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.

It's very nice to see two very different responses to my question, as it confirms that the debate on many aspects of this idea are still ongoing. It also tells us that we probably aren't at the list part of the discussion yet, just throwing things at the wall and seeing if they stick.

After 8 pages of discussion, I think its safe to say that we've covered a lot of reasonable arguments that would allow us to build some informed lists. Besides, list building is a practical exercise that informs the discussion.

If there's a glaring hole in the reasoning thus far that you may have spotted, I'd be excited to hear it.

Yeah I agree with Junk, at this point I think differences in 2 tremor-cron lists will be due to play style choices. I went Immotek and scarab farm, but a regular overlord with tesla spam works too, if thats your thing. Or max scythes.

I honestly feel that the only auto-includes for tremor-crons is Orikan+some kind of Overlord, WW Ctan, and 2+ tremor teks. Orikan is on my auto-include because he quakes the entire enemy side on turn 1, and without Orikan the enemy can deploy and move in the first turn to a position of power where the tremor teks are of limited value. Or put another way, if you wanted tremor-crons to limit mobility, without Orikan then you cant guarentee the enemies mobility will be limited.

I do like the points that JY2 raised about using orikan and a CCB-lord; I'm always trying to shoehorn Anrakyr into my lists because I like the Eternals buff. A single solar pulse might be enough. My preferred build for tremorcrons is probably going to look a lot like my wraith wing.

On the flip side: I'll be testing out this list in a week, when I get back to NY from Boston. I was challenged not to play wraiths, to see if I could win a game without them (my opponent believes that my winning streak is based entirely on how good wraiths/scarabs are), so I thought it would be a good opportunity to try this one out.

Orikan
Phaeron W/Rezorb
Veil-Tek
Pulse-tek
3xQuake-tek
10xDeathmarks
WW/Grand Illusion C'tan
2x5 Warriors in Ghost Arks
10x Warriors
Monolith
2xDoomsday Arks

Since I'm on record saying that I don't care much for warriors, ghost arks and doomsday arks; I can blame them if I lose - I have yet to see whether my opponent will permit Grand Illusion Shennanigans with the Deathmarks, If he doesn't, I'll split them into two squads.

Looking back over this list, I think it would actually be a pretty good place to test out Trazyn, he could make my deathmarks scoring! I might rework it to include him over the next few days.

I'll probably also try that pseudo-lascannon spam build if I can get a second game in.
For reference-

2 Bargelords 360
2 Pulse-teks 110
1 Lance-tek 35
6 Quake-teks 180
9 heavy Destroyers 540
30 Tesla Immortals (5s) 510
Thunderbolt C'tan 265

Posted this in lists:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/431668.page

It's a WW/Scythe hybrid, wanted to catch y'alls input.

Ok, my battle reports are done. Though I still need to write the post-game analysis. Overall, my C'tan/tremor-tek combo didn't do too much. Over the course of 2 games, they caused only 1 immobilization. Orikan was avoided entirely by my opponent reserving his entire army, though he did so because of miscommunication on our part. I guess that actually helped me to beat him, but I wouldn't put too much stock in that result. Overall, I didn't commit to an overly-aggressive tremorcron build, but that was because I wanted to try out a lot of new units that I've never used before. But what it does highlight is what I have been thinking all along - that you just can't rely on this combo to do your work for you. That it's performance is inconsistent. And that I will use it in fun, casual games but probably not in my TAC competitive list. You could have an awesome game one day when your are playing DoW and killing units before they even come onto the board, or you can have games in which you don't do hardly anything. That is what you can expect from a tremorcron build - to be consistently inconsistent.

junk wrote:
I'll probably also try that pseudo-lascannon spam build if I can get a second game in.
For reference-

2 Bargelords 360
2 Pulse-teks 110
1 Lance-tek 35
6 Quake-teks 180
9 heavy Destroyers 540
30 Tesla Immortals (5s) 510
Thunderbolt C'tan 265

For this army, you definitely need to fit in 1 or even 2 lascannon triarch stalkers into the list for some twin-linked goodness.

