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.
2020/05/23 23:51:54
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Ah, so the choppy walkers are a destroyer variant. Well, I have been wanting melee destroyers, so I can't complain much. I just hope they synergize with destroyer lords.
Skorpehk isn't great though. They don't even look like Scorpions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/23 23:53:30
2020/05/23 23:54:57
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Vaktathi wrote: My big question with GW and Necrons, in terms of models at least, is why on earth do they keep insisting on making kits that look like utter hell to paint, and that appear to have all sorts of complex gubbins and awkward spots that will be impossible to reach with a brush if you don't paint before assembly (something that just doesn't work for many of us)?
Because everyone kept bitching that necrons are boring to assemble and paint
As long as its not as bad as the Arks I don't care. I don't do special characters anyway, so the Silent King being a possible git to build and paint doesn't really concern me.
Do necrons still self-repair? Any news about that? I noticed a disturbing lack of self-repair in the trailer, and I hope that's not hinting at something.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/24 00:00:11
2020/05/23 23:59:44
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
DeChevalier wrote: So, the three-legged ones are the new destroyers... Wonder if we'll still have the option for flying destroyers?
And they better be plastic, not crappy failcast.
I wouldn't worry. GW hasn't made a finecast kit in years, and will most likely never again. It was too much of a hassle for them, and they've been making everything in hard plastic.
Flyers still have that stupid hole in it, but it was unlikely GW was going to redesign it anyway. Its a relatively new kit. Warriors, destroyers and monoliths are nearly 20 years old. The flyers are half that age.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 00:03:18
2020/05/24 00:23:08
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Vaktathi wrote: My big question with GW and Necrons, in terms of models at least, is why on earth do they keep insisting on making kits that look like utter hell to paint, and that appear to have all sorts of complex gubbins and awkward spots that will be impossible to reach with a brush if you don't paint before assembly (something that just doesn't work for many of us)?
Because everyone kept bitching that necrons are boring to assemble and paint
As long as its not as bad as the Arks I don't care. I don't do special characters anyway, so the Silent King being a possible git to build and paint doesn't really concern me.
Do necrons still self-repair? Any news about that? I noticed a disturbing lack of self-repair in the trailer, and I hope that's not hinting at something.
That's pretty much the Iconic Necron mechanic. I would be really shocked if that went away. I'm sure it will change in someway, because the current implementation is not working at all, but I don't think it's going away.
As long as they don't make it Feel No Pain, that is. The 7th ed version was dull. It may have been effective, but it wasn't necron.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/24 00:23:34
2020/05/24 15:57:41
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: So you're really not a Necron player you just some stuff to put together in boredom.
...or it could be that he doesn't like the model? Ghost Arks are not an essential model, and are also a pain in the arse to build and paint. I find it quite understandable if a Necron player doesn't want to bother with that poorly designed nonsense.
Tauris_Blazestar wrote: One thing I've noticed is the regalia around the necks of the new Overlord/Lord characters is very similar to what was on the original 1993 Necrons.
The 'collar' does match those on the old metal Necron Warriors but the Skorpekh Lord has the Ankh of the Triach on his chest, so a bit of the old and a bit of the new..
"The Ankh of the Triarch" isn't new. That was a motif present in third ed, and you can see an cruder iteration of it on that 2nd ed warrior. It only became associated with the Triarch in 5th ed after they retconned the necrons to be more dynastic.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/26 22:22:17
2020/05/28 13:36:28
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Ghaz wrote: From the 'Last of the Silent Kings' article in the January 2020 White Dwarf:
The Silent King took his ship, a vast sepulchral engine, black as night and as massive as a planetoid, and set out into the depths of the intergalactic void. Perhaps out there, a measure of solace or penance could be found. With him went legions of his own Szarekhan Dynasty, entombed in stasis-crypts like their kin.
'Skorpekh' would appear to be the name of the unit and has nothing to do with the Silent King's dynasty.
I hope that's not the final name, and just saying his dynasty by using his name. If it is, it's pretty lame.
As opposed to the Tudor Dynasty, founded by Henry Tudor, aka Henry VII of England, or Ptolomaic dynasty, founded by Ptolomy I Soter? Dynasty Founders tend to name dynasties after themselves, and their descendants share the same name. There really isn't anything wrong with what GW did here.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/28 13:36:47
2020/05/30 10:25:19
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Or maybe having a grav platform isn't efficient for close quarters combat. Skorpekhs appear to have a smaller profile than their flying counter parts, allowing them to fit into smaller areas, and I would imagine its harder to fight properly in melee if you're floating everywhere.
