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.

Dudeface wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
I don't think the consensus has changed. The short range appears at this point to be crippling and all we can do is wait to see if the codex gives the tools needed to make up the difference. I'll build some with it just because it looks cool but don't expect much because right now it is absurdly situational

There are some niche uses for them. Sling 10 in a ghost ark and use the Deceiver to yeet it up the field, the unit inside can dismebark and move into rapid fire range.

If Ghost Arks become open topped, they're also interesting. If Night Scythes stop sucking, interesting again.

But generally, flayers are better as they're more versatile. I don't see much point in mixing weapons.

I play against death guard a lot and the reapers at max range will still hurt plague marines more than flayers in rapid fire range from my napkin maths.

Your napkin maths is wrong. 40 S4 AP-1 shots kill 2.963 plague marines; 20 S5 AP-2 shots kill 2.963 plague marines as well, making the end output identical; the flayers cause more unsaved wounds which is compensated for on average by inferior saves thanks to the reapers' AP-2. You can check for yourself here. Against T4 targets, e.g. Primaris, the flayers are far superior in the 8"-12" window you outlined. But this doesn't take into account the larger point, which is that the flayer still has 10" on the reaper, and while the latter is obviously going to do horrible things to any target in short range, even on a terrain heavy board you're going to get far more volleys in with the flayers than you will with the reapers.

As I said in my original post, the reaper is at best very situational and all of the suggestions on this thread thus far require you to build heavily around it. I'm not at all sold but for all we know the codex may provide tools making it a more attractive option

edit: this is the last time I try to write something on my phone what an editing nightmare

Added to yesterday's Sunday Preview article on Warhammer Community:

Also available at launch is a selection of essential gaming accessories – a collection of objectives for your battlefield, a combat gauge for those key mini-measurements, and a themed carrying case! These will only be available while stocks last, so make sure to grab them while you can.

 vipoid wrote:
I think my biggest concern is that Necrons still won't be viable without 3 DDAs, because all our other anti-tank is still garbage, in spite of both the new models and the revised rules.

We have the Doomstalker and Lokhust Destroyer coming in on the anti-tank front. I'm also think Triarch Stalkers are going to be excellent in 9th, particularly heat ray version.

New monolith also looks like it has heat ray type sponson options. And in a pinch, the Skorpekhs can mess up armor in combat with some strat support. Not to mention we still have scarabs, one of the best tagging units in the game.

I think DDAs will still be great (and I'm so glad I've already got my three built because feth that model), but I don't think we'll be leaning on them quite as heavily.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
He’s meaning the new weapon option for Necron Warriors, not Dark Reapers

Indeed, my bad

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
I don't think the consensus has changed. The short range appears at this point to be crippling and all we can do is wait to see if the codex gives the tools needed to make up the difference. I'll build some with it just because it looks cool but don't expect much because right now it is absurdly situational

There are some niche uses for them. Sling 10 in a ghost ark and use the Deceiver to yeet it up the field, the unit inside can dismebark and move into rapid fire range.

If Ghost Arks become open topped, they're also interesting. If Night Scythes stop sucking, interesting again.

But generally, flayers are better as they're more versatile. I don't see much point in mixing weapons.

I play against death guard a lot and the reapers at max range will still hurt plague marines more than flayers in rapid fire range from my napkin maths.

Your napkin maths is wrong. 40 S4 AP-1 shots kill 2.963 plague marines; 20 S5 AP-2 shots kill 2.963 plague marines as well, making the end output identical; the flayers cause more unsaved wounds which is compensated for on average by inferior saves thanks to the reapers' AP-2. You can check for yourself here. Against T4 targets, e.g. Primaris, the flayers are far superior in the 8"-12" window you outlined. But this doesn't take into account the larger point, which is that the flayer still has 10" on the reaper, and while the latter is obviously going to do horrible things to any target in short range, even on a terrain heavy board you're going to get far more volleys in with the flayers than you will with the reapers.

As I said in my original post, the reaper is at best very situational and all of the suggestions on this thread thus far require you to build heavily around it. I'm not at all sold but for all we know the codex may provide tools making it a more attractive option

edit: this is the last time I try to write something on my phone what an editing nightmare

I'll take them not being mathematically worse, I understand the value of the extra range, but if they're a unit plodding up field then flayers are the obvious choice, if they're dropping in or coming off a board edge it's nice to at least have the option of a different loadout.