So I've been thinking about how to real play up the disparity in shooting that SPs can create and combine that with the bogging down effect of WW and I came up with this:

HQ
120 Overlord w/TA
150 Overlord w/TA/res orb
RC 1
55 HarpTek
40 Chronotek
55 PulseTek
30 QuakeTek
RC 2
55 PulseTek
30 QuakeTek
ELITE
230 C'Tan WW/LofF
165 TS TWHGC
165 TS TWHGC
TROOPS
170 Tesla Immortals (Both lords, HarpTek and ChronoTek)
65 Warriors (PulseTek/QuakeTek)
65 Warriors (PulseTek/QukaeTek)
FAST ATTACK
180 HDs
180 HDs
180 HDs

1935

Suggestions on that last 65 points welcome, thoughts are:
Adding the shards (anti assaulty thing) to the smaller squads quake teks
Adding Gaze to the smaller squads pulseteks
Upgrading the smaller squads to tesla immortals.
Getting something better then LofF for the C'Tan.
Beefing up one or both of the Overlords (seriously thinking about at least SW on both to take advantage of wound allocation with a strong 2+ save).


I really, really like where this list is going though. Basically with you superior range (everything in the list is 36" or unlimited) and two SPs you should be able to completely control the first two turns, and once you've thinned out the primary targets the remaining turns should be mop up duty.

Play particular attention too: The two Tachyon Arrows + Harp + chrono + Twinlinking = Dead AV14 ( I would probably not shoot both the same turn)

jy2 wrote:Ok, my battle reports are done. Though I still need to write the post-game analysis. Overall, my C'tan/tremor-tek combo didn't do too much. Over the course of 2 games, they caused only 1 immobilization. Orikan was avoided entirely by my opponent reserving his entire army, though he did so because of miscommunication on our part. I guess that actually helped me to beat him, but I wouldn't put too much stock in that result. Overall, I didn't commit to an overly-aggressive tremorcron build, but that was because I wanted to try out a lot of new units that I've never used before. But what it does highlight is what I have been thinking all along - that you just can't rely on this combo to do your work for you. That it's performance is inconsistent. And that I will use it in fun, casual games but probably not in my TAC competitive list. You could have an awesome game one day when your are playing DoW and killing units before they even come onto the board, or you can have games in which you don't do hardly anything. That is what you can expect from a tremorcron build - to be consistently inconsistent.

junk wrote:
I'll probably also try that pseudo-lascannon spam build if I can get a second game in.
For reference-

2 Bargelords 360
2 Pulse-teks 110
1 Lance-tek 35
6 Quake-teks 180
9 heavy Destroyers 540
30 Tesla Immortals (5s) 510
Thunderbolt C'tan 265

For this army, you definitely need to fit in 1 or even 2 lascannon triarch stalkers into the list for some twin-linked goodness.

You know, I don't hate the idea of squeezing in a stalker; but It's so bare bones... I can probably lose thunderbolt off the c'tan, lose the extra lance tek, and maybe a destroyer... Still, I'll try it out this week and try to get a batrep up.

I have a question. This may belong in YMDC but then again, it may just be a simple answer.

Writhing Worldscape says you roll for Dangerous Terrain on a 1-2 only if it was already a dangerous terrain. Assuming no units start off in dangerous terrain, do they fail their Dangerous Terrain test (made from WW) on a 1 or a 1-2? My interpretation is that it should be on a 1 only unless they were originally on dangerous terrain. Am I way off base?

its a 1 if it was only difficult terrain before writhing worldscape made it dangerous.
It's a 1 or a 2 if it was already dangerous terrain, or difficult terrain being treated as dangerous for some other reason, before writhing worldscape.

For example, Jump infantry hit by a tremor stave, would treat difficult terrain as dangerous before writhing worldscape, so after writhing worldscape effect, they treat it as double dangerous.

Bikes as well, and I think most Vehicles.

Indeed. 33% chance to kill bikers and immobilize vehicles, or 16% to kill infantry while reducing their movement by average 3". Its a sound statistical advantage, the question is one of math too tedius for me; at what point costs does the mechanism justify it's own use?

