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.

changemod wrote:
Not great for number of releases or big releases, no. Still, IA12 was pretty solid for us until 7th rolled around and was just short of entirely incompatible. My biggest complaint when it was interacting with 5th's codex in 6th was that the Tomb Stalker was terrible, yet had such a cool model.

Oh goodness, that model is amazing. It's just never been good. I don't even understand how they could make it only have 4 wounds when it's that big.

Even a unit of S6 Melta is pretty good next to current. 5+ instead of 4+ absolutely not great, but it's still Melta in units of 3-9.

Oh and the Tesseract Ark is another chance of something halfway decent.

Yeah, I mean, it's not bad, I just mean it still won't be cost effective as a solution to our issues.

MoonlightSonata wrote:Something else that's laughable is the fact that of the three melee weapons available to lords, two of them have the exact same weapon profile!

Huh? You know that the melee weapons list is the one at the start of the Necron rules, not the bit in the points section, right? You can only take Hyperphase swords (AP-3), Staff of Light (AP-2 + shooting attack) or the Warscythe (+2S AP-4). They all seem different enough to me.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Actually the options are sword, voidblade and warscythe. Voidblade and sword have the exact same stats; -3 ap and 1 damage, user strength.

Huh, weird. I totally missed that passing over the rules. That is utterly bizarre.

Having just watched the Warhammer Live battle report, it raised 3 really interesting things which I'd realised, but didn't quite realise how much of a game changer they were:
1) Characters must be the closest unit if you want to shoot at them. You cannot shoot at units in combat. Therefore, if there's a combat happening anywhere between you and a character, that character cannot be shot at. If the character is interspersed with a unit in combat, it's basically invincible to all but snipers. That makes certain AOE buffs extremely potent.
2) It is much harder to kill your opponent generally. Not only have vehicles become more survivable, all large model count armies have. Additionally, you control objectives by having the most models close to them as possible. That means that bodies on the table is much more meaningful than it first appears.
3) Even slightly touching a vehicle in combat completely stops it firing in it's next shooting phase unless they can fly. In the live game, a land Raider absolutely wreaked havoc until enemies got near - then it was useless because its only options were retreat or make some very weak attacks. That means we don't HAVE to deal with vehicles as long as we can just reach them in combat. In particular, you MUST consolidate to the nearest enemy model - kill an enemy unit walling off a vehicle and you will instantly lock up the vehicle with consolidation moves.

Reconsidering that, it makes me less worried about vehicle heavy armies. We don't need to kill them - just render them useless somehow. So what if there were some super fast, super tough units which could aid this - Wraiths, perhaps?

I've been very negative about what we can't do. It's time to knuckle down and get to grips with what we beat everyone else at.

Imotekh, 2 units of flayed one and a Deceiver is deceptively strong. In combat, if you can get the effects to work together and use my will be done, you have flayed ones charging 2D6"+1, hitting on 2+ rerolling, S4 rerolling to wound with 4 attacks each AND the enemy is at -2 morale. Additionally, this detachment gives +1 CP, so you could afford to reroll one of the dice in the charge. If you deep strike, that puts a 9" charge down to 8" from MWBD, If you reroll the lowest, assuming a failed charge, the maths becomes pretty tricky - assuming you don't waste a CP when it's a double one (that's an impossible charge no matter how you reroll), your chances become 125/216, or ~57% to make that charge. Still not amazing odds, but something. To put that into perspective, a unit of 10 will kill ?9.7 MEQ per turn, then force a morale check at -2 as if they'd inflicted 11.7. Against Ork Boyz, you kill ~24.3 and they test as if it was ~26.3. Ld effects are actually pretty strong.

Zahndrekh is really, really geared for combat. All his abilities really want the enemy up close and personal. This makes him pair fantastically with Szeras or Orikan, both of whom will buff units nearby in combat.

Szeras grows on me every time I read his rules. Worst case, you buff 1 unit to S5 and have a pocket lascannon. Best case, you just made a blob of 20 warriors T5 with a big gun hidden in the middle and which reanimates on 4+.

Orikan seems very good with Scythe Lychguard. Instead of paying 70 points to give a unit sword and shield, you could pay 143 to give them a 5++, +1 to reanimate, a character with an AP-3 D3 damage weapon who might suddenly become super tough. It's not the world's best unit, but it's definitely pretty solid - excellent against tough assault units. Even if you sit him in a unit of 20 warriors and do nothing else, it's a pretty good anti-charge defence.

