iGuy91 wrote:


Please god no. Getting hit with that kind of nerf will cement our bottom-feeder status.

Yeah it's a double-edged sword, but I don't think our top-tier lists are spamming tesla anymore as it is. Regardless, this is the way the wind is blowing. Most other rules that trigger on 6s have changed to natural 6s.

If they make that change, but also improve the rest of our gakky rules then I'm fine with it. Anyway that's some far off speculation.

The only way Tesla is likely to change is if we get a new book. And I don't think that'll be the only change, so thinking it alone will make necrons bottom tier is a little ridiculous.

If we're talking new codex then Tesla should just become rapid fire 2 or 3, and Gauss blasters assault 2. Rapid fire is a perfect fit for Tesla since arcs of electricity are going to ground themselves at longer range. Sure if that's the only change it'll annoy lots of power gamers that have loads of Tesla immortals, but again, it's not a change that could/would happen in isolation!

Honestly, I'm ok with Tesla staying Ass2, but my lord if I didnt rather Guass Blasters were RF2

When I saw Storm Bolters were RF2 at the turn of the edition, I actually got my hopes up

Nah, Ass2 makes more sense than RF2; because the lightning grounds itself, you don't need to aim, so you can fire from the hip while advancing.

Gauss doesn't need more shots, it'd be better and more interesting for it to get a little bit of it's "oomph" back. Like To Wound Rolls of an unmodified 6 get AP-5. But that's more getting to rulescrafting than tactics.

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
Nah, Ass2 makes more sense than RF2; because the lightning grounds itself, you don't need to aim, so you can fire from the hip while advancing.

I thnk you said that slightly backwards? I am saying I'm fine if they dont change Tesla

Gauss doesn't need more shots, it'd be better and more interesting for it to get a little bit of it's "oomph" back. Like To Wound Rolls of an unmodified 6 get AP-5. But that's more getting to rulescrafting than tactics.

I want Guass to not be automatically inferior. Giving them RF2 means that they have the same minimum damage output at long range, where Tesla can still pop on 6s for extra, and then getting close to them means they'll really really hurt (plus makes Mephrit better)

I'd say the obvious fix for Gauss is to make it D2, since it's the anti-elite infantry option and most elite infantry is rocking 2 wounds now.

Maybe damage 2 on a wound roll of a 6 for all gaus weapons, but flat damage 2 all the time is just more power creep. I mean, I get it, with stalker bolters out in the wild, but those are clearly an error themselves.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Maybe damage 2 on a wound roll of a 6 for all gaus weapons, but flat damage 2 all the time is just more power creep. I mean, I get it, with stalker bolters out in the wild, but those are clearly an error themselves.

Honestly most "On a 6" solutions for Gauss still wouldn't particularly serve to replicate the old benefit of being able to wear down vehicles and monsters with supplementary infantry fire to make up for our very sparse dedicated anti-big weapons.

It doesn't help that Warscythes also lost most of their oomph. I mean yeah, relying on footslogging combat infantry for anti-tank work is niche, but combining the lack of armourbane and all the extra wounds monsters have now... It's one less tool.

I could get behind 6s to wound is a mortal wound on top.

That seems to be floating round in spades right now

changemod wrote:
Honestly most "On a 6" solutions for Gauss still wouldn't particularly serve to replicate the old benefit of being able to wear down vehicles and monsters with supplementary infantry fire to make up for our very sparse dedicated anti-big weapons.

Could we perhaps take a page from the nightbringer and voidreaper?

Have gauss weapons always wound on a 2+ against vehicles, and follow normal strength vs toughness for non-vehicles.

Would this bring gauss too far above tesla? I think it further solidfies the anti-vehicle vs anti-horde nature of the 2.

edit: added quote to clarify what post is responding to.

RIP reading skills.

IanVanCheese wrote:
I'd say the obvious fix for Gauss is to make it D2, since it's the anti-elite infantry option and most elite infantry is rocking 2 wounds now.

Sorry I should say, I meant Immortal Gauss Blasters specifically, not Gauss Flayers.

I floated the idea of all gauss doing MW in addition on a 6 to wound, but loads of people cried that it would be OP (despite the maths showing that it would be fine). I understand though, people hate MW because they're almost impossible to block, so it takes player interaction out of the game.

IanVanCheese wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I'd say the obvious fix for Gauss is to make it D2, since it's the anti-elite infantry option and most elite infantry is rocking 2 wounds now.

Sorry I should say, I meant Immortal Gauss Blasters specifically, not Gauss Flayers.

I floated the idea of all gauss doing MW in addition on a 6 to wound, but loads of people cried that it would be OP (despite the maths showing that it would be fine). I understand though, people hate MW because they're almost impossible to block, so it takes player interaction out of the game.

Who the gak is crying about that? The echo chamber has always said fishing for 6s is a gakky strategy to begin with.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I'd say the obvious fix for Gauss is to make it D2, since it's the anti-elite infantry option and most elite infantry is rocking 2 wounds now.

Sorry I should say, I meant Immortal Gauss Blasters specifically, not Gauss Flayers.

I floated the idea of all gauss doing MW in addition on a 6 to wound, but loads of people cried that it would be OP (despite the maths showing that it would be fine). I understand though, people hate MW because they're almost impossible to block, so it takes player interaction out of the game.

Who the gak is crying about that? The echo chamber has always said fishing for 6s is a gakky strategy to begin with.

Given that’s the major strength of Possessed bombs, it can’t be that gakky.

Fishing for 6s becomes immeasurably better with rerolls and spades of bonuses

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I'd say the obvious fix for Gauss is to make it D2, since it's the anti-elite infantry option and most elite infantry is rocking 2 wounds now.

Sorry I should say, I meant Immortal Gauss Blasters specifically, not Gauss Flayers.

I floated the idea of all gauss doing MW in addition on a 6 to wound, but loads of people cried that it would be OP (despite the maths showing that it would be fine). I understand though, people hate MW because they're almost impossible to block, so it takes player interaction out of the game.

Who the gak is crying about that? The echo chamber has always said fishing for 6s is a gakky strategy to begin with.

It was in a proposed rules thread I started.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Maybe damage 2 on a wound roll of a 6 for all gaus weapons, but flat damage 2 all the time is just more power creep. I mean, I get it, with stalker bolters out in the wild, but those are clearly an error themselves.

Stalkers aren't bad though because they are Heavy 1

Not in a vacuum no. But taken in context of full rerolls and exploding hits with doctrines sprinkled in for that extra pop and they are filthy.

Same can easily happen with necrons, +1 to hit here, +1 to hit there, rerolls etc and suddenly you have something that's out of control. But, that's kind of a tangent and a pet peeve of mine that applies to the game in general (too many rerolls, auras being too prolific etc) so I'll leave it there.

Maybe so, but really if it's exploding on wounds, that's the most important part to have your rerolls and bonuses on. Almost everything Necrons have is on the hit roll with the exception of lords giving reroll 1s to wound...until you get to destroyers. I think that is going to be the biggest issue with trying to Give gauss weapons a boost and maintain that flavor across the range. You make a good unit into a crazy good unit while bringing other units up to par. I think that until we get a rewrite, gauss needs to be addressed by changing the stat lines on the weapons that are lack luster rather than giving a special rule that applies to all gauss based guns.

New fluff article for pariah on Warhammer community sight. I can't tell if it's about crons though

I'd say it's about crons:

Thrule’s angry starlight glinted on burnished metal, glinted in cruel, lens-like eyes,

Sounds very much like a load of humans being affected by an aura like the old Pariahs used to emit...

Or maybe they are bringing back mind shackle scarabs and the people are all being infected. Would make for a cool special rule or strat i suppose.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
I'd say it's about crons:

Thrule’s angry starlight glinted on burnished metal, glinted in cruel, lens-like eyes,

Sounds very much like a load of humans being affected by an aura like the old Pariahs used to emit...

That's what I thought too, but I don't want to get my hopes up. Besides.....I don't think Pariahs, if released, would even be very good considering the lackluster rule they gave to Szeras. That's just my opinion though.

I reckon that Pariahs with the same aura as Szeras are exactly what we're getting.

I hope not. That ability is 99.9% useless. Psykers move, and can advance, before the psychic phase, moving out of its range . 30/180 psychic powers are 9" or less. And even if a double is rolled, there still is the command reroll.

I reckon we will get that deny a psychic power on 4+ for 1cp.

 p5freak wrote:
I hope not. That ability is 99.9% useless. Psykers move, and can advance, before the psychic phase, moving out of its range . 30/180 psychic powers are 9" or less. And even if a double is rolled, there still is the command reroll.

I reckon we will get that deny a psychic power on 4+ for 1cp.

Strictly speaking, the ability is not 99.9% useless.

Without CP cost, it increases the chance of perils (before re-roll abilities) from 2/36 to 6/36: a 3-fold increase in initial likelihood. If it bleeds off CP from the opponent to enable re-rolls, that's a net benefit.
Note that for armies that have Psychic Power re-roll abilities, those are typically relied upon to mitigate failure chance--if they use it to avoid this, that's also a net benefit.

Thereafter, analysis moves to likelihood of the ability being within the 9" bubble. We simply cannot evaluate that without seeing more of Szera's statline and other abilities (if any).

In principle, we can say it is nearly certain to have no effect on Turn 1 if we go Second, and it is unlikely to have any effect on Turn 1 if we go First.

Further in principle, we can say that any units which have a movement speed greater than 9" are likely to be able to avoid the bubble--though whether this affects downstream impacts around strategic positioning is a Tactical consideration (i.e., if they elect to move away from Szeras which hinders their ability to capture an Objective marker--we can't realistically evaluate that mathematically in a vacuum). Similarly, any Psychers with movement greater than 18" (e.g., Hemlocks) are nearly certain to be able to avoid the bubble. Everything else, however, have reasonable prospects of being caught within the bubble. If we imagine that they will default to within 1.1" from Szeras following our movement, and where movement for infantry psychers is typically 6", they have a high likelihood of escaping in the movement phase only if they Run.

Etc.

I'm not trying to be pedantic here, but this isn't a 99.9% useless ability--saying it is, in a Competitive Tactics thread is a disservice to the community.

Note, I am not commenting at all on hypothetical Pariahs with a further hypothetical chance of their receiving this known/spoiled ability. I hate wishlisting like this because it has a high likelihood of disappointment even when the Actual outcome is a net positive. Why do that to ourselves?

It's one of those abilities that appear inconsequential in theory but come into effect only when put into the context of the actual layout of the gaming board.

Being able to move out of range is nice and all, but that might also take you out of range for you own abilities to cover certain units, away from objectives etc. It will force tough decisions on your opponent from time to time, without a reliable tangible benefit. I understand that this is probably not a quality many people would value over more immediate and replicable effects, but I personally really enjoy it and I would wish for more abilities to follow this approach.

If Pariahs have the same ability, it becomes less useless because we can in theory flood the board with them. But as it stands, yeah its a gimmick that will rarely come up.

 BertBert wrote:
It's one of those abilities that appear inconsequential in theory but come into effect only when put into the context of the actual layout of the gaming board.

