Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

See title...can a Necron list work without Destroyers?  Clearly the Destroyer fills a much needed long-range punch to the Necron list, but can Disruptor-laden Scarabs fill the void?

ForceVoid

I guess it would depend on how much armour you plan to encounter. Theoretically scarabs could fill the void and enough gauze flayers would supplement them. Any army list that has more than 3 or 4 tanks that aren't transports will give you some severe problems. Of course this is just my opinion. But it seems that destroyers are very important to viable cron lists. I'd give it some play testing before coming to a definite answer. A lord leading a large unit of warriors with a veil would be very useful to pop up on those pesky tanks.

Of course. Destroyers were compulsory in 3rd edition when they could be screened by infantry, but in 4th they are often the most vulnerable part of the formation, and many players don?t bother with them. Warriors and Immortals can kill every vehicle you want, especially with the additional mobility offered by the Veil and/or any Monoliths you use.

When playing my dreads against Necrons, I find myself much more concerned with the massed numbers of gauss flayer and blaster shots than I am about an easily-dropped unit of Destroyers or Heavy Destroyers. Even with T5 and 3+ saves, the units can't be big enough to resist a concerted effort to drop them, unless they turboboost... and then they're not a threat at all, because they can't even shoot.

Heavy Destroyers are good for things like Wraithlords. You can drop a severe amount of gauss flayers on Wraith Lords and not do a thing because of the high T and 3+ save. I spent 3 rounds hitting a Wraith Lord with 10 Immortals and 15 Necron to no avail. So in that regard, no HDs are tough.

In fact a no destroyer Necron arm up against any army with high Toughness (read Demons, Wraithlords, etc) will have problems. Wraiths are nice but their 1 wound makes them too weak to handle all the high priority targets. Terminators/Oblits also fall into the problem category.

But if you're going to run mostly scarabs and warriors against an army without high Toughness, you'd do ok. Necrons has enough other tricks (veil, Monolith, warscythes, gauss) to be competitve against even heavy armor armies.

-Jmz

Monoliths and immortals are where it's at.

You need the destroyers to claim and contest objectives. They give you mobility and firepower what's not to like. Scarabs I believe can't hold quarters/objectives. They help you with phase out numbers ect. IMO Liths should not be taken below 1500pts because a good opponent will ignore it and go for the phase out. To many plas around these parts for scarabs to be viable. To easy to instant kill. My vote is no. Take destroyers.

Warriors give you 2 str 4 shots @ 12"  or one shot @ 24" for 18 points each.
Immortals give you 2 str 5 shots @ 24" on the move for 28 points each.
Destroyers give you 3 str 6 shots @ 36" on a very fast move, for 50 points.

It totally depends on what role needs to be filled mate.

While immortals are damned good all around for their points, destroyers fill in a much needed gap as well.

Destroyers arent as good as they wee in 3rd ed with screening in the phalanx, but then again, lots of stuff got hit the same way.

I rarely run a list without them. if I dont, then its because I either know what my opponent is bringing, or because I need the points for something else in a specific mission, say for example in a COD mission, etc.

I love scarabs, but when it comes to choosing which to take, its a no brainer for contesting FA slots. Destroyers all the way.

Off topic, they should have made scarabs like they were rumoured to be when the codex came out, and that was the missing troop slot.

Why not? Eldar get jetbikes which are far more effective than scarabs. I am willing to bet that scarabs will be a troops selection in 2 years.

Scarabs are so many times better than destroyers it is scary. I can't believe anyone would stand up and say otherwise because it's absurd.

Destroyers are simply too expensive for how tough they are, and also too big (they are hard to hide due to taking up a lot of space on the tabletop). Immortals are hands down better every time, especially considering you get almost two for one. Immortals make your army tough as nails and destroyers give you a glass jaw.

In an army that can take scarabs in the FA slots, I can't imagine taking destroyers before your slots are filled with immortals and scarabs.

The immy/scarab/lith army is definitely the best necron army in this edition.

Eldar jetbikes are more effective than scarabs? man. That's crazytalk buddy.

1 wound T3 guys v. 3 wound guys. Rethink that.

Scarabs have a weakness to S6 guns, but they're cheap enough that you can afford to lose half of a squad to S6 guns if the last 3 (9 wounds!) get into combat and tie stuff up for a couple turns. Plus they have a +1 cover save and ignore terrain, so getting a 3+ or 4+ cover save is not unrealistic.

That's 1 wound T3(4) and 3+ save versus 3 wound T3 and 4 or 5+ save. So both have strengths the other lacks. And one has shooting ability and the other doesn't. They fit entirely different roles. Scarabs tie stuff up so necrons can isolate units. Eldar jetbikes are a scoring harasser unit. Both can hunt tanks with the right setup.

However, I agree that scarabs are simply awesome and wouldn't hesitate to run 3 units if I ever use necrons. Never been impressed with destroyers outside of the flying circus list.


Refresh my memory here. Are they ignoring terrian because they are jetbikes or some other rule. Cause if its due to being a jetbike, you'd have a hard time convincing people they get a cover save if they are over the terrain.

