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.

Shortest base I think is about an inch tall though I'd have to check. That being said the monolith overhangs it as the hole is in a recessed area under it. Meaning the actual space is between 1/5 to 3/4 of an inch. Trust me, 99% of the time you'll be seeing nothing. But hey, if that's what you took from the report thanks for visiting and reading

One of buddies started playing Necrons when we got back into 40k in 2006. He purchased three monoliths and none of them had a flying base.

Whether or not you think a monolith should be on a base I don't think there is any way you'll see underneath them because of their large footprint, and because of the outer rim of the monolith that hangs down lower than where the base would make contact, effectively lowering the amount of clearance gained by basing it. Maybe termagaunts could get close and shoot under because of how low to the ground they are but I can't see any basic infantry getting to shoot under.

Also, arent you supposed to ignore tails for LoS?

So you wouldnt be able to target the wraiths even if you could see their tails.

I don't know where the idea that Monoliths should be on flying stands comes from, but the boxes definitely don't have a flying base in it. The rules require you to put models on the supplied base. If there's no base, you don't put one on it.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:So next tournament I go to...

"You can't prove my storm ravens came with bases... They fly on the ground and get cover from all the rest of my tanks."

"You can't prove vendettas came with bases, you can't see them behind the hill because they are on the ground."

That's a ridiculous reading of the rules, not supported by the rulebook, INAT, or the spirit of the game. I hope you never run a tournament.

As far as old kits, update your bases. I would say the same thing to someone with termies in 28mms or monstrous creatures on 40mms. The game is different than it was 8 years ago, spend 10 dollars and get the approriate bases.

This is the far extreme that you used to try and prove your point. There's just one problem. Storm Ravens have always come with flying bases, Vendettas have always come with flying bases. So, considering you can't even buy Necrons right now in most countries, I'd say that the Monolith still doesn't come with a flying base, I've bought 3, and not one came with a flying base. The only pack that the flying base came in was a Monolith 2 pack that they sold on the GW website for a few months. So, no matter how much you complain, you can get blue in the face, quote INAT, and think it's as ridiculous as you want, point is no one is going to play their monoliths like the way you state, because they weren't supplied with bases, so I can't play them with bases by RAW. They might come with bases now (I dont think so), MY monoliths never came with bases, so thus in the rule book it states that only bases supplied with the model may be used.

Doesn't matter. It really, really doesn't matter that he didn't but his monoliths on a base. For the reasons that so many of you have stated. Great battle report, I sincerely enjoyed reading it.

#1. I have never, ever seen a monolith on a flying base, and I have played against a lot

#2. What Hulksmash says. I doubt you can see anything behind one do to the angle. (do people shoot through Eldar skimmers?)

Vitruvian XVII wrote:Also, arent you supposed to ignore tails for LoS?

So you wouldnt be able to target the wraiths even if you could see their tails.

What you call a "tail" is its body. It is kind of like a snake, where does the body end and the tail begin?

Maybe he means the tentacle things that actually connect to the base?

Blackmoor wrote:#1. I have never, ever seen a monolith on a flying base, and I have played against a lot

#2. What Hulksmash says. I doubt you can see anything behind one do to the angle. (do people shoot through Eldar skimmers?)

Vitruvian XVII wrote:Also, arent you supposed to ignore tails for LoS?

So you wouldnt be able to target the wraiths even if you could see their tails.

What you call a "tail" is its body. It is kind of like a snake, where does the body end and the tail begin?

Indeed, I have two monoliths, I think mine did come with bases, but they're almost completely irrelevant.

1) They snap the stems in about 5 minutes.
2) The area where the whole is is recessed into the bottom. On top of this, theres hanging skirt pieces which the model rests on without the stem that make it appear as if it's floating. even if you put it up on the stem, theres about a 1/4inch gap between these and the ground. Maybe, maybe 1/2 in at the edges (where the dropskirts arent). Given the length of the monolith, and the angle, the model would have to be lying completely flat to see anything underneath. Any other model would be approaching from too high of an angle (an infantry or anything really is too high) to see more than an inch or so under it before the angle you were viewing from terminated into the board.