Being able to move out of range is nice and all, but that might also take you out of range for you own abilities to cover certain units, away from objectives etc. It will force tough decisions on your opponent from time to time, without a reliable tangible benefit. I understand that this is probably not a quality many people would value over more immediate and replicable effects, but I personally really enjoy it and I would wish for more abilities to follow this approach.

Yeah if that libby dread or mephiston wants to move over 9" of my units it's benefit already. And of course grey knights not coming close means their melee abilities are wasted. I think I can find use for that.

Ork psykers meanwhile will have very few safe results for them that will either not result in peril or failed casting.

Even if within 9" of Szeras a double roll is still needed. BA psykers can cast their unleash rage and wings of sanguinius outside of 9". Good luck getting within 9" of an ork psyker when there are 30 boys around him.

I'm hoping Szeras has an additional ability or a new stratagem to help boost this previewed ability. Let's say something like 'Change the value of any die by 1 when psychic powers are manifested within 9" of this model'

Something like this could be used to make psykers peril or fail their tests. Just saying, there could be more rules round the corner to counter psychic.

Hi there, long time lurker and newbye Necron collector, I ve read some bits here and there and went thru the codex, 1st page and 4chan.

I know I might sound naive and PA might shake things a bit, but I was wondering, would a C´tan spam list be possible? including a Vault and all 3 C´tan, in order to spam MW; scarabs to screen and a bunch of immortals to clear hordes and enemy screen. Maybe a couple of arks or a score of tomb blades might help to show up consintency on the board.

I have been playing ork as a shooting army for the last 2 years with modest success and I would like to move to a more shooty list with a lesser model count and maybe a bit more challenging with how you move and show your presence on the board.

Thanks for this great thread and active community !

 Emicrania wrote:
Hi there, long time lurker and newbye Necron collector, I ve read some bits here and there and went thru the codex, 1st page and 4chan.

I know I might sound naive and PA might shake things a bit, but I was wondering, would a C´tan spam list be possible? including a Vault and all 3 C´tan, in order to spam MW; scarabs to screen and a bunch of immortals to clear hordes and enemy screen. Maybe a couple of arks or a score of tomb blades might help to show up consintency on the board.

I have been playing ork as a shooting army for the last 2 years with modest success and I would like to move to a more shooty list with a lesser model count and maybe a bit more challenging with how you move and show your presence on the board.

Thanks for this great thread and active community !

Its possible. You could in a list take 1 nightbringer, 1 deceiver, 3 transcendant ctan, and a t-vault.
You'd need to find the right spot to put them all. I'd also suggest getting a big blob of something like scarabs to screen all your expensive ctan vs smites and vs shooting.
Otherwise, yeah, destroyers and tomb blades might be a good fit for something so aggressive.

Something comes on May 23td!

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/10/a-regal-returngw-homepage-post-3/?

I know this isn't a speculation thread, but getting the Silent King is going to be (hopefully) an amazing power boost.

Hopefully power boost is in new codex or pa supplement rather than crutch character

 Emicrania wrote:
Hi there, long time lurker and newbye Necron collector, I ve read some bits here and there and went thru the codex, 1st page and 4chan.

I know I might sound naive and PA might shake things a bit, but I was wondering, would a C´tan spam list be possible? including a Vault and all 3 C´tan, in order to spam MW; scarabs to screen and a bunch of immortals to clear hordes and enemy screen. Maybe a couple of arks or a score of tomb blades might help to show up consintency on the board.

I have been playing ork as a shooting army for the last 2 years with modest success and I would like to move to a more shooty list with a lesser model count and maybe a bit more challenging with how you move and show your presence on the board.

Thanks for this great thread and active community !

Of you are looking for a C'Tan heavy list the guys at GoonHammer are trying some out.
https://www.goonhammer.com/hear-me-out-lockdown-ctan/

Necrons are not the God awful things some make them out to be but I certainly wouldn't say no to a buff or two. I haven't played them much recently, because it just takes so much focus now to kind of master armies against the shifting meta, so i find myself wading upstream to get games in with some of my forces, Necrons being one of them. I play on Tabletop Simulator so maybe I will play a couple games with them and see where we are at. This Covid thing is seriously making life no fun tho. Games on TTS take so much longer.

I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

 Jancoran wrote:
Necrons are not the God awful things some make them out to be but I certainly wouldn't say no to a buff or two. I haven't played them much recently, because it just takes so much focus now to kind of master armies against the shifting meta, so i find myself wading upstream to get games in with some of my forces, Necrons being one of them. I play on Tabletop Simulator so maybe I will play a couple games with them and see where we are at. This Covid thing is seriously making life no fun tho. Games on TTS take so much longer.

We aren’t straight up godawful but we do have some painful gaps. I’m hoping the custom dynasty rules include a decent durability buffing one so we can feel a bit more like we used to, but plugging the anti-vehicle/monster gap would take either the introduction of new units or a significant overhaul of gauss.

changemod wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Necrons are not the God awful things some make them out to be but I certainly wouldn't say no to a buff or two. I haven't played them much recently, because it just takes so much focus now to kind of master armies against the shifting meta, so i find myself wading upstream to get games in with some of my forces, Necrons being one of them. I play on Tabletop Simulator so maybe I will play a couple games with them and see where we are at. This Covid thing is seriously making life no fun tho. Games on TTS take so much longer.

We aren’t straight up godawful but we do have some painful gaps. I’m hoping the custom dynasty rules include a decent durability buffing one so we can feel a bit more like we used to, but plugging the anti-vehicle/monster gap would take either the introduction of new units or a significant overhaul of gauss.

See I really don't feel like we have many gaps in our ability to kill things, we're just too brittle. Sure DDAs are a bit swingy, but between them, destroyers and heavy destroyers, I think we have enough big guns to blow most armored lists off the table, if onyl we could survive a few turns of firepower.

We struggle most with hold board presence. Our troops are too expensive and weak to be brought in the numbers we'd need to hold the center of the table. We're also quite slow.

We need resilience more than we need more guns.

IanVanCheese wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Necrons are not the God awful things some make them out to be but I certainly wouldn't say no to a buff or two. I haven't played them much recently, because it just takes so much focus now to kind of master armies against the shifting meta, so i find myself wading upstream to get games in with some of my forces, Necrons being one of them. I play on Tabletop Simulator so maybe I will play a couple games with them and see where we are at. This Covid thing is seriously making life no fun tho. Games on TTS take so much longer.

We aren’t straight up godawful but we do have some painful gaps. I’m hoping the custom dynasty rules include a decent durability buffing one so we can feel a bit more like we used to, but plugging the anti-vehicle/monster gap would take either the introduction of new units or a significant overhaul of gauss.

See I really don't feel like we have many gaps in our ability to kill things, we're just too brittle. Sure DDAs are a bit swingy, but between them, destroyers and heavy destroyers, I think we have enough big guns to blow most armored lists off the table, if onyl we could survive a few turns of firepower.

We struggle most with hold board presence. Our troops are too expensive and weak to be brought in the numbers we'd need to hold the center of the table. We're also quite slow.

We need resilience more than we need more guns.

Giving for example warriors back some of their ability to threaten vehicles, that they had in 7th, might perhaps add some interesting dyamics here though.

It would mean that even if we struggle with keeping models inthe game, what models remain for later game rounds, are still scary enough to make up for their dwindling numbers. Every list wouldn't have to hug 3 DDAs to have a fighting chance, could perhaps field 2x20 warriors instead for daded variety, body count but still maintained AT threat.

20 warriors is trivial to delete though. Even if you have immune to morale wt around

The difficulty is that Warriors exist to be buffed by characters. Warriors with a Cryptek invulnerability field are a bit harder to remove. Annoying part of that is that Crypteks are VERY easy to remove. Eliminators especially, but all snipers make Necrons sad.

IanVanCheese wrote:
I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

Worse? Sisters of Silence. Theres literally one build for them. One. My buddy is trying to learn them. A braver man I've never known. But he's really good and he scores well in his losses. Lol.

I think Imperial KNights in general suffer right now.

Dark Angels perpetually it seems.

Tyranids are "ok" but Necrons kinda have their number. Too much withering firepower for bugs to handle while the Wraiths and Swarms just interminable tie them up.

I'd take Necrons over those choices.

I mean we could even venture into some of the Chaos Marine stuff while we're at it... Models are cool tho. Death gaurd can be real good, and some niche builds will give necrons hell, but i wouldnt call that an unfair fight in MOST of those matchups.

So... I dunno.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
The difficulty is that Warriors exist to be buffed by characters. Warriors with a Cryptek invulnerability field are a bit harder to remove. Annoying part of that is that Crypteks are VERY easy to remove. Eliminators especially, but all snipers make Necrons sad.

Yeah Sniper are an issue for the Necrons for sure and none worse than Raven Guard in round one.

 Jancoran wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

Worse? Sisters of Silence. Theres literally one build for them. One. My buddy is trying to learn them. A braver man I've never known. But he's really good and he scores well in his losses. Lol.

I think Imperial KNights in general suffer right now.

Dark Angels perpetually it seems.

Tyranids are "ok" but Necrons kinda have their number. Too much withering firepower for bugs to handle while the Wraiths and Swarms just interminable tie them up.

I'd take Necrons over those choices.

I mean we could even venture into some of the Chaos Marine stuff while we're at it... Models are cool tho. Death gaurd can be real good, and some niche builds will give necrons hell, but i wouldnt call that an unfair fight in MOST of those matchups.

So... I dunno.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
The difficulty is that Warriors exist to be buffed by characters. Warriors with a Cryptek invulnerability field are a bit harder to remove. Annoying part of that is that Crypteks are VERY easy to remove. Eliminators especially, but all snipers make Necrons sad.

Yeah Sniper are an issue for the Necrons for sure and none worse than Raven Guard in round one.

Sisters of Silence are not a real faction, come on now.

Sure, we have tyranids number. But in the grand scheme of balance, they're probably on par with us (they beat some armies that beat us).

Dark Angels are marines. Even the worst marines are head and shoulders above us, even if we have an OK match up against them (again, balance across the whole game, Dark Angels will beat more factions than we will).

Knights maybe, but they can be souped with a whole manner of excellent armies and they're a rough match up for us by themselves too.

I think when we're scraping the barrel of sisters of silence trying to find worse factions than us, it's a pretty good sign that we're one of the worst factions lol.

Luckily, that might all be about to change.

IanVanCheese wrote:
I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

GSC, and Harlequins (even after the update) for sure, like not even a debate.

With Sisters, Demons, Militarum Tempestus, custodes, Death Guard, T-Sons and Space Wolves as contenders for the victim awards. Most of these armies appear better then they are because of soup, but an army should be judged on its own IMO.


Edit: IMO the biggest issue with Necrons is how bland they have become. Like my Beloved Dark Eldar a ton of the flavor was gutted from the units. Several options are just shadows of what they were, and I don't even mean competitively necessarily. I would just like the flavor back and for some of the more aggregious units like spyders, FO, deathmarks and crypteks to get redone.

In regard to durability, that's not an Necron exclusive issue, it's an 8th edition problem that every army is wary of at this point. Every army is begging for buffs year on year until the lethality is just stupid. Core game needs to fix rerolls and terrain and add some sort of fog of war mechanic.

Yeah I'll take more flavour over power gaming for sure.

