Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]

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.

**JNAProductions**

p5freak wrote:
JNAProductions wrote:
It's not an Aura. (Well, given GW's poor writing, it might count as one, but...)

It targets a single unit.

Unless the aura ability definition changes in 9th, its an aura ability.

Aura Abilities
Some units – usually
Characters – have
abilities that affect certain
models within a given
range.

I wonder how many points this reanimator will be. Usually those repair/heal/ressurect units arent worth their points. Like the canoptek spyder is useless for spawning scarabs. Just bring more scarabs, instead of the spider.

It might count as an Aura under GW's rules, but it doesn't count for the normal usage of it in this sense.

MWBD is an Aura under the rules, but it's most certainly not an aura like that the Lord has.

**Twilight Pathways**

What an odd article. It says 'What the new edition means for Necrons' and then simply repeats some of the basic rules they've already shown for 9th, and then shows some of the rules from the 8th edition codex which remain unchanged... wtf? Not sure about a 14" gun on a slow-moving infantry unit either, especially when 12" flamers are starting to creep in elsewhere. Showing the unchanged Deceiver ability and unchanged Mephrit is just... weird.

**Aza'Gorod**

The death ray is blast now which isn't mentioned in the stats listed which is nice.

Also glad to see that it looks like we are keeping the deceiver and nightbringer. Makes me think more and more that the new one might be the void dragon.

I agree the reaper stats are really weird as it means if we VOD we can't rapid fire, but 14 inch str 5 AP-2 is still pretty good, also with mephrit of we can get within 7 AP-3 will be nasty, hopefully the monolith and nightscythe have been improved

I do get that mephrit might not seem great as its already ap -2 but I'm hoping for improved manouverabilty from the night scythe and monolith (maybe the deceiver as well depending on how it will work in conjunction with the monolith

**sieGermans**

Twilight Pathways wrote:
What an odd article. It says 'What the new edition means for Necrons' and then simply repeats some of the basic rules they've already shown for 9th, and then shows some of the rules from the 8th edition codex which remain unchanged... wtf? Not sure about a 14" gun on a slow-moving infantry unit either, especially when 12" flamers are starting to creep in elsewhere. Showing the unchanged Deceiver ability and unchanged Mephrit is just... weird.

The canoptek reanimation beam isn’t restricted to Infantry, either. That’s pretty different for Wraiths/etc. in 9th.

**Sasori**

Twilight Pathways wrote:
What an odd article. It says 'What the new edition means for Necrons' and then simply repeats some of the basic rules they've already shown for 9th, and then shows some of the rules from the 8th edition codex which remain unchanged... wtf? Not sure about a 14" gun on a slow-moving infantry unit either, especially when 12" flamers are starting to creep in elsewhere. Showing the unchanged Deceiver ability and unchanged Mephrit is just... weird.

This wasn't a preview for the 9th edition dex or Pariah. It is just a lowdown on how the current dex is going to operate with 9th edition rules.

Don't expect any core rules changes until Pariah.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Not a rules question, but a kit question. And a pretty daft one.

Got me a pair of Tesseract Vault kits, with the intent of making one of each.

But, looking at the instructions before beginning construction, they recommend superglue the ‘doors’ sections to the central bit on the Tesseract Vault.

Is.....is that really necessary?

**torblind**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not a rules question, but a kit question. And a pretty daft one.

Got me a pair of Tesseract Vault kits, with the intent of making one of each.

But, looking at the instructions before beginning construction, they recommend superglue the ‘doors’ sections to the central bit on the Tesseract Vault.

Is.....is that really necessary?

Doors?

Note, I magnetized mine, but its a fairly flimsy kit, if I were glueing it I'd put glue everywhere.

**sieGermans**

I've assembled mine as a dissassemblable TVault (for transport purposes). So, it's not fully modular.

However, where the horizontal beams attach to the central pillar: those don't need glue to stay in. Likewise, where these horizontal beams and curved spine connectors attach to the shells also doesn't need glue to stay in.

I've played 10+ games with these simply push-fit in and its never dissassembled on me and never had a problem.

**Maelstrom808**

sieGermans wrote:
Twilight Pathways wrote:
What an odd article. It says 'What the new edition means for Necrons' and then simply repeats some of the basic rules they've already shown for 9th, and then shows some of the rules from the 8th edition codex which remain unchanged... wtf? Not sure about a 14" gun on a slow-moving infantry unit either, especially when 12" flamers are starting to creep in elsewhere. Showing the unchanged Deceiver ability and unchanged Mephrit is just... weird.