Assuming a 230 point c'tan and 4 30 point tremor staves. Able to quake 3-4 units per turn.... Blah blah blah... Yay! Unless the answer is Boooo!

I see. Thanks.

Now that's another BIIIGGGGG mistake that I made in my battle reports. Doh!


Definitely will be giving them another try again.

Something to keep in mind: walkers behave like Infantry... not other vehicles.

How does the USR "Skilled Rider" work, and will it negate our list?

I'm thinking of units that won't be slowed by our list, and may be higher priority.
Opposing C'Tan
Opposing Wraiths

Skilled rider lets you re-roll failed DT tests only if you are a bike or cavalry (and have that USR).

There are many units that will reduce the efficiency of our tremorcrons.

Dozer blades on Imperial vehicles.
Siege shields
Skilled Riders units
Battlewagon deff-rollas
Move Through Cover units

And of course, the new necron units you've just mentioned above.

Right, vehicle upgrades are a problem. but the problem becomes one of target priority... We're most likely running at least 10 scarabs, right? If not, it's only because we've maxed heavy destroyers (which I'm still not sold on).

Vehicles that can ignore or mitigate dangerous terrain tests either get focus fired or scarab swarmed; unless they're too far back, in which case, they're not a threat anyway, and can be prioritized lower.

Skilled rider units (bikers, cavalry, etc) are relatively less common, but a higher priority threat as we want to remove fast units as a matter of purpose, we just have to prioritize them as higher shooting targets, or we try to intercept with wraiths. If they're avoiding us, then great, lower priority.

Battle Wagons w/ Deff Rollas - Obviously, huge target priority here, this is a problem that needs to be addressed at deployment, and it will have solutions based on what list you're running. Scarabs still do the job, especially big scarab farm swarms that can surround; otherwise, we need to stun-lock it in the back ranks, so night scythes/doom scythes are stellar choices. Tesla Destructors are made for orks... They can stun lock the vehicles and still kill lots of infantry.

Move through cover units, MTC units besides walkers are still taking casualties from dangerous terrain. They're just not slowed significantly by it. Being that they're in cover, tesla weapons are still the preferred solution for this problem, as well as wraiths...


Damn, wraiths and scarabs are the best. I keep on wanting to give destroyers and tomb blades a chance, but I just don't want to lose wraiths and scarabs they solve too many problems and they cause too many problems for opponents to not use.

Wraiths, Scarabs, Tesla. That's the combination to deal with all of those issues, and probably the best loadout for a TAC.

junk wrote:If not, it's only because we've maxed heavy destroyers (which I'm still not sold on).

I think I'm waiting until 6th Edition for my Destroyers to come out of the box.

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:

junk wrote:If not, it's only because we've maxed heavy destroyers (which I'm still not sold on).

I think I'm waiting until 6th Edition for my Destroyers to come out of the box.

The more I look at them in there current incarnation, the more I like them. The thing to keep in mind with destroyers, particularly HDs, is that they have the only 48" threat range (or fast 36") in a codex that can force Night Fighting on their opponent. I think people are dramatically under valuing what a strategic advantage this buys you. If your firing at max range, the chances of the opponent being able to retaliate are quite low (even units that can move 12" and fire will be staring down a (15/36) or (41.667%) of not being able to take a shot at all. A ravager for instance, which is one of the kings of mobile fire power, will average about .70 dead destroyers a turn, before RP, and a venom .55 before RP. And if your hanging around 36" of the closest model, obviously each successive model will have weaker and weaker chances.

Also, keep in mind the closest model, if at or around 36", is probably dead or stunned, so in reality the next closest model will probably be 40" + at the start of there turn, and even more so if they have spread out to contend with Tesla Destructors.




Something I've been thinking about in regards to the C'Tans secondary power in a WW list.

Sentient Singularity,

I, and it seems like many others, have been tending to dodge that one. I know for myself it's really hard to pass on the BS5 shots, or the CC buffs, or the cheap options when shaving points, but SS really synergizes with WW quite well. I know the 6" range kind of was a turn off for me, but if you start thinking about your average area terrain layouts, you generally have what, 15 or so inches between pieces, so you can affectively shut down (or significantly slow down) a whole flank with careful C;Tan placement. Also, giving him SS makes him less of an offensive threat, which can help confuse your opponents target prioritisations.