I'm hoping crypteks are getting some spice back with the new update, something akin to chaplain abilities but to bring back the old powers they used to have.

I agree that the game as whole need to be altered to fix durability, but a band-aid to help the necrons wouldn't go amiss in the meantime.

It occurs to me that re-rolls are the bane of this edition. I think that's because they wanted the game to be more lethal (they succeeded), which theoretically would encourage us to put more models on the table. But that just exacerbates the problem of lopsided games, and makes games take too long.

Perhaps a limitation on rerolls in the new edition would be a good thing, but it would hurt a lot of units, specifically buffing characters, which they want to sell lots of due to better profit per model.

 Red Corsair wrote:

With Sisters, Demons, Militarum Tempestus, custodes, Death Guard, T-Sons and Space Wolves as contenders for the victim awards. Most of these armies appear better then they are because of soup, but an army should be judged on its own IMO.

Sisters have been showing nice results before lockdowns.

Though this is 8th. Soup is name of the game. If faction isn't getting mono bonus it should be considered as part of soup rather than artificial restrictions.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

Worse? Sisters of Silence. Theres literally one build for them. One. My buddy is trying to learn them. A braver man I've never known. But he's really good and he scores well in his losses. Lol.

I think Imperial KNights in general suffer right now.

Dark Angels perpetually it seems.

Tyranids are "ok" but Necrons kinda have their number. Too much withering firepower for bugs to handle while the Wraiths and Swarms just interminable tie them up.

I'd take Necrons over those choices.

I mean we could even venture into some of the Chaos Marine stuff while we're at it... Models are cool tho. Death gaurd can be real good, and some niche builds will give necrons hell, but i wouldnt call that an unfair fight in MOST of those matchups.

So... I dunno.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
The difficulty is that Warriors exist to be buffed by characters. Warriors with a Cryptek invulnerability field are a bit harder to remove. Annoying part of that is that Crypteks are VERY easy to remove. Eliminators especially, but all snipers make Necrons sad.

Yeah Sniper are an issue for the Necrons for sure and none worse than Raven Guard in round one.

Sisters of Silence are not a real faction, come on now.

Sure, we have tyranids number. But in the grand scheme of balance, they're probably on par with us (they beat some armies that beat us).

Dark Angels are marines. Even the worst marines are head and shoulders above us, even if we have an OK match up against them (again, balance across the whole game, Dark Angels will beat more factions than we will).

Knights maybe, but they can be souped with a whole manner of excellent armies and they're a rough match up for us by themselves too.

I think when we're scraping the barrel of sisters of silence trying to find worse factions than us, it's a pretty good sign that we're one of the worst factions lol.

Luckily, that might all be about to change.

Well i dont share that appraisal. Sisters of Silence are certainly bad but they are a faction.

Tyranids are definitely not better. I don't think Tyranids are bad, because I play a guy who does serious work with his and its not even a truly meta list, though its developing into one that is closer. Necrons will still whoop them. They destroy an entire gaunt squad per round. A simple halo and the Genestealers are f'd. I dunno. I have a higher opinion of Tyranids.

I REALLY dont think Dark Angels have much that I think is insurmountable but i will totally agre that they are marines and are very tough, and you will absolutely have to play well but I call that a pick em game unlesss they are just not playing a typical Dark Angel list. Which could happen.

Knights are bad. No buffing can save them. Cant even recall the last time i didnt school a Knight list... They are cool loooooooking?

My only point is that we dont qualify for the bottom. I didn't say it was the top. It's floating i nthe middle of the lower tier somewhere. My friend Devin does a great job of sterring ecrons nd I dont struggle much with them which leads me to think that this is a little overblown but i also condedd that my recent game schedule has not allowed me time to practice recently with them so perhaps i would feel differently now. Like i said i might pull them out and test my mettle today with them. I use a fairly atypical list for Necrons which fits my own proclivities as a player which is something you always have to consider too. Sometimes its just that people aren't very flexible in what they are willing to play. Ive found plenty of people here that certainly dont like unorthodox ideas so it could be as simple as a certain pattern being too familiar to people.

I just encountered this. I was exhorted to look into Celestians (not to be confused with St. Celestine) who have been terrible since time began. Now they are one of the most points efficient killers I've seen. They should average 20 dead MEQ (or 10 Primaris) without any gear. Just them. 100 points. THAT is efficient. So in a larger army that allows for the CP, they are absolutely terrifying. Takes out entire ork mobs, takes out entire Primaris units... and God help you if you are T3. Yet its not a unit that gets ANY press.

So this same thing happens to other armies.

 Jancoran wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
I mean sure, we can play and win with Necrons, but I struggle to think of a worse faction than us?

Maybe tyranids? Maybe. So yeah, we need buffs. Many of them.

Also on a funny note, anyone else remember the huge arguments we had in this thread about whether our new model was going to be Szeras or Szerak? Looks like everyone's a winner lol.

Worse? Sisters of Silence. Theres literally one build for them. One. My buddy is trying to learn them. A braver man I've never known. But he's really good and he scores well in his losses. Lol.

I think Imperial KNights in general suffer right now.

Dark Angels perpetually it seems.

Tyranids are "ok" but Necrons kinda have their number. Too much withering firepower for bugs to handle while the Wraiths and Swarms just interminable tie them up.

I'd take Necrons over those choices.

I mean we could even venture into some of the Chaos Marine stuff while we're at it... Models are cool tho. Death gaurd can be real good, and some niche builds will give necrons hell, but i wouldnt call that an unfair fight in MOST of those matchups.

So... I dunno.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
The difficulty is that Warriors exist to be buffed by characters. Warriors with a Cryptek invulnerability field are a bit harder to remove. Annoying part of that is that Crypteks are VERY easy to remove. Eliminators especially, but all snipers make Necrons sad.

Yeah Sniper are an issue for the Necrons for sure and none worse than Raven Guard in round one.

Sisters of Silence are not a real faction, come on now.

Sure, we have tyranids number. But in the grand scheme of balance, they're probably on par with us (they beat some armies that beat us).

Dark Angels are marines. Even the worst marines are head and shoulders above us, even if we have an OK match up against them (again, balance across the whole game, Dark Angels will beat more factions than we will).

Knights maybe, but they can be souped with a whole manner of excellent armies and they're a rough match up for us by themselves too.

I think when we're scraping the barrel of sisters of silence trying to find worse factions than us, it's a pretty good sign that we're one of the worst factions lol.

Luckily, that might all be about to change.

Well i dont share that appraisal. Sisters of Silence are certainly bad but they are a faction.

Tyranids are definitely not better. I don't think Tyranids are bad, because I play a guy who does serious work with his and its not even a truly meta list, though its developing into one that is closer. Necrons will still whoop them. They destroy an entire gaunt squad per round. A simple halo and the Genestealers are f'd. I dunno. I have a higher opinion of Tyranids.

I REALLY dont think Dark Angels have much that I think is insurmountable but i will totally agre that they are marines and are very tough, and you will absolutely have to play well but I call that a pick em game unlesss they are just not playing a typical Dark Angel list. Which could happen.

Knights are bad. No buffing can save them. Cant even recall the last time i didnt school a Knight list... They are cool loooooooking?

My only point is that we dont qualify for the bottom. I didn't say it was the top. It's floating i nthe middle of the lower tier somewhere. My friend Devin does a great job of sterring ecrons nd I dont struggle much with them which leads me to think that this is a little overblown but i also condedd that my recent game schedule has not allowed me time to practice recently with them so perhaps i would feel differently now. Like i said i might pull them out and test my mettle today with them. I use a fairly atypical list for Necrons which fits my own proclivities as a player which is something you always have to consider too. Sometimes its just that people aren't very flexible in what they are willing to play. Ive found plenty of people here that certainly dont like unorthodox ideas so it could be as simple as a certain pattern being too familiar to people.

I just encountered this. I was exhorted to look into Celestians (not to be confused with St. Celestine) who have been terrible since time began. Now they are one of the most points efficient killers I've seen. They should average 20 dead MEQ (or 10 Primaris) without any gear. Just them. 100 points. THAT is efficient. So in a larger army that allows for the CP, they are absolutely terrifying. Takes out entire ork mobs, takes out entire Primaris units... and God help you if you are T3. Yet its not a unit that gets ANY press.

So this same thing happens to other armies.

Off topic but yeah, I've been eyeing up Celestians for sure. The only downside is that they take up an elite slot which is usually filled with imagifiers, but they're beasts (and they can protect your Imagifiers if you're running them, which is added hotness).

Not the worst no, but we've been consistently bad for this entire edition and along with tyranids we're the biggest major faction to suck so much. It's hard to feel bad for dark angels not being top tier when a million other marine variants exist.

Does anyone have experience with the WL trait that makes units immune to morale? How effective was it?

Those of you that have experience using said WL trait, how much of an impact do you think army wide morale immunity would have?

punisher357 wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the WL trait that makes units immune to morale? How effective was it?

Those of you that have experience using said WL trait, how much of an impact do you think army wide morale immunity would have?

Immortal Pride is great for warrior blobs, but situational otherwise. Our leadership is so high that it only really comes into play with 10 man immortal squads that have lost 7+ models.

Hyperlogical Strategist or Thrall of the Silent King are my go to choices usually.

punisher357 wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the WL trait that makes units immune to morale? How effective was it?

Those of you that have experience using said WL trait, how much of an impact do you think army wide morale immunity would have?

Essential if you have 2-3 big warrior blobs but just makes those bad units to need it.

Myself being nephrek I go for -1 to hit or reroll charges if I'm throwing in lychguard around to propel them on T1 into charge.

It's also not army wide as it's limited range and if you stay in that with army you struggle with objectives.

In summary, if Necrons had army wide immunity to morale it would make our worst unit better and make little difference elsewhere...

MrPieChee wrote:
In summary, if Necrons had army wide immunity to morale it would make our worst unit better and make little difference elsewhere...

I think you can frame this either as a negative or a positive.

You can either say it the way you did, or...

"Necron's already possess high Leadership and their RP mechanic forces the opponent to focus on inefficiently eliminating entire units; such that morale is either not a problem or does not arise in the first place--making morale immunity unnecessary."

Immortal Pride looks good on paper but, as others have said, it doesn't do much in practice because the main unit it's helpful for is Warriors, who aren't very good. Also, as the edition as evolved even removing 20 T4 4+/5++ save models in one turn isn't that difficult for a lot of armies anyway. I usually use Thrall of the Silent King on a CCB (Add Lightning Field for extra lols!). I guess if Necrons get a strat to double up on WL traits we might see it more, but there are probably better options even then.

Just my 2p, but I have yet to leave army creation without Hyperlogical Strategist

With the exception of a couple meme builds for friendly shiggles games, I haven't ever been able to justify anything else. It's kinda annoying, because I would really like to try something else, but the options make it hard.

edit: spelling

I never leave home without Immortal Pride. I usually run x20 warriors and 2x10 Immortals, or 3x10 Immortals. I make my opponents commit to wiping them out fully, or they skip the morale phase, run out of LOS, and start regenerating.

My 5+ rolls to regain command points are absolutely atrocious. I think in the 4-5 games i've used Hyperlogical Stratagist....I've regained maybe 1 command point. Its let me down every time i've used it.