The canoptek reanimation beam isn’t restricted to Infantry, either. That’s pretty different for Wraiths/etc. in 9th.

Not really, the cryptek's current ability doesn't specify infantry either and works on wraiths when you pop the strat to give them RP.

**sieGermans**

Ah, good point.

**tneva82**

Had game vs necrons and reminded again I need to try to get some more c'tans. I had my hand full of 2 of them in my backrank(deceiver and transcendant c'tan). I did get them but cost basically my best melee unit and melee/shooting celestian block to do it. Plenty of MW's, some melee casualties and had both fo them blow in my face.

As a matter of fact everything that COULD blow up in my face did. Including epic 11" BOOM from the big superheavy walker. Did more damage that way than with regular attacks and basically cleared my left flank with that explosion...Those explosions really hurt for sisters who hate MW's that ignore their defences and have tons of small units generally.

And tomb blades good. Got to get painting rest of what I have of them.

**IanVanCheese**

tneva82 wrote:
Had game vs necrons and reminded again I need to try to get some more c'tans. I had my hand full of 2 of them in my backrank(deceiver and transcendant c'tan). I did get them but cost basically my best melee unit and melee/shooting celestian block to do it. Plenty of MW's, some melee casualties and had both fo them blow in my face.

As a matter of fact everything that COULD blow up in my face did. Including epic 11" BOOM from the big superheavy walker. Did more damage that way than with regular attacks and basically cleared my left flank with that explosion...Those explosions really hurt for sisters who hate MW's that ignore their defences and have tons of small units generally.

And tomb blades good. Got to get painting rest of what I have of them.

Nice to hear someone is getting a game in, I fear I've had my last game of 8th. We'll see though. I think Necrons have a great matchup against sisters tbh, so not surprised you had trouble.

C'tan are cool if shielded properly, but they're squishy once they can be shot. Tomb Blades are one of those units everyone always raved about, but I never had any to test. Building up a unit of 6 now, magnetising them is a pain but worth it i feel, especially with new edition and codex on the way. Who knows what loadouts will be best.

What does the Seraptekh explode on? Every story I hear about it doing well involves it exploding lol.

**tneva82**

4-5 it explodes 2d6 radius, on 6 it blows up 3d6". That thing you want to ram middle of enemy army. Between lt and c'tans blowing i think i suffered 5d3 and 4d6 mortals...

Walker itself flopped hard beside explosion but that was largely dice rolls. With that rolling not much that wouldn't flop. I started, got 8 shots with exorcist, 5 or 6 wounds. He fails 3 saves and i rolled 17 damage. He healed 3, moved and shot. Side guns got 1 or 2 sister. Main gun double 1 for shots. Reroll 1, 4 shots. Hit on 3+ and 1 hit. Anything but 1 to wound and 1...9" charge with cp reroll failed. Then seraphim comes in, 3 damage and exorcist fires. 9 shots, 8 hits, 5 wounds and even with cp reroll 4 in and bye bye. So yeah what can you say...Dreading to think what would have happened with better dice rolling.

And yes necrons have it decent vs sisters. With mostly ap0 or ap3+ guns they basically ignore order bonus of popular valorous heart. Tons of ap0 shots is what you want vs sisters.

**Moosatronic Warrior**

A bit of analysis on the new Gauss Reaper for warriors:

My concern when this was first announced was that it was going to be the obvious choice over the Flayer in order to push sales, but I'm pleasantly surprised with how well it's balanced against the Flayer to provide an interesting choice for warriors.
I did some maths to compare the two. Which is better depends on the stat line of what you are shooting at and how far away it is.

At 15-24" the Flayer is obviously always better, but anyone who's used warriors knows that they are disappointing outside of rapid fire range, unless you're shooting GEq.

At 13 or 14" the Reaper is better vs all targets. This is a pretty narrow window, but to me essentially extends the range at which Warriors become effective by 2".

At 8-12" the two guns are more closely matched. The Flayer is superior vs GEq, but vs. MEq and TEq they are about even.

At 7" or less the Reaper is always superior, particularly against MEq and TEq.

So the Flayer is more suited to anti horde, the Reaper is more suited to anti elite infantry.

We have Tesla Immortals as an anti horde troop choice, but Gauss Immortals aren't an equivalent anti elite troop, so Reaper Warriors may have a place here. How things will be in 9th is any ones guess, but if we had the option in 8th I reckon 10x Reapers in a Ghost Ark would be the best way to run Warriors (assuming you want to run Warriors). A couple of Arks of them advanced deployed by the Deceiver could actually be quite nasty.