I think Anrakyr buffs himself to 4 attacks. Either way, this guy is amazing - even if you don't want to run a dedicated combat unit, the attacks buff is always relevant if you expect to get charged (you should - it's almost unavoidable as far as I can see). Additionally, mind in the machine is pretty great when it goes off, the S8 warscythe is a very nice buff and the Tachyon Arrow is a cool bonus, if not always that meaningful.

Hopefully everyone realises how incredibly strong Immortals are now. They're actually slightly ridiculous - S5 is as good as S7 against T4 or T8, and they're just extremely cost effective. You basically can't go wrong with these guys as long as you protect them from being charged.

Triarch Stalkers seem great. They don't cost you victory points in Big Guns Never Tire, and they're much more durable than Heavy Destroyers. Even ignoring the Quantum shielding, they're more than 3 times as durable as a Heavy Destroyer and hand out buffs, as well as being quite reasonable against vehicles in combat. It's a shame they lose BS from moving and degrade in ability, otherwise I'd always be taking one.

C'tan are still surprisingly vulnerable to big guns if exposed, but hidden away they are quite deadly. Now, the T C'tan strikes me as poor, but I would happily take the Deceiver or Nightbringer in most lists, at least for now. I definitely feel like Antimatter Meteor is the right pick 99% of the time, as it's the only one almost guaranteed damage, but Seismic Assault can be great if you're worried about hordes. I don't think that times arrow is ever worth it - it only starts beating anti-matter meteor at 3 wound models and becomes useless against things with more than 5 wounds. The meteor is just incredibly reliable mortal wounds, which is great.

I'm a big fan of the Doom Scythe. It's got good damage output which is hard to hide from, plugs a hole in our anti-tank, and can't be assaulted very easily. Not much more to say - it's a flyer with guns. Fragile but strong.

I feel like Wraiths get a bad rap because they're not the slaughter machines they once were in assault. Whilst true, they're still M12" T5 W3 3++ for 38 points; it's hard to argue they're not good. They're fast, they're durable and they will hurt things in assault. An absolute minimum size unit of them is only 114 points, has 9 S6 AP-1 attacks and is pretty tough to shift while still killing 2 MEQ per turn. 20 Genestealers, one of the most incredibly efficient melee units in the game, buffed by a Broodlord to get +1 to hit, goes 7.4 wounds. That means that your 114 point unit just survived one of the most brutal assaults in the game. The real downside is no reanimation compared to Praetorians, but they're still good. In fact, against MEQ, they're practically the same at fighting after 2 round of combat, and slightly better after 3. Sounds good to me.

Scarabs are also hard to oversell. Okay, they die like flies to anything which shoots at them. However, at a little more than 4 points a wound, they're relatively disposable, easy to hide and quite deadly in combat. Maybe the scarab farm is dead, but these guys are still kicking.

Tomb blades are 2 Immortals stuck together with 14" movement, +1T and a worse save. Solid unit. Not much more to say - they're excellent all around, and it's possible that an army of these without many troops might work well.

Heavy Destroyers get special mention here for being the best AT we have. You seriously pay for it, but there's something to be said about a lascannon which can move 10" without penalty.

Monoliths are growing on me. I'm not sure exactly what archetype of list they fit, but they seem really quite good. Point for point, they are nearly as good at shooting as an Immortal with Gauss at 12"-24" and better for T6+ - buffed with a Stalker shooting, they're very formidable indeed. However, they're surprisingly "easy" to kill - 16 lascannon shots will put it down quickly. Still, they're pretty fun and I'll definitely try them at least once.

So yeah, what do people think will do well? What are you excited to try most?

Quite surprised to see Kutlakh and Toholk there when they don't have models. I'm still not super hopeful about Necron's FW stuff but if it's good then it'll be nice to get them off the shelf. End of June can't come fast enough.

 vipoid wrote:

Do you think he's worth it over a standard Cryptek or Orikan - both of which give surrounding units a 5++?

Absolutely, though I feel they're for different units. The 5++ is fantastic for its cost, but Orikan can't shoot; the Cryptek only gives a 5++ vs shooting and doesn't want to be within 12" if it can be avoided as it's terrible in assault. That means that Orikan wants to jump into a melee unit (otherwise his abilities are largely wasted) and the Cryptek is ~100 points for better reanimation and a 5++ for a backfield unit. If either get sniped out then you lose all their benefits. Meanwhile, Szeras buffs troop blobs, and even if he dies they keep that buff. While usually a 5++ is stronger than the buffs, those buffs are incredibly meaningful - 20 warriors firing at BS 2+ are 25% more deadly, T5 is 3% more durable against S4 small arms and S5, while a little lacking, is a reasonable deterrent to being charged. On top of that, he has a really good AT weapon which can be used after advancing (which he might want to do to hand out a buff at the end of movement, for example) and is surprisingly decent in a pinch against marines in combat. I think there's a place for all of them, but Szeras really takes my eye.