I've had games where it did nothing, and I've had games where it's taken my 9CP pool and I've played with 15

You could roughly compare Immortal Pride with spending 2CP for auto-pass morale.

If Hyperlogical Strategist nets you 4-6 CP, well that's three turns worth of autopass morale Warlord Trait.. for one unit each turn

In games where moral rolls aren't important, you lose out. If you dont need to pass more than 2-3 moral rolls in a game, at worst, to play to the strengths of your strategy, then perhaps HS covers
everything IP would have given you.

torblind wrote:
You could roughly compare Immortal Pride with spending 2CP for auto-pass morale.

If Hyperlogical Strategist nets you 4-6 CP, well that's three turns worth of autopass morale Warlord Trait.. for one unit each turn

In games where moral rolls aren't important, you lose out. If you dont need to pass more than 2-3 moral rolls in a game, at worst, to play to the strengths of your strategy, then perhaps HS covers
everything IP would have given you.

Theoretically you're correct, but the problem I have with IP is that wiping units out fully is just good play in 40k in general and against Necrons it's an even better idea. Combined with the increase in lethality in 8th that means big blobs of Warriors tend to either get shot off the board in one turn or left alone until they can be dealt with in one turn. Under those conditions I've never really seen IP work often enough to be worth it.

At 1,000 or 1,500, Immortal Pride can be amazingly helpful. Silver Tide!

It sounds like, in most cases and most people's experience, morale doesn't cause a unit to be lost. It's wiped out and denied reanimation by the opponent's firepower.

I wonder if morale or immunity to it is negligible specifically because players aren't using ghost arks and warriors. I'll have to play test games using warriors, ghost arks, and a house rule making Necrons immune to morale. Maybe I can get some useful information to share.

edit: spelling

I haven't used my 60 Warriors at all yet in 8th.
Been too focused on not being forced to take them and being able to run Scarabs, Spyders, Sentry Pylons, all the fun things I couldn't run because of the old FOC and mandatory Warriors.

I was always a fan of warriors and ghost arks. I liked throwing all those dice! Changes to the game, weapons, transport, etc....well the current codex doesn't really make them much fun.

Sadly, the codex overall lacks synergy. I know that it was supposedly play tested but I find that hard to believe. I definitely resent Front Line for their role in it, but that's just my own opinion.

It doesn't make much sense to me how things interact with each other. Seems to be haphazardly thrown together.

 iGuy91 wrote:
I never leave home without Immortal Pride. I usually run x20 warriors and 2x10 Immortals, or 3x10 Immortals. I make my opponents commit to wiping them out fully, or they skip the morale phase, run out of LOS, and start regenerating.

My 5+ rolls to regain command points are absolutely atrocious. I think in the 4-5 games i've used Hyperlogical Stratagist....I've regained maybe 1 command point. Its let me down every time i've used it.

They focus fire them anyway. And it's not like necron infantry is hard to remove in one go except wraiths who don't have rp except with inefficient stratagem

tneva82 wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I never leave home without Immortal Pride. I usually run x20 warriors and 2x10 Immortals, or 3x10 Immortals. I make my opponents commit to wiping them out fully, or they skip the morale phase, run out of LOS, and start regenerating.

My 5+ rolls to regain command points are absolutely atrocious. I think in the 4-5 games i've used Hyperlogical Stratagist....I've regained maybe 1 command point. Its let me down every time i've used it.

They focus fire them anyway. And it's not like necron infantry is hard to remove in one go except wraiths who don't have rp except with inefficient stratagem

It can be mitigated by playing with LOS rules from ITC, area terrain, and for the warriors a chronometron cryptek nearby. You just pull casualties until the squad is out of los. And they never roll a save worse than a 5+

Whelp boys, looks like meat may be back on the Menu!

Not just a bunch of new models, but if the rules of evening out CP points and not rewarding soup will be pretty huge.

Just wanted to throw some tin foil out there. The large guy has the spines on his back, if you look at the codex so does the one infantry model but not the others. The models look to be, from left to right, Immortal, Warrior, Lynch Guard (he has the axe in hand)

Actually, looks to be a Lord with Warglaive of some sorts. Those spines are VERY Tyranid like.

*EDIT: This is a lord due to the head, but the guy on the dex still looks like a normal immortal but with the spines. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.

Hmm! Most of these new necron models and aesthetics look like god awful gak!

 MoonlightSonata wrote:
Hmm! Most of these new necron models and aesthetics look like god awful gak!

I like that their faces don't look like 60's aliens any more.

I'm also curious about that gauss pistol thingy.

Perhaps we get weapon options throughout? Would be awesome regardless how rules turn out to be


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That spider thingy looks like he has a gauss shooter cc combo weapon. Didn't the Pariahs have that back in the days? (Before my time)

I don't like the new sculpts. Way too rounded, not nearly boxy enough. I do like the new 3 legged, 3 armed lord thing, and the 3 legged double handed sword wielding critter in the video. Maybe HtH destroyers without fly? They seem to imply speed in the video.

Well guys, this thread is gonna be lit the feth up this Summer/Fall season. Spotted all manner of leaks today including the new boxset and all models are new sculpts.

Well, they put a destroyer body on top of the walker. But that IDs that character and two bodyguards I pointed out on the FB group

EDIT* they could be some form of cryptek that repairs warriors

New scarabs by the looks of it. Which I think is nice.

And dual wielding Pariahs?

torblind wrote:
New scarabs by the looks of it. Which I think is nice.

And dual wielding Pariahs?

Those are the 3 legged destroyers we've seen. They have giant axe or dual axes.

Body guards seem to have cryptek heads and jet engine bodies. Curious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nintura wrote:

torblind wrote:
New scarabs by the looks of it. Which I think is nice.

And dual wielding Pariahs?

Those are the 3 legged destroyers we've seen. They have giant axe or dual axes.

You'd think there wasn't any CC niche left to fill after wraiths, lychguard, praetorians and flayed ones. And scarabs.

I'm really not a fan of the new look.
They're making them too human. Tomb Kings in space.
Bring back the lovecraftian cosmic horror!

That dude standing with the scarabs. It'd be nice if that was intentional and he's a canoptek character

Or perhaps that tripod with destroyer-body-for-head is an awesome rewamped Spyder.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What about the claw guy in top, Imotekh? Edit: Ah no that's the tripod thingy we've seen in detail.

I love this new look! Totally on board.

 Blndmage wrote:
I'm really not a fan of the new look.
They're making them too human. Tomb Kings in space.
Bring back the lovecraftian cosmic horror!

I have no idea what could give you the impression that the new models are more human than the old ones. The new walkers are right out of War of the Worlds.

The warriors are only minor changes to their previous designs - mostly in the heads and the power rods on the guns. Otherwise its the same design they've had since they've gone plastic.

Not seen this posted here yet.

New monolith, new heavy destroyer, what looks like a big winged c'tan (New nightbringer?), silent king chillin in the background.

Here is a break down of the boxset units:

30 bases total shown

17 Warriors with mixed weapons (right unit is cut off so may be a full 10man)

3 Crabby Stabbies (CC Destroyers, yes?) with a Crabby Stabby Daddy and a floaty scarab

1 Immortal support character

1 Walker Construct

1 Overlord

2 Swarmy Scarab swarms

1 Cryptek with 2 retinue

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:
Here is a break down of the boxset units:

30 bases total shown

17 Warriors with mixed weapons (right unit is cut off so may be a full 10man)

3 Crabby Stabbies (CC Destroyers, yes?) with a Crabby Stabby Daddy and a floaty scarab

1 Immortal support character

1 Walker Construct

1 Overlord

2 Swarmy Scarab swarms

1 Cryptek with 2 retinue

I'm so happy with this, beyond my wildest expectations of what we'd be getting. Loving the look of everything, especially the stabby destroyers and weird war of the worlds thingys.

I started a general discussion thread if anyone wants to head there so we don't spam up the tactics thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/788624.page

I'm not sure I like the three armed lord.
How does it fight? I don't understand how it can move its gun arm into firing position without the sword arm getting in the way.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'm not sure I like the three armed lord.
How does it fight? I don't understand how it can move its gun arm into firing position without the sword arm getting in the way.

Really ? We get a ton of new models, a new codex, new general rules, and thats what you think about ??

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'm not sure I like the three armed lord.
How does it fight? I don't understand how it can move its gun arm into firing position without the sword arm getting in the way.

That's the sort of thing you can't take issue with in 40k

 Sasori wrote:
I started a general discussion thread if anyone wants to head there so we don't spam up the tactics thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/788624.page

This is Necrons general. Discussing tactics is useless anyway when there are few tournaments because of corona and 9th + PA dropping soon. Now let's get back on the topic of discussing leaked images of models we don't know any rules for. I agree with some of the other posters that the new direction isn't great. I just wanted more HQs to choose from, but the tall walker is pretty cool as far as I can see with the blurry images and I'm a sucker for the pokémon C'tan so I'll have to get the new Silent King.

 p5freak wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'm not sure I like the three armed lord.
How does it fight? I don't understand how it can move its gun arm into firing position without the sword arm getting in the way.

Really ? We get a ton of new models, a new codex, new general rules, and thats what you think about ??

Yes, I do appreciate we get new models and a codex. That doesn't mean I can't critique the new models.
If the arm was coming out the back or had its own socket instead of apparently sharing it with the sword arm it would look better, imo.
Still looks more necron and better than the 5th ed vehicles though.

I do like the Skorpekh destroyers. I don't find the 3 legged look too egregious, although four legs probably would have looked better.

I'm guessing from the guy in the bottom left of that picture that there will be a new destroyer/heavy destroyer kit. I'm guessing the destroyer lord goes bye bye and is replaced with that three-legged dude. What happens to flayed ones? The most logical thing would be to add an alternate build to the warriors kit. They need to be plastic and come in groups of 10.

The front corner of the front monolith has two melee models which are probably flayed ones, or something in a kit with them - no flesh has people in other threads doubting they are FO...

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I'm guessing from the guy in the bottom left of that picture that there will be a new destroyer/heavy destroyer kit. I'm guessing the destroyer lord goes bye bye and is replaced with that three-legged dude. What happens to flayed ones? The most logical thing would be to add an alternate build to the warriors kit. They need to be plastic and come in groups of 10.

If destroyer lord goes away to be replaced by 3 legged he better get good buffs to compensate for the nerf the 3 legs are

tneva82 wrote:

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I'm guessing from the guy in the bottom left of that picture that there will be a new destroyer/heavy destroyer kit. I'm guessing the destroyer lord goes bye bye and is replaced with that three-legged dude. What happens to flayed ones? The most logical thing would be to add an alternate build to the warriors kit. They need to be plastic and come in groups of 10.

If destroyer lord goes away to be replaced by 3 legged he better get good buffs to compensate for the nerf the 3 legs are

Unless the three legged version is just as fast as the flying version and has some jumping rule to simulate flight.
The Skorpekh looked pretty agile in the trailer, so maybe Daddy Skorpekh is just as fast.

I doubt it's got fly keyword which is if anything going to go up in importance in 9th by the look of it. There's difference between jumping and flying.

