serious" tournement list, but thats due to the locals not to do with the unit.
p5freak wrote: Characters arent protected from ctan powers, because those happen at the end of the movement phase. The character protection rule only applies in the shooting phase. Transdimensional thunderbolt says you can only a choose a CHARACTER if he is the closest enemy unit, or has more than 10 wounds. Its the only power who has this limitation about characters.
Technically Anti-Matter Meteor also has a character limitation as its closest unit, but yeah, you can kill characters with C'tan powers. The thing though is that Time's Arrow is the only one that's actually efficient at it, and its only effective against characters with low max wounds. You could use it against a character with 5 wounds, but your chances aren't great.
A = borderline auto include B = really good C = can be situationally decent D = generally not worth it F = straight up bad
Imotekh : A Zahndrekh : C Trazyn : D Anrakyr : B *Kutlakh : C Obyron : B Orikan : C Szeras : B *Toholk : C
Command B. : B Overlord : A D. Lord : C Lord : B Cloak-tek : B Chrono-tek : B
G. Immortals : B T. Immortals : A Warriors : C Ghost A. : C
G. Tomb Blades : A T. Tomb Blades : A P.B. Tomb Blades : C Destroyers : B Scarabs : B Wraiths : B *Acanthrites : D *To. Sentinel : C
Deathmarks : C Flayed Ones : D Scythe-guard : C Shield-guard : C Rod-Praets : D Void-Praets : C HGC Stalker : B Heat Stalker : C Part. Stalker : D Deceiver : B Night Br. : B *To. Stalker : D
Spyder : D H. Destroyers : C A. Barge : C Doomsday A Monolith : D T. C'tan : C *Tess. Ark : B *Heat S. Pylon : C *Death S. Pylon : F *Gauss S. Pylon : D
Taking this list to a tournament tomorrow, I have had some decent success with it in the practice games I have played (think I am 5-2, with one of those losses being by 1 point).
Spoiler:
Nihilakh Battalion Detachment:
Overlord w/ warscythe
Lord w/ hyperphase sword
8x Immortals w/ tesla
7x Immortals w/ tesla
7x Immortals w/ tesla
2x Doomsday Arks
Novokh Outrider Detachment:
Overlord w/ warscythe, VoD
10xLychguard w/ warscythes
6x Wraiths
3x Scarabs
3x Scarabs
Sautekh Airwing:
3x Doomscythes
The scarabs are generally objective holders (if I have good LoS blocking terrain I will make them engineers and get those extra points as well), while the lychguard and wraiths tend to do a good job of moving across the board and tying stuff up in combat. So far in every game where my opponent had a castellan/knight/superheavy the lychguard have either killed it or done a good job of damaging it. In other games I hold the lychguard back as a counter assault unit along with the wraiths. The battalion is Nihilakh soley for the reroll 1s to hit on the doomsday arks, I was running them as Mephrit before because the immortals benefit from it, but just recently decided to give another dynasty a go.
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: How are the Lychguard surviving or getting into melee? VoD, and then hope for a 9” charge, or do you use the reroll charge warlord trait as well?
Re-roll charge WL trait is pretty bad in his list IMO, the only important thing is that the Lychguard make it, whether the Overlord makes it is pretty irrelevant, I'd much rather do the Novokh trait since that allows the Lychguard to really smash and also helps the Wraiths and Scarabs out once they come up the field.
*MWBD charge = 42% *MWBD charge with a CP 33% of the time (re-roll if highest roll is 4+) = 62% *MWBD charge with a CP 50% of the time (re-roll if highest roll is 3+) = 67% *MWBD charge with WL trait = 67% *MWBD charge with WL trait and CP 17% of the time (re-roll if highest roll is 5+) = 70% *MWBD charge with WL trait and CP 33% of the time (re-roll if highest roll is 4+) = 71%
Nearly a year ago, Tesseract Vaults were all the rage, with lists featuring multiple TVs fairing moderately well.
The new hotness appears to be Doom Scythes.
Is it not a coincidence, perhaps, that the DS stratagem is similarly a MW generator, though cheaper and with better anti-vehicle?
Did TVs, despite the wound count and invulnerable save (plus shenanigans) not prove durable enough?
Was the slight point increase that significant of a nerf after all?