After watching a few 9E Batreps, I for sure have softened my stance on the Gauss reapers. With holding the Midfield being so important I can see them having a place with a Royal Warden. Taking warriors at all though is going to depend on how RP ends up doing though.

I'm going to at the very least play test them, when before I had just kind of written them off.

 Sasori wrote:
After watching a few 9E Batreps, I for sure have softened my stance on the Gauss reapers. With holding the Midfield being so important I can see them having a place with a Royal Warden. Taking warriors at all though is going to depend on how RP ends up doing though.

I'm going to at the very least play test them, when before I had just kind of written them off.

I plan to play test them, too. I think everyone is a little disappointed that they weren't 18inch assault weapons. Also, it was a little bit of a let down that they were just very watered-down gauss blasters.

I will say, as much as I'm reserving judgment and looking at things in a positive way, I don't have much hope for gauss reapers. Even if the ghost ark is open topped, I just don't see them outweighing the utility and flexibility of 10 extra inches of range.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:
Added to yesterday's Sunday Preview article on Warhammer Community:

Also available at launch is a selection of essential gaming accessories – a collection of objectives for your battlefield, a combat gauge for those key mini-measurements, and a themed carrying case! These will only be available while stocks last, so make sure to grab them while you can.

One more thing to buy

I think I'll build my indomitus warriors with the reapers, because I already have 40 of them with flayers, so even if they are terrible it's not like I'm out anything. We don't know the rules for necrons yet, so there might be a stratagem or something that makes reapers good, and if I guess wrong they'll look really cool riding the bench next to my obelisk.

Oh yeah, all my Indomitus warriors (and theoretically the NOS box I have plus some immortal spares) are all gonna become Reaper dudes, simply because I have more than sufficient flayers already

 Ghaz wrote:

punisher357 wrote:

torblind wrote:
Wonder if the platform itself is weaponized. The two side towers do look like Tesla weaponry. Bit I can't see anything in particular on the floater throne. But the CTan husk likely is powering something, and two lords are required to control it.

In one of the other photos the silent king his supreme command barge thing showed gauss weapons. I'd assume you'll have a couple options

You can see a 360 degree pic of the Silent King in the teaser video. I don't see any gauss weapons...

I don't think it was a video. Just a picture. I could be wrong.

Was watching a bat rep and one of the guys let slip living metal is going to D3, unless he was thinking phylactery. That's just a flat upgrade from the previous rule if it's true.

I have 80 warriors.
I'm not sure if I need more flayers, but I kind of want reapers because its a new weapon on a new warrior model.

I might not get indomitus though. I don't want marines and selling them on Ebay sounds like a hassel.
Maybe I'll find someone to split the box at my FLGS, I dunno.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are quite a few Necrons on eBay come the 26th of July. The SM side of the box is going to be much more popular, leaving quite a few people looking to sell the Necron half. You may find you can get what you need buying just the rulebook and then going to eBay, or speaking to someone at your store.

Radikus wrote:
Was watching a bat rep and one of the guys let slip living metal is going to D3, unless he was thinking phylactery. That's just a flat upgrade from the previous rule if it's true.

If you're talking about the StrikingScorpion83 Batrep, it's because he took the Cryptek with Canoptekh Cloak.

How many Warriors is too many?

Yes.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I might not get indomitus though. I don't want marines and selling them on Ebay sounds like a hassel.
Maybe I'll find someone to split the box at my FLGS, I dunno.

Trust me its not hard.

Yeah both halves will be very popular and should sell/split/trade really easily.

I've been searching around my area for necron halves, would 6 be too many? What would be a good price to offer someone for the necron half? 100$? 80$?

 Venerable Ironclad wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I might not get indomitus though. I don't want marines and selling them on Ebay sounds like a hassel.
Maybe I'll find someone to split the box at my FLGS, I dunno.

Trust me its not hard.

My brother offered to split the box with me the day it was announced and I've had two other offers from hopeful Spess Mahreen players since then.

Necron players are very popular right now.

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I've been searching around my area for necron halves, would 6 be too many? What would be a good price to offer someone for the necron half? 100$? 80$?

