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.

Praxiss wrote:Really? I thought they would be more than that (never even looked at a Tau codex).

Considering it is Necron, i would have thought they would be tougher or have soemthgin special abotu them. With that gun stat i would guess at around 150 if not more.

Yea its cheap, but pops like a bubble. Also, the blast is nowhere near as strong as the necrons. Single is a beast, ordanance is infantry's nightmare.

The +2 strength actually doesn't sound bad at all to me,

let's see, our lords normally have like 3 attacks, okay let's think that they will have some better WS, probably 6, So hitting normal marines on a 3+. Most of the times 2 succesful hits then = ow I got Str 7 and i kinda ignore ur petty power armour, bye bye marines . a 2+ wound nearly garantees ur wounds. Now look at a rhino (just for the sake of having a rear armor 10 vehicle example) = ow armour 10 that's nice, 4+ hit good, got 2 hits on you. Now with Str 7 i need a 3+ to glance and a 4+ to penetrate, quite nice maybe 1 glance, 1 penetration right there

Feeling quite okay with that, even more if they have like all I 4 and maybe a 10 'man' necrons squad who all have those nice warscythes = SOLD!!

Actually, I thought of how the str 7 scythe is better as you combine a cyptek/Lord with the squad, they WBB on a 4+, maybe can get invuls and what do you have? A fairly solid beat stick unit you can teleport around as opposed to what Pariahs used to be. Thinking now, it's like a thunder hammer but better as one less str but strike at init. Sure th/ss termies will be tough but if we get some ap2 guns then that shouldn't be a problem. I like now having a means to cleave apart MC.

Kurgash wrote:Actually, I thought of how the str 7 scythe is better as you combine a cyptek/Lord with the squad, they WBB on a 4+, maybe can get invuls and what do you have? A fairly solid beat stick unit you can teleport around as opposed to what Pariahs used to be. Thinking now, it's like a thunder hammer but better as one less str but strike at init. Sure th/ss termies will be tough but if we get some ap2 guns then that shouldn't be a problem. I like now having a means to cleave apart MC.

As I said = SOLD!!

O, forgot this. Necrons have an ordinance, tau don't. That's a big thing to add to how the tanks can't be compared. Sorry, had to post this, it bugs me when I get rules wrong.

To the recent posts, I love the idea of a power weapon with +2 str as opposed to just a power weapon. Seriously, it could have just been a pw or fw.

Brother SRM wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Still, a vehicle packing a S9 Ap1 72" Ordnance gun for 100 points? I can't see it.

Considering an Ork looted wagon with a boomgun comes to 105 and is S8 AP3 36" Ordnance, I can't see it either.

Well yeah but think of broadsides instead of hammerheads. For 70 points they get TL STR 10 AP 1 weapons. For 30 points more necrons lose 1 strength but gain the large blast.

I mean I still don;t think they'll do it though. Not for the points cost, but something like that wouldn't seem to fit.

kenzosan wrote:To the recent posts, I love the idea of a power weapon with +2 str as opposed to just a power weapon. Seriously, it could have just been a pw or fw.

Assuming it was going to lose the "ignore invuln saves" bit in any case, I think I would've preferred "PW against which targets must reroll successful invulnerable saves" like...some other weapon around somewhere that I can't remember.

That would be Bone Swords which is only found on one SC in the entire Tyranid codex...The Swarm Lord...and he costs 280 points.

Yes, and Astorath the Grim's axe. I think it is a bit unfair that marines get to keep weapons that mess with invuls, but the masters of technology don't? I am becoming more pessimistic.

mcmuffin wrote:Yes, and Astorath the Grim's axe. I think it is a bit unfair that marines get to keep weapons that mess with invuls, but the masters of technology don't? I am becoming more pessimistic.

DE too...