I wouldn't call a 70 point hike a "slight increase", I'd call it pretty significant. Especially considering how most other units were simultaneously made much cheaper. In the context the nerf was huge.
Nearly a year ago, Tesseract Vaults were all the rage, with lists featuring multiple TVs fairing moderately well.
The new hotness appears to be Doom Scythes.
Is it not a coincidence, perhaps, that the DS stratagem is similarly a MW generator, though cheaper and with better anti-vehicle?
Did TVs, despite the wound count and invulnerable save (plus shenanigans) not prove durable enough?
Was the slight point increase that significant of a nerf after all?
I wouldn't call a 70 point hike a "slight increase", I'd call it pretty significant. Especially considering how most other units were simultaneously made much cheaper. In the context the nerf was huge.
Not a bad point about the increase in contrast to simultaneous decreases elsewhere!
In isolation, 70 points on a 470? Point model was a 1/6 increase. Obviously relevant for mathhammer purposes, but that’s still slight compared to like increases we’ve experienced historically (e.g., ABs from 6th to 7th going up 70pts from 90 to 160).
Nonetheless, whether “slight” or not, I agree it was significant—do you think that’s the only reason it’s not played now?
Not a bad point about the increase in contrast to simultaneous decreases elsewhere!
In isolation, 70 points on a 470? Point model was a 1/6 increase. Obviously relevant for mathhammer purposes, but that’s still slight compared to like increases we’ve experienced historically (e.g., ABs from 6th to 7th going up 70pts from 90 to 160).
Nonetheless, whether “slight” or not, I agree it was significant—do you think that’s the only reason it’s not played now?
Pretty much, yes. There is a very strong correlation between CA being published and TVs instantly no longer being used. The combination of other units suddenly made viable, and the TV in contrast made less viable, is what I think killed it.
Then again, considering the treatment of the Pylon, it wouldn't surprise me if it's unnerfed or even put back to its original points by the next CA. Same thing happened; Pylon was nerfed by 75 points, people completely stopped using it, then they unnerfed it.
Edit: The knight meta may have further discouraged its use as well, since more things were geared towards anti-titanic, but that wouldn't have been enough to undo it without the nerf
Not a bad point about the increase in contrast to simultaneous decreases elsewhere!
In isolation, 70 points on a 470? Point model was a 1/6 increase. Obviously relevant for mathhammer purposes, but that’s still slight compared to like increases we’ve experienced historically (e.g., ABs from 6th to 7th going up 70pts from 90 to 160).
Nonetheless, whether “slight” or not, I agree it was significant—do you think that’s the only reason it’s not played now?
Pretty much, yes. There is a very strong correlation between CA being published and TVs instantly no longer being used. The combination of other units suddenly made viable, and the TV in contrast made less viable, is what I think killed it.
Then again, considering the treatment of the Pylon, it wouldn't surprise me if it's unnerfed or even put back to its original points by the next CA. Same thing happened; Pylon was nerfed by 75 points, people completely stopped using it, then they unnerfed it.
Edit: The knight meta may have further discouraged its use as well, since more things were geared towards anti-titanic, but that wouldn't have been enough to undo it without the nerf
I really like your point about the knight meta. Anything that can work against a 3++ knight will fare well against a 4++ TV.
Indeed. With this and the various other nerfs, if the meta swings away from knights, the TV just might have a place again. Even more so if it's given the Pylon treatment.
Edit: Actually, if the chaos knights alter the meta to force people to deal with T9, the TV, being only toughness 7, could actually prove a little more efficient against such weapons, since the excess strength is wasted. This obviously only matters a little bit, and depends on how chaos knights end up mattering/being used, but it could be worth to take into consideration
Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote: How are the Lychguard surviving or getting into melee? VoD, and then hope for a 9” charge, or do you use the reroll charge warlord trait as well?
Generally I play either NOVA or ITC, which means a lot of LoS blocking terrain. In matchups where they are going to use the Veil, I hide them and pop them out when needed. I don't use the reroll charge trait, would much rather have either immortal pride on the other overlord or exploding 6's on the Novokh one. In matchups where I don't need to deep strike them, I just tend to use them conservatively as a counter assault unit. With the giant NOVA L terrain you can hide them pretty easily, along with wraiths. I've found that having two melee units can really mess up how people play against necrons, because they either dump all their shots into the wraiths instead of immortals/flyers/doomsday arks or the lychguard deep strike and lock down vehicles in the backfield or help clear up an enemy assault.
