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.

Dashofpepper wrote:They're both slow - where the Deceiver shines is his ability to gain momentum from combat and *get* to where he needs to be. If the enemy isn't coming to you, its going to *be* turn 3-4 before either C'Tan even gets anywhere useful, even running during his shooting phase. The Deceiver can make those last couple of turns shine via mobility and assault; the Nightbringer has to desperately go for what he can and hope for good dice.

Both C'tan can run and shoot. You can run the Deceiver for example and use one of his powers. or the NIghtbringer and fire his Lightning Arc. They're not shooting attacks, they just take place in the shooting phase as "powers". SO you can be forcing morale checks and popping tanks as you close the gap.

Uh...since most tournament armies these days can generally outshoot Necrons, there is no need to come to you to phase you out.

Necrons are not powerful enough, nor do they have the range to sit in their deployment zone and trade fire with enemy armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

samrtk wrote:

Both C'tan can run and shoot. You can run the Deceiver for example and use one of his powers. or the NIghtbringer and fire his Lightning Arc. They're not shooting attacks, they just take place in the shooting phase as "powers". SO you can be forcing morale checks and popping tanks as you close the gap.

Nay...they cannot both run and shoot at the same time. Running takes the place of shooting, so you get one or the other.

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...since most tournament armies these days can generally outshoot Necrons, there is no need to come to you to phase you out.

I don't know about that.

There's plenty of Orks and Tyranids out there, and Space Marine shooting doesn't really bother Necrons in cover quite as much. Particularly since your warriors ought to be in reserve for at least one round. With IG and DE you have a point, but Deep Striking Monoliths kind of help with that but I'll agree with you that it's a much harder game.

Once the Nightbringer hits that IG blob squad though... Oh it's a thing of beauty.

Can you keep both your troop choices in reserve from the beginning? I thought you had to have one on the table and one in reserve?

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...since most tournament armies these days can generally outshoot Necrons, there is no need to come to you to phase you out.

Necrons are not powerful enough, nor do they have the range to sit in their deployment zone and trade fire with enemy armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

samrtk wrote:

Both C'tan can run and shoot. You can run the Deceiver for example and use one of his powers. or the NIghtbringer and fire his Lightning Arc. They're not shooting attacks, they just take place in the shooting phase as "powers". SO you can be forcing morale checks and popping tanks as you close the gap.

Nay...they cannot both run and shoot at the same time. Running takes the place of shooting, so you get one or the other.

actually, the deceiver has one or two abilities that are used in the assault phase, so yes you can run and use an ability of his. I don't think the nightbringer has anything like that though as his tempest and gaze of death require him to be in CC.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dave_salmon wrote:Can you keep both your troop choices in reserve from the beginning? I thought you had to have one on the table and one in reserve?

You absolutely can, nothing in the deployment rules for necrons or the main rule book says otherwise.

Kevin949 wrote:actually, the deceiver has one or two abilities that are used in the assault phase, so yes you can run and use an ability of his. I don't think the nightbringer has anything like that though as his tempest and gaze of death require him to be in CC.

Not so.

The Tempest works on all units within 6".

Monster Rain wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:actually, the deceiver has one or two abilities that are used in the assault phase, so yes you can run and use an ability of his. I don't think the nightbringer has anything like that though as his tempest and gaze of death require him to be in CC.

Not so.

The Tempest works on all units within 6".

tempest works on all units assaulting him in their own assault phase i didnt think there was a range.

Yeah, there's definitely a range.

"Any enemy unit (not vehicles) with a model within 6"..."

Page 29, in my codex.

Well i played my deceiver recently against an eldar army and wiped the floor with him. It was kill points, at the end of the game i had 12 and he didn't kill a single model. To be fair, he did seem kinda inexperienced.

Dashofpepper wrote:Nay...they cannot both run and shoot at the same time. Running takes the place of shooting, so you get one or the other.

I never said shoot The C'tan have powers, not shooting attacks. Therefore in the shooting phase they can both run and use one of these powers. This has been covered in at least two topics about the subject of the C'tan rules.

Here's one of the topics, this was when I asked for clarification a while back: Clicky

I like having the extra stat upgrades of the Nightbringer. So usually prefer to play him. Th Deceiver is good but I feel only in certain situations, ie against low LD armies.

I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

phantommaster wrote:
I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

here i really disagree. Combat can be extremely worth it for necrons, if it means that they cannot assault your precious warriors. Half of the time I am trying to find ways that stupid orcs/tac squads or some such unit is trying to get into combat with my warriors to phase me out and I assault them with my deciever, it slows them for a turn and I run/teleport away.

tiekwando wrote:

phantommaster wrote:
I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

here i really disagree. Combat can be extremely worth it for necrons, if it means that they cannot assault your precious warriors. Half of the time I am trying to find ways that stupid orcs/tac squads or some such unit is trying to get into combat with my warriors to phase me out and I assault them with my deciever, it slows them for a turn and I run/teleport away.