What would you do with 6? Nothing suggests 120 warriors are going to be significantly better than now, you certainly don't need 6 of any of the characters, or the reanimator. The Skorpekh destroyers may actually be a problem if they do a real kit with unit options and the boxed set version is stuck with a lackluster weapon setup.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
How many Warriors is too many?

Currently?
Any.

Even if you don't subscribe to 'the meta,' more than one or two units is more of a burden than a boon.
They will be slightly more resilient to morale damage, in that the enemy will need to kill 19 rather than 15 to be absolutely certain the unit dies.

Still very unconvinced by the Gauss Reaper. It's strictly superior in the ranges 0-7" and 12-14", and always better vs T8/9 and exactly T5 2+. The flayer has such a huge ranged advantage where you can't be kited around and the few times it's worse, you're not that much worse anyway that on paper I think it's still generally better. Now, it could be that something lets warriors rapid fire at full range or some other buff which makes the 14" a fantastic midrange killer but for now, meh.

I will say that I feel much better about the new destroyers and the plasmancer. Not entirely sure how it'll play out in the long run but due to the massive amount of midfield play, it feels like the destroyers can be quite deadly, yet not quite scary enough to focus down compared to our shooting, which is a really interesting spot for them. As for the plasmancer, same thing - decent weapon but the abilities are genuinely very powerful. Now, the reanimator still looks rubbish and the plasmacyte is still a joke, but I feel better about it than I did before. Eradicators are still dumb to fight, we still may have AT issues, but things are a bit brighter than before.

Eyjio wrote:
Still very unconvinced by the Gauss Reaper. It's strictly superior in the ranges 0-7" and 12-14", and always better vs T8/9 and exactly T5 2+. The flayer has such a huge ranged advantage where you can't be kited around and the few times it's worse, you're not that much worse anyway that on paper I think it's still generally better. Now, it could be that something lets warriors rapid fire at full range or some other buff which makes the 14" a fantastic midrange killer but for now, meh.

I will say that I feel much better about the new destroyers and the plasmancer. Not entirely sure how it'll play out in the long run but due to the massive amount of midfield play, it feels like the destroyers can be quite deadly, yet not quite scary enough to focus down compared to our shooting, which is a really interesting spot for them. As for the plasmancer, same thing - decent weapon but the abilities are genuinely very powerful. Now, the reanimator still looks rubbish and the plasmacyte is still a joke, but I feel better about it than I did before. Eradicators are still dumb to fight, we still may have AT issues, but things are a bit brighter than before.

Why are you not a fan of the Plasmacyte? Assuming in the regular Dex the Destroyers are 3-6, it seems really good. The buff can be extremely relevant, getting to strength 8 on the reap blade. Worst case, it can take something like a Lascannon shot if needed to keep the rest of the unit alive. yeah, the 1 in 6 chance to kill a destroyer isn't amazing, but if RP is improved it may not be that huge.

I've also revised my opinion of the Plasmancer as well. My main concern is it seems like our HQ slot going to be super competitive now.

Voss wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I've been searching around my area for necron halves, would 6 be too many? What would be a good price to offer someone for the necron half? 100$? 80$?

What would you do with 6? Nothing suggests 120 warriors are going to be significantly better than now, you certainly don't need 6 of any of the characters, or the reanimator. The Skorpekh destroyers may actually be a problem if they do a real kit with unit options and the boxed set version is stuck with a lackluster weapon setup.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
How many Warriors is too many?

Currently?
Any.

Even if you don't subscribe to 'the meta,' more than one or two units is more of a burden than a boon.
They will be slightly more resilient to morale damage, in that the enemy will need to kill 19 rather than 15 to be absolutely certain the unit dies.

A lot of conversions probably, the killbox would probably get a few.

120 Warriors comes out to 1440 pts, so it would be fun to try and drown the enemy, throw in a couple reanimators and HQ's for the hell of it.

In all honesty I'll probably acquire 4, and if the price/opportunity for more pops up then maybe I'll bite.

Then I remember I have to paint them all, I guess I'll be buying Iron Warrior and Brass Scorpion in bulk

 Sasori wrote:

Radikus wrote:
Was watching a bat rep and one of the guys let slip living metal is going to D3, unless he was thinking phylactery. That's just a flat upgrade from the previous rule if it's true.