Just got back from an event called the Cleveland Chainsword Championship, a 50-person GT at a Dave and Busters (awesome venue, highly recommend getting out there for it next year if you can!). I went 5-1 and took 2nd Overall with the following list:
Congrats ! I am a little surprised you have no scarabs. Also surprised you mentioned MWBD on destroyers. I usually never MWBD them, i use EP on them every turn until they die. Which happens pretty fast. You could remove the sautekh spearhead, get rid of the cryptek, add the TBs and DAs to the nephrekh battalion, make it sautekh, and use the cryptek leftover points to replace the overlord with imotekh.
I used to use Stormlord with the Strategem to use MWBD on three squads of Heavy Destroyers, and for what it's worth I had good results. I was told I cannot do that with Stormlord but it was fun while it lasted.
vict0988 wrote: Nope, not additional time, not a third time, a second time.
By using the power, he designates 2 targets. The stratagem allows him to use it again. Unless an errata clarifies it. I'm sticking to it.
That's not what it says.
"Phaeron of the Sautekh Dynasty: Imotekh the Stormlord can use his My Will Be Done ability twice a turn, but only if you choose friendly SAUTEKH INFANTRY units to be affected by it both times."
"Use this Stratagem after an OVERLORD from your army has used their My Will Be Done or Wave of Command ability. That model can immediately use that ability for a second time this turn."
An Errata does clarify it: abilities/stratagems which specifically allow a unit to do something for a "second:" time, such as 1) Imotekh's Phaeron of the Sautekh Dynasty and 2) the Phearon's Will stratagem cannot be stacked.
I believe it was in the Big FAQ from April/May of this year, but I can't pull it up just now.
Imotekh is in half of competitive lists, no use whining about it and no need to cheat with it. It's fair enough if you didn't get it on your first read, it's a little weird.
Hey, I'm brand new to 8th edition but I played a ton of 6th,
Right now I am exclusively playing against Eldar,
Is there some models that I can take in a necron list that are auto includes against eldar?
I have every HQ over 100 warriors,
couple squads of immortals,
3 barges, 6 doom scythes, 3 monoliths.. most vehicles except barges..
KonTheory wrote: Hey, I'm brand new to 8th edition but I played a ton of 6th,
Right now I am exclusively playing against Eldar,
Is there some models that I can take in a necron list that are auto includes against eldar?
I have every HQ over 100 warriors,
couple squads of immortals,
3 barges, 6 doom scythes, 3 monoliths.. most vehicles except barges..
And I have 15 destroyers and 3 heavy destroyers..
What would I take to do well against Eldar?
Depends on what your opponent is taking, if your opponent is taking a bunch of Scatbikes it's a totally different matchup compared to facing Wave Serpent and/or Flyer spam. In general Monoliths are trash and should be avoided at all costs and Warriors and Gauss Immortals are vastly inferior to Tesla Immortals supported by an Overlord. Crypteks are only good for really big and valuable squads and Resurrection Orbs are even more niche in that direction but are in general trash. 12 Destroyers, 3 Doom Scythes and a Battalion with all your Tesla Immortals, Imotekh and an Overlord would probably be best. Fill out your list with Warriors in squads that are as big as possible, if you don't have Imotekh switch him out for a Cryptek. Remember to use our best Relic and make your entire army Sautekh and use the Methodical Destruction Stratagem to help you shoot down Flyers. Destroyers are bad against Wave Serpents, but otherwise they are always better than Heavy Destroyers.
All I know about his list is that he doesnt have flyers, uses a few jetbikes, and a couple fire prisms and wave serpents, he usually likes his infantry units that start off the table and in first movement are placed right in your face
Tesla immortals counter infantry. DDAs counter fire prisms and wave serpents. Destroyers can destroy everything with extermination protocols. Scarabs can screen against melee attacks.
You can do it, but Warrior blobs need a few things to make them resistant enough to be a problem:
Warlord with Immortal Pride to give them auto-pass morale
Cryptek with Chronometron to give them +1 to reanimation and the 5++, which comes into its own when your opponent uses inefficient firepower that's like -3 or whatever to pick off those last few models.