Sc maybe will have the old scyth then or an updated/new one like astoroth or the swam lord.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
O and btw, any thoughts on the c'tan weapons? I hope they stay the same otherwise the gk just got a bit op.

kenzosan wrote:Sc maybe will have the old scyth then or an updated/new one like astoroth or the swam lord.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
O and btw, any thoughts on the c'tan weapons? I hope they stay the same otherwise the gk just got a bit op.

God....i pray that they dont nerf the c'tan any more than they already are hurting...take away the current C'tan weps, and what do you have?

NADA!

kenzosan wrote:

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Still, a vehicle packing a S9 Ap1 72" Ordnance gun for 100 points? I can't see it.

A Hammerhead with railgun is only 140 points, and that has 2 modes of fire. 100 points isn't that unlikely, imo.

S10 ap1 heavy or an ord shot that isi wanna say ap4 and I can't recal s, but its an infantry killer, not a tank buster like you want. And a large blast at that.

Hammerheads have 3 modes of fire. Ion Cannon 60" S7 AP3 Heavy 3, Railgun (solidshot) 72" S10 AP1 Heavy 1, Railgun (submunition) 72" S6 AP4 Heavy 1.

Okay, I'm not really expecting that skimmer to be heavily armored, and I'm guessing it's probably going to be its only weapon system (Necrons have a tendency to have faith in one pain in the butt weapon per unit).

Railgun and ion cannon are 2 different weapons. You cannot opt to fire an ion cannon simply because want s7 ap3 over s6 ap4. If you got a rail gun you can fire 1 of 2 ways: s10 ap 1 heavy1 or s6 sp4 heavy1 blast. Just to clarify if anyone was unsure.

asimo77 wrote:I never thought I'd be saying this, but the current codex looks more appealing so far. Kinda sad that after waiting a bazlliion years for an update many of the rumours are disheartening.

I'm very sceptical that anywhere near all of these rumours are true - if they are then it is the biggest alteration made to any army in 5th edition by a loooong way.

My biggest problem with the rumours at the moment is that there is nothing to help Warriors in Combat, and I think that if GW don't fix that then they will have missed a big opportunity and Warriors will still languish of shelves and in drawers - who like seeing 15 models destroyed by sweeping advance because 3 died in combat and you need to roll a 6 to escape on initiative? In fact if they can't be pulled out of combat by the Monolith etc (as is the rumour) then they will actually be even worse off in combat!

Yet they cost 1/3rd less, and phase out (the main problem with current codex) is gone.

Soulx wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Still, a vehicle packing a S9 Ap1 72" Ordnance gun for 100 points? I can't see it.

Considering an Ork looted wagon with a boomgun comes to 105 and is S8 AP3 36" Ordnance, I can't see it either.

Well yeah but think of broadsides instead of hammerheads. For 70 points they get TL STR 10 AP 1 weapons. For 30 points more necrons lose 1 strength but gain the large blast.

I mean I still don;t think they'll do it though. Not for the points cost, but something like that wouldn't seem to fit.

The rumors on the first page don't say which unit will be able to take the *Tesla Doomsday Cannon* but says it will go on one of the new *vehicles*. If you count the new walker as a vehicle whos to say that the 72" S9 AP1 Heavy 1 large blast weapon isn't on it instead. I'm sure that would drop the points cost a tad. Nowhere near the cost of the broadside but... i think/hope you get my point.

I guess I'm just trying to figure out why anyone would bother with Warriors if they already have a Necron list that (sorta) works. Likely all 40 of the warriors I now field will be "Immortals," will have the same stats and Warriors do now with a better gun, for a ppm cheaper. Yeah. And since the unit of immortals I already field is cheaper, I'm looking at upwards of 50 troops models and a good 200 spare to play with. Sounds okay to me. Why bother with normal Warriors? Like ever?

And to those missing Pariahs, I would like to remind people that they were 2ppm less than a terminator and had a single I3 attack each. I could never justifiy their inclusion, as normal CC jump troops would just wipe them out with a flood of attacks. It doesn't matter how good your attack is if you never survive to use it. Point for point, TH/SS termies are still far better vs Pariahs. The Lord was death on a stick, but... In any event, I will judge the army on it's own merits and let that sway my decision to reacquire my Necron army.