I don't always love Dash, but this point is a pretty moot one. Flying base or no, that tactic does indeed still work just fine.

Blackmoor wrote:#1. I have never, ever seen a monolith on a flying base, and I have played against a lot

#2. What Hulksmash says. I doubt you can see anything behind one do to the angle. (do people shoot through Eldar skimmers?)

Vitruvian XVII wrote:Also, arent you supposed to ignore tails for LoS?

So you wouldnt be able to target the wraiths even if you could see their tails.

What you call a "tail" is its body. It is kind of like a snake, where does the body end and the tail begin?

How about at the point where it's body becomes it's tail?

The chestplate and shoulder plates are definite body. The tail is a tail.

Look in the necron codex under Wraith (pg 19) and you'll see that it is armed with claws and a barbed TAIL.


Monoliths come on flying bases according to the website, but i have bought 15 over the years and not one has ever had a flying base. On calling with the first couple i was told that the website was in error, and that they don't come with a base (but this being Customer Service we're talkiing about, that's not all that conclusive).

The codex has one photo showing a Monolith on a flying base, and four with it not on a base.

The recent battle report in WD with necrons vs Guard had Monoliths in play, and with no flying base in sight.

If fact aside from that single picture in the codex and the presumably incorrect listing on the website (as apparently very few people are getting flying bases in their monolith kiys, if any) has anyone ever seena Lith on a flying base?

There's a reason for that. The flying base will support a lith, barely, but the slightest nudge results in the lith tumbling off the base or the base snapping off.

This may or may not be what you guys were looking for, but after reading this little bit of an argument, I decided to pull out my monolith and one of my skimmer stands. This, was the result...




No difference between the stand, and the little bits at the bottom that hold it up off the ground anyways... Now, I believe this base originally was for my tomb spyder, I highly doubt it would make much of a difference LoS wise as right now it isn't even noticed (literally no change in height).

To sum up:

1. The monolith has, at least for most of the last ten years, not been sold with a base. A few may have been. I've seen a few conversions over the years to make them fly/hover, particularly during 4th edition.
2. In 3rd edition they blocked LOS like Mofos. In 4th no Skimmer blocked LOS. In 5th they block again.
3. As demonstrated, due to the physical design of the Monolith, even if you put a flying stand under there, it doesn't raise the model up to any significant degree, and it still blocks LOS except for prone models.

No harm, no foul. This is one of the advantages of Monoliths.

Looking at the studio liths i think they are missing the little tabs that make a lith hover. They sit flush to the ground.

Perhaps an earlier version of the model, with the final production lith having the risers due to its habit of snapping right off the base?

<message redacted - no personal attacks needed; keep it factual, and you won't have problems> --Janthkin

Even with a 1" stand, the overhang of the monolith will only allow you to see about .25 inch from under. And the wraiths are also on 1" stands, I dont see how you can draw LOS at all.

SonsofVulkan wrote:<message redacted>Even with a 1" stand, the overhang of the monolith will only allow you to see about .25 inch from under. And the wraiths are also on 1" stands, I dont see how you can draw LOS at all.

Wraiths aren't on flying stands, they're on 40mm bases. Maybe you're thinking of destroyers?

Since the GW Website says the monolith is supplied with a base, I think all you folks have been gipped out of your bases! Time to call up GW and have them send you some.

Maybe you'll luck out and they'll send you a whole new monolith.

This thread has accomplished two things:

1. Illustrated why the switch to "true LOS" was such a horrible, horiible idea.

2. Reminded me why I avoid tournaments.

@CT

I'm glad you felt the need to add those things. I'm glad you got something out of it.

CT GAMER wrote:This thread has accomplished two things:

1. Illustrated why the switch to "true LOS" was such a horrible, horiible idea.

2. Reminded me why I avoid tournaments.

Prior to swapping to TLOS, the exact same folks made the inverse statement about how anything other than TLOS was a horrible, horrible idea. Remember those tanks hiding in plain sight, but since there was >2 inches of "infinite height" woods in the way, they were invisible?

Or the eldar jetbike shenanigan pop out attacks, which you could clearly see, but could never shoot?