Ghost Ark isn't strictly necessary, but they are good on their own for the extra firepower and also their ability to tag and shutdown shooting with charges. The reroll reanimation is perfect for keeping the blobs alive as bad rolls do happen.
The thing about silver tide is that while it can be tricky to shift if you build around it, it's only good at specific things, like refusing to yield an objective or swamping models, they won't kill a whole lot of things bigger than GEQ
KonTheory wrote: Is it viable to horde with warriors? or is that no good?
Here is how I'd silver tide, assuming its not a particularly competitive game.
Sautekh lets them advance, and still get at least SOME firepower if you need to claim objectives.
Plenty of fast units to grab objectives, and a lot of fearless bodies.
Nightbringer to get a few mortal wounds and kill anything that tries to tie up the warriors in melee.
Sautehk Bataliion +5CP
Spoiler:
Overlord with Voidscythe, Res Orb, Veil of Darkness, WL: Immortal Pride
Lord with Warscythe
Cryptek with Chrono
KonTheory wrote: All I know about his list is that he doesnt have flyers, uses a few jetbikes, and a couple fire prisms and wave serpents, he usually likes his infantry units that start off the table and in first movement are placed right in your face
Sounds like you don't use up to date rules. Nothing that isn't deployed on board or in transport that is on board can come to the board on t1. T2 is earliest you can bring reserves.
KonTheory wrote: All I know about his list is that he doesnt have flyers, uses a few jetbikes, and a couple fire prisms and wave serpents, he usually likes his infantry units that start off the table and in first movement are placed right in your face
Sounds like you don't use up to date rules. Nothing that isn't deployed on board or in transport that is on board can come to the board on t1. T2 is earliest you can bring reserves.
We've only played with the new rules once, and have already noticed a lot of mistakes that were made, for now we are just reading up on the gameplay in general to tighten up the mistakes from last game.
But this is how I learn I suppose.
Dunno. Necron's don't have all that much deep strike assaulters and would just eat T1 charges a lot. Especially as necron's have only 1 semi viable screen unit.
The Monolith (and the tomb world in general tbh) is designed around being able to drop reinforcements T1, and even then it's unreliable. But now, since it only has a 6" move it's completely pointless as a transport if deployed normally, and if you deep strike it, your reserves won't arrive until t3, which is also the last turn when reinforcements can arrive at all. Not to mention the fact that it has similar durability and firepower to a Plagueburst Crawler, but seems to pay an additional 184 points for this extremely lackluster transport ability
Considering how it's the most iconic necron unit, it's really sad how busted it is
Kahi the Uncertain wrote: The Monolith (and the tomb world in general tbh) is designed around being able to drop reinforcements T1, and even then it's unreliable. But now, since it only has a 6" move it's completely pointless as a transport if deployed normally, and if you deep strike it, your reserves won't arrive until t3, which is also the last turn when reinforcements can arrive at all. Not to mention the fact that it has similar durability and firepower to a Plagueburst Crawler, but seems to pay an additional 184 points for this extremely lackluster transport ability
Considering how it's the most iconic necron unit, it's really sad how busted it is
I'm very very angry with what they "designed" with Tomb World deployment.
It's kinda supposed to reflect the technological superiority of the Necrons with half-breed transports/deep strike portals. But we end with something vastly inferior than either of them.
We cannot deploy multiple units from a single transport without taking multiple turns or costing us CP.
The only advantage of Tomb World is to be able to deploy from any portal, which offer options, but it's not realistic with the costs of the Monolith/Nightscythe.
Emergency disembark cost us CP and is only available when the last portal dies.
If we don't disembark post T3 we're screwed.
We're totally screwed Drukhari and Gene-cult deny our Emergency Beams with Agent of Vect and the gene-cult version.
With all the cons of the rule, it should save money on the transport. It's litteraly worse that any transport rule
Kahi the Uncertain wrote: The Monolith (and the tomb world in general tbh) is designed around being able to drop reinforcements T1, and even then it's unreliable. But now, since it only has a 6" move it's completely pointless as a transport if deployed normally, and if you deep strike it, your reserves won't arrive until t3, which is also the last turn when reinforcements can arrive at all. Not to mention the fact that it has similar durability and firepower to a Plagueburst Crawler, but seems to pay an additional 184 points for this extremely lackluster transport ability
Considering how it's the most iconic necron unit, it's really sad how busted it is
6" movement, high price and being super soft kills it. You can still bring stuff out of it T1 if you want with stratagem. Necrons might gain a bit from monolith being able to bring stuff out of it without CP but it would still be overpriced super soft target with weakish guns. Meanwhile you would be facing T1 charges by the bucketload.
