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.
2018/04/18 22:29:08
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Dynas wrote: Came Across this from a high level tourney player. Interesting quote regarding the FAQ:
"Durable units that can take shooting for a bit while they wait for reinforcements will see more play, and faster units that can effectively redeploy will be more valuable to make up for the momentum loss."
Sounds like necrons to me, with some wraiths, Tomb Blades and Teleporting Deciever/Monolith support to me.
was agreeing all the way till you said the monolith >.< still dont see it getting played in the top lists
It definitely won't be in top lists, but it seems to have more strategic purpose in casual games now. It's still over-costed or under-gunned, whichever way you want to view it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Halfpast_Yellow wrote: I think the pure Nephrekh Battalion has potential merit for competitive play. I do like manuever and space occupying armies especially with the card game. I read Nick's blog on the FAQ as well.
- Two big blocks of 20 Warriors. These will likely deepstrike in most games where I need them via the stratagem.
You know you can only use the deep strike stratagem once per turn right?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/18 22:34:34
2018/04/18 22:36:37
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
torblind wrote: It happens before the first phase, so the once per phase limitation doesn't affect it
Oh....I was under the impression you would put two units into reserve, but then you'd only be able to bring one in per turn....but i guess that wouldn't make sense since you'd pay 1 cp for each unit at the time you put them into reserve.
2018/04/18 23:42:27
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
You can use the Veil of Darkness to pull a unit out of close-combat, which means they didn't fall back right?
Where was this rule written again? I can't find it anywhere in any of the FAQ's.
It's in the rulebook faq... it's in the Q&A section
Automatically Appended Next Post: Q: If a unit starts its Movement phase within 1" of an enemy
unit but elects to remain stationary, but subsequently uses a rule
that removes them from the battlefield and then sets them up
again, such as the Teleport Homer ability or the Gate of Infinity
psychic power, is it considered to have Fallen Back this turn?
A: No.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Q: If a unit starts its Movement phase within 1" of an enemy,
can it use a rule that removes them from the battlefield and then
sets them up again, such as the Teleport Homer ability or the
Gate of Infinity psychic power?
A: Yes.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/04/19 01:21:52
2018/04/19 02:51:10
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I think Nephrek should be the default dynasty for battalions if you are running more than 1 detachment, not only are they good for destroyers, but they are arguably our best dynasty for troops. Moving 11" a turn through, over, and past obstacles/enemy units is great for obsec units. I recently went undefeated in a tournament in part because I was so good at getting on objectives and holding them. It also makes our foot HQ much more mobile as well, which enables mobile phalanxes.
Mephrit requires our troops to be close to get the advantage of -1 AP, which is easier said than done for units that moves 5". Nihilakh requires them to stand still to get the reroll ones to hit, which we won't get if we send our troops to capture objectives. I don't see Warriors and immortals taking advantage of Novokh, they aren't really great in CC and are too slow to catch the few units that are worse in CC.
If I were going mono detachment sautekh would probably be my choice, since they are the second best for our troops (maybe best depending on application), since they can advance and fire their weapons. The dynasty also buffs several units such as CCBs, Annihilation barges, Doom Scythes, and wraiths with Transdimensional beamers. Access to the majority of our special characters is what seals the deal.
Nihilakh seems the best for a spearhead detachment, go for two DDA a spyder and a cloak tek, so they repair any incoming damage and the DDA can reroll ones since they don't have to move with their range.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2018/04/19 03:43:43
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Is there any other faction that can do tricks like the Deceiver and VoD? We pretty much became the best alpha strike if we get to go 1st and if you have a Deceiver.
Also, I think Toholk re-roll to seize is getting a bit looked over. He is the price of Anrakyr but he does let one Vehicle heal D3 wounds rather than 1 via living metal. Also has 5+ invul for Maynark infantry units.
His re-roll to size is the main reason you take him though. Going 1st for us has never had such an impact in 8th edition until the FaQ.
Odrankt wrote: Is there any other faction that can do tricks like the Deceiver and VoD?
Grey Knights, Blood Angels, Orks, Genestealer Cults, Tyranids, Dark Eldar, Space Marines (Raven Guard), Chaos Space Marines (Alpha Legion), Custodes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/19 05:30:59
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
2018/04/19 06:38:50
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
skoffs wrote: If you want 3x Vaults + The Deceiver you're going to have to opt for an Outrider.
For a triple TV list, you could run a Vanguard instead if you have Deathmarks.
They're effected by the deep strike limitations, but Deceiver + Lord + Vaults leaves you with just enough points left over for two squads of them. Flayed Ones also work, but IMO Deathmarks synergize better since they'd be able to finish off any characters that the vaults soften up on T1.
It leaves you with just enough points to run an Overlord with a Warscythe or a Cloaktek with a Staff (relic Sautekh if running cloaktek imo, since you can't repair until T3 if you plan on veiling).