2020/05/30 13:02:49
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Galas wrote: Yeah, I mean. Imagine trying to fight hand to hand combat on top of a floating board against something like a Tyranid or an Eldar. I don't think that would allow for a good range of reactions and movements. But it is much better to remain at a distance firing enemies. Hellions do it but they are more about gladiatory combat on the skies agaisnt similar enemies and doing runs over their enemies. Necrons lack the speed for that.
Hellions are more dive bombers, imo. They don't stand and fight, they swoop down from high, try to decapitate a poor git and go for another go.
They don't really seem built for actual close quarters (such as inside a building) or going toe to toe with a combatant. I don't know how it is in 8th, but they once had Hit and Run, iirc, which represented that.
Now, Destroyers could also do that, it even said in the lore that they would strafe targets in range and then dive bomb survivors, but it didn't say they were built for close quarters and I would imagine they would suffer from similar limitations as Hellions.
A destroyer variant with legs would fit a close quarters role a lot better, as they don't have to worry that much about navigating tight corridors, crashing into walls or getting their bearings against enemies at close range.
I think GW thought it through this time.
It also gives them a more distinct look, rather than "lol, just give destroyers swords"
2020/05/30 13:45:41
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
BrotherGecko wrote: With the new big boi tri legs being a skorpekh destroyer lord I wonder if that new big boi destroyer isn't the new destroyer lord and has been upgraded for shooting rather than punching.
Could be, yes. But that would be a problem for everyone who has the old Destroyer Lord, which is kitted for melee :/
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/30 13:55:21
2020/05/30 15:15:16
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
To be fair, there's nothing wrong with the current HGC on Heavy Destroyer aesthetic, its just that assembly is a pain in the arse because of the plastic tubes and because its made out of thin metal.
What's interesting is that the big gun on the new Destroyer looks a lot like the HGC mounted on the Triarch Stalker, so it could be that its a modern take on the Heavy Destroyer's HGC to make it more consistent with the 5th ed introduced range. Or it could be a new weapon entirely, that just looks like a HGC because it has a similar role or something.
Kharne the Befriender wrote: I personally think the large destroyer we see with the gun is the new heavy destroyer, so fingers crossed for multi kit.
I also think that its possible that that's not a heavy gauss cannon, what're the odds that they've given them new gauss weapons? We have a model for the heavy gauss cannon and normal gauss cannon on the triarch stalker and annihilation barge respectively, perhaps they decided to make them unique and give them crazier weapons, because it looks like a much larger version of the gauss weapon on the Skorpekh Lord, and it cant be the new gauss aesthetic because the large walker has normal flayers as does the new warriors and new monolith in the back ground.
Just spitballing here but I think theyre going to get multiple weapons options
I'm hoping that's a multi-part kit as well. It is also very possible that that weapon is a multi-fire mode one and there is only one destroyer, which may sadly be more likely. I'd hate this, because then you are paying for both modes when you often just want to pay for the Destroyer mode.
It probably would be a select fire weapon. Right now Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers are in an odd place army design wise, as HD tend to under perform compared to Destroyers. Its why they had to give Heavies point reductions, so they aren't that terrible as a choice compared to destroyers. Making them effectively the same unit with a weapon that can switch between rapid fire and single shot would streamline balancing and army design, as then you'd only have to worry about balancing one unit as opposed to balancing two units against each other.
I don't really mind select-fire weapons, as long as they make each fire mode useful against its respective preferred target type.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/05/30 15:25:42
2020/06/01 14:13:25
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Considering how destroyers are S4 and it gives +2 to strength, it probably will be S6.
Decent weapon, basically a better warscythe...which annoys the hell out of me because the Warscythe is reknowned necron weapon and it deserves some respect.
Also Reap-Blade is a terrible name. Doesn't roll off the tongue at all.
2020/06/01 14:29:58
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
They did say in one of their teaser videos that terrain will allow you to "sneak up" on enemy units, so I'm assuming that its designed with melee in mind.
They also said that Skorpehks have different loadouts available to them, and going by the picture at the end it seems you are allowed to take a mix of weapons, which already makes them a better close combat unit than Lychguard.
2020/06/01 14:53:38
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Kharne the Befriender wrote: Watching the twitch stream right now and they're talking about the Skorpekh. They've also said there will be more to come.