After ATC and keeping on eye on the top lists at various ITC events, I'm thinking this trend towards knights, fliers, and other vehicles is going to stick for a little while.
I normally play with 30 Tesla Immortals and Immotekh, but they didn't really have a lot of targets in my games at the ATC. After getting to see 30 different lists across the table in those 6 team games, one would think that we would've seen a horde list or two.
But most players seem to be packing minimum troops so they can fit in as many heavy-hitters as possible. Obviously, there are some very competitive lists that still pack a lot of bodies, but I'm seeing that overall, the winning lists seem to be skewing to a lower model count.
I'm very happy with the performance of 3 Doom Scythes, 3 DDAs, and 6 Destroyers, but the 30 Immortals never really had a moment to shine. They definitely stuck out as a liability in my games against Aeldari fliers. So not only did they not really do anything spectacular in my wins, they felt like a handicap in my losses.
I'm curious if there's a more effective approach in the current meta than the traditional Imotekh + 30 Tesla Immortals. What do you think?
I just ordered a few Tesseract Arks, and I plan to test this list for the SoCal Open:
How about imotekh and 15 immortals ? Your list is a little low on CP. I can imagine you spend 1 or 2CP on ATD, depending on when you lose one DS. Another 1 or 2CP are spend on EP. Which leaves you with only 2CP for some re-rolls. You have no obsec infantry, no tomb blades, no scarabs. How are you going to handle a 150 model obsec horde army ?
The low CP is an issue, but I'm thinking it will be ok. ATD, EP, Methodical Destruction, Quantum Deflection, and Damage Control Override are the only really important stratagems to get off. With Hyperlogical Strategist, I should be able to get a couple of them off twice. ATD isn't even a strat I want to get off in every matchup, and EP is something that is lucky to go off twice.
When's the last time you faced a 150 model ob sec army in ITC? And if I do run into that, I'll just focus on screening off one objective so I get to hold one every turn and then work on getting kill more and maxing secondaries.
For ITC in general, I'm giving up hold more in the early turns for kill more.
Like I said, it appears that most competitive lists are only running a few dozen small bodies for objectives, and I have more than enough dakka for something like 60 Guardsmen.
If hordes start dominating, then I'll pivot. But Custodes grav-tanks, Aeldari fliers, Imperial (and now Chaos) Knights, and triple Riptides are definitely way more popular than huge hoard armies.
Hrrm. I think I saw that the top Necrons player at ATC was running silver tide immortals in two battalions, placing ahead of at least one doom six list. Not sure I agree with the elite low model count setup for Necrons ITC. 50 to 60 immorts with 3+\5++ seems a valid option, and people don't seem as concerned by doom six as they do having to face 100/120 tesla on 4s or 5s. You can still incorporate either scythes or ddas in that setup, just not both.
I came to the double battalion concept before listening to ATC recaps, and I was pleasantly surprised to hear people saying they'd rather face doomsix than a table full of immorts with saves and 4+ reanimates
I love the nephrek lychguard. Dump one in a translocation crypt.. yeah, that works. I get so stuck on the concept that melee needs to be novokh: "movement is more important to melee than a reroll" is a strikingly compelling argument.
DogHeadGod wrote: I love the nephrek lychguard. Dump one in a translocation crypt.. yeah, that works. I get so stuck on the concept that melee needs to be novokh: "movement is more important to melee than a reroll" is a strikingly compelling argument.
He messed up his list, the Battalion should include the Cryptek or Anrakyr. He brought Kutlakh but the LG were the wrong Dynasy. If they had been Maynarkh they could not get DS which is how I imagine it was played. I don't understand why he'd go for a double Battalion, I have no idea what is eating his CP. I tried Kutlakh a couple of times, maybe it was the lack of Dispersion Shields that brought me down, I found 30 Lychguard + Kutlakh to be too squishy, of course playing against a DA plasma castle will do that to you. I've had much more success with 30 Novokh Lychguard, Anrakyr doesn't fall behind nearly as much when you play Novokh instead of Nephrekh and saving 120 pts on Kutlakh feels like it makes a difference.