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Transdimensional Thunderbolt
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
++ Total: [102 PL, 1988pts] ++
2018/04/19 06:47:33
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
skoffs wrote: If you want 3x Vaults + The Deceiver you're going to have to opt for an Outrider.
For a triple TV list, you could run a Vanguard instead if you have Deathmarks.
They're effected by the deep strike limitations, but Deceiver + Lord + Vaults leaves you with just enough points left over for two squads of them. Flayed Ones also work, but IMO Deathmarks synergize better since they'd be able to finish off any characters that the vaults soften up on T1.
It leaves you with just enough points to run an Overlord with a Warscythe or a Cloaktek with a Staff (relic Sautekh if running cloaktek imo, since you can't repair until T3 if you plan on veiling).
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Transdimensional Thunderbolt
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Antimatter Meteor, Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
Tesseract Vault [25 PL, 496pts]: Power of the C'tan: Cosmic Fire, Power of the C'tan: Seismic Assault, Power of the C'tan: Sky of Falling Stars, Power of the C'tan: Time's Arrow
++ Total: [102 PL, 1988pts] ++
Actually, that ain't bad. I might consider going with a Lord for the HQ choice, as his wound rerolls significantly help Deathmarks would can potentially change a 1 into a 6.
Also, in regards to Nephrekh,
I'm telling you guys,
A unit of ObSec 20 Warriors held back until turn three to T.C. drop on to an objective your opponent thought was going to be his could very much be game winning.
2018/04/19 07:33:10
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
ArtyomTrityak wrote: Holding units in DS might be okay but i feel like if you're holding them you have less firepower => do less damage to opponent.
That's always the compromise.
The "good" thing with warriors in that regard is that they don't really deal that much damage.
Yeah, in the above case they're being used more for their superior numbers suddenly appearing on an objective with them being objective secured. The potential to surprise deny your opponent a clutch point there should not be underestimated.
(Plus, you know, being able to clear some extra campers off via rapid fire range is just icing on the cake)
2018/04/19 09:37:44
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
ArtyomTrityak wrote: Holding units in DS might be okay but i feel like if you're holding them you have less firepower => do less damage to opponent.
That's always the compromise.
The "good" thing with warriors in that regard is that they don't really deal that much damage.
Yeah, in the above case they're being used more for their superior numbers suddenly appearing on an objective with them being objective secured. The potential to surprise deny your opponent a clutch point there should not be underestimated.
(Plus, you know, being able to clear some extra campers off via rapid fire range is just icing on the cake)
They do however take 240 points from other units in your army that could deal good damage (13 immortals, almost 5 destroyers), That's what you need to way in.
2018/04/19 09:41:39
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Personally think this is going to be the job of my destroyers, yes they are not object secure, but with their -ap, they should just remove a camped unit.
I mean, you could always have a 5 man immortal squad do a similar job (be objective secured that can drop in and steal an objective from non ObSec units that were hoping to cap a point). I'd say that's be with a CP.
2018/04/19 12:30:12
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Just remember that waiting til turn 3 means you are giving your opponent a chance to zone away from objectives as well. And with the 9" zone, they can easily make it so you can't drop anywhere near an objective.
On the other hand, you should have softened them up enough that they have less zoning tools... But if you're Nephrekh, you could achieve similar results just by Advancing the Warriors and still letting them screen.
It's a useful tool if, say, you're playing Hammer and Anvil and there's one on the far back end you'll never reach, though. I just wouldn't make DSing Warriors my main tactic.
2018/04/19 13:18:04
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
iGuy91 wrote: Probably would work for a casual, friendly game. I'd use a unit of wraiths to provide target priority issues. Or, sell out, and run 18 Nephrek Wraiths, 10 Lychguard with Anrakyr in a Night Scythe, and then watch them scramble to try and beat all those units. Pretty lulzy stuff. I call the list "Space Jam" because it goes hard in the paint.
How does Anrakyr utilize a Night Scythe? He doesn't have a dynasty keyword. Has this been addressed?
It was addressed in the most recent FAQ for Arankyr and Szeras
Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts
MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum.
2018/04/19 13:34:13
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Grimgold wrote:I think Nephrek should be the default dynasty for battalions if you are running more than 1 detachment, not only are they good for destroyers, but they are arguably our best dynasty for troops. Moving 11" a turn through, over, and past obstacles/enemy units is great for obsec units. I recently went undefeated in a tournament in part because I was so good at getting on objectives and holding them. It also makes our foot HQ much more mobile as well, which enables mobile phalanxes.
Mephrit requires our troops to be close to get the advantage of -1 AP, which is easier said than done for units that moves 5". Nihilakh requires them to stand still to get the reroll ones to hit, which we won't get if we send our troops to capture objectives. I don't see Warriors and immortals taking advantage of Novokh, they aren't really great in CC and are too slow to catch the few units that are worse in CC.