And they mentioned that old destroyers are Locus(?) destroyers, mightve misheard but it was something like that
EDIT:They just hinted at a 3rd destroyer type, saying that theres more than Skorpekh and classic destroyers
I wonder if it's the sneaky boy behind the Monolith. A Stealthy destroyer maybe?
Hadn't even considered that, maybe like what deathmarks are too immortals, these are to destroyers? I love that
It does look odd as a support character
Oooh I just noticed what everyone is talking about.
That looks like a cool model.
Doesn't really look like a destroyer though, maybe some sort of Cryptek variant?
2020/06/01 23:18:52
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Grimgold wrote: The new destroyers are armed with sorta-kinnda thunder hammers, which is nice. I'm guessing 2 attacks base, +1 attack if they go for the double hyperphase sword variety, if they are not going crazy with the attacks like they did with Primaris. Still not instilling me with confidence.
As for changing gauss and RP, it took them almost three years to get us to the middle of the pack, one hesitant point cut after another. I'll go with Hanlons razor, and just assume they don't know how to price special rules, and those are the same folks who will be pricing us after any big change.
If you look closely you can see that there's actually 3 weapon variants -
You have the Reap-Blade, which is their heavy weapon / warscythe equivalent.
Then you have the destroyer on the left who has a pair of dual swords.
Then you have the destroyer on the right who has something that looks more like tonfas.
I'm going to assume that the dual swords are a hyperphase sword variant, and the tonfas are a void-blade variant.
2020/06/02 14:43:37
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
torblind wrote: What abot the Canoptek Plasmacyte, has there been any ideas on what that might be? A scarab with a gun? And why is he together with the Skorpekhs?
I wonder if this might be a bit of a clue?
Definition of Plasmacyte wrote:an antibody-secreting cell, derived from B cells, that plays a major role in antibody-mediated immunity.
Plasmacytes being a kind of an 'immune system' for a Tomb World's defenders against Psykers would open up some interesting opportunities.
Ooh that's a good thought. I thought plasmacyte sounded familiar.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
punisher357 wrote: I love the extra weapon options/variants for the skorpekhs. It's great that we're finally getting a variety!
Did anyone notice that the large destroyer with the huge gun (bottom left corner) looks like it might have 3 arms? One appears to be near the ankh on the chest piece while the other is further towards the fron of the gun and looks like its attached to the gun
I'm wondering if the gun may be some kind of enmitic annihilator variation rather than a gauss weapon. The caption may indicate otherwise though.
Edited for spelling
Or it could be that Enmitic weapons are souped up gauss variants.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/02 14:45:20
2020/06/05 11:26:40
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Things really are looking up for us huh? I'm actually motivated to repaint my whole army. If we really do get that 3rd Destroyer variant and the classic 3 destroyers get new kits then that means that it'd be possible, maybe even viable, to field an entire destroyer cult
Hope is the first step on the long path to disappointment, remember deathguard were the big bad of 8th ed, and it hasn't been an unvarnished success for them. They got a ton of new models, but being an early codex really hurt them because they are several metas of power creep behind. Maybe 9th ed won't have as big of swings in power, it is a evolution rather than a revolution, but managing expectations is important.
Very true, but the group of people I play within rarely field super powerful lists, so I'll be happy with just half decent rules.
Worst case scenario i still have the coolest looking army
And a DtW mechanic on the monolith would go a long way in my opinion, I'm just hoping for more anti-psychic abilities in general aside from Immortal Pride and Gloom Prisms
Gloom prism was always weird to me. So necrons have an anti psyker technology that they only equip to 1 model (and spyders aren't the best models either) so I would love to see a few more models with similar anti psyker abilities
Its left-over from 5th ed. That was something 5th ed introduced, and GW just kept copying pasting it into later editions.
2020/06/07 12:23:10
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Aza'Gorod wrote: This might just be the ramblings of a mad Android here, but with GW loving dual kits (due to being cost effective for them as you need to buy the same kit twice to make both models) and the monolith getting a complete refresh it does make me wonder if maybe the monolith is gonna come in 2 flavours.
Yeah I do realise its farfetched but it was an interesting thought
Well, we know from that teaser image that Monoliths are going to come with weapon options. There appears to be some sort of deathray weapon on the monolith in the foreground and gauss flux arrays on the monolith in the background.