Are those Dark Eldar vehicle stats counting Night Vision?

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:Are those Dark Eldar vehicle stats counting Night Vision?

Ah yes, good point, so the ravagers would have a bit better chance, killing closer to one HD per ravager per turn, again assuming they are right at 36" on there turn.

Oh and before RP.

I have to say, I was actually against the tremor-crons till I played with them last night. I thought they would be way too gimmicky to actually be effective, but this is the 2k point list I ran and won a kill point game and tied a capture and control game:

HQ's
Overlord - warscythe, mindshackle scarabs, Command barge

Royal court
- Cryptek of Transmog
- Cryptek of Transmog
- Cryptek of Destruction w/ solar pulse
- Cryptek of Destruction

Destroyer Lord w/ warscythe, sempiternal weave, mindshackle scarabs

Troops
5x immortals tesla
5x immortals tesla
5x immortals tesla
5x immortals tesla

Elites
1x Triarch Stalker

1x C'tan Shard w/ Writhing worldscape & lord of fire

Fast attack
5x Tomb blades w/ shadowloom & particle beamers

8x Scarabs

6x wraiths (3x whip coils, 2x particle casters, 1x normal)

Heavy
1x Monolith

1st game: Kill points vs black templar
I usually find MEQ armies a fairly difficult match up, especially black templar since they literally re-roll everything in cc (preferred enemy & lightning claws suck....) but I ended up immobolizing his land raider on turn 1, so he couldnt deliver his terminators, and popped 2x rhinos turn 1 so literally he had to foot slog it. Couple that with my triarch stalker lighting up a group of infantry and the tomb blades dropping template after template on them and the wraiths tying up 1x regular squad + 1x squad of terminators was awesome. The scarabs skirted around the side and popped 2x preds and a razorback w/ a twinlinked lascannon. The c'tan ended up cc'ing a dreadnought after the monolith popped (I ran the c'tan and made my opponent choose, shoot the scarabs in his tank line or the c'tan fast approaching... he chose the scarabs).

End result was a 9-7 victory for me. Wraiths ended up dying with the destroyer lord, but they tarpitted for about 3 rounds.

Second game vs Chaos space marines (noise marines)... never played these guys before so didn't really know what to expect. Scarabs did nothing. I don't really like assaulting rhinos with scarabs since they always get asaulted the next turn and die, and that was the majority of this army. Wraiths and the destroyer lord were probably the winners in this game. Killed a squad of plague marines, their rhino, survived volley after volley of noise marine gunfire and 1 wraith and the destroyer lord killed the entire squad of noise marines to contest their objective, unfortunately the chaos player moved an empty rhino cruising speed to contest mine so the game ended in a draw (my 2x damn cryptek lances both missed on turn 5... likely would have penned it and possibly popped had they hit it!).

Good games though, enjoyed the list. Found it did a lot more vs the black templar as they wanted to approach vs the chaos space marines who camped their objective. I'd use this list again though.

Cryage,
Thanks for the report! I'm glad the basic idea of the list is working for you.
What changes would you make to the list?

@Cryage:

Nice list! Looks just like my own non-optimized experimental tremorcron list. Sounds like a success for you.



Just played a game against Janthkin's tyranids. I dreaded his list as I think tyranids are one of the banes of footcrons. Last time, Janthkin played against necrons, it was against Reecius' scarab-farm and his nids just destroyed those necrons. This time, we both brought our lists down to 1750 for a practice game for the BAO tournament coming up next week.

I think if I can give him a decent game, it will show how tremorcrons can stand up to a superior army run by an awesome general. But honestly, I was just hoping not to get tabled.

BTW, for those not familiar with the BAO, it uses all 3 missions at once - Seize Ground, Capture and Control and Kill Points. You have to win at least 2 of the mission objectives to win the game.