Nagashek wrote:I guess I'm just trying to figure out why anyone would bother with Warriors if they already have a Necron list that (sorta) works. Likely all 40 of the warriors I now field will be "Immortals," will have the same stats and Warriors do now with a better gun, for a ppm cheaper. Yeah. And since the unit of immortals I already field is cheaper, I'm looking at upwards of 50 troops models and a good 200 spare to play with. Sounds okay to me. Why bother with normal Warriors? Like ever?

The only reason i can think of is a cheap unit to sit at the back of the field and hold objectives. but if the rumors about the new tesla and other shooting *styles* with different coloured rods is true, then it might beneficial to include a massive warrior army. but yeah i came to the same conclusion as you whats the piont if you get a model that is a warrior now but with a better gun for one ppm cheaper.

Nagashek wrote:I guess I'm just trying to figure out why anyone would bother with Warriors if they already have a Necron list that (sorta) works. Likely all 40 of the warriors I now field will be "Immortals," will have the same stats and Warriors do now with a better gun, for a ppm cheaper. Yeah. And since the unit of immortals I already field is cheaper, I'm looking at upwards of 50 troops models and a good 200 spare to play with. Sounds okay to me. Why bother with normal Warriors? Like ever?

And to those missing Pariahs, I would like to remind people that they were 2ppm less than a terminator and had a single I3 attack each. I could never justifiy their inclusion, as normal CC jump troops would just wipe them out with a flood of attacks. It doesn't matter how good your attack is if you never survive to use it. Point for point, TH/SS termies are still far better vs Pariahs. The Lord was death on a stick, but... In any event, I will judge the army on it's own merits and let that sway my decision to reacquire my Necron army.

They also had no options like termies, but +1(BASE)S, +1T, 3+sv instead of 2+sv and no inv save. Sure the LD thing was cool but SOOOOO pointless 99% of the time. They were so horribly overpriced compared to other models in the same category and so easy to pick off (plasma galore and other mass AP3/AP2 weapons, I'm look at you demolisher cannons) that they were basically pointless. For 360 points I'd rather take the nightbringer.

The only thing they're good for is hiding like a scared rat and trying to counter-assault something already in CC.

I suppose the warrior/ immortal arguement is if you want the huge shambling horde of eventual death or a more elite force. In a very generalised perspective of course.

I've fielded horde warrior crons before. It would be nice to take all 120 of them without it being an apocalypse game

The shambling soulless horde is very Necron'y

Scarey Nerd wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Still, a vehicle packing a S9 Ap1 72" Ordnance gun for 100 points? I can't see it.

A Hammerhead with railgun is only 140 points, and that has 2 modes of fire. 100 points isn't that unlikely, imo.

A Hammerhead with a railgun is actually 150pts at its cheapest due to requiring a necessary upgrade of either Burst Cannons, SMS or Gun Drones, of which Burst Cannons are the cheapest.

Grim.Badger wrote:My biggest problem with the rumours at the moment is that there is nothing to help Warriors in Combat

Well from what I'm hearing, you can now hide a Cryptek in the unit with a S6 or 7 power weapon, you can boost them to a 4+ invulnerable save that works in the shooting and assault phase, they can be inside a vehicle (possibly open topped) instead of on foot to get assaulted, and there is also a vehicle that can apparently regenerate dead models in a unit. There are also a hinted bunch of special characters that will hopefully have some special rules that make them worth beyond their points cost when utilized correctly. Imagine Vulkan He-Necron, all Gauss weapons are now twin-linked

I think Necrons are going to be a very resilient army when played correctly if this all pans out as I'm seeing it.

I have no doubts that they will be competitive, but it seems many of the interesting and flavorful things the Necrons have might be disappearing. Or that they'll just get homogenized what with transports, Necron-Relic Blades, and so on. Then again I'm a pessismist...at least the new DE cheer me up! (2nd wave releases on my b'day heh heh heh....)