2020/06/09 16:24:07
Subject: Re:Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
The Warhammer Community team dropped a double dose of information on vehicles today, with a new article on Warhammer Community as well as a discussion between Stu Black and Eddie Eccles on Warhammer TV. While we don’t normally publish these as posts, we transcribe them to use when we do our weekly round-up of rules. They’ve been really popular and today’s update was so massive we felt compelled to share the information right away.
Credit: Games Workshop
What’s changed with tanks and monsters in the new edition?
Quite a few things. Some are inherent to tanks and monsters, others that have changed in the game that will affect them. Tanks being able to shoot into combat is the biggest thing, as units within an inch can choose to shoot out with their guns (see the rule above from Warhammer Community). There are some restrictions, such as a -1 to hit penalty when shooting heavy weapons against targets in engagement range. Blast weapons also cannot be used against targets within engagement range.
The reason for this is narrative and gameplay reasons. Heavy flamer sponsons don’t care about being surrounded by hormagaunts; flame on. You declare all of your attacks before you shoot (previously you couldn’t declare invalid targets), so you can declare your anti-personnel weapons to clear off infantry and then use main guns to target a second threat. The risk is that if there are survivors then you can’t fire. This is an example of the kind of tactical decisions that GW wants more of. This applies to all VEHICLES and MONSTERS, including Dreadnoughts and Walkers. This supports “all-rounders” that have both melee and shooting capability.
There are other rules that will benefit vehicles:
Units are able to fight people on the next floor up if you can reach them. Fighting in buildings and terrain has changed; stairs will not protect you.
Terrain changes will also help vehicles, such as being able to hug LOS blocking terrain and let them get across the battlefield.
The opportunity to outflank and move from off the board can also help vehicles. Stu gave an example of Repulsor Executioners flanking and taking out a target previously hidden from LOS.
Based on playtesting, which forces get the biggest boost?
Tyranids for sure. Imperial Guard as well. Being able to use things like pintle-mounted weapons in melee will make them viable. Basically anything with a mechanized force or a bunch of monsters. Sisters of Battles with Immolators will be happy.
Is there room for specialization?
There’s room for both generalists and specialized units. Specialists give the option to be great at one thing but face threats that you might lack the tools for, while generalists better at everything. Stu said the designers are repeatedly told “how do we give people choices that matter” in all stages of play from army building to tactics. The goal is to make the game more about choices and less about pure random luck. If you built a model with a generalist configuration because you thought it looks cool you’ll no longer be penalized for making a sub-optimal configuration.
Do you expect to see less bubble wrapping?
Castling is less effective now that missions are more dynamic and vehicles can hold their own in combat. Having mobile weapon platforms that can claim objectives and hunt down threats will be more beneficial. Tanks are designed to be more like hammers that smash enemies instead of glorified artillery pieces. The game will be less static combat thanks to new missions and more terrain.
What challenges will vehicles face in the new edition?
The big challenge will be that with the changes to terrain it will be much harder to get a clear view of the battlefield. No choosing a place to sit and hit everything. Have to move a lot more. Vehicles will not be able to enter certain pieces of terrain, requiring infantry and encouraging combined arms forces.
This is a major change: the -1 hit penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons will only apply to INFANTRY in 9th Edition.
Will we start to see more vehicle or monster heavy armies?
Yes. 9th Edition “throws all the jigsaw pieces in the air” with the changes to Command Points, detachments, etc. Goal is to have “more best things” instead of one optimal solution. Games Workshop wants great games together with different lists. Orks Speed WAAAGHs, Tyranid Monster armies, tank companies, etc. “Any army you like the look of can compete.”
What’s your favorite vehicle?
Stu has a “slight Redemptor Dreadnought problem” and is happy that they’re better in 9th Edition. There’s something “cool and horrible” about Space Marine Dreadnoughts. “Big stompy robots crewed by almost dead Space Marines is pretty cool.” Stu’s second favorite is plastic Carnifexes.
Psychic Awakening – What does War of the Spider bring to Death Guard?
Hateful Assault and Malicious Volleys. Six new Relics, 21 new Stratagems. 7 different Plague Companies (including Typhus’s and Mortarion’s Chosen) each with Warlord trait, Relic, Stratagem. “30-odd new Stratagems”. It’s been awhile since DG have had anything new so this is a major update. Really brings the Death Guard codex up to the level of other books.
What is your favorite Stratagem or Warlord trait?