But why not keep them in combat instead of weakening them and then letting them charge you?

phantommaster wrote:

tiekwando wrote:

phantommaster wrote:
I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

here i really disagree. Combat can be extremely worth it for necrons, if it means that they cannot assault your precious warriors. Half of the time I am trying to find ways that stupid orcs/tac squads or some such unit is trying to get into combat with my warriors to phase me out and I assault them with my deciever, it slows them for a turn and I run/teleport away.

But why not keep them in combat instead of weakening them and then letting them charge you?

You assault them, lock them in combat on your turn.
On their turn, you run away during the assault phase, so they cant attack you or even move.
Then, you charge right back into combat on your turn.

omerakk wrote:

phantommaster wrote:

tiekwando wrote:

phantommaster wrote:
I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

here i really disagree. Combat can be extremely worth it for necrons, if it means that they cannot assault your precious warriors. Half of the time I am trying to find ways that stupid orcs/tac squads or some such unit is trying to get into combat with my warriors to phase me out and I assault them with my deciever, it slows them for a turn and I run/teleport away.

But why not keep them in combat instead of weakening them and then letting them charge you?

You assault them, lock them in combat on your turn.
On their turn, you run away during the assault phase, so they cant attack you or even move.
Then, you charge right back into combat on your turn.

Yep, exactly. Also if you have a monolith or VOD you can teleport away on your turn so that the squad that was previously a threat now has to move across the entire board. It works pretty well actually. Then your Deceiver can focus on a different unit, rinse and repeat.

tiekwando wrote:

omerakk wrote:

phantommaster wrote:

tiekwando wrote:

phantommaster wrote:
I feel that a combat is only worth it if you wipe the enemy out and don't just run away, making it pointless IMO.

here i really disagree. Combat can be extremely worth it for necrons, if it means that they cannot assault your precious warriors. Half of the time I am trying to find ways that stupid orcs/tac squads or some such unit is trying to get into combat with my warriors to phase me out and I assault them with my deciever, it slows them for a turn and I run/teleport away.

But why not keep them in combat instead of weakening them and then letting them charge you?

You assault them, lock them in combat on your turn.
On their turn, you run away during the assault phase, so they cant attack you or even move.
Then, you charge right back into combat on your turn.

Yep, exactly. Also if you have a monolith or VOD you can teleport away on your turn so that the squad that was previously a threat now has to move across the entire board. It works pretty well actually. Then your Deceiver can focus on a different unit, rinse and repeat.

Although I get your point of view I would still believe it to be better to simply wipe out the problem.

^^^ Totally agree. Wiping is obviously much better in most cases. I was just saying that it is not necessarily the only use of close combat. Pulling troops off objectives, wasting the enemies turn, forcing your enemy not to shoot at you (if you can stay in assault for more than one turn) are all plenty of good reasons to charge into close combat. Also sometimes it is enough to just weaken a force, for instance:

Say there is a 5 man assault squad ready to charge your necron warriors (A). You assault them with your deciever and take no wounds, but kill 3. Now there are only 2 left. BUT there is a dreadnaught nearby that is also threatening a different warrior squad(B). You disengage on their assault phase (so they cannot charge your warriors) and move 2d6 towards the dread (average of 7") then move another 6" and assault 6" for 19" total. The dread is in trouble at least and your warriors are safe. The two man assault squad is no longer a terrifying threat so you do not need to stay in combat. Your warriors (A) either rapid fire at them (hopefully killing them, or at least one more marine) or shoot something else that is more important. (B) can also do the same, they can shoot the dreadnaught knowing the Deciever will stop the dread from charging, or shoot some other priority target. Obviously this is just an example so may have flaws, but hopefully it illustrates the point.

The Necrons have one 'broken' (aka no one else can do it) ability, in my opinion, which is precisely that they can use close combat for a multitude of different objectives. The ability to get out of combat without having to worry about sweeping/ld tests is a huge asset for Necrons.

*edit also I guess that is why i like the Deceiver, once he is in combat he may not kill as much, but he can move really, really quickly and tie up more units than the Nightbringer could

Phatommaster....Necrons do not have the shooting or assault capability to wipe out serious problems. They have the capability to remove threats, mitigate danger, confuse and confuddle enemies through technological magic....but not to simply wipe the board with an enemy.

Dashofpepper wrote:Phatommaster....Necrons do not have the shooting or assault capability to wipe out serious problems. They have the capability to remove threats, mitigate danger, confuse and confuddle enemies through technological magic....but not to simply wipe the board with an enemy.