Hopefully with the new codex they actually make the obelisk viable, I know the monolith isn't great but the obelisk is such a weak vehicle for us.
You pay the points for a lord of war that struggles to kill anything with a half decent save so it'll be interesting to see if they have modified the Tesla weaponry on it
maybe haywire type rule as its it an electrical based attack or make the gravity pulse able to affect all unit types as gravity pulse should affect land units aswell but its smaller area that you have to specify. I know they haven't said anything about it but thought I'd point out another weak unit in our codex

 Aza'Gorod wrote:
Hopefully with the new codex they actually make the obelisk viable, I know the monolith isn't great but the obelisk is such a weak vehicle for us.
You pay the points for a lord of war that struggles to kill anything with a half decent save so it'll be interesting to see if they have modified the Tesla weaponry on it maybe haywire type rule as its it an electrical based attack or make the gravity pulse able to affect all unit types as gravity pulse should affect land units aswell but its smaller area that you have to specify. I know they haven't said anything about it but thought I'd point out another weak unit in our codex

The obelisk was voted worst unit in the game, beating out the monolith, servitors and a wide variety of other terrible models.

I for one would love to see a point reduction on the Seraptek, so it can fit in a list more comfortably, based on its fragile nature.

Well, going just by what we know for sure, I'm thinking how it effects existing necron rules and tactics.

We know for certain that warriors get a new weapon option that is shorter ranged but more effective in that range. We can guess it might get more shots that a gauss flayer. We don't know if it will have different S, AP or Dam.

Even if it just gets more shots it means the VoD, the deceiver, night scythes and monoliths become better because anything that gets the gauss reaper warriors in range will now be more effective. Likewise MWBD is now more powerful than before.


Nephrekh's ability to make a longer advance move will be more effective if these weapons, which we can assume but aren't sure of yet, are assault 2.


Of course if they are"just" assault 2 and have the same stats otherwise as flayers they're no better than flayers at 12" so it's quite possible they will have something else to be an improvement. extra ap? A new special rule? Possible.


So just one change, a new warrior gun that is more effective at shorter range, affects anything that improves shooting or speeds up warrior movement to get them close enough to use it.

And that's just one small bit of what's coming. Thins are already looking good for the necrons.

What we really need is more resilience so we can effectively *use* the weapons we bring to the table.

Right so GW just had their live Q&A today going over some of the new stuff for the new edition. One of the biggest things I took away is the overhaul to the Command Point system. As it is now you have to fill out detachments to unlock additional CP. What the live Q&A went over is CP pools will be based on the size of the game e.g. 1000pts, 2000pts and everyone will start with the same amount of CP. We've always been starved for CP during 8th, I feel this alone will go a long way for list building and what options we have to bring to the table.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:
Right so GW just had their live Q&A today going over some of the new stuff for the new edition. One of the biggest things I took away is the overhaul to the Command Point system. As it is now you have to fill out detachments to unlock additional CP. What the live Q&A went over is CP pools will be based on the size of the game e.g. 1000pts, 2000pts and everyone will start with the same amount of CP. We've always been starved for CP during 8th, I feel this alone will go a long way for list building and what options we have to bring to the table.

This was already revealed on saturday. But yeh that's nice help. Might have to pay for extra detachments to mix dynasties(not sure on that. Different codexes for sure) though.


Another big one is modifiers are capped at +1/-1 and you always hit on 6's. No more +2 to hit so MWBD+sautekh stratagem to get 4+ tesla(assuming tesla isn't unmodified 6's in new codex to begin with)

Monsters will shoot out of melee just like tanks so maybe it's actually vehicle/monster keyword thing?

Hiding in 2nd floor is no protection from monsters/vehicles anymore. The big walker will kill stuff on 2nd floor in melee.

In fairness, we were starved for CP because our Troops are sub-par as of Late Stage 8th Ed.

I would have loved to bring large Brigades of troops supplemented by other detachments/units--but that wasn't competitively viable in any reasonable way.

sieGermans wrote:
In fairness, we were starved for CP because our Troops are sub-par as of Late Stage 8th Ed.

I would have loved to bring large Brigades of troops supplemented by other detachments/units--but that wasn't competitively viable in any reasonable way.

Not just that. Also HQ tax and that necron troops needs to be full sized or they give up plenty of their bonuses. When even min sized squad costs about 2 units worth of other faction and loses bunch of abilities it pays for being min sized while other faction works just fine it's hard to get 6/9 troops needed.

Necron troops could be worth their points but when 1 costs 150 as cheapest it's hard to fit in 6...Especially when troops aren't the expensive part of the army.

Agreed.

If they were better for their points, or brought functionality which we otherwise needed to spend points on elsewhere (for other units) then the CP starvation wouldn't be as much an issue.

Questions about the Silent King do you want him to be like Magnus a beast by himself or do you want him to be a buff god like Jimmy G?

 CKO wrote:
Questions about the Silent King do you want him to be like Magnus a beast by himself or do you want him to be a buff god like Jimmy G?

Definitely more buffer than personally buff.

I do want him to be a good combatant, but I'd rather he be a LEADER than a duelist.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Questions about the Silent King do you want him to be like Magnus a beast by himself or do you want him to be a buff god like Jimmy G?

Definitely more buffer than personally buff.

I do want him to be a good combatant, but I'd rather he be a LEADER than a duelist.

I am greedy I want it all my guy made GODS work for him unlike the puny Emperor! My guy is on par with the EMPEROR! Ctan powers are a must since there seems to be one struggling in the picture thus he is being powered by a freaking star god! At least 4-7 attacks since 2 bodyguards and a lord equals 7 attacks last time I checked. Most importantly this guy buffs should be 2 my will be done rules a turn and a cryptek plus 1 to reanimation protocals within 12 inches and he deserves a 4++ and quantom shielding, I mean please GW don't ruin this for me!

 CKO wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Questions about the Silent King do you want him to be like Magnus a beast by himself or do you want him to be a buff god like Jimmy G?

Definitely more buffer than personally buff.

I do want him to be a good combatant, but I'd rather he be a LEADER than a duelist.

I am greedy I want it all my guy made GODS work for him unlike the puny Emperor! My guy is on par with the EMPEROR! Ctan powers are a must since there seems to be one struggling in the picture thus he is being powered by a freaking star god! At least 4-7 attacks since 2 bodyguards and a lord equals 7 attacks last time I checked. Most importantly this guy buffs should be 2 my will be done rules a turn and a cryptek plus 1 to reanimation protocals within 12 inches and he deserves a 4++ and quantom shielding, I mean please GW don't ruin this for me!

How many points do you think that'd all be?

Most of all, I don't want him to be ESSENTIAL. He should be a good unit, but not a crutch.

If he is the same as the Primarchs I will be fine with that

He has a floating death chair with orbiting shields, two lesser lords and a trapped C'tan. If he doesn't have some personal buffness as a model you'd have to wonder what all that's for.

As a subset of the huge model isolated to just the guy his buff auras should probably be more important than his direct ability to hit things with a pointy stick though, yes.

I wonder if that new Ctan model is a multi-model kit. The two on the GW webstore right now are both finecast, would be a neat way to give a new model and sweep them out by replacing them with a multi-kit model in plastic.

That would basically just leave Necrons with old leaders in finecast - assuming flayed ones are being replaced with something.

 Overread wrote:
I wonder if that new Ctan model is a multi-model kit. The two on the GW webstore right now are both finecast, would be a neat way to give a new model and sweep them out by replacing them with a multi-kit model in plastic.

That would basically just leave Necrons with old leaders in finecast - assuming flayed ones are being replaced with something.

I'm hoping the make the NB and deceiver plastic (as I really hate finecast). With the new C'Tan a lot of people think it's the void dragon and from the Lore I've read and the model it does kind of fit. Either way a new C'Tan is nice but in the Lore the void dragon imbued necron warriors with the power of lightning which sensing on how they do it could have some cool effects in CC

One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

A multi-build c'tan would be amazing. My best guess is that it's the nightbringer reimagined though, at least the build we've seen.

Flayed ones going bye bye would be sad, but if it's the price we pay for all this goodness then so be it.

I'm now trying to decide whether to go with a new paint scheme for my new shiny boys. My current force is just silver, even the vehicles. It's painted OK< but it's so tough to make the big vehicles look good when they're just one big blob of metallics.

Reluctant to paint anything until we get the new codex, but god knows when that will be.

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

I don't think games workshop would give Orikan empowered such a huge model, but I agree he could do with one to represent his empowered state

Or maybe Orikan will no longer have a de-powered state.

With the desire to replace Finecast it does put a lot of those special characters in a weird spot. The range is already getting a massive update with several new units. Surely they couldn't be replacing 6 or so character models too?

 Bosskelot wrote:
With the desire to replace Finecast it does put a lot of those special characters in a weird spot. The range is already getting a massive update with several new units. Surely they couldn't be replacing 6 or so character models too?

Well, Szeras is effectively (if not actually) replaced. I don't see why Orikan can't be.

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

You thought wrong. That model has the size of mortarion, lord of change, bloodthirster. Its not gonna be orikan empowered, looks more like the void dragon.

 p5freak wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

You thought wrong. That model has the size of mortarion, lord of change, bloodthirster. Its not gonna be orikan empowered, looks more like the void dragon.

Orikan's empowered stats are those of a C'Tan shard--so I'm not sure what you're distinguishing, here.

With regards to characters, I think they'll be replaced through 9th editions version of psychic awakening. The new range is focused on a new dynasty (presumably the Szerachan dynasty, the dudes that the Silent King took with him when he left the galaxy). It wouldn't make sense for them to remake characters from other dynasties in this wave.

I also really doubt that's Orikan. It's a C'tan, the only question is which one (or if it's just one).

sieGermans wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

You thought wrong. That model has the size of mortarion, lord of change, bloodthirster. Its not gonna be orikan empowered, looks more like the void dragon.

Orikan's empowered stats are those of a C'Tan shard--so I'm not sure what you're distinguishing, here.

The wings make it look like the void dragon.

 p5freak wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

You thought wrong. That model has the size of mortarion, lord of change, bloodthirster. Its not gonna be orikan empowered, looks more like the void dragon.

Orikan's empowered stats are those of a C'Tan shard--so I'm not sure what you're distinguishing, here.

The wings make it look like the void dragon.

And the lightning too.

 p5freak wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
One thought I did have is that it might be a model for Orikan Empowered?

Orikan kinda has the tail and Staff thing going on?

I would prefer it to be the Dragon, but it's a fun thing one of my friends mentioned

You thought wrong. That model has the size of mortarion, lord of change, bloodthirster. Its not gonna be orikan empowered, looks more like the void dragon.

Orikan's empowered stats are those of a C'Tan shard--so I'm not sure what you're distinguishing, here.

The wings make it look like the void dragon.

I agree. I think it's more likely it is the Void Dragon. But it isn't impossible it could be Orikan instead.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/01/rise-of-the-skorpekh-destroyer/

A bit of a look at the stabby crabbies.



Assuming they're strength 4 like normal destroyers, that puts them at Str 6. So these guys are going to shred elite infantry, but anti-armour might be a stretch. Impossible to tell how they'll function without all the context of 9th though.

Their models look dope af. Loving all the new creepiness.