They ignore terrain because scarabs have a special rule that ignores terrain. They also have a special rule that gives them the cover save and vulnerability to blasts, etc.

(It's possible I am misremembering on the ignoring of terrain, but I don't think I am)

If by ignoring terrain you mean they dont have to take difficult terrain tests, then youre correct. Its part of their "swarms" special rule and quite often overlooked.

Though I never said destroyers were better than scarabs. I said that when it comes to FA slots, I would choose a destroyer over a scarab if I had a tight amount of FA slots as in being a defender in special missions such as those using the Raids, Battles and Breakthrough force org charts. In "Battles" missions, scarabs are pointless because they lack scoring. In fact, of those three special types of missions, scarabs would only win the single FA slot in sabotage and reargaurd, but only barely.

But thats neither here not there. Hardly anyone plays anything besides std force org so I guess its a moot point.

Also, what I meant about the scarab and jetbike comparison is that eldar are able to take a formerly subpar FA choice as a troop choice now, it shouldnt be unreasonable for scarabs to go that direction either. I also mispoke when I remarked about jetbikes being better, I should have said more flexible.

I am not convinced about destoyers being a glass jaw though. Not convinced at all.

Because of their speed and their 36" range, they are able to maneuver quite well for an experienced player to keep them normally out of harms way.

While I do admit that immortals are considerably better than destroyers, I would hardly call destroyers a glass jaw.

Though I think the OP's header for the thread should have been "are destroyers necessary to make necrons work".
To that I would answer a resounding "No".

Immortals have taken the destroyers formerly compulsory place in this edition.

I appreciate your softening of your examination of destroyers, but I'll stick to my guns on this one: 50 pt models with a 3+ save, T5, and 1 wound, are a glass jaw for any army, even if they get back up.

Space marine bikes are of debatable use at 30pts, due to packing too many points into too small a package.

Same goes for destroyers. If you don't have at least 10 and have the squads snuggle the whole game you're going to run into the likelihood of someone denying them WBB rolls.

Destroyers have range, but what else do people have to shoot their ML/Lascannons at against Necrons? Destroyers are simply the best thing to shoot at due to the maximum return on investment for shooting them. Shooting heavy weapons at Immortals who are always rolling WBB due to being twice as numerous is a poor option, comparatively.

I'd go so far as to say they are essentially useless when you can take Immortals who are precisely as durable for half the price and use teleporting to move them around - and use small squads of Scarabs, which are infinitely better than destroyers, in your FA slots.

There is one reason to take destroyers though: You can make a functional Necron army for 300 bucks by buying a few battleforces which are a kickass deal.

As opposed to paying 300 bucks for just the immortals, and having to lug around 30 metal dudes.

Posted By Longshot on 04/30/2007 3:30 PM
There is one reason to take destroyers though: You can make a functional Necron army for 300 bucks by buying a few battleforces which are a kickass deal.

As opposed to paying 300 bucks for just the immortals, and having to lug around 30 metal dudes.

That is a pretty compelling caveat. I didnt buy my necrons that way but if I waited to buy them when battleforces for them were available, then it would definatly be a sure thing.

2 battleforces and *bam* bobs your uncle.

(off topic- where the hell did the saying "bobs your uncle" come from anyways. I cant find any resources on the net explaining such...)

Posted By Hellfury on 04/30/2007 7:22 PM
(off topic- where the hell did the saying "bobs your uncle" come from anyways. I cant find any resources on the net explaining such...)

I'm pretty sure you made it up

On-topic: Of course you can live without destroyers, though having at least one minimal squadron is nice for the jetbike objective rush in turn six.

The NEcron guy I play against keeps trying different things out and I think the more destroyers he has, the fewer better choices he is able to take.  Basic 'crons are more efficient.

Heh. I found it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob's_your_uncle

Wow, so you were in the presscorps back in 1887!  Nice!

I jest, I jest..

If you run them right, Destroyers are far from a glass jaw. In my own experience, I've either won or have been in the final game for first in every RTT I've taken a Destroyer heavy army to. I like them better than scarabs because I'm able to keep close combat and horde armies at a distance and shoot the dogsnot out of them with strength six weaponry. Toughness 5 makes the 11-12 I usually field hard to eliminate with any ease. In fact , it's been quite some time when I didn't have at least 6 left at game's end.
As a final bonus over scarabs, destroyers can take and hold objectives.

In my experience, take a lot of destroyers or take none at all. 10-15 of them are pretty hard to take down, and put out a lot of firepower. Also, strength 6 makes Eldar cry (of course, necrons make Eldar cry in general).