If anything, this thread should remind us why we avoid internet drama. Tournaments are a blast.

oops yea i meant destroyers.

either way, a infantry model that isnt prone wont be looking under the monolith.

*Trying to avoid getting sucked back into this thread*

I agree that against 99% of lists and 99% of opponents the whole base thing is a none issue. I personally feel like it would be an issue against my army, which probably skews my opinion on the matter.

@CT I go to lots of tournaments of 9/10 games go off without a hitch. And even if someone complains (as I said I would in this instance) the TO makes a ruling, and you move on. Arguements like this are much more an internet thing than a tournament thing.

@Targetawg You're right people will complain (and did) about any LOS rules. I don't like TLOS because it's often physically difficult to drop down to model's eye view and determine if you have sight, what to, and is it 50% obscure. There's A LOT of judgement and room for abuse. I find the level/non TLOS system less open to debate, which is IMO better.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:@Targetawg You're right people will complain (and did) about any LOS rules. I don't like TLOS because it's often physically difficult to drop down to model's eye view and determine if you have sight, what to, and is it 50% obscure. There's A LOT of judgement and room for abuse. I find the level/non TLOS system less open to debate, which is IMO better.

I'd agree with you here on both accounts:

1) It's often hard to actually do TLOS in practice. This is a problem compounded by GW putting spikey bits on their scenery, ending in a wall/buildings spikey attachment jabbing me in the face more than once. This could be a personal problem.

2) The old system was less debatable. I found it smoother in game because there was a more well defined line of can/can't see, and now arguments/disagreements do arise as to "is it 50% obscured? Or 45%?" or whether x actual model can in reality see, if you're unable to actually put your eye to his. That being said, these arguments/disputes are typically quick and relatively painless, with either an agreement being reached quickly, or a decision to just dice it off if it's truly that close to 50%. I still think I like the new system better as it feels a bit more realistic/tactical, especially as events/shops transition away from 4th edition terrain. When 5th first came out, all of those green flat pieces that were infinite height area terrain were now absolutely no protection. But, as time has went on, these have slowly been replaced by more accurate looking scenery (another positive!).

And don't be afraid to get drawn back into the thread! I never quite understood why internet discussions had to devolve into nasty shouting matches, but this one certainly doesn't have to .

targetawg wrote:
1) It's often hard to actually do TLOS in practice. This is a problem compounded by GW putting spikey bits on their scenery, ending in a wall/buildings spikey attachment jabbing me in the face more than once. This could be a personal problem.

Stab me once, Cities of Death Basilica, shame on you. Stab me twice, Cities of Death Basilica, shame on me.

I own 5 Monoliths, purchased at various times over the last 5 years. None came with flying bases.

Also, I don't understand why Dash's opponent didn't unload all of that shooting into those wraiths. The mind boggles.

Monster Rain wrote:Also, I don't understand why Dash's opponent didn't unload all of that shooting into those wraiths. The mind boggles.

This has always puzzled me a little about Dash's reports. People consistently do really silly things around him. I don't mean to bash him, but a lot of the time I don't feel that Dash wins games so much as he is really good at getting his opponents to lose them. If that makes sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add to that, I would say that that is a compliment. Somehow he completely confuses target priority in most of his lists for his opponents and they just do dumb things.

I'm pretty sure if I was playing him with my sisters, I would be convinced that disembarking like three or four squads in front of his monoliths to try some melta shots was a good idea.

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean.

And yeah, it's not to knock him. The wins are wins, I'm just surprised at the grievous mistakes made in all three of these Necron reports, particularly when considering that the games took place at a tournament and ostensibly one of them at the top table.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:From GW's website

"This box contains one Monolith. This multi-part, large plastic kit contains over 60 pieces, can be assembled with its portal open or sealed and has rotating gauss blasters. Model supplied with a large flying base"

If yours is missing the base you need to contact GW. Just because my vendetta is missing something it's supposed to come with doesn't mean I get to play it on the table surface getting cover from everything.

And a guardsmen is only about 1" tall. Put the monolith up 1" and it can see completely under it. I don't have a stand with me but the shorter stand might not be a entire inch, but if you step back away from the front of the monolith there should be plenty of room to shoot.

Taller things can still see through it if you attack the unit behind from angles and not the front of the monolith.

