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.

I think IG are porbsbly the farthest down on the list of "non interactive" armies in the game at this point....you can usually do pretty much anything to them...

 Chapter Master Angelos wrote:
I severely dislike Necrons. They don't die, it gets boring to fight. And the local necron players don't make the experience any more fun. Ones favorite argument was in a 4k point team game "No D weapons cus they ignore re-animation" which yes is a player issue not an army one but no fun just the same.

I would never play against Necrons unless I had D weapons (albeit in moderation and not in cheesetastic amounts). Needless to say, I rarely got in a game with the players of that faction in my local meta.


The reasons I voted for the 'Crons are pretty much the same as yours.

Why do Tau and Eldar have over 100 votes each? Are they seriously Overpowered or something?

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Why do Tau and Eldar have over 100 votes each? Are they seriously Overpowered or something?

Noooo. Not from the outset. But when you face 40 Windrider Jetbikes with scatterlasers and its game over in turn two, you'll think differently.

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Why do Tau and Eldar have over 100 votes each? Are they seriously Overpowered or something?

They absolutely can be, Eldar pretty much are almost no matter what you do with them . Necrons are high up there too for the same reasons

wuestenfux wrote:

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Why do Tau and Eldar have over 100 votes each? Are they seriously Overpowered or something?

Noooo. Not from the outset. But when you face 40 Windrider Jetbikes with scatterlasers and its game over in turn two, you'll think differently.

Vaktathi wrote:

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Why do Tau and Eldar have over 100 votes each? Are they seriously Overpowered or something?

They absolutely can be, Eldar pretty much are almost no matter what you do with them . Necrons are high up there too for the same reasons

Very interesting.

Tau mess me up too bad.

Necrons... and I haven't played any 40k since last edition (or necrons last edition for that matter) but that was fairly annoying...

Imperial guard, 4 players at my flgs, one list common between them all, they all run a pask punisher gun line using as many tanks as possible, psykers and tech priests to support them and as little infantry as possible. They also INSIST upon kill points only games and uniformly refuse to play my daemons because of their reliance on invulns.

Tau more than Eldar? Really?

Ouroboros0977 wrote:
Imperial guard, 4 players at my flgs, one list common between them all, they all run a pask punisher gun line using as many tanks as possible, psykers and tech priests to support them and as little infantry as possible. They also INSIST upon kill points only games and uniformly refuse to play my daemons because of their reliance on invulns.

Begin a quest to find a new store, my friend.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Mine, personally, is Eldar. Their book is just multiple levels of annoying/broken, and even casual games against them usually end up ridiculous.

That's rich, coming from a Necron player...

I'm a firm believer that you can tone Eldar down significantly to provide good games, unfortunately they can attract total muppets who only spam the most powerful stuff even in non competitive games, and as an Eldar player myself, thats inexcusable .

Tau being so high on the list doesn't surprise me. Their playstyle encourages just sitting back in an intercepting, overwatching, ignoring cover, ignoring LOS high strength, low AP gun lines, and thats a very boring opponent. That said I really like the new breacher units that allow Tau to get up in someone's grill and clear out cover, basically anything that can promote movement (that isn't running away JSJ style) is good in my books.

Kinda surprised that Necrons aren't over 100+ votes if only because of the legacy of annoyance the decurion inflicted, saying that If I play against a non decurion Necron player, I'd probably enjoy the match.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Mine, personally, is Eldar. Their book is just multiple levels of annoying/broken, and even casual games against them usually end up ridiculous.

That's rich, coming from a Necron player...

Oh, I'm sure it is. But people's arguments for Necrons are not that their straight up OP, but that they're un-fun and boring to play against. You can't really argue that Necrons are more OP than Eldar, or even on the same level as some of the cheesemonger lists.