Lets look at some math. Lets just stick with 5 destroyers (instead of the asserted 10 'needed'

To deny WBB, we need 5 wounds unsaved
That means 15 wounds
Assuming a S6 weapon (to be nice about it) that means 22.5 hits
Assuming a BS of 4, that means 33.75 attacks.
Assuming S4 BS4, that means 67.5 attacks

And that is for a unit of only 5 destroyers. And, of course, these means you can get those shots to be within the 36" range of the destroyer. (HInt to Necron player, don't fly your unit of destroyers between 3 dakkafexes)


Okay, since (as I understand it) you can only get one of these per marine unit, the real problem is with devastator squads. But since they tend to be placed far away, and can't move, it should be fairly simple for the 'jet bike' destroyers to keep some decent terrain in the way.
But still 5 wounds, no saves, need 6 hits, BS4 means you still need *9* ML/LC attacks to keep even a *5* destroyer unit from getting WBB. (Second note to Necon player, try to avoid being between 2 dev squads at the same time.)
Any thing that requires that much firepower to bring down, doesn't strike me as a 'glass jaw' (That is enough to take out any carnifex)

I've seen one unit of 5 destroyers turn up in escalation get one shot in then shot 2 death by even my humble BT army - no WBB.

It becomes a no brainer if theres one unit you can kill fairly easily that's worth 250pts and can lay down that much firepower.

I prefer Immortals - maybe not as mobile as destroyers but much harder to put down 10 T5 models than it is to do it with 5.

Any weapon can kill destroyers. Get within 24" and they are absolutely done. hard not to do on a 48" table with limited firing lanes and a mobile opponent.

Trust me on this. If you have 5, and fly them around by themselves, you're going to lose them and they won't get WBB's at the very least after two turns if not one.

They work with 10 or 15, as someone has said, but that's about the only way, and only if they hump the whole game. I'd rather have double the immortals for the price and not use up my slots for Scarabs (much needed fast tarpitting).

And if the destroyers are the only unit, the Cron player has other problems to deal with. And if he let them get that close, that is a different problem. Or if you just got lucky shots, that is just his bad luck.

But they are still 5 T5 wounds, and if you don't get them all, half will come back. They have speed, and range. Anything that can get into range, is also an expensive unit. And if that unit is powerful enough to put out 33 S6 attacks, or 67 S4 attacks, the destroyers are in trouble.

Immortals have less movement, and less range; they cannot do what destroyers can do. Of course they are cheaper, it is to make up for them lacking movement, range, weaker shots, fewer shots, the ability to ignore terrain, and if necessary, to turboboost.

Thing you're forgetting is that using immortals:
a) gives you a 190% tougher army (due to being much cheaper and the same toughness/armor save). Arguably this is more like 250% because you have double the models to ensure you have a WBB.

b) Frees up your FA slots for Scarabs, which for 1/3rd of the price of destroyers fill the need for speed and do it better than destroyers (same speed, but 3 wounds each and the ability to use cover save, and able to assault).

c) Allow you to utilize monoliths to their utmost efficiency (teleport guys, double WBB rolls). This also essentially neutralizes the destroyer speed advantage. Veils can help greatly too.

Not saying there are no redeeming qualities to destroyers, but they are simply inferior to immortals. Even if you straight-swapped them and didn't use any speed in your army at all they'd still be better, but since you have other FA options and monoliths the difference is magnified.

I've seen a lot of people play them and there's two ways Necrons are close to top tier:

1) Both immortals and destroyers (buddy of mine plays 12 immortals and 10 destroyers and 10 scarabs, and does very well)
2) Immortals and scarabs.

All (12-15) destroyers is a mid-range army. Fewer than 3x4 destroyers and no immortals is a mid-bottom army destined to go 2 wins/1 tie/1 loss most of the time.


Necrons just need what Immortals provide. They need it bad. it's mobility + defense in the same package. They move and shoot and they're tough as nails. Destroyers provide mobility but they're just about the most fragile for the points thing in the Necron army.

Even with WBB rolls, good shooting armies can actually make points in a shooting match with destroyers (whereas they can't shooting at immortals).

on the destroyer survivability front one key tactic hasn't come up. if you always leave one member of a 5 man squad out of LOS, then WBB can't be denied. keeps your squads alive a lot longer if you need to seperate them for some reason.

i don't think the problem with destroyers has anything to do with the unit itself. necrons just need a 4th fast attack slot. i would happily drop a slot from every other category if i could field 10 destroyers and 20 scarabs.

as is, one unit of destroyers is risky and fewer than 2 units of scarabs hurts the army quite a bit. so for the forseeable future me and my 30 scarabs will continue having fun while my poor destroyers gather dust.

Destroyer-less Necrons can indeed work as can Destroyer Necrons.

The key to Detroyer Necrons is to build the list around them. There is not always a need to take Immortals or Monoliths with lot's Destroyers. Immortals need a Veiled Lord and a Monolith to work. Destroyer do not. Take 12-15 Destroyers and 9 Heavy Destroyers. Finish the list with 2 10-man warrior squads and the Jackel God and there is 1850pts. The core army is tough as nails, very fast, and have a good range for shooting.

Immortal Necrons are also very good, but you need lots of Immortals (duh), a veiled Lord and monolith(s). Taken together these all work well together. If you try and combine the armies you might run into trouble.

Maybe this is a dumb question, but how about heavy destroyers? Can you do 2 x 4 regular destroyers, 2 x 2 heavies, and maybe six scarab bases instead of immortals?

To answer the first question... NO