Regarding Time's Arrow, I think the main point is that it can target characters. It's a long-shot for sure, but the potential to kill a 4- or 5-wound character without them ever getting to make a save isn't to be underestimated.
It's not reliable initially, but if a character (or MC or Vehicle) starts to lose wounds, then this could be a very good way to get those last couple of wounds. Especially if the target has a good invulnerable save or some other means of protection.

Is that true? If so, that's really powerful. I guess if it's not a shooting attack there's no reason it shouldn't be true. I also missed that it's the only power which doesn't have to target the closest enemy unit, so I guess you could charge one unit and time's arrow units in the enemy's backfield (with a 2+ to kill many things through cover). That might've just convinced me that it's the best power by far then - removing an enemy character can be utterly lethal for some armies; guard rely on orders for example. Most characters seem to have 6 wounds though, so there's that. I dunno, maybe it pairs well with Deathmarks - fire to reduce wounds, then outright remove them from the game. Might be worth a shot.

Out of interest, how would you run them? The base one with 2 Gauss Blasters is 42pts, would you buy any of the upgrades?

Probably not to be honest. I'm not sure how important ignoring cover is now, because I don't think that intervening models (i.e. hiding guys behind tanks) or firing through ruins actually confers it any more which is huge. a 5++ seems good on paper, but unless that shot is AP-3 or better, it's not as good as shieldvanes. So, shieldvanes are what I would tend towards if I was going to buy anything, but usually I'll probably skip all the upgrades.

Would you run them on their own or would you hide them in units of regular Destroyers?

I'll probably try both. My fear with running them alone is that they're easy VP for the opponent in 2 of the missions, and they give you more units so you're less likely to choose who goes first. My issue with running Destroyers is that they seem underwhelming on paper - a lot worse than Tomb Blades at shooting and as many points per wound. I might be wrong though - it may turn out that their combination of fast, tough, counts as infantry for cover and being able to disengage from combat at will gives them a huge bonus for objective missions. We'll see.

I want to use my Destroyer Lord and Triarch Stalker (mostly because I converted some models for them that I love using), so I'll probably try a Destroyer Wing of some sort or other.

What do you guys think of the Warscythe vs. the Staff of Light on the D. Lord and other characters?

I'm quite interested to see how the new RPs pan out. I still find it depressing that our HQs don't get them anymore, but bringing back models on full wounds could be interesting. As could the ability to bring back models that have previously failed their RP roll.

Out of interest, do you think infantry-Necrons could be viable in this edition? (I can't remember what it was called - Silver Tide or something like that?)

I feel like the Staff of Light is a great choice for D Lords and not much else, as I imagine usually you'll want to disengage from combat rather than rush in. I dunno though, we'll see how it pans out.

Characters kind of get RP in the form of living metal. It's not the same, sure ,but it is at least automatic. I sort of think infantry heavy lists might be one of the better Necron lists in this edition to be honest; my other bet is on Tomb Blade heavy armies just due to the sheer effectiveness of gauss blasters at half range; a unit of 6 puts 24 shots out at 12" for 252 points, which is quite amazing.

Yeah, I'm 100% going to try time's arrow. It seems like it could be brutal; one roll could just remove a commissar or even an Inquisitor if you get lucky. That's a serious asset. I think I slightly prefer the Nightbringer too; while redeploying units seems very good, the ability to do D6 shots hitting on 2+, wounding on 2+ at AP-4 and doing D3 damage each seems amazing. It's like a super good pocket battlecannon which is weak to vehicles.

Also, just so I'm clear, for multiple wound shots you have to allocate wounds one at a time, then save rolls, then roll for damage, then allocating the next wound, rolling, etc right? I want to make sure I'm going to play it correctly going into 8th.

So Frontline Gaming has a discussion around Necrons (well, all the indices, but Necrons came up) and they confirmed that yes, tesla will go off on a 5+ wwith My Will Be Done. That makes every shot basically worth 1.5 hits - 10 Immortals with Tesla expect to fire 20 shots and hit 30 times. That's absolutely crazy!