Maybe it's just that I'm a necron player and I see the gaping holes, or maybe it's because I'm an older necron player and I don't have the 'in' units... but what do necrons have?
Necrons aren't the army that breaks all the rules anymore (3rd edition book).
We get a second save, big deal. See all the other armies that have Feel No Pain... tricks can take theirs all the way to a 2+++ in cases, ours is limited to 4+ (though almost army wide)
Our basic weapon has a chance to damage anything... even if it is only a small small chance.
Wraiths are stupid good. Should have been nerfed because they were stupid good in the last book too, but if you shoot the Spyder, the whole detachment falls apart.
Our ground vehicles are AV 13 until they are on the way out. But they are EXPENSIVE for what they do.
Most of our weapons are limited to 24 inches. Most of our units hit like a foam pool noodle in combat, and most of our army is extremely limited as to mobility (and our transports are EXPENSIVE).
If we go for the decurion, we lose objective secured.
I'm not saying that Necrons aren't good... we are. But all you need to do to beat us is play the mission.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Maybe it's just that I'm a necron player and I see the gaping holes, or maybe it's because I'm an older necron player and I don't have the 'in' units... but what do necrons have?
We get a second save, big deal. No different than other armies that have Feel No Pain.
Our basic weapon has a chance to damage anything... even if it is only a small small chance.
Wraiths are stupid good. Should have been nerfed because they were stupid good in the last book too, but if you shoot the Spyder, the whole detachment falls apart.
Most of our weapons are limited to 24 inches. Most of our units hit like a foam pool noodle in combat, and most of our army is extremely limited as to mobility (and our transports are EXPENSIVE).
If we go for the decurion, we lose objective secured.
I'm not saying that Necrons aren't good... we are. But all you need to do to beat us is play the mission.

Well, lets see here.

"We get a second save, big deal. No different than other armies that have Feel No Pain." Yes, that can be buffed to a 4+, as well as has ways to be rerolled (Rez Orbs/Reclamation Legion) That's better than most armies that have FNP.

"Our basic weapon has a chance to damage anything... even if it is only a small small chance." Well, that is actually a pretty big deal. Sure, it's a small chance, but against vehicles, we have the Weight of fire for it to hardly matter.

"Wraiths are stupid good. Should have been nerfed because they were stupid good in the last book too, but if you shoot the Spyder, the whole detachment falls apart." Wraiths are fine, I think, but people haven't past them yet. They're a strong unit, yes. Not that strong.

"Most of our weapons are limited to 24 inches. Most of our units hit like a foam pool noodle in combat, and most of our army is extremely limited as to mobility (and our transports are EXPENSIVE)." This one I disagree with the most. Yes, our guns are limited to 24" range most of the time. However, we have the durability to make it within range easily. Also, all of our CC units are good, and we have access to Relentless on anything, so between double tapping and charging, I'm not sure where the Foam Noodle comes into place. Also, mobility? Tomb Blades are good, Ghost Arks are good, monoliths can help reposition units, We have a Flying Transport that can teleport guys onto the board, as well as VOD/Obyron for Deep Striking across the board. Then take into account the amount of units that can Deep Strike (Flayed Ones, Deathmarks, Destroyers, Praetorians, Monoliths, VOD characters), and the fact that Destroyers are durable and can move on average 13" a turn, then also widespread Move Through Cover....Necrons are very mobile.

Now, my point, and I do have one, is that I can definitely see why people would hate playing against Necrons. However, as a Necron player myself, I also see that they're not as ridiculous OP as problem units from other codexes, such as Eldar and Tau.

Hrm, Wraiths are stupid good. That fact that theyre almost never absent in top tournament lists is oretty proof positive of that. They may not be able to outkill a TWC deathstar, but they're cheaper, more resilient, unhindered by terrain, and still very killy.

Even without the Canoptek Harvest formation and the benefit of RP, a unit of 6 requires more BS4 S10 shots to kill than a Warhound Titan, or 432 Lasgun shots to kill. They have absurd and quite simply unjustifiable resiliency against both quantity and quality of fire, on top on extreme speed and being Fearless.

Necrons as a whole have this issue, but Wraiths exemplify it most, and the army is every bit as ridiculous as Tau and Eldar.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, Wraiths are stupid good. That fact that theyre almost never absent in top tournament lists is oretty proof positive of that. They may not be able to outkill a TWC deathstar, but they're cheaper, more resilient, unhindered by terrain, and still very killy.

Even without the Canoptek Harvest formation and the benefit of RP, a unit of 6 requires more BS4 S10 shots to kill than a Warhound Titan, or 432 Lasgun shots to kill. They have absurd and quite simply unjustifiable resiliency against both quantity and quality of fire, on top on extreme speed and being Fearless.

Necrons as a whole have this issue, but Wraiths exemplify it most, and the army is every bit as ridiculous as Tau and Eldar.

You mean the army even outside of Wraiths? What else is considered ridiculous? I know that my gaming group has labeled Necrons "The Kings of Casual" for a reason, but when you start bring out cheese units, Necrons slowly start falling behind.