With Nephrekh Kutlakh I just often found that I was racing ahead of Anrakyr and making 17 hits, with Novokh I'm either making 54 with Veil, fight twice and Crimson Haze, 27 with Anrakyr or 31 with Anrakyr and Crimson Haze, even if you do keep Anrakyr close you are getting at most 25 hits with no way of fighting twice. I'm guessing the LG player was playing a more tactical game instead of simply clearing the board, the lack of a Lord also speaks to that fact. You are better off just spamming Canoptek Wraiths instead of this garbage, I mean seriously 11"+ charge, wow you're almost as fast as Wraiths, 3+/4++ wow you're almost as tough as Wraiths, 20 attacks D1 S5 AP-3, wow you're almost as hard-hitting as Wraiths. This player was just an absolute maverick of a player but he seems to be trash at list-building or to have gone out of his way to make his own life difficult by bringing Kutlakh in a list where only his Overlords and Immortals benefit.
Deep Striking melee Necrons is kind of meh, you can't MWBD so you are looking at a very good chance of eating overwatch and failing your charge. You'd be better off taking Nephrekh Destroyers, drop down and blast T2. That's a thousand times more reliable and almost as durable. The only thing they don't do so well is kill 4++ Knights, but hey, when they fail at killing it they aren't getting stomped half to death!
I'm kind of sad we had a 30 Lychguard list do well at a tournament, I'm not really sure if I can justify bringing 30 Lychguard to casual games anymore.
DogHeadGod wrote: Hrrm. I think I saw that the top Necrons player at ATC was running silver tide immortals in two battalions, placing ahead of at least one doom six list. Not sure I agree with the elite low model count setup for Necrons ITC. 50 to 60 immorts with 3+\5++ seems a valid option, and people don't seem as concerned by doom six as they do having to face 100/120 tesla on 4s or 5s. You can still incorporate either scythes or ddas in that setup, just not both.
I came to the double battalion concept before listening to ATC recaps, and I was pleasantly surprised to hear people saying they'd rather face doomsix than a table full of immorts with saves and 4+ reanimates
Do you have a source on that? From what I can see the ATC had one Necron player in the top four teams and he brought 15 Immortals. I don't think I've ever seen anyone top 5 with anything more than 30 Tesla Immortals in a big event and 0 Troops is a thing in about 30% of Necron lists. You don't need a Cryptek with a Chronometron to watch your Immortals, the likelihood of a Cryptek earning his keep is relatively low. Stick with Lords and Overlords instead, especially the Overlords are key when you bring that number of Immortals.
I do recommend people give 50+ Immortals + Vargard Obyron a try, it's surprisingly mobile and great fun overall, all the captive gak of melee armies just kind of fails when you can teleport a unit each turn and another unit once per game. It looks like TB spam is far more common than Immortal spam ATM. When you don't have to invest in Overlords Tomb Blades put out a very similar amount of firepower as Immortals. The main strength of Immortals I'd say is their ability to get through things with penalties to hit compared to TBs which I would imagine struggle a lot more with those. As far as Knights goes, you really can't get anything better than Immortals, they are some of our most durable units when it comes to Knights and they are also better than anything else we have at killing them. The weakness of Immortals is 2+ Sv, things like Custodes take twice as many shots to kill as Knights. The big Custodes Dreadnought for example is exactly as tough as a Knight at only 3/4 or 3/5 of the cost, but just as hard to kill with AP-.
Marshal_Gus wrote: The low CP is an issue, but I'm thinking it will be ok. ATD, EP, Methodical Destruction, Quantum Deflection, and Damage Control Override are the only really important stratagems to get off. With Hyperlogical Strategist, I should be able to get a couple of them off twice. ATD isn't even a strat I want to get off in every matchup, and EP is something that is lucky to go off twice.
I wouldnt bother with QD with 3 DDAs. Just play DCO when one gets damaged. Dont count on HS for getting CPs back. I had games with 10CP+ at the beginning, and i didnt get a single point back.
