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.

Scarab Swarms can turbo boost as bikes. Doing this gives them a cover save of 3+ like all bikes that turbo boost. They are also small targets. Which confers a +1 to their cover save. So does that mean they would get a 2+ cover save the turn they turbo boost? I am just wondering as I am about to use 30 of them plus 9 spiders that make 9 more swarms a turn. So i really wanna clear this up before tomorrows game.

I think I am reading it right but wanna be very sure as I don't wanna cheat my opponent. Thanks in advance.

As an addendum to the fist question. As swarms are small. Necrons behind them should not receive cover saves or grant cover to opponents by shooting over the swarms. I am having problems finding a good answer for this in the book, as swarm models are not that common in the game. Once again I don't feel like bending the rules on this one.

My gut tells me that cover should not be given but stranger things have happened.


Thanks.

p76 of the rulebook has the answers you need.

Scarab turbo-boost = 2+ cover.

Scarabs do not give a cover save when shot through.

Boss Ardnutz wrote:p76 of the rulebook has the answers you need.

Scarab turbo-boost = 2+ cover.

Scarabs do not give a cover save when shot through.

Just to clarify, this is because the FAQ states that scarab swarms are swarms per the Universal Special rule, while this was a bad clarification because it suggest they would be entitled to both the Stealth USR and thier own "small target" special rule for a cumulative +2 to cover saves, logical application of the answer would indicate the intention to be that all their special rules are replaced by the Swarms USR.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Boss Ardnutz wrote:p76 of the rulebook has the answers you need.

Scarab turbo-boost = 2+ cover.

Scarabs do not give a cover save when shot through.

Just to clarify, this is because the FAQ states that scarab swarms are swarms per the Universal Special rule, while this was a bad clarification because it suggest they would be entitled to both the Stealth USR and thier own "small target" special rule for a cumulative +2 to cover saves, logical application of the answer would indicate the intention to be that all their special rules are replaced by the Swarms USR.

This isnt in question here. When any bike turbo boosts they gain a 3+ cover save. Scarabs, by virtue of being swarms get +1 to their cover save, granting them a 2+ cover save when turbo boosting.

Regwon wrote:This isnt in question here. When any bike turbo boosts they gain a 3+ cover save. Scarabs, by virtue of being swarms get +1 to their cover save, granting them a 2+ cover save when turbo boosting.

I don't understand, I never disputed them being able to get a 2+ cover save when turbo boosting, I was merely indicating that the Necron FAQ which grants them the Swarms USR effectively doubles up on their special rules since it doesn't take their older ones away, giving them x(base cover save) +1(Swarms USR grants Stealth USR) +1(Small Target rule from Necron Codex), for a total of +2 to cover saves.

It's beardy, it's cheesy, it's downright mean, but the way they wrote the faq, it's there. That said, nobody in thier right mind would consider it the intention of the rule.

Edit: deleted as what I said was only repetition of what Drunkspleen said earlier.

On page 76 of the rule book it states. Swarms never offer any cover save to monstrous creatures or vehicles.

That wording would suggest that they would give cover to infantry. Seems odd but this statement is why I was asking the question. Any one have a good reason that I missed or can point it out why they would not confer a cover save to infantry? I know in my gut they cannot but would like the rule that denies it.

Once again thanks.

You'd use TLOS to determine cover just like normal, wouldn't you? So if the swarm model obscures the head, torso, arm, and/or legs of the target unit then you would in fact get a cover save. I'd guess the legs are the only part you would expect to ever be obscured, unless you've modeled your infantry laying down.

As far as I can tell there's nothing that says they couldn't grant a cover save.

Damn, assuming frameshift is correct I'm in trouble. Some of my Scarab swarms are modeled on rocks and small bumbs on the base.
I can see it allready; "You cheesy git. You made 'em like that to gain an unfair advantage!".

Have been going Destroyer heavy, so haven't played 5th with Scarabs.

Ok so last question. Or more of a recommendation if you use spiders. I just ran a 30 swarm 9 spider army vs SM. It did scary well. However only make one swarm per spider. With wound allocation the way it is your spider becomes toughness 3 vs shooting and assault if you have majority swarms. However with only one you get to choose so the swarm is basically toughness 6. On that note never charge your Ctan into assault marines in a fight with swarms. Fearless wounds per unit and the ctan goes pop vs units that can't even hurt him. He did like 7 wounds to my swarms and I killed 3. So ctan took 4 wounds for losing and being fearless.

Let me know if i did this wrong. Don't think i did but I will never be in that scenario again!!!!!

When fighting against units that cannot hurt them, fearless models do not suffer No Retreat! wounds. So if you mean that the unit could literally not inflict a wound, it was a mathematical impossibility, then he should not have died.

Edit: Just to be more clear, this is at the bottom of page 44, "If none of the enemies involved in the combat against a fearless unit can actually hurt it, the unit does not suffer any wounds if its side is defeated in combat, and simply continues to fight."