It comes down to this:
Most people like removing their enemies models and don't like it when their models get removed.
Eldar and Necrons are hard to kill (for different reasons)
People don't like Eldar and Tau because they are brutally effective at shooting.
Space Marines aren't on top (in spite of keeping Objective Secured and being able to field 15+ OS Units in their Gladius Strike Force) because a 5 man squad of marines isn't all that tough to kill and doesn't slaughter everything.
It's not about win-loss ratios or even power. It is about removing models.

Its mostly the formation/detachment bonuses (as straight CAD's are relatively unheard of) that turn solid units into absurd units. But theres a lot of stuff about the army as a whole thats build very well to the core rules to take advantage of things that make almost everything minimize the potential for failure. Thins like flyer transports that dont suffer the downsides of being a flyer transport (and are cheap to boot), ground transports that allow unparallled flexibility with incredible resiliency at a relatively low cost for what they offer, etc.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Its mostly the formation/detachment bonuses (as straight CAD's are relatively unheard of) that turn solid units into absurd units. But theres a lot of stuff about the army as a whole thats build very well to the core rules to take advantage of things that make almost everything minimize the potential for failure. Thins like flyer transports that dont suffer the downsides of being a flyer transport (and are cheap to boot), ground transports that allow unparallled flexibility with incredible resiliency at a relatively low cost for what they offer, etc.

The Flyers are appropriately costed now, at least in my opinion. And sure, the Ghosk Ark is really good, but it not without it's downsides.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
It comes down to this:
Most people like removing their enemies models and don't like it when their models get removed.
Eldar and Necrons are hard to kill (for different reasons)
People don't like Eldar and Tau because they are brutally effective at shooting.
Space Marines aren't on top (in spite of keeping Objective Secured and being able to field 15+ OS Units in their Gladius Strike Force) because a 5 man squad of marines isn't all that tough to kill and doesn't slaughter everything.
It's not about win-loss ratios or even power. It is about removing models.

Well sure, but judging by the poll, people still hate facing Eldar/Tau more.

For a dedicated transport, are there really any downsides on the Ghost Ark? Its more points than a Rhino, sure, but can put out an insane amount of hurt at different targets, benefit from Jink, enhanced rear armor (making it immune to S4 glances and requiring double the average numbet of krak grenades to kill vs most tanks in the game), gets AV13 shields to block most HP stripping spam weapons, allows passengers to assault out and shoot out without hindrance, with the shields and Jink to protect from damage results), and more HP's than anything in the game but Land Raiders and the Monolith short of a superheavy. Its not Wraithknight broken, but theres not much downside to it.

The Night Scythe remains probably by far the most cost effective and safest flyer transport in the game I believe. The Valkyrie has more front and side armor (but weaker rear armor if I'm not mistaken), but doesnt get the protection for passengers that the Scythe does nor anything near the same Firepower, while the Vendetta doesnt have as much transport capacity and costs way more, and the Stormraven is about 2x the cost of a Scythe, and none can be taken as dedicated transports.

 Vaktathi wrote:
For a dedicated transport, are there really any downsides on the Ghost Ark? Its more than a Rhino, but can out out an insane amount of hurt, benefit from Jink, enhanced rear armor (making it immune to S4 glances and requiring double the average numbet of krak grenades to kill vs most tanks in the game), gets AV13 shields to block most HP stripping spam weapons, allows passengers to assault out and shoot out without hindrance, with the shields and Jink to protect from damage results), and more HP's than anything in the game but Land Raiders and the Monolith short of a superheavy. Its not Wraithknight broken, but theres not much downside to it.

The Night Scythe remains probably by far the most cost effective and safest flyer transport in the game I believe. The Valkyrie has more front and side armor (but weaker rear armor if I'm not mistaken), but doesnt get the protection for passengers that the Scythe does nor anything near the same Firepower, while the Vendetta doesnt have as much transport capacity and costs way more, and the Stormraven is about 2x the cost of a Scythe, and none can be taken as dedicated transports.

the Ghost Ark is good, yes. However, in every game I've played with it, it typically gives up first blood, or is immobilized due to a pen. The Open-topped is nice for the passengers, but it also means it goes boom a lot easier. I typically run 1-2 when I do, and they always do well for about a turn or 2 at most. Then my guys are footslogging, since their Ark exploded.