Anyway, here's my current thinking:

2000 point Battalion:
HQ
Anrakyr the Traveller - 167
Illuminor Szeras - 143

Troops
10 Immortals, Tesla - 190
10 Immortals, Gauss - 190
20 Warriors - 240

Elites
C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230
9 Deathmarks - 180

Fast Attack
5 Tomb Blades, Gauss - 210

Heavy Support
2 Heavy Destroyers - 150
2 Heavy Destroyers - 150
2 Heavy Destroyers - 150

I'm not super happy with this list yet. However, it is quite interesting I think - the heavy destroyers sit back and pound the enemy; if they aren't focused down, they can pop back up again too. I wonder if it's better to run 2 units of 3 or 3 units of 2 like this but my fear was that people will kill them once they target them, so overkilling a small unit might help keep the big guns alive. Tomb Blades are very fast, extremely deadly units - these 5 alone look fairly benign, but put out 20 S5 AP-2 shots at close range, plus move 14" a turn and reanimate if they aren't focused down. Deathmarks sound really dumb to be honest, but I'm banking on them against AM; I've got to imagine Straken in a blob of conscripts is going to be fairly popular, as will Harlequins and SM. They output a respectable amount of wounds VS characters, are quite durable and can drop onto objectives if needed. I'm not in love with them in all honesty, but I feel like htey pug a big gap. The Nightbringer I'm just interested to use at all.

That gives me:
8 T7 4+ wounds
24 T5 3+ wounds
10 T5 4+ wounds
33 T4 3+ wounds
20 T4 4+ wounds
...which in all honesty isn't that much. However, there's quite a lot of good quality firepower - 20 rapid fire S5 AP-2 shots, 20 S5 tesla shots, 20 S4 AP-1 shots, 6 S9 AP-4, a one shot S10 AP-5 shot, a S8 AP-4 shot, D6 AP-4 shots wounding on 2+ and 9 rapid fire sniper rifles. I don't really know how it'll fare - I suspect not that well, because it's not got any assault elements. We'll see.

78zrider wrote:
IMO I feel every army should prob start with this

Cryptek
Cryptek
20 warriors
20 warriors
10 immortals
Ghost ark
Ghost ark

That just seems like such a great core for the force . From what I have been reading tho is a lot of people seem to not like wraiths and scarabs.

doomsday ark is good but I think heavy destroyers are better might be preference tho

I disagree with bits of this. MWBD is such a strong buff that I think an Overlord is a near necessity; because it can buff any unit, a set of 3 heavy destroyers essentially becomes BS10 when buffed, and that makes their shooting go from averaging ~5.4 wounds to a tanks to ~6.8. That's a huge deal when we're so limited in AT! I also think the Immortal/Warrior choice will boil down to whether you need to deal with MEQ or hordes - Warriors are substantially better against Boyz, Hormagaunts, Genestealers, etc, but Immortals are way better VS MEQ. Likewise, I can see one Ghost Ark and Cryptek being a solid investment, but do you really need 2? That's a huge points investment for units which don't shoot particularly well, don't help with the anti-tank weakness and are pretty slow.

Actually, I think with the new deployment options, that's one of our biggest weaknesses. I've sort of come to accept that most lists will need 6 Heavy Destroyers (or equivalent), but actually getting into range of the opponent to shoot them at all is a big issue. We're at real risk of being shot to death before we get to do anything.

Xyxel wrote:What would you get vs. Ork boyz horde at 1000 point battle?
Anihillation Barges Look good (?) because they are fast 12"Fly and have a lot of tesla shooting.
Tesla Immortals, 3 canpotec scarabs for blocking Ork blobs. What else?

You're going to need more than 3 scarab bases if you want them to screen you, you can take 100 boyz in 1k pretty comfortably. I think your best bet is a bunch of warriors and Orikan to get the 5++ and reanimation in combat. Also, anything you can do to disrupt their charge will be a great help.

I'm now thinking my last list was a bit too "toy heavy", i.e. tried to do too much. Most of the lists which look strong in 8th have been what I would traditionally call a spam list - in reality, it's just threat redundancy to mitigate damage.

Here's a different take:

Anrakyr the Traveller - 167
Illuminor Szeras - 143

10 Immortals, Tesla - 190
15 Warriors - 180
15 Warriors - 180
10 Warriors - 120

2 Destroyers, 1 Heavy - 201
2 Destroyers, 1 Heavy - 201
4 Tomb Blades, Gauss - 168

3 