Supposedly there are going to be 3 destroyer variants. The Skorpekh, Locust (might have heard it wrong?), and another Destroyer type.
The Locust are the originals, while the Skorpekh are close combat, and the third we don't have info on.
I wonder if the big destroyer in the bottom of the released image is a new type of destroyer? I hope it's just a re-make of the original. That would mean there's another new model kit we haven't seen.

I know GW raised prices and it bothers me, but I also know I'll be buying everything as soon as it releases.

Eh, price hikes likely won't affect us. New models were always coming in at new prices, and most of the hikes are on old stuff. our old stuff is being replaced.

Where'd this three destroyer types rumour come from?

IanVanCheese wrote:
Eh, price hikes likely won't affect us. New models were always coming in at new prices, and most of the hikes are on old stuff. our old stuff is being replaced.

Where'd this three destroyer types rumour come from?

The GW twitch stream

Hm I really wanted S8 to get back some of our ability to mow down vehicles that we lost going from 7th to 8th

It's reasonable to think that the Skorptekh will be Str 5 base to be honest, considering that Lychguard are. So Str 7 seems likely. Hopefully there will be some dynasty traits and strats to buff them if we need them to handle some anti-tank duties.

OK cool, maybe the third type will be the heavy destroyer, or that weird dude that people spotted hiding behind the monolith. he looked like he was on crab legs, right?

IanVanCheese wrote:
It's reasonable to think that the Skorptekh will be Str 5 base to be honest, considering that Lychguard are. So Str 7 seems likely. Hopefully there will be some dynasty traits and strats to buff them if we need them to handle some anti-tank duties.

OK cool, maybe the third type will be the heavy destroyer, or that weird dude that people spotted hiding behind the monolith. he looked like he was on crab legs, right?

Yes, it'd a likely candidate.

We already have a S+1 strat, so in that sense they're all set. Unless you have two units in cc same turn

It’s interesting how much they’re fleshing out the destroyer cult, it’s quite cool. I hope the old Destroyers, the locust ones, get an update to their models, they’re really crude now compared to all these new models, especially with the updated heavy destroyer.

I really don't mind the plain destroyers too much. It's nice that the heavy one looks significantly more bad ass, if that's what we're looking at.

Of course any update to our range is always cool.

Since no one's said it yet: hyperphase reap-blades.... What a terrible name!

Just price it right and I don't care what it's called

 Tiberius501 wrote:
It’s interesting how much they’re fleshing out the destroyer cult, it’s quite cool. I hope the old Destroyers, the locust ones, get an update to their models, they’re really crude now compared to all these new models, especially with the updated heavy destroyer.

It's safe to assume, everything else with green rods is getting a redo. I'd guess the heavy destroyer will be a dual build with the normal destroyers.

Candidly, a Strength 4 base (with +2) would also make them symmetrical with existing Destroyer shooting profile of Strength 6.

Whether that's to be retained, however, is certainly an open question.

sieGermans wrote:
Candidly, a Strength 4 base (with +2) would also make them symmetrical with existing Destroyer shooting profile of Strength 6.

Whether that's to be retained, however, is certainly an open question.

.. if we also get that reroll everything strat for them in cc then things would be interesting

torblind wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
Candidly, a Strength 4 base (with +2) would also make them symmetrical with existing Destroyer shooting profile of Strength 6.

Whether that's to be retained, however, is certainly an open question.

.. if we also get that reroll everything strat for them in cc then things would be interesting

Agreed. Note also that this addresses the 7th Ed. incoherence of a melee Destroyer Lord having no Destroyer cult compatriots to cleave into battle with.

MrPieChee wrote:
Since no one's said it yet: hyperphase reap-blades.... What a terrible name!

Yeah, its a dumb name, and I don't like how it looks either.
The weapon itself looks fine, but the hands being welded to it looks odd.
I actually think the other weapon options look better and more natural.

Did anyone notice that the model everyone refers to as the heavy destroyer has 3 arms?

punisher357 wrote:
Did anyone notice that the model everyone refers to as the heavy destroyer has 3 arms?

I'm ok with that

MrPieChee wrote:
Since no one's said it yet: hyperphase reap-blades.... What a terrible name!

Agreed. Don't understand why they didn't just call it a Hyperphase Reaper, or really just anything that's not as clumsy as reap-blade.

I’ve pretty much accepted that GW are gonna name everything terribly. It feels sort of like they’ve got a random name generator that pumps out a verb then a noun and then the designers roll with whatever they combine.

So riddle me this.

The new destroyers, assuming the have 10 inch movement, and the infantry keyword. 3 attacks base, with 3 weapon options.

How would you use them in a list? Give a VoD to a Destroyer lord, and teleport them into threat range? It feels as if we're still stepping on the toes of the Wraiths, which would probably pair well with them as a distraction carnifex to draw fire?

Thoughts?

 iGuy91 wrote:
So riddle me this.

The new destroyers, assuming the have 10 inch movement, and the infantry keyword. 3 attacks base, with 3 weapon options.

How would you use them in a list? Give a VoD to a Destroyer lord, and teleport them into threat range? It feels as if we're still stepping on the toes of the Wraiths, which would probably pair well with them as a distraction carnifex to draw fire?

Thoughts?

A lot will depend on how terrain works in 9th. Assuming they're infantry, and infantry still get to do things like ignore walls of ruins when moving, they might be OK just running up through cover. 10"+D6 Advance then another 10" in their next turn is around 22-24" of movement before the charge roll, which gives them a decent amount of table coverage. I'm assuming/hoping 9th won't be a case of charge first turn or die to withering return fire but I can see them being very resilient to small arms fire and a Necron army with a bunch of Wraiths and regular Destroyers will have quite a lot of threat saturation of relatively high Toughness infantry that are all either fast or threatening from range. I prefer using the VoD on shooting units to take an advantageous position early, usually in cover.

It's impossible to know. If they're basically destroyers on legs, then with those stats they'd be wraiths that trade toughness for damage output.

With new emphasis on cover, they could be a phenomenal counter charge unit to hide in the middle of the board. Our firepower is typically mdi range, which leaves us worryingly close to our foes. having a unit of these ready to maul anything that comes near could be great.

We don't know much for now, other than that reap-blades is an awful name.

If these wonky balanced tripod destroyers are slower than the flying ones it raises a lot of questions as to why on earth they’d mod themselves to be worse at getting into melee than their shooty pals.

changemod wrote:
If these wonky balanced tripod destroyers are slower than the flying ones it raises a lot of questions as to why on earth they’d mod themselves to be worse at getting into melee than their shooty pals.

Presumably they'll get a melee rule to replace the Repulsor Platform rule, which only benefits shooting.

Insaitable Destruction: This unit can charge even if it has advanced this turn.

Please & Thanks

You’re giving me hope. And we all know what hope is the first step to. -_-

Someone mentioned before that the canoptek plasmacyte gets its name from the plasmacyte which is a part of the immune system that makes antibodies when it detects a threat so maybe it will have the ability to make some kind of scarabs or cause mortal wounds?

Or it is reacting to the high warp presence and “activating”?

sieGermans wrote:
Or it is reacting to the high warp presence and “activating”?

Could be that's, maybe a bubble to protect from warp shenanigans

torblind wrote:

punisher357 wrote:
Did anyone notice that the model everyone refers to as the heavy destroyer has 3 arms?

I'm ok with that

Not a complaint. I also don't think thevgiant gun he has is gauss. It looks just like the enmitic annihilator the skorpekh destroyer lord has, except larger.

punisher357 wrote:

torblind wrote:

punisher357 wrote:
Did anyone notice that the model everyone refers to as the heavy destroyer has 3 arms?

I'm ok with that

Not a complaint. I also don't think thevgiant gun he has is gauss. It looks just like the enmitic annihilator the skorpekh destroyer lord has, except larger.

Would be cool if the heavy destroyer had multiple weapon options, but that official pic GW put out labelled him as "all the gauss", so who knows.

With a new kit I'd like to see more weapon options

Rumours from the 4chan dynasty,

Super dubious about these, given that they say hyperphase reap-blades have a -1 to hit built in, which the preview made no mention of.

Other thoughts:

Gauss reapers are wayyyyy better than flayers. Hell, they're better than Gauss blasters.
Skorptekh destroyers look decent, their viability depends on strats and dynasty traits. Rerolling RP after killing a unit is cool.
Canoptek Stalker (presumably the smaller of the war of the worlds walkers) - not great. Gives an inv save and spreads auras, but without character rule it'll just die super quickly. Maybe decent if new cover makes it hideable.
Immortal Overseer - poop. Moral isn't a huge issue for us. Might see some limited use as a filler HQ, since assuming he'd be dirt cheap with those stats.

I'm assuming the Canoptek Stalker is the thing skulking behind the Monolith


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Could also concievably be the Limbed Turbine accompanying the cryptek in the centre of the image

IanVanCheese wrote:


Rumours from the 4chan dynasty,

Super dubious about these, given that they say hyperphase reap-blades have a -1 to hit built in, which the preview made no mention of.

Other thoughts:

Gauss reapers are wayyyyy better than flayers. Hell, they're better than Gauss blasters.
Skorptekh destroyers look decent, their viability depends on strats and dynasty traits. Rerolling RP after killing a unit is cool.
Canoptek Stalker (presumably the smaller of the war of the worlds walkers) - not great. Gives an inv save and spreads auras, but without character rule it'll just die super quickly. Maybe decent if new cover makes it hideable.
Immortal Overseer - poop. Moral isn't a huge issue for us. Might see some limited use as a filler HQ, since assuming he'd be dirt cheap with those stats.

Yeah I agree I hope these rumours are false. As those models are pretty underwhelming.

Surely the walker is T 6 with a few more wounds and would shielding otherwise it'll get obliterated and yeah morale isn't a problem for us.

Reapers are good but at 18 inch range it would feasibly give a primaris unit at least 2/3 full turns of shooting for us to get in range

And I also hope that's not the only use for the plasmacyte, rerolling 1 is nice but will you enemy give you chance to do so

Its fake, there are typos you dont see in GW rules. It says canopteck re-reoll, and enamy. And hyperphase reap blades now list the -1 to hit, which wasnt there a few hours ago.

Typoes hardly proof since those aren't photos of actual rule so somebody would be writing them anyway. Typo would have come somebody typing from book.

The lack of -1 to hit is bigger tell.

tneva82 wrote:
Typoes hardly proof since those aren't photos of actual rule so somebody would be writing them anyway. Typo would have come somebody typing from book.

The lack of -1 to hit is bigger tell.

Why would you write them down when just taking a photo with your smartphone is much faster ? If you dont have your smartphone at hand you wouldnt be able to remember everything and write it down later.

 Aza'Gorod wrote:

Reapers are good but at 18 inch range it would feasibly give a primaris unit at least 2/3 full turns of shooting for us to get in range

Yeah 18" range is boo, but if we still have the VOD, then 20 warriors rocking them is a pretty great use of it. Also the new monolith might not suck, in which case eternity gate is back on the menu.

Again though, this reads like a bunch of educated guesses, not a real leak.

 p5freak wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Typoes hardly proof since those aren't photos of actual rule so somebody would be writing them anyway. Typo would have come somebody typing from book.

The lack of -1 to hit is bigger tell.

Why would you write them down when just taking a photo with your smartphone is much faster ? If you dont have your smartphone at hand you wouldnt be able to remember everything and write it down later.