-- Correction: in the BAO scenarios, you have to win more mission objectives than your opponent and not necessary 2 of them. Thus, you can win 1 and tie the other 2 to win the game. --

This is the list that I brought:


Overlord - MSS, PS, Warcsyche, Weave,
CCB

5x Crypteks - 3x Tremor-teks, 2x Lance-teks w/1x Solar Pulse

C'tan - WW, Swarm (just because I had an extra 10pts in my army)

4x5 Warriors

10x Scarabs
5x Tomb Blades - Particle Beamers, Shadowlooms
6x Wraiths - 4x Whips, 1x Caster

Monolith

1750


Look for my battle report coming this weekend.

For a change I think i'd swap out 2 groups of immortals for 2x groups of warriors just to get a perfect amount of points to give my lord on the CCB a phase shifter. His barge blew up on turn 1 shooting of both my games, even with his flat out cover save. When he was legging it, he just was a bit too susceptible to heavy weapons fire and power weapons.

I truly wish we could give our destroyer lords a phase shifter over a semp weave, but oh well. Overall it was a very fun list, but I will say you do miss a lot of shootiness that is typically necrons.

Jy2, as usual, looking forward to that rep. One of these days I'd love to see you slinging some immortals around.

Cryage : awesome data, good results.

I'm still feeling the double doomsday ark idea with spammed tremorstaves, and still interested in seeing a scythespam list running the tremor mechanic. I'll have some games coming up next week and I'll try to test as many builds as I can get games for.

After seeing these results I have to seriously reconsider my dismissal of the stalkers.

Like I've said before, I like the triarch stalkers. I think that they are a good unit, but you have to build a list around them (or to take advantage of their buffs at the very least). This will usually revolve around shooty, non-tesla-destructor lists (because tesla destructors are already twin-linked).

Triarch stalkers are not an offensive unit. Rather, they are a force multiplier unit such as tau pathfinders, tervigons, KFF big meks and eldar farseers. I view these types of units usually as good units. What they contribute to the army is far greater than how much they can kill just by themselves.

Oh, and they also serve double-duty as counter-assault units, much like my dreads in my imperial armies.

If it wasnt for the cover the monolith granted my c'tan, id almost get rid of it. Gets melta'd so quickly or lascannoned , and lord of flame didnt work once :(

Totally agree with stalker talk. Because the regular necron staples of wraiths, scarabs, command barges, and annihilation barges all don't take advantage of stalkers they aren't an easy pick up unit.
Most other shooty units only get mild benefits from rerolls too since bs4 is already so decent, 20 warrior gauss flayer shots only go from ~13 hits to ~18, 10 destroyer gauss cannon shots go from ~7 hits to ~9 hits and so on. Still not really worth the 150+ price of entry.
The rerolls really come into play with lots of non-destructor tesla shots getting another shot at those lucky 6s and lots of blast weapons, rerolling the entire 2d6+scatter you pretty reliably get direct hits or at worst under 3" scatter, which can turn beamer blade's and doomsday cannon's effectiveness way up.
Not to turn the thread into triarch stalkers: pros and cons, but still fun to think about.

Ok. Battle report started. Will be out on Sunday.


http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/432508.page

Is the list for the battle report set in stone jy2? I can't really tell if you played the game already with the mixed tenses there.

Personally, instead of the monolith, I'd take two A. Barges (for 90 points they're a steal) and upgrade a squad of warriors to Tesla Immortals. This ought to beef up the anti-horde a bit, and you already have 6 blast weapons with the Tomb Blades and the tremorteks. Also wasn't the point of taking the monolith (correct me if I'm wrong) mostly as mobile cover for the C'Tan? You don't really need that in this matchup.

I like stalkers in that match up as well, but the only thing to cut is troops and you need lots of troops for the combined objective scenario.

In general, I find that the Tremor-crons have a huge advantage in objective missions. Controlling troop movement in the latter turns is very powerful.

Also has anyone attempted deep striking scythes? I just noticed they had that rule, and it might be nice to have Doom Scythes come in later in the game after you've taken care of some of you opponent's long range weaponry. I don't think it would necessarily help night scythes that much.