“Mutant Strain” buffs Pox Walkers that deal mortal wounds on sixes to wound, but it also burns them out. Who doesn’t like zombies? Typhus and his “merry band” specialize in plague zombies and get a bonus.
Harbingers of Destruction are back, this time as a standalone unit.
Plasmancers are a mysterious class of Cryptek also known as Harbingers of Destruction. This ominous title is well earned, as it happens. A Plasmancer is a master in the art of weaponising the hypertechnology of the Necrons, and the plasmic lance its bears – equally deadly at range as it is in melee – is a fine example of its skills given form. Floaty and frail-looking? Yes. Super deadly at every distance? Also yes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/13 13:32:38
2020/06/13 13:52:08
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Kanluwen wrote: The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.
Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?
Lords have worse stats than an overlord and allows units around it to reroll failed hits of a 1. It used to be reroll failed morale checks, but then GW realized that was useless on an army of LD10 units and give it an ability that's slightly more useful. In terms of equipment they're the same, iirc.
Keep in mind that there are actually 3 lord types in the necron army - You have Overlords, Lords and Destroyer Lords.
Overlords are comparable to Captains, I suppose. Good stats, except for attacks which is a bit on the low side, and they have an ability that gives a bonus to charge, hit and advance rolls. This is not an aura but a single unit buff. We know they are still going to be around because GW showed off the new Overlord model, which looks pretty good.
Lords are analogus to lieutenants. Already talked about them. We don't know if they are coming back, as it would seem that the Royal Warden is going to take over the lord's role as a minor support HQ choice. You generally want Lords to escort warrior blobs to give them rerolls for Gauss spam, and it seems that Wardens are also designed for that.
Then we have destroyer lords, which are at an odd spot - They are designed for close combat and are alright duelists, or at least would be if they had an invul, but their buffs only work on destroyers, which is a unit who wants to shoot. Skorpekh Lords are pretty much going to make Destroyer Lords obsolete, it would seem, as they are also designed for melee, but also can attack at range.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/15 00:17:12
2020/06/15 00:19:41
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
The ‘final boss’ of the awesome Warhammer 40,000 cinematic trailer, the Skorpekh Lord is death incarnate for anyone who dares face it in battle – looks like that Primaris Sergeant and Battle Sister are in for the fight of their lives! This enormous, hate-fuelled Destroyer can unleash the searing fury of its enmitic annihilator at range, reap anyone in its path with its devastating hyperphase harvester, or use its flensing claw to… er, flense its prey.
Going off what you're saying Cthulu, maybe Lords will end up being the Captain equivalent while Overlords get buffed to Chapter Master equivalency?
Maybe, but technically Pharaons are already meant to be the Necron equivalents for Chapter Masters, its just that they aren't in 8th ed. They were in 5th ed though. Basically an upgrade you can buy for an Overlord that gave any unit it joined Relentless, iirc.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/15 00:22:29
2020/06/15 00:27:02
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Kanluwen wrote: The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.
Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?
I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.
Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect. It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Lord
Nemesor just means general. Zahndrekh is both an Overlord and a Nemesor, for example.
Vargard would probably be a Royal Warden through. Obyron is Zahndrekh's bodyguard, and a warden is pretty much a guard.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/06/15 00:31:48
2020/06/15 00:34:06
Subject: Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.
Kanluwen wrote: The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.
Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?
I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.
Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect, and Nemesors are supposed to fall under Overlords. It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Nemesor > Lord
I'm fairly certain that Nemesor is a title given to the Overlord that is in charge of the Dynasty's military. So a Nemesor should be > than an Overlord.
I've read conflicting bits of background. Lexicanum says Nemesors are subservient to Overlords, the Wiki says Nemesor is just a higher military rank. The Wiki gave the better explanation, so I edited my comment to reflect that. The 8th ed codex seems to corroborate on this, as there's a diagram that shows how an army is structured.
Nemesor has Overlord next to it in parenthesis. Apparently Vargard is just a title given to a lord who's the bodyguard of a Nemesor. Unless the Vargard is part of Tomb World Command, in that case its an Overlord.
I have to say, as military diagrams go the one in 8th ed isn't great. It doesn't tell me how many legions are supposed to be in a Decurion. Is it one legion per decurion? Then why is it a Decurion? Wouldn't that mean 10 legions? Then it tells you that legions are divided into 10 phalanxes, each consisting of 10 necrons. So...why can you take Necron warrior squads in units of 20 then?
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2020/06/15 00:45:04