Well yeah, the Invasion Beam is nice, and AV11 all around with Living Metal is nice. But it's weapon isn't the best on a flier. In fact, I'd rather have a Twin-linked Multimelta or 3 Twin-linked Lascannons. And there are some minor things you have to remember. It's not an assault transport, and If the passengers move more than 24" and disembark, they have to snap-fire that turn. It also has no hover option, and in numerous games I'd suffer a Weapon Destroyed result, and therefor it's essentially dead as it has no further purpose.

I'm not disagreeing that they aren't good. I'm just saying they're not the end-all-be-all of Transports.

OK, what is the best Transport? Because, my IG would love to trade their Chimeras for Ghost Arks.

 Vaktathi wrote:
For a dedicated transport, are there really any downsides on the Ghost Ark? Its more points than a Rhino, sure, but can put out an insane amount of hurt at different targets, benefit from Jink, enhanced rear armor (making it immune to S4 glances and requiring double the average numbet of krak grenades to kill vs most tanks in the game), gets AV13 shields to block most HP stripping spam weapons, allows passengers to assault out and shoot out without hindrance, with the shields and Jink to protect from damage results), and more HP's than anything in the game but Land Raiders and the Monolith short of a superheavy. Its not Wraithknight broken, but theres not much downside to it.

The Night Scythe remains probably by far the most cost effective and safest flyer transport in the game I believe. The Valkyrie has more front and side armor (but weaker rear armor if I'm not mistaken), but doesnt get the protection for passengers that the Scythe does nor anything near the same Firepower, while the Vendetta doesnt have as much transport capacity and costs way more, and the Stormraven is about 2x the cost of a Scythe, and none can be taken as dedicated transports.

Agreed. Aside from the Drop Pod, the GA is probably my favorite transport. The Night Scythe is probably only rivaled by the Eldar fliers.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
OK, what is the best Transport? Because, my IG would love to trade their Chimeras for Ghost Arks.

My bet would be the Wave Serpent. Much more durable that a Ghost Ark (Ala not Open-topped, Serpent Shield, has access to an invuln), has better firepower, and is much faster. Can also carry more than just Warriors.

Im not sure one could say the Wave Serpent has better firepower or resiliency. It gets the shield and isnt open topped, but has 1 less HP and doesnt get AV13 shields, and both get 4+ Jink and better rear armor that means its not auto-killed in CC, while the Ghost Ark can put out up to 20 S4 Gauss shots at two different targets vs the Wave Serpents one-use shield and turret + underslung catapult/cannon. The Ghost Ark is cheaper and doesnt have to buy any upgrades to boot while a Wave Serpent usually ends up ~140pts+ vs the Ghost Arks 105.

The big thing is that the WS is Fast, and can be bought for a wider array of infantry. Those are its major advantages.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Im not sure one could say the Wave Serpent has better firepower or resiliency. It gets the shield and isnt open topped, but has 1 less HP and doesnt get AV13 shields, and both get 4+ Jink and better rear armor that means its not auto-killed in CC, while the Ghost Ark can put out up to 20 S4 Gauss shots at two different targets vs the Wave Serpents one-use shield and turret + underslung catapult/cannon. The Ghost Ark is cheaper and doesnt have to buy any upgrades to boot while a Wave Serpent usually ends up ~140pts+ vs the Ghost Arks 105.

The big thing is that the WS is Fast, and can be bought for a wider array of infantry. Those are its major advantages.

Most of the time you're not going to be able to use both sides, so that's hardly worth it. And yeah, it doesn't get AV13, but the Ghost Ark only has that until it suffers a pen, and then it becomes a Rhino. The Wave Serpent will take a pen, can have a 5++ against it if it doesn't get cover, and then knocks that pen down to a glance. And then as far as the Firepower is concerned, lets say it takes a Brightlance. Well, that's a Brightlance. Good range, Lance, AP2, something I'd kill for as Necrons. And then it has some S6 Bladestorm to add in for light armor and Infantry. ghost Ark gets 10 Gauss Shots, which are Bolters against Infantry, and can glance on 6s. Sure, it is open-topped, so the guys inside can fire for a lot of Gauss shots. It is nice, but Open-topped is a double edged sword, as we all know.

So, they both have their advantages, and both are good transports. It just depends on the circumstances as to which one is better.

I also think Tau are the most annoying to play against.

They just sit there and shoot at you and are very non-interactive of an army.

Eldar and Necrons also make sense, as they are strong codex's.

Back in 5th ed Guard were the bane of my existence. Now in 7th I'd have to say Eldar/Tau are the most annoying/broken.