Not using a base changes how the model works. It's not using the base the kit is supplied with, and it's modeling to advantage.

I'm not saying that's why dash won, but I don't see how you can say that it isn't an potential issue.

Please don't use the GW site for reference in this instance because they also still use the old picture for scarabs from way way back in the day and they have the ranged attack of the nightbringer wrong as well.

Also, the monolith IS SUPPLIED WITH A FLYING BASE. It is built into the base of the lith which is why it is even off the ground at all. And I'm pretty sure that on my liths there is no spot for a base to get inserted into on the bottom of any of the three liths I have purchased over the past couple years since I started playing.

*edit*
Note: Monoliths used to come with a large flying base but from what I understand (and would imagine) it was extremely unwieldy and they broke constantly so GW stopped supplying it. But obviously they don't update their site regularly except for armies that are new dex or models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Oaka wrote:The terrain for this event was much better than the Alamo GT, it's a pity neither army was finished. The best battle reports, to me, include photographs of well-painted armies doing battle on a table with nice terrain.

As for the actual battle report, I think this Necron army can take quite a few opponents by surprise. I was caught off guard by both the movements of the wraiths- the turboboosting to the left, and then the teleporting back to the monoliths. I didn't know Necrons could redeploy that well. The fact that the warriors then teleported through the portals to rapidfire makes it obvious to me that it is the Monolith that makes or breaks the army. I think Dash could have taken all warriors, or destroyers, heck, even pariahs, and it would still be a solid army with a three monolith backbone. That's a little unfortunate because I don't see Necrons working very well at 1000 points or less.

Well, pariahs can't be teleported and don't get WBB so...probably not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

omerakk wrote:Monoliths JUST started coming with bases recently because they are being updated in preparation for the new codex. You do realize this, right? NONE of the monoliths produced since they were originally released have ever come with a base. Ever. Until they get a new codex, it is perfectly legal for them to be modeled without one, since that's the way it's been for how many years now?

And have you ever actually checked the los under a monolith that was mounted on a legal flying base? Even models that are crouching can't see under it unless they are 1" away from it and angled just right.

If you want to complain, complain about the horrible lists he is facing. Trying to say he's cheating by using his models the way they have always been is just ridiculous.

I think you have this backwards as the GW site (as horribly out of date for necrons as it is) has been saying for YEARS that the lith comes with a flying base. And, see my above post.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:Yes it does. It comes with a large flying base.

And the INAT (which this tournament may not have used) says that models must be mounted on their flying bases.

I know we are only talking about an inch of elevation, but that inch allows you to shoot at the guys behind. And killing 9 wraiths at range is relatively easy and destroys the backbone of the army. Absolutely game changing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MVBrandt wrote:That said, many Lith boxes (if not all) don't come with one, so formally it is not required.

It comes with one now. It came with one when I owned necrons four years ago. I'm not aware of it ever coming without one. But now is the only important time anyway.

I just bought a monolith a couple months ago from GW and it did not come with a large fly base. I also know two other Cron players (they're the only other cron players I know) who have never gotten flying bases for their Liths either.

Monster Rain wrote:Yeah, I know exactly what you mean.

And yeah, it's not to knock him. The wins are wins, I'm just surprised at the grievous mistakes made in all three of these Necron reports, particularly when considering that the games took place at a tournament and ostensibly one of them at the top table.

Dash's opponents all had the tools to beat him, but they were not able to put it together in the game.

i pointed out what the Eldar player did wrong, and I could do the same for the others. Monoliths are unkillable so you need to ignore them. You need to shoot down the deceiver so don't even bother assaulting him, because you just waste your time and give him free movement. If you are fast, hit the warriors. It is not that hard.

Blackmoor wrote: It is not that hard.

That's the thing I keep thinking. I'm not a great player by any stretch, but even I get that playing it his way is going to make you lose. So why do these guys keep doing it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I mean, none of his opponents did the obvious... Feed him one unit to kill with his wraith-star. That unit dies on his turn from overkill. Shoot your entire army at the WS. Profit.

All his opponents had the mental block of 'Oh, necrons are bad at hand to hand. I should assault the deathstar.'