I've done it. A number of times. Against different marine armies. It can happen, but it's not reliable. I wouldn't say the necrons don't have the capability though.

I agree with Kevin.

Destroyers aren't bad against Rhino and they really beat up on the Marines inside.

Problem is deceiver has the cool rules and nightbringer the cool model - so I run deceiver using nightbringer model! Job solved ...

Monster Rain wrote:I agree with Kevin.

Destroyers aren't bad against Rhino and they really beat up on the Marines inside.

Uh...yeah. Because Rhino spam full of marines constitutes anything outside of a lulzlist on the competitive scene these days?

I didn't say that Necrons don't have the shooting or assault capability to wipe out anything, I said they didn't to wipe out serious problems. The kind that show up across the table from you rounds 3-7 of a GT.

Triple longfang units with 5 las/plas razorbacks and two rune priests in tow with Living Lightning and at least one with Jaws...you can win. Table? Not a smoky chance in hell.
Triple Baal predators supported by triple Autolas predators, Mephiston, and 2-3 razorbacks and 2-3 rhinos...you can win. Table? Not a smoky chance in any circle of hell.
Pretty much any variant of Mech IG: Same story.
DoA Blood Angels, Deathwing: These both heavily depend on what your opponent does.

I wouldn't classify some rhinos full of marines as a serious problem. Or a competitive army either for that matter.

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...yeah. Because Rhino spam full of marines constitutes anything outside of a lulzlist on the competitive scene these days?

Rhino armor = Razorback armor. I didn't realize that needed to be spelled out.

Also, take a look and see what the Space Wolf list that won the competitive aspect of Adepticon looked like. Rhinos all over the place.

Monster Rain wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...yeah. Because Rhino spam full of marines constitutes anything outside of a lulzlist on the competitive scene these days?

Rhino armor = Razorback armor. I didn't realize that needed to be spelled out.

Also, take a look and see what the Space Wolf list that won the competitive aspect of Adepticon looked like. Rhinos all over the place.

Yes, I'm familiar with Toby. He's gone undefeated at both the Nova Open last year and Adepticon this year. Hopefully we'll run into each other at the Nova Open this year. And a rhino spam army is different than a longfang spam army.

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...yeah. Because Rhino spam full of marines constitutes anything outside of a lulzlist on the competitive scene these days?

Monster Rain wrote:...Also, take a look and see what the Space Wolf list that won the competitive aspect of Adepticon looked like. Rhinos all over the place.

Dashofpepper wrote:Yes, I'm familiar with Toby. He's gone undefeated at both the Nova Open last year and Adepticon this year. Hopefully we'll run into each other at the Nova Open this year.

Does not compute.

Dashofpepper wrote:And a rhino spam army is different than a longfang spam army.

Very true. Not sure of the relevance though.

Toby *has* rhinos in his army. He won Adepticon. His army is not "a bunch of rhinos full of space marines" though - although he does have a couple of rhinos in his army.

Right, so marines in rhinos do not necessarily a "lulzlist" make.

That was the only point I was making. You, of all people, should know that making statements that are untrue do a disservice to the readers of this fine website.

Either way, I'm willing to drop this and get back on topic if you are.

i think it depends on the type of armie your running.

for me i don't actually have any c'tan yet but from what i';ve seen and read i'm gona get the nightbringer. because the deciver is nice but his powers are based on ld tests and unless you have some pariahs nearby most enemies pass those easily.

his grand illusion is very nice i must admit but the way i play that won't make too much of a differnce for me. And his ability to leave combat, wel to be fare that is usefull but i'd want him in combat except with distraction or roadblock assaulters.

Now the nightbringer is just my cup of tea as they say. his improved stats make him evan more deadly(always a good thing ) the lightning ark is effectivly a heavy destroyer shot wich is quite good when you consider getting charged by a dreadnaut or something it can come in handy. gaze of death is very effective againsed swarms or anything without an invunerable save e.g. bezerkers, orks, tyranids and finnaly the ethric tempest is gona be a life saver for getting warriors out of combat.

in addition to all these i have to say i love his fluff he's a ing beast

So for me the nightbringer has my vote all they way

I've found that most new necron players start out with the nigthbringer, then move on to the deceiver after they get experience with the army.

The nightbringers better smashy smashy in combat makes him more appealing at first, then they switch over to the greater utility of the deceiver once they see how it synergizes with the rest of their army

omerakk wrote:The nightbringers better smashy smashy in combat makes him more appealing at first, then they switch over to the greater utility of the deceiver once they see how it synergizes with the rest of their army

I started with the Nightbringer, tried the Deceiver, and went running back the the Nightbringer. Especially after the advent of Thunderwolf Cavalry.

I keep the Deceiver around because of Apocalypse though. Those two go through the other armies like Smokey and the Bandit.