Good question. But what was shown is clearly not photos of actual pages. Note how column stat name and values don't line up. Clearly its somebody typing down and in this process typos come just fine even without being fake. So back to -1 hit being bigger tell it's fake than typoes.

Leakers rarely are logical though. If they were once in a while we would get non blurry pictures...

Which actually brings one reason to your why if this was real. "leak" comes from gw themselves like those blurry photos come

tneva82 wrote:

Good question. But what was shown is clearly not photos of actual pages.

And thats whats telling me that its fake. The new necron codex is already printed, GW does this 6 months in advance.

tneva82 wrote:

Which actually brings one reason to your why if this was real. "leak" comes from gw themselves like those blurry photos come

A blurry photo from an actual datasheet, that i would consider to be real.

Those are reasonable stats though, right? Buys warriors 6" extra distance and ups strength, which is great (flayers really need to be in 12" for rapid fire)

You could deceiver in one flayer unit at 12" and two units of these guys at 18" for example.

torblind wrote:
Those are reasonable stats though, right? Buys warriors 6" extra distance and ups strength, which is great (flayers really need to be in 12" for rapid fire)

You could deceiver in one flayer unit at 12" and two units of these guys at 18" for example.

The stats for the walker are far from reasonable. Its stats are almost identical to a destroyer except 1 higher S, A and 2 extra W.

For its size it should be a bit tougher then that otherwise it's a target

I'm sure there is more to it. Maybe those rules are incomplete ? Plus, remember that besides unit stats, the armie and subfactions might get new rules or a revision of the ones existing.
I don't really mind the gauss 18" range. I play nephrek. Movement isn't a problem. Plus, it's an assault weapon. It matches my style of play. As for Primaris, remember they are getting a raise in point cost. Who knows if we'll see as many of them in this edition.

 Khornate25 wrote:
I'm sure there is more to it. Maybe those rules are incomplete ? Plus, remember that besides unit stats, the armie and subfactions might get new rules or a revision of the ones existing.
I don't really mind the gauss 18" range. I play nephrek. Movement isn't a problem. Plus, it's an assault weapon. It matches my style of play. As for Primaris, remember they are getting a raise in point cost. Who knows if we'll see as many of them in this edition.

A 17% raise.
While Cultists (a worse unit) got a 50% increase.

I would not be optimistic about them pointing stuff correctly.

 Khornate25 wrote:
I'm sure there is more to it. Maybe those rules are incomplete ? Plus, remember that besides unit stats, the armie and subfactions might get new rules or a revision of the ones existing.
I don't really mind the gauss 18" range. I play nephrek. Movement isn't a problem. Plus, it's an assault weapon. It matches my style of play. As for Primaris, remember they are getting a raise in point cost. Who knows if we'll see as many of them in this edition.

I don't think anyone is complaining about the Gauss reaper stats, they're fantastic.

But yeah, if those are the stats for that canoptek thing, then it better have some other things that keep it alive. There are also some rumoured rules for the SK floating about on reddit. Again, enormous pinch of salt but these actually look reasonable.



Again, could very well be fakey fakey nonsense, but something about that rings very plausible to me. And at first glance.... not terrible. Like I could see some use for him.

 Aza'Gorod wrote:

torblind wrote:
Those are reasonable stats though, right? Buys warriors 6" extra distance and ups strength, which is great (flayers really need to be in 12" for rapid fire)

You could deceiver in one flayer unit at 12" and two units of these guys at 18" for example.

The stats for the walker are far from reasonable. Its stats are almost identical to a destroyer except 1 higher S, A and 2 extra W.

For its size it should be a bit tougher then that otherwise it's a target

Aren't the walkers basically melee destroyer? Makes sense they have destroyerish stats. And of course the more you have stats the more pricey. 100 pts per model for melee unit is expensive.

tneva82 wrote:

 Aza'Gorod wrote:

torblind wrote:
Those are reasonable stats though, right? Buys warriors 6" extra distance and ups strength, which is great (flayers really need to be in 12" for rapid fire)

You could deceiver in one flayer unit at 12" and two units of these guys at 18" for example.

The stats for the walker are far from reasonable. Its stats are almost identical to a destroyer except 1 higher S, A and 2 extra W.

For its size it should be a bit tougher then that otherwise it's a target

Aren't the walkers basically melee destroyer? Makes sense they have destroyerish stats. And of course the more you have stats the more pricey. 100 pts per model for melee unit is expensive.

The thing is a tomb spider is T 6 so why not this thing. It's basically a glorified cryptek that can't hide amongst out models going by this rumour.
Its slightly tougher then a cryptek but since its canoptek it wont have any kind of regeneration so T5 5W 3+ 5++. It wouldn't take much too bring this thing down.

The ability to extend aura is nice but with our units being on average range 24 with the majority of the weapons in our codex a smart opponent is just gonna take this thing out turn 1 to stop you spreading your army out and to force you to bunch up around the characters with the abilities you were trying to extend further


Also with the stats given in CC you would, get 2 hits, cause a wound but with only a -1 they'd likely save it but it's only 1 D so would it really matter??

tneva82 wrote:

 Aza'Gorod wrote:

torblind wrote:
Those are reasonable stats though, right? Buys warriors 6" extra distance and ups strength, which is great (flayers really need to be in 12" for rapid fire)

You could deceiver in one flayer unit at 12" and two units of these guys at 18" for example.

The stats for the walker are far from reasonable. Its stats are almost identical to a destroyer except 1 higher S, A and 2 extra W.

For its size it should be a bit tougher then that otherwise it's a target

Aren't the walkers basically melee destroyer? Makes sense they have destroyerish stats. And of course the more you have stats the more pricey. 100 pts per model for melee unit is expensive.

He means the tall spindly walkers, not the Skorptekh destroyers. The destroyer stats are fine. It's the war of the worlds looking thing that we're meh about.

I'm really no fan of the new 'Big Guns never tire' Eule.
Looks like melee is gonna be even worth in 9th than in 8th...

Surtr wrote:
I'm really no fan of the new 'Big Guns never tire' Eule.
Looks like melee is gonna be even worth in 9th than in 8th...

Eh, it forces them to shoot at the unit that tagged them at least. I think it's fair enough, tanks have been pretty lackluster this edition, outside of those that fly.

GW have said they've made changes to buff melee and we haven't seen any of them yet. We'll see how good melee is once we know how the new cover rules work. but personally I'm OK with these changes. They make it some anti-tank weapons are the best way to kill tanks, not tagging them with cheap chaff.

Yeah great buffs Like that new stratagem against fall back that deals maybe 1 Mortal wound. If you are lucky 2


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only thing GW seems to do to buff melee seems to be the new Terrain. And maybe the new Missions that seem to be focused on more engagments. But it doesn't change the fact that the enemy can still simply fall back and shoot you to death

Surtr wrote:
Yeah great buffs Like that new stratagem against fall back that deals maybe 1 Mortal wound. If you are lucky 2


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only thing GW seems to do to buff melee seems to be the new Terrain. And maybe the new Missions that seem to be focused on more engagments. But it doesn't change the fact that the enemy can still simply fall back and shoot you to death

We don't know yet. Small changes have a big effect on how the game plays. Yes that strat blows, but other changes could be much more significant.

You can still wrap and trap units. Tagged vehicles have to clear what has engaged them before they can hit anything else. If they fall back, they can't shoot anything still. I wouldn't see a buff to tanks as a nerf to melee. Both needed buffing and it looks like both will get buffed, we've just not seen everything yet.

Surtr wrote:
Yeah great buffs Like that new stratagem against fall back that deals maybe 1 Mortal wound. If you are lucky 2


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only thing GW seems to do to buff melee seems to be the new Terrain. And maybe the new Missions that seem to be focused on more engagments. But it doesn't change the fact that the enemy can still simply fall back and shoot you to death

And so far terrain changes have been what has been commonly used anyway...so no help there either so far.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IanVanCheese wrote:

Surtr wrote:
Yeah great buffs Like that new stratagem against fall back that deals maybe 1 Mortal wound. If you are lucky 2


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only thing GW seems to do to buff melee seems to be the new Terrain. And maybe the new Missions that seem to be focused on more engagments. But it doesn't change the fact that the enemy can still simply fall back and shoot you to death

We don't know yet. Small changes have a big effect on how the game plays. Yes that strat blows, but other changes could be much more significant.

You can still wrap and trap units. Tagged vehicles have to clear what has engaged them before they can hit anything else. If they fall back, they can't shoot anything still. I wouldn't see a buff to tanks as a nerf to melee. Both needed buffing and it looks like both will get buffed, we've just not seen everything yet.

So far with GW when there's "there still might be something cunning that helps out" it never pans out. "marine codex 2.0 won't be that bad! Just wait and see! It's fixed somehow!". And then it turns out to be even worse than before.

GW says they buffed melee but...GW says a lot of things. Rarely accurate though. It's marketing speech they say. Who says in marketing speech "melee will suck"?

I want the Necrons to be out already!

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I want the Necrons to be out already!

From what we've heard, and from what the guy at my local GW says, it's gonna be real soon. Early/mid July is my best bet.

And we'll have Szeras/Pariah sooner than that.

25.7 seems to be current rumour for 40k starter set. Separate necron release could be bit later like death guard last time or sob qad

tneva82 wrote:
25.7 seems to be current rumour for 40k starter set. Separate necron release could be bit later like death guard last time or sob qad

Yeah I doubt we're getting our codex until a little later in the year, maybe august/september. Still, I think we'll have enough new toys to reignite this thread for a while.

That’s not soon enough! I need my metal skelly bois and gals NOW!

sieGermans wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I hope not. That ability is 99.9% useless. Psykers move, and can advance, before the psychic phase, moving out of its range . 30/180 psychic powers are 9" or less. And even if a double is rolled, there still is the command reroll.

I reckon we will get that deny a psychic power on 4+ for 1cp.

Strictly speaking, the ability is not 99.9% useless.

Without CP cost, it increases the chance of perils (before re-roll abilities) from 2/36 to 6/36: a 3-fold increase in initial likelihood. If it bleeds off CP from the opponent to enable re-rolls, that's a net benefit.
Note that for armies that have Psychic Power re-roll abilities, those are typically relied upon to mitigate failure chance--if they use it to avoid this, that's also a net benefit.

Thereafter, analysis moves to likelihood of the ability being within the 9" bubble. We simply cannot evaluate that without seeing more of Szera's statline and other abilities (if any).

In principle, we can say it is nearly certain to have no effect on Turn 1 if we go Second, and it is unlikely to have any effect on Turn 1 if we go First.

Further in principle, we can say that any units which have a movement speed greater than 9" are likely to be able to avoid the bubble--though whether this affects downstream impacts around strategic positioning is a Tactical consideration (i.e., if they elect to move away from Szeras which hinders their ability to capture an Objective marker--we can't realistically evaluate that mathematically in a vacuum). Similarly, any Psychers with movement greater than 18" (e.g., Hemlocks) are nearly certain to be able to avoid the bubble. Everything else, however, have reasonable prospects of being caught within the bubble. If we imagine that they will default to within 1.1" from Szeras following our movement, and where movement for infantry psychers is typically 6", they have a high likelihood of escaping in the movement phase only if they Run.