To be fair, I did not go onto BCP and doublecheck this claim, but this is the army to whom I referred, and I heard it spoken of on one of the four podcasts I listen to... possibly the long war. Not twisted dice or FTN. They had a full recap of one of the guys ATC experiences with, I think, Brohammer, and a solid segment was in regards to how nobobody wanted to play against the crazy bastard with 60 immortals.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Since I was already playing a 55 immortal list... this made me happy.
To be fair, I did not go onto BCP and doublecheck this claim, but this is the army to whom I referred, and I heard it spoken of on one of the four podcasts I listen to... possibly the long war. Not twisted dice or FTN. They had a full recap of one of the guys ATC experiences with, I think, Brohammer, and a solid segment was in regards to how nobobody wanted to play against the crazy bastard with 60 immortals.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Since I was already playing a 55 immortal list... this made me happy.
NW buddy, if Zid said that he was a top ATC player then it's fine that you repeat it. Orikan is interesting, I don't know if he'd be worth it, in my opinion he is even worse than a regular Cryptek because so much melee is happening at AP- (Orks, AM) or AP-2 (Knights, DPs). Bloodletters aren't used much anymore so that leaves Custodes and Smash Captains. I don't think I've played against codex Genestealer Cults and only played against Cults once or twice before. The Orb of Eternity seems like mistake, less than maybe obvious because he brought Destroyers.
I kind of skipped around the batrep and the best Necron player at ATC went 5/0/1 and was named Zachary and the batrep opponent was Zach. So probably the same guy. Zach appeared to be lucky with his 5+ invuls, if it works it works, so it may just be something that he finds personal success with, but from a personal and maths perspective it seems like a bad choice. The absolute madman got 5 Destroyers back with the Orb of Eternity, I guess that's worth the CP and 35 pts, still just barely and with an average of half a Destroyer from the Relic, come on, it's a bad choice.
Orikan, for me, is worth it for the flexibility in a 6 inch saves umbrella rather than 3. The whole "sudden beatstick" thing is purely a bonus: double invuln range is worth 20, imho. I don't run an orb of any sort in my list, but I do run imotekh/orikan/55 immortals (50 tesla/5 gauss, gauss are engineers along w 5 shield lychguard.)
That being said, I am certain this man is a far better pilot at this point: just tickled me to see the immortal tide have success.
Automatically Appended Next Post: One point which confuses me regularly: why would you take Imotekh as your warlord? Imo, hyperlogical strat is measurably worse than immortal pride in all ways, and no rule says Imotekh has to be your warlord, merely that if he is your warlord, you have to use this objectively bad trait. I willingly sacrifice the 1cp to avoid having to take HS, and bring imotekh only for his efficiency in MWBD to help with properly supporting the 50 tesla robots.
One point which confuses me regularly: why would you take Imotekh as your warlord? Imo, hyperlogical strat is measurably worse than immortal pride in all ways, and no rule says Imotekh has to be your warlord, merely that if he is your warlord, you have to use this objectively bad trait. I willingly sacrifice the 1cp to avoid having to take HS, and bring imotekh only for his efficiency in MWBD to help with properly supporting the 50 tesla robots.
Because he has BS/WS2+, S5, T5, W6, 2+ sv, 4+ inv, regains D3 wounds, MWBD twice for free for sautekh, his storm ability and the 1CP. He is the only HQ unit which is worth his points.
I did not say "why take him". He's currently a model I'm using. However, making him your warlord only grants you the 1cp, yet I see it regularly. Take him, slap warlord/immortal pride on a random overlord. Avoid HS.
DogHeadGod wrote: I did not say "why take him". He's currently a model I'm using. However, making him your warlord only grants you the 1cp, yet I see it regularly. Take him, slap warlord/immortal pride on a random overlord. Avoid HS.
More like 5 CP and a free re-roll. How many Immortals do you think you'd lose to Morale? I've ran 60 Immortals in I don't know how many games and I lose maybe 3 models/game to morale. Immortal Pride is worse than Hype Strat unless you are running Warriors. If your opponent tries to push hard for the Morale value you can re-roll or auto pass for CP, your opponent will have no reason to try their luck if you are Fearless. Imotekh is also our toughest HQ (unless you use Relic + WL trait on a D-Lord), it makes perfect sense to make him your WL.