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

Ascalam wrote:Tau- do they have a single model with an inv save?

Like, a billion Shield Drones?
And Shield Generators that their characters can take.
The Space Pope may have one, but I'm not sure, since I develop a sudden nose bleed and dizziness whenever I try to remember his rules.

Shield drones are shocking though, they don't give the squad an inv and are a waste of points.

Shield gens are for battlesuits

Space Pope has a re-rolling 4+ cover save, fluff wise it is the same as a shield gen, but some how a flamer can get through this one

Nagashek wrote:I guess I'm just trying to figure out why anyone would bother with Warriors if they already have a Necron list that (sorta) works. Likely all 40 of the warriors I now field will be "Immortals," will have the same stats and Warriors do now with a better gun, for a ppm cheaper. Yeah. And since the unit of immortals I already field is cheaper, I'm looking at upwards of 50 troops models and a good 200 spare to play with. Sounds okay to me. Why bother with normal Warriors? Like ever?

It's a good point, but I think having a unit in the codex that is so horribly vulnerable to something is a waste - especially when it's the iconic unit!

Sectiplave wrote:Well from what I'm hearing, you can now hide a Cryptek in the unit with a S6 or 7 power weapon, you can boost them to a 4+ invulnerable save that works in the shooting and assault phase, they can be inside a vehicle (possibly open topped) instead of on foot to get assaulted, and there is also a vehicle that can apparently regenerate dead models in a unit. There are also a hinted bunch of special characters that will hopefully have some special rules that make them worth beyond their points cost when utilized correctly. Imagine Vulkan He-Necron, all Gauss weapons are now twin-linked

Again, all good (particularly if the new WBB is taken before morale checks) but if they're still I2 then you'll lose the unit plus the cryptec which probably makes them as expensive as they are now - what I would like would be a rule that stops big units being sweeping advanced so that footslogging lists are viable or that big unit that's just had their transport blown up wont get wiped out in combat just because they're a bit slow. I think if a limit to how many could be destroyed by SA would be useful, i.e. a select number of 'crons littery get in the way while the rest of the squad escapes.

Grim.Badger wrote:
My biggest problem with the rumours at the moment is that there is nothing to help Warriors in Combat, and I think that if GW don't fix that then they will have missed a big opportunity and Warriors will still languish of shelves and in drawers - who like seeing 15 models destroyed by sweeping advance because 3 died in combat and you need to roll a 6 to escape on initiative? In fact if they can't be pulled out of combat by the Monolith etc (as is the rumour) then they will actually be even worse off in combat!

Again, all good (particularly if the new WBB is taken before morale checks) but if they're still I2 then you'll lose the unit plus the cryptec which probably makes them as expensive as they are now - what I would like would be a rule that stops big units being sweeping advanced so that footslogging lists are viable or that big unit that's just had their transport blown up wont get wiped out in combat just because they're a bit slow. I think if a limit to how many could be destroyed by SA would be useful, i.e. a select number of 'crons littery get in the way while the rest of the squad escapes.

I feel that the point you're missing is that Warriors aren't supposed to be good in combat. You generally want to get them run down because the army has always been generally centered around mid to short ranged shooting. The problem with Warriors now is that because they're so 'tough' their points cost is so high that losing any unit in combat means a giant chunk out of your army...that and the fact that there are really so few different types of units available to the army.

With the lowered points costs for Warriors it finally gives you options. You can take small units and use them as a speed bump where the PURPOSE of them is to be run down in combat so the rest of your army can then obliterate the enemy. If you do this, taking a 10 man unit is now saving you 60 points per the same 10 man unit in the current codex, which is a tremendous amount of points per unit.

Or if you DO want the Warrior unit to be able to soak up a charge better then the lower point cost will allow you to pack in 1/3 more bodies than before and you can now add Crypteks with whatever special abilities they'll have to help swing combat your way.