If I played any army w/ swarms in it, I'd have to model the swarms leaping and moving over one another. Having the swarm all flat on a base is certainly a bit boring and modeling them as such makes you lose out on a possible cover save from them.

Thanks for the replies fellas. Yeah I wish I would have been up to speed on these before the game. I pulled a draw. He only had like 200pts left and I had around 500+ left. But the Ctan was in prime position to own him had he not died in a way he could not have. Would have been pretty one sided if I have been more clear on the rules. Ah well. Ctan exploded and killed every model in a 6 inch radius. Mostly all were his so he killed more in death then in life.

Sha1emade:
If you had both a C'tan, 9 Tomb Spyders and 30 Scarab Swarms then that's at least 1155 points. Seems like an army that's pretty easy to phase out.

How many points was it, what other units did you have and did your opponent focus at phasing out at all?

Deciever

Lord with res orb, destroyer body, warscythe

3 x 10 warriors

3 x 10 scarab swarms with disruption fields

9 tomb spiders

2000pts

He thought it would be easy too. Swarms turbo boost recieving 2+ cover spread out. Spiders running and making swarms behind the Swarms. Lord boosting forward joining the swarms. Ctan in the middle running. Spiders spread out provide cover to warriors who go to ground if any wounds taken for a 3 up cover save. Turn 2 I was all over him. He couldn't get to the warriors with out thinning me out first. Turn 2 i had more points on the table than I started with thanks to the spiders. The swarms hit his vehicle front line and most were dead or rendered useless. It saved him actually as the swarms and spiders would have eaten the troops if they didn't have to slow down first. Thats over 150 wounds and 11 monstrous creature type things. So much fast movement kept him from getting to the warriors in the back. It was easier to protect them then I would have thought. Any time he could shoot at the warriors it was only once before a spider or swarm hit him back. Its easy to protect them with this list.

Its a nasty list if used properly. If you shoot at the warriors early too much gets to you and you die. He waited till late in the game when the odds were better. It was pretty smart. He played a flawless game. I made tons of mistakes as it was my first game with this gimmicky list. He deserved the victory but only pulled a tie and almost got tabled anyway. It was a tie but only just. He only had like 6 assorted marines and a immobilized landraider with no guns on it at the end. I had well over 600pts left. All his stuff was in CC with the spiders in the last turn. One more turn and he was basically tabled and I would have won by positioning.

I thought you could only have 3 tomb spiders?

Either way all I have to do is kill 21 Necrons and I win. Seems pretty easy.

23 or 24 Necrons actually (don't recall which way it's rounded, up or down), Lord and 30 warriors equal 31 Necrons.
My IG wouldn't have too much of a problem against this list.

23-24 necrons dead after WBB and Tomb Spiders and you have 1-2 turns of shooting before your entire army is engaged. Seems like it has potential. Might be worth it to put a Monolith in there somewhere instead of a group of tomb spiders. Would add some firepower and increase the survivability of your warriors. Also allows for nice cover in games where the LOS blocking terrain is light.

I love scarabs potential to wreck transport dependent armies. One group to run up and immobilize a vehicle to death and another to turboboost around it to block the body.

Well the swarms are going to lose combat. Really, really badly. Loss by 5 and take 5 saves. So those swarms go down quickly now.

I did miss the phase out. It's 7 left but it's still not hard to do. Plus what is the Lord doing? Standing near a warrior squad?

You are saying that in 3 turns the army is engaged. In what? Combat? Like I said you are going to lose HTH vs most of the armies. Vs Nids this list will be laughable. Vs templates this list dies bad. Just flamers on scarrabs wrecks them. No cover save from that. Even the new Whirlwinds will kill scarabs badly.

With Disruptor fields only doing Glancing hits they are not very good any more.

Hellhound flamers on Scarabs for the win................
Does each wound still kill two bases? Don't remember if swarms still have vulnerable to blast.

Shaggoth wrote:Might be worth it to put a Monolith in there somewhere instead of a group of tomb spiders. Would add some firepower and increase the survivability of your warriors. Also allows for nice cover in games where the LOS blocking terrain is light.

Agree with Shaggoth ... and if you remove all the scarabs, and the other tomb spiders, and add in some destroyers and more warriors, you'll have a viable army. :-) Seriously, combining the phrases "tabled my opponent" and "my army is all scarabs" causes cognitive dissonance - it does not compute.

With that said, it would be a different Necron army to play against, which is cool.

That is the point of the army. To do something different and flavorful. It just happens to be surprisingly effective.

The point never was to make a top tier army. It will take on most people however I am confident. Will it always win? No. Does it have weaknesses? Yes. Can it win? Yes and even vs good players. Is it fun? Hell Yes! These questions are what make it worth it for me and possibly others.

This board is rife with people saying the only way to be effective is using A) 3 liths, duel lash, 3 sternguard, nob bikers and others. Everything else is crap. Frankly I am sick of this mentality. Some people actually play with other things and are effective. I know it is surprising but it is true. With a lil creativity and tactics almost any unit and any army can be effective. I say don't be pigeon holed into playing what the majority of people here say just because they are convinced it is the only way to win. That view is close minded and daft.