If I were going mono detachment sautekh would probably be my choice, since they are the second best for our troops (maybe best depending on application), since they can advance and fire their weapons. The dynasty also buffs several units such as CCBs, Annihilation barges, Doom Scythes, and wraiths with Transdimensional beamers. Access to the majority of our special characters is what seals the deal.
Nihilakh seems the best for a spearhead detachment, go for two DDA a spyder and a cloak tek, so they repair any incoming damage and the DDA can reroll ones since they don't have to move with their range.
I agree with this assessment. I like running a mono Dynasty with Immotekh, though I can see how a Nihilakh spearhead and Novokh Outrider are powerful. Similarly to the Tyranid book taking different detachments from different hive fleets, I see competitive Necron lists running at least 2, if not 3 different dynasties. Sautehk or Mephrit for the battalion depending on flavor, with Nihilakh and Novokh detachments.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/04/19 13:34:15
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
iGuy91 wrote: Probably would work for a casual, friendly game. I'd use a unit of wraiths to provide target priority issues. Or, sell out, and run 18 Nephrek Wraiths, 10 Lychguard with Anrakyr in a Night Scythe, and then watch them scramble to try and beat all those units. Pretty lulzy stuff. I call the list "Space Jam" because it goes hard in the paint.
How does Anrakyr utilize a Night Scythe? He doesn't have a dynasty keyword. Has this been addressed?
It was addressed in the most recent FAQ for Arankyr and Szeras
Wasn't that just for warlord traits?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Woha, check out this Facebook reply from GW:
iGuy91 wrote: Probably would work for a casual, friendly game. I'd use a unit of wraiths to provide target priority issues. Or, sell out, and run 18 Nephrek Wraiths, 10 Lychguard with Anrakyr in a Night Scythe, and then watch them scramble to try and beat all those units. Pretty lulzy stuff. I call the list "Space Jam" because it goes hard in the paint.
How does Anrakyr utilize a Night Scythe? He doesn't have a dynasty keyword. Has this been addressed?
It was addressed in the most recent FAQ for Arankyr and Szeras
Wait, I thought that was in regards to his interactions with Warlord trait buffs they can give out?
Can they actually use Ghost Arks/Night Scythes/Monoliths/be Veil'd now?
2018/04/19 14:31:49
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
iGuy91 wrote: Probably would work for a casual, friendly game. I'd use a unit of wraiths to provide target priority issues. Or, sell out, and run 18 Nephrek Wraiths, 10 Lychguard with Anrakyr in a Night Scythe, and then watch them scramble to try and beat all those units. Pretty lulzy stuff. I call the list "Space Jam" because it goes hard in the paint.
How does Anrakyr utilize a Night Scythe? He doesn't have a dynasty keyword. Has this been addressed?
It was addressed in the most recent FAQ for Arankyr and Szeras
Wasn't that just for warlord traits?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Woha, check out this Facebook reply from GW:
iGuy91 wrote: Probably would work for a casual, friendly game. I'd use a unit of wraiths to provide target priority issues. Or, sell out, and run 18 Nephrek Wraiths, 10 Lychguard with Anrakyr in a Night Scythe, and then watch them scramble to try and beat all those units. Pretty lulzy stuff. I call the list "Space Jam" because it goes hard in the paint.
How does Anrakyr utilize a Night Scythe? He doesn't have a dynasty keyword. Has this been addressed?
It was addressed in the most recent FAQ for Arankyr and Szeras
Wasn't that just for warlord traits?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Woha, check out this Facebook reply from GW:
Except nothing in the answer indicates that such abilities can bypass the restriction of not being able to DS into the enemy's half of the board in the first turn.
2018/04/19 14:42:23
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
torblind wrote: Well, specifying that they can do so because they started the battle deployed ok the battlefield certainly is some indication
That's an interesting point. If the intent was you can do it either way but only in your deployment zone then what difference does the line about them starting on the battlefield matter?
2018/04/19 16:20:26
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
It was a poorly worded question, and so the answer had no bearing. Besides, the Facebook crew have said that they aren't an official source for rulings...
So, it's a fart in the wind... best let it go.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/04/19 16:55:56
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Anpu-adom wrote: It was a poorly worded question, and so the answer had no bearing. Besides, the Facebook crew have said that they aren't an official source for rulings...
So, it's a fart in the wind... best let it go.
If you read further down in the comments for that question Warhammer 40000 responds again. Here are two quotes in sequence
"Chris Holden: I believe it falls under the same catagory as the Raven Guard's Statagem and Genestealer Cult exceptions as it isn't holding them back in reserve as such and it is before the first battle round begins."
"Warhammer 40,000: As Chris has said, this can be benefited from as you're re-deploying a unit which is already on the table."
10000 pts
4000 pts