**IanVanCheese**

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
A bit of analysis on the new Gauss Reaper for warriors:

My concern when this was first announced was that it was going to be the obvious choice over the Flayer in order to push sales, but I'm pleasantly surprised with how well it's balanced against the Flayer to provide an interesting choice for warriors.
I did some maths to compare the two. Which is better depends on the stat line of what you are shooting at and how far away it is.

At 15-24" the Flayer is obviously always better, but anyone who's used warriors knows that they are disappointing outside of rapid fire range, unless you're shooting GEq.

At 13 or 14" the Reaper is better vs all targets. This is a pretty narrow window, but to me essentially extends the range at which Warriors become effective by 2".

At 8-12" the two guns are more closely matched. The Flayer is superior vs GEq, but vs. MEq and TEq they are about even.

At 7" or less the Reaper is always superior, particularly against MEq and TEq.

So the Flayer is more suited to anti horde, the Reaper is more suited to anti elite infantry.

We have Tesla Immortals as an anti horde troop choice, but Gauss Immortals aren't an equivalent anti elite troop, so Reaper Warriors may have a place here. How things will be in 9th is any ones guess, but if we had the option in 8th I reckon 10x Reapers in a Ghost Ark would be the best way to run Warriors (assuming you want to run Warriors). A couple of Arks of them advanced deployed by the Deceiver could actually be quite nasty.

Thanks for putting this together, some really interesting stuff there. Maybe they aren't as bad as they first appear. I'm getting two lots of necrons worth from new boxes - I think I'll go 20 of each and see how they go.

I agree that banging them in Ghost Arks is probably the way to go, use them aggressively. Especially with the Deceiver since they'd gain the extra 3" move from disembarking from the arks, and still be able to charge afterwards too. Could be very effective shock troops. And if you don't get first turn, Deceiver the Arks into hiding positions in the mid-field, behind obscuring terrain.

**Moosatronic Warrior**

I think people were hoping for the Reaper to make Warriors good, but in order to do that it would have had to be a far better gun than the Flayer.
I was hoping for Reaper Warriors to be equally as bad as Flayer Warriors but different, which is what they are.
Hopefully both options will become good units when our codex drops. New RP rules will be crucial to that.

**tneva82**

Uuuh no. That would be horrible way. Gun being so OP compared to option that turns bad unit to good would be bad game design(and obvious cash milking...). It would make it non-option. Don't take gauss flayer period and every warrior model with gauss flayer could just as well be binned.

It's rather surprise it wasn't like that.

But no. Proper fix to warriors is to fix the warriors, not give new weapon that's OP good compared to old gun.

There's plenty of ways warriors COULD be improved if GW wants. But as they are not marines not holding much hope.

**Slipspace**

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
A bit of analysis on the new Gauss Reaper for warriors:

My concern when this was first announced was that it was going to be the obvious choice over the Flayer in order to push sales, but I'm pleasantly surprised with how well it's balanced against the Flayer to provide an interesting choice for warriors.
I did some maths to compare the two. Which is better depends on the stat line of what you are shooting at and how far away it is.

At 15-24" the Flayer is obviously always better, but anyone who's used warriors knows that they are disappointing outside of rapid fire range, unless you're shooting GEq.

At 13 or 14" the Reaper is better vs all targets. This is a pretty narrow window, but to me essentially extends the range at which Warriors become effective by 2".

At 8-12" the two guns are more closely matched. The Flayer is superior vs GEq, but vs. MEq and TEq they are about even.

At 7" or less the Reaper is always superior, particularly against MEq and TEq.

So the Flayer is more suited to anti horde, the Reaper is more suited to anti elite infantry.

We have Tesla Immortals as an anti horde troop choice, but Gauss Immortals aren't an equivalent anti elite troop, so Reaper Warriors may have a place here. How things will be in 9th is any ones guess, but if we had the option in 8th I reckon 10x Reapers in a Ghost Ark would be the best way to run Warriors (assuming you want to run Warriors). A couple of Arks of them advanced deployed by the Deceiver could actually be quite nasty.

That's a good analysis, thanks. I think the problem the Reaper has is that it's so short ranged you likely won't get to a point where its mathematical superiority is useful. I think to do a proper analysis you need to consider a unit's overall effectiveness throughout the game with a given loadout. So while the general situations where a Reaper is better than a Flayer seem balanced, I suspect Warriors will much more often be in a position to leverage the advantages of the Flayer.