I am not of the school that says there is only one way to be effective with an army. This army is characterful and very good. Just because the " Guru's " would say it is weak because it doesn't fit with their concept of what is powerful does not necessarily make it so.

True it has a low phase out number. But does that honestly scare people that much? I have played necrons since they have come out. I hardly ever lose with them and have NEVER phased out. Phase out seems to happen when people take too many necron warriors to compensate. Then a small marine squad runs you off the table after assaulting your 15 + man squad. You just put too many points into them making it easier for you opponent. Who now killed 20 crons instead of 10 that they should have with a smaller squad. To many eggs in one basket comes to mind. In this army it is very tricky engage the necrons in HtH without clearing a path. Which is easier said then done.

Swarms can move 24in a turn and have a 18' assault range. They kill small squads dead and render vehicles useless quickly. Sure they are not amazing in CC but with spiders they pay for them selves tactically and points wise quickly. It is about positioning of your units not how they appear on paper. This army is dead fast and manoverable. You would be a moron to put your warriors where your opponent can assault them with this list and as said before if you shoot at them at the beginning ignoring the swarms, spiders and Ctan you are gonna get swamped. Then I choose the assaults I wish to join.

As for the adding a monolith the thought had crossed my mind as I love the hovering houses. Yes it would make the army far better and stronger. For me it goes against the concept and the feel of the army so I opted not to use one. The army was designed to throw people off guard. It achieves this nicely IMHO.

Basically it is meant to be fun, look cool on the table, be different, require tactics to use effectively, confuse opponents and hopefully win a game or two along the way. My surprise was that, for me, it achieved all of these things. Just wasn't expecting it to be as nasty as it was. I believed it to be weak when I built the list. Looking at it on paper I knew it had many weaknesses but didn't care. However given its speed, ability to hold things in combat and take away vehicles effectiveness I realized the army could quickly compensate for them. Only when playing it did I realize what it could achieve.

P.S. Don_Mondo I would like to avoid a pissing match but I play the guard as well. 90 wounds that get a 2+ cover saves is hard to kill them all before they get to you. The only flamers that will work given the speed of the swarms is Hellhounds. Russes still have to hit on 2+ and the front line is spread out. However hellhounds are the single most nasty thing vs this army. However most swarms will still get to the guard squads. I have seen 3 marines tear up my guard backfield. Allot more than 3 bases will get to a guards backfield holding things up and causing havoc till the spiders get there. To the guard it is like a tyrinid army on jet bikes. That would scare me. Will it always win vs guard. No , but trust me this will give most guard armies nightmares. Like I said not top tier but if underestimated it will put the hurting on an army. Vs drop guard or Drop Pod army. It would be like a 5 course meal working twords desert.

No pissing match here!!
Yes indeed, the 2+ save is extremely effective, and I've played against similar armies, and it is indeedy hard to stop all those nasty little scarabs and some are probably going to reach me. Hopefully my two or three hellhounds (depending on size of game) will alleviate some of that should we ever play!
Course, I also play Drop Troops so a possible ntactic against this army would be to keep all the infantry off table and deep strike them where they can go after the Warriors. Counter for the toasters would be to buffer the area around the Warriors with the spiders and scarabs. It would be an interesting game, but I think the key for playing against it is the low phase out number.

You speak truth. The easy counter to this list is Hellhounds IMHO. Drop troops can get to the warriors with ease unless as you say a screen is put around them. I have yet to face guard with them but as a veteran guard player I think it could be competitive based on lists and tactics.

With your army as stated. I think it would make for a fun game with strange tactics being used to counter the other player. If we are ever in the same place we should make that happen. As it would certainly make for a interesting game regardless of whether it turned out to be competitive or not.

I have always been a firm believer that most any army can take on most any army. There are always exceptions but for the most part I think the statement holds true.

But at the end of the day it is just a fun necron list to play, at least for me anyway. Often necrons are not put in the same sentence as fun and interesting to play as or against. So I really got what I wanted.

Sha1emade wrote:

But at the end of the day it is just a fun necron list to play, at least for me anyway. Often necrons are not put in the same sentence as fun and interesting to play as or against. So I really got what I wanted.

And in the end, that's all that really matters!!

I've tried 30 swarms in a cityfight tournament. Wasn't overwhelming by any means, but it throws people a lot. But it was fun to see the looks on peoples faces when I put them on the table.

It does mess with peoples minds. Add 9 tomb spiders and the fun will begin. They are what wins it for me in my current configuration. The swarms job is to die. Holding things long enough for the spiders and Ctan to munch the rest. Most people panic and make bad choices vs this list. Too much fun.

Fantastic post and quite epic - kudos to you Sha1emade for "sticking to your guns" and realizing the hobby from all angles. If I do not finish a game where I didn't have fun or my opponent didn't have fun then its a game not worth playing - and if you can't have fun even when you lose perhaps you shouldn't be playing.