If you're talking about the StrikingScorpion83 Batrep, it's because he took the Cryptek with Canoptekh Cloak.

It was the Guerrilla Miniature Games Indomitus box set bat rep. For what it's worth I don't think it was them accidentally talking about future rules as it could be existing rules.

Eyjio wrote:
Still very unconvinced by the Gauss Reaper. It's strictly superior in the ranges 0-7" and 12-14", and always better vs T8/9 and exactly T5 2+. The flayer has such a huge ranged advantage where you can't be kited around and the few times it's worse, you're not that much worse anyway that on paper I think it's still generally better. Now, it could be that something lets warriors rapid fire at full range or some other buff which makes the 14" a fantastic midrange killer but for now, meh.

The Reaper is the perfect example of GW's approach to 40k game design. Give the Xenos factions the weird, awkward and unique weapons with strange range bands and stats, then give Primaris weapons and abilities strictly better than everything else. I think the Reaper will only be good if there is some way to either buff its range or even just its rapid fire range. At the moment losing out on all those Flayer shots seems like too high a price to pay.

The Royal Warden being a HQ instead of Elites is a crime!

 Vector Strike wrote:
The Royal Warden being a HQ instead of Elites is a crime!

In 8th i would definitively wanted him to be an HQ, in 9th i would prefer Elite

Slipspace wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Still very unconvinced by the Gauss Reaper. It's strictly superior in the ranges 0-7" and 12-14", and always better vs T8/9 and exactly T5 2+. The flayer has such a huge ranged advantage where you can't be kited around and the few times it's worse, you're not that much worse anyway that on paper I think it's still generally better. Now, it could be that something lets warriors rapid fire at full range or some other buff which makes the 14" a fantastic midrange killer but for now, meh.

The Reaper is the perfect example of GW's approach to 40k game design. Give the Xenos factions the weird, awkward and unique weapons with strange range bands and stats, then give Primaris weapons and abilities strictly better than everything else. I think the Reaper will only be good if there is some way to either buff its range or even just its rapid fire range. At the moment losing out on all those Flayer shots seems like too high a price to pay.

I respectfully disagree about Primaris being "just strictly better", but fully agree about wierd and unique weaponry.

I view them like the Deathwatch Shotguns, or like the Fire Warrior Breacher Pulse-thing-I've-forgotten-the-name-of that did more damage the closer you got to it. Both are extremely viable weapons, but must be used for a different tactical role, usually involving a transport for a breach-and-clear kind of maneouver.

 IHateNids wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
Still very unconvinced by the Gauss Reaper. It's strictly superior in the ranges 0-7" and 12-14", and always better vs T8/9 and exactly T5 2+. The flayer has such a huge ranged advantage where you can't be kited around and the few times it's worse, you're not that much worse anyway that on paper I think it's still generally better. Now, it could be that something lets warriors rapid fire at full range or some other buff which makes the 14" a fantastic midrange killer but for now, meh.

The Reaper is the perfect example of GW's approach to 40k game design. Give the Xenos factions the weird, awkward and unique weapons with strange range bands and stats, then give Primaris weapons and abilities strictly better than everything else. I think the Reaper will only be good if there is some way to either buff its range or even just its rapid fire range. At the moment losing out on all those Flayer shots seems like too high a price to pay.

I respectfully disagree about Primaris being "just strictly better", but fully agree about wierd and unique weaponry.

I view them like the Deathwatch Shotguns, or like the Fire Warrior Breacher Pulse-thing-I've-forgotten-the-name-of that did more damage the closer you got to it. Both are extremely viable weapons, but must be used for a different tactical role, usually involving a transport for a breach-and-clear kind of maneouver.

The problem with that is 40k is now so ridiculously lethal the idea of working your way into short range is just not viable and most transports with dangerous guys inside die very quickly. I'm hoping 9th's terrain rules can help with that. But in general you need to be massively more dangerous if your firepower is very short-ranged in order to outclass how good most firepower is at more normal ranges. I think your Deathwatch shotgun analogy is unfortunately spot-on. There's a reason you never see any good DW lists using shotguns. Same with Breachers. Outside of Farsight Enclaves they're not very common because the Fire Warrior is more consistent in its damage output and able to fire from turn 1.