**torblind**

You run a 20 model unit you could have 10 flayers in the back and 10 reapers in front, if you manage to get them into 7"

**Moosatronic Warrior**

Slipspace wrote:

That's a good analysis, thanks. I think the problem the Reaper has is that it's so short ranged you likely won't get to a point where its mathematical superiority is useful. I think to do a proper analysis you need to consider a unit's overall effectiveness throughout the game with a given loadout. So while the general situations where a Reaper is better than a Flayer seem balanced, I suspect Warriors will much more often be in a position to leverage the advantages of the Flayer.

That's the sort of stuff that can't really be mathed out unfortunately, but it's roughly true to say the the Reaper is better once you are within 14" of the target, so then you have to rely on experience using warriors to tell you how much that matters. I feel like big blobs of 20 marching up the board will be better with Flayers. Whereas units in Ghost Arks or using teleporting tricks will be better with Reapers.

**tneva82**

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

That's a good analysis, thanks. I think the problem the Reaper has is that it's so short ranged you likely won't get to a point where its mathematical superiority is useful. I think to do a proper analysis you need to consider a unit's overall effectiveness throughout the game with a given loadout. So while the general situations where a Reaper is better than a Flayer seem balanced, I suspect Warriors will much more often be in a position to leverage the advantages of the Flayer.

That's the sort of stuff that can't really be mathed out unfortunately, but it's roughly true to say the the Reaper is better once you are within 14" of the target, so then you have to rely on experience using warriors to tell you how much that matters. I feel like big blobs of 20 marching up the board will be better with Flayers. Whereas units in Ghost Arks or using teleporting tricks will be better with Reapers.

Not really. It's better withim 7" and between 12.01 and 14". Between 7.01 and 12"(like say from deep strike) flayer is better vs light infantry, vs basic T4 3+ marines and pretty much spot on vs terminators.

**Moosatronic Warrior**

Yeah that's what I said in my earlier post. Hence the "roughly true" in the post you quoted, which it is. The Flayer will be every so slightly better vs MEq at deepstrike range, but if you only get one round of shooting off it won't have been worth it anyway.

**sieGermans**

Given the ability to walk onto the board to counter-deploy any DZ shennanigans (deep strike/charges/etc.)--the Gauss Reaper is a useful Answer equipment on a squad set up for that purpose.

Likewise, Tomb World arrival can put you within 7" of any chosen targets--though whether that is feasible timing-wise remains to be seen. (E.G., as it stands right now, you have to disembark at the start of movement, so your ability to successfully achieve this tactic depends on a function of (1) your ability to gauge how your Opponent is prioritizing and moving as a result and (2) how many sources of Tomb World transports you have by which to box off the opponent's options in light of (1) above.)

**Moosatronic Warrior**

There's probably going to be a month or so of 9th ed where we're using our old codex, during which I expect Ghost Arks to be the only decent way to get Reapers in range. Hopefully our new codex makes tomb world deployment functional and we get lots more options.

**torblind**

sieGermans wrote:
Given the ability to walk onto the board to counter-deploy any DZ shennanigans (deep strike/charges/etc.)--the Gauss Reaper is a useful Answer equipment on a squad set up for that purpose.

Likewise, Tomb World arrival can put you within 7" of any chosen targets--though whether that is feasible timing-wise remains to be seen. (E.G., as it stands right now, you have to disembark at the start of movement, so your ability to successfully achieve this tactic depends on a function of (1) your ability to gauge how your Opponent is prioritizing and moving as a result and (2) how many sources of Tomb World transports you have by which to box off the opponent's options in light of (1) above.)

That weird 14" range of the gauss reaper does increase hope that Ghost Arks will become open topped again.

**tneva82**

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
There's probably going to be a month or so of 9th ed where we're using our old codex, during which I expect Ghost Arks to be the only decent way to get Reapers in range. Hopefully our new codex makes tomb world deployment functional and we get lots more options.

Well as said above strategic reserve Anything that comes within 20" of your table edge is in range. Anything that comes within 13" of your table edge gets rapid fire surprise from them.

**Jancoran**

14". Well thats wierd. Must be on a ...10" move model?

**Jancoran**

Did a fun 14 minute battle report with the list I talked about a long while ago, with Flayed ones. played it against the new Grey Knights with their crazy new smitiness. Only the 4th in person game since the lock down.

Enjoy: https://www.facebook.com/groups/185402052000929/permalink/734434410431021/

**IanVanCheese**

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/21/sunday-preview-the-psychic-awakening-finale/

Pariah finally, but the wording of this article worries me. Very much sounds like Szeras is all we're getting - no build your own dynasty, no stratagems etc.

Weirdly all the focus seems to be on the inquisition.

**Tiberius501**

I reckon it’s because our codex is really soon (based on what Stu has been saying) so would be pointless to put stuff in here as it would instantly become redundant.