Etc.

I'm not trying to be pedantic here, but this isn't a 99.9% useless ability--saying it is, in a Competitive Tactics thread is a disservice to the community.

Note, I am not commenting at all on hypothetical Pariahs with a further hypothetical chance of their receiving this known/spoiled ability. I hate wishlisting like this because it has a high likelihood of disappointment even when the Actual outcome is a net positive. Why do that to ourselves?

Just pointing out that with the newer, smaller boards, Szeras's aura ability is now proportionally better!

sieGermans wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I hope not. That ability is 99.9% useless. Psykers move, and can advance, before the psychic phase, moving out of its range . 30/180 psychic powers are 9" or less. And even if a double is rolled, there still is the command reroll.

I reckon we will get that deny a psychic power on 4+ for 1cp.

Strictly speaking, the ability is not 99.9% useless.

Without CP cost, it increases the chance of perils (before re-roll abilities) from 2/36 to 6/36: a 3-fold increase in initial likelihood. If it bleeds off CP from the opponent to enable re-rolls, that's a net benefit.
Note that for armies that have Psychic Power re-roll abilities, those are typically relied upon to mitigate failure chance--if they use it to avoid this, that's also a net benefit.

Thereafter, analysis moves to likelihood of the ability being within the 9" bubble. We simply cannot evaluate that without seeing more of Szera's statline and other abilities (if any).

In principle, we can say it is nearly certain to have no effect on Turn 1 if we go Second, and it is unlikely to have any effect on Turn 1 if we go First.

Further in principle, we can say that any units which have a movement speed greater than 9" are likely to be able to avoid the bubble--though whether this affects downstream impacts around strategic positioning is a Tactical consideration (i.e., if they elect to move away from Szeras which hinders their ability to capture an Objective marker--we can't realistically evaluate that mathematically in a vacuum). Similarly, any Psychers with movement greater than 18" (e.g., Hemlocks) are nearly certain to be able to avoid the bubble. Everything else, however, have reasonable prospects of being caught within the bubble. If we imagine that they will default to within 1.1" from Szeras following our movement, and where movement for infantry psychers is typically 6", they have a high likelihood of escaping in the movement phase only if they Run.

Etc.

I'm not trying to be pedantic here, but this isn't a 99.9% useless ability--saying it is, in a Competitive Tactics thread is a disservice to the community.

Note, I am not commenting at all on hypothetical Pariahs with a further hypothetical chance of their receiving this known/spoiled ability. I hate wishlisting like this because it has a high likelihood of disappointment even when the Actual outcome is a net positive. Why do that to ourselves?

Just pointing out that with the newer, smaller boards, Szeras's aura ability is now proportionally better!

This was a very well thought out review, and I enjoyed reading it. I hope I see more stuff like this from you in the future.

IanVanCheese wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
25.7 seems to be current rumour for 40k starter set. Separate necron release could be bit later like death guard last time or sob qad

Yeah I doubt we're getting our codex until a little later in the year, maybe august/september. Still, I think we'll have enough new toys to reignite this thread for a while.

That is my thoughts as well.

PA: Pariah comes out with new Illuminor Szeras model, and new Traits/gear etc. Which, might just be a few weeks from now, as they are trying to make up for lost time due to COVID shutdowns.

9th edition SM/Necron starter with the new Necron units will have a mini index covering just those models. Seems to be July 25thish.

9th edition Full Codex will release incorporating PA: Pariah, 9th Starter kit units and any old model army wide updates. Similar to what happened with CSM.

 Draco765 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
25.7 seems to be current rumour for 40k starter set. Separate necron release could be bit later like death guard last time or sob qad

Yeah I doubt we're getting our codex until a little later in the year, maybe august/september. Still, I think we'll have enough new toys to reignite this thread for a while.

That is my thoughts as well.

PA: Pariah comes out with new Illuminor Szeras model, and new Traits/gear etc. Which, might just be a few weeks from now, as they are trying to make up for lost time due to COVID shutdowns.

9th edition SM/Necron starter with the new Necron units will have a mini index covering just those models. Seems to be July 25thish.

9th edition Full Codex will release incorporating PA: Pariah, 9th Starter kit units and any old model army wide updates. Similar to what happened with CSM.

I think to avoid invalidating Pariah completely, they won't actually put everything from it into the Necron codex. Like a few strats or relics will stay exclusive to Pariah to give you a reason to own it still.

I'm hoping we find out the release date this weekend with the box opening. I've got a week to take off work in July, need to know which week lol.

In the meantime, I have some Tomb Blade to magnetize. Pray for me (I just cant get the guns to line up properly, drilling a precise hole into a perfect sphere is hard)

Yeah I should probably paint my Lychguard and Wraiths while there’s a break between the new kits coming.

Do we think the Monolith will get Quantum Shielding this time around? Or would that be too much for a T8, 20 wound model?

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Yeah I should probably paint my Lychguard and Wraiths while there’s a break between the new kits coming.

Do we think the Monolith will get Quantum Shielding this time around? Or would that be too much for a T8, 20 wound model?

It'd probably be too much.

A 2+, though, would be nice.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Yeah I should probably paint my Lychguard and Wraiths while there’s a break between the new kits coming.

Do we think the Monolith will get Quantum Shielding this time around? Or would that be too much for a T8, 20 wound model?

We don't even know if QS will work the same way. I think if you want to make it a beast, you give it 2 out of these three: 2+, 4++, QS.

I'd take 2+ save and QS personally. It'll be expensive and that's fine, but I actually want it to be scary.

I'd settle for a 2+ save and fixing its transport/offensive capabilities though.

Yeah a 2+ save would be neat, and better guns I agree. The Blackstone allowing it to deny psychic powers as well would be nice.

Safe to say those "leaks" were fake based on this preview, too many names don't line up and they described the roles of several models which don't fit the leaked rules.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/13/warhammer-40000-preview-whats-in-the-boxgw-homepage-post-1/

Good, because they were meh.

Excited to see what all this new stuff does (also that Overlord is confirmed to be rocking a Tachyon arrow.

IanVanCheese wrote:
Safe to say those "leaks" were fake based on this preview, too many names don't line up and they described the roles of several models which don't fit the leaked rules.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/13/warhammer-40000-preview-whats-in-the-boxgw-homepage-post-1/

Good, because they were meh.

Excited to see what all this new stuff does (also that Overlord is confirmed to be rocking a Tachyon arrow.

I couldn't agree more with you, so glad the leaks were fake as it was so underwhelming

Oh man I’m keen. Anyone else legitimately creaming their pants over these new Necrons?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/13/warhammer-40000-preview-beyond-the-boxgw-homepage-post-2/ More goodies for us here.

Congrats to whoever said that the Lokhust Heavy Destroyer was rocking an Emnitic gun, you were correct. Dual weapon options.

Canoptek Doomstalker rocking a Doomsday Blaster with dual fire modes for moving vs staying still.

Also as an aside, I love the big dumb block aesthetic of the marine buggy.

Hmm, the leaks did call the second weapon option for the Warriors Gauss Reapers. So he may be somewhat in the know, or just made a lucky guess.

The Tomb Stalkers he also mentioned may not be the big dude, but the cheeky bugger in the background of the big image. So the only dude he named wrong is the Royal Warden.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Oh man I’m keen. Anyone else legitimately creaming their pants over these new Necrons?

They're awesome No idea if I'm ever going to take them into battle but I'm going to get the box for the marine part anyway and these space robots look too good to sell off.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Hmm, the leaks did call the second weapon option for the Warriors Gauss Reapers. So he may be somewhat in the know, or just made a lucky guess.

The Tomb Stalkers he also mentioned may not be the big dude, but the cheeky bugger in the background of the big image. So the only dude he named wrong is the Royal Warden.

Pretty sure they named them in the initial reveal with the cgi trailer, during the stream.

Ah you are correct. Okay I have more hope again then that the “leaks“ are false. I too thought they were pretty lame and boring so that’s good.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Ah you are correct. Okay I have more hope again then that the “leaks“ are false. I too thought they were pretty lame and boring so that’s good.

Yeah, it definitely looks like who ever made the "leak" compiled every piece of info we already had and then added his own rules as it would make them look more authentic

After seeing the last couple of PA books I’m really keen to see ours and what kind of strats and relics we get.

With the new Terrain Rules in mind, isn't our Monolith >5"?

sieGermans wrote:
With the new Terrain Rules in mind, isn't our Monolith >5"?

Yeah it is bigger than 5", but that's not how the rule works.

The building needs to be taller than 5", not the unit being hidden. Monolith won't be able to hide behind obscured terrain though, it has over 16 wounds. Hopefully it'll be tough enough that it won't need to.

IanVanCheese wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
With the new Terrain Rules in mind, isn't our Monolith >5"?

Yeah it is bigger than 5", but that's not how the rule works.

The building needs to be taller than 5", not the unit being hidden. Monolith won't be able to hide behind obscured terrain though, it has over 16 wounds. Hopefully it'll be tough enough that it won't need to.

I was thinking more about expanded covering capabilities that he Monolith can confer now. Historically it could only block true-LOS or else there was 0 effect.

sieGermans wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
With the new Terrain Rules in mind, isn't our Monolith >5"?

Yeah it is bigger than 5", but that's not how the rule works.

The building needs to be taller than 5", not the unit being hidden. Monolith won't be able to hide behind obscured terrain though, it has over 16 wounds. Hopefully it'll be tough enough that it won't need to.

I was thinking more about expanded covering capabilities that he Monolith can confer now. Historically it could only block true-LOS or else there was 0 effect.

Yeah but the obscuring rules only applies to buildings, not vehicles. It doesn't instantly block LOS because it's taller than 5". It'll be interesting to see how it's modeled with regards to LOS under it. Technically it's a flying unit, so you can always see under it, but given how low it sits, that's dumb as hell.

Technically it can fly as high as it wants though: as a flying vehicle, it can "fly" into melee with other flyers.

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
Technically it can fly as high as it wants though: as a flying vehicle, it can "fly" into melee with other flyers.

A Monolith charging a plane, now that would be a sight for sore eyes

torblind wrote:

 Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
Technically it can fly as high as it wants though: as a flying vehicle, it can "fly" into melee with other flyers.

A Monolith charging a plane, now that would be a sight for sore eyes

I have felt that all vehicles should get a “rigged to blow” ability.

sieGermans wrote:

I was thinking more about expanded covering capabilities that he Monolith can confer now. Historically it could only block true-LOS or else there was 0 effect.

I would love to see necron player trying to convince opponent that obscured terrain trait applies to monolith. It's not even trait that applies to every terrain piece but rather to those defined as such by players.

tneva82 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

I was thinking more about expanded covering capabilities that he Monolith can confer now. Historically it could only block true-LOS or else there was 0 effect.

I would love to see necron player trying to convince opponent that obscured terrain trait applies to monolith. It's not even trait that applies to every terrain piece but rather to those defined as such by players.

I don't think "convince" is the right word here (unless that's how you play--no judgment).

I think it's more about trying to clarify, given the new rules around obscuring/LoS, how to treat large models and infantry hiding/stuck 'behind' them. Particularly in Casual games where some degree of reasonableness is mutually applied to all the game decisions and interactions.