But more importantly (and I think this is the important part) is that now you'll have some real options on CC units if you want some counter-assault. Besides the Wraiths, Flayed Ones and new and improved Scarabs, you can also have Tomb Spyders, the big Walker thing, 2 new pricey Elites choices that can be configured to rock in CC, not to mention the C'Tan shard thing.

So the point is, Warriors shouldn't be good in combat. That's not their point. That's their weakness. Their strength lies in the fact that they still shoot BS4 guns almost exactly as before but you're getting them for 1/3 the cost. That's their genius. They're the only army in the game whose basic infantry has a gun that can damage any vehicle unit as well as the standard infantry damage.

For those people who don't understand why you would take Warriors when you can take Immortals, you really not grasping how point values truly work. You're focusing on potentially how much easier Warriors may be to kill or how weak they may be in CC and most focusing on the fact that their damage output in shooting looks to remain roughly the same while you can now include 1/3 more of them in the army for the same exact amount of points.

yakface wrote:

Grim.Badger wrote:
My biggest problem with the rumours at the moment is that there is nothing to help Warriors in Combat, and I think that if GW don't fix that then they will have missed a big opportunity and Warriors will still languish of shelves and in drawers - who like seeing 15 models destroyed by sweeping advance because 3 died in combat and you need to roll a 6 to escape on initiative? In fact if they can't be pulled out of combat by the Monolith etc (as is the rumour) then they will actually be even worse off in combat!

Again, all good (particularly if the new WBB is taken before morale checks) but if they're still I2 then you'll lose the unit plus the cryptec which probably makes them as expensive as they are now - what I would like would be a rule that stops big units being sweeping advanced so that footslogging lists are viable or that big unit that's just had their transport blown up wont get wiped out in combat just because they're a bit slow. I think if a limit to how many could be destroyed by SA would be useful, i.e. a select number of 'crons littery get in the way while the rest of the squad escapes.

I feel that the point you're missing is that Warriors aren't supposed to be good in combat. You generally want to get them run down because the army has always been generally centered around mid to short ranged shooting. The problem with Warriors now is that because they're so 'tough' their points cost is so high that losing any unit in combat means a giant chunk out of your army...that and the fact that there are really so few different types of units available to the army.

With the lowered points costs for Warriors it finally gives you options. You can take small units and use them as a speed bump where the PURPOSE of them is to be run down in combat so the rest of your army can then obliterate the enemy. If you do this, taking a 10 man unit is now saving you 60 points per the same 10 man unit in the current codex, which is a tremendous amount of points per unit.

Or if you DO want the Warrior unit to be able to soak up a charge better then the lower point cost will allow you to pack in 1/3 more bodies than before and you can now add Crypteks with whatever special abilities they'll have to help swing combat your way.

But more importantly (and I think this is the important part) is that now you'll have some real options on CC units if you want some counter-assault. Besides the Wraiths, Flayed Ones and new and improved Scarabs, you can also have Tomb Spyders, the big Walker thing, 2 new pricey Elites choices that can be configured to rock in CC, not to mention the C'Tan shard thing.

So the point is, Warriors shouldn't be good in combat. That's not their point. That's their weakness. Their strength lies in the fact that they still shoot BS4 guns almost exactly as before but you're getting them for 1/3 the cost. That's their genius. They're the only army in the game whose basic infantry has a gun that can damage any vehicle unit as well as the standard infantry damage.

For those people who don't understand why you would take Warriors when you can take Immortals, you really not grasping how point values truly work. You're focusing on potentially how much easier Warriors may be to kill or how weak they may be in CC and most focusing on the fact that their damage output in shooting looks to remain roughly the same while you can now include 1/3 more of them in the army for the same exact amount of points.

I think that's why people are hung up on warriors being able to die easier in CC now. Before if we lost a unit it was basically a lost cause but now with different troop and more bodies to throw at the field, we can afford to just bait a unit out, lose it and shoot apart something vital for the enemy and lose what? A handful of plebeians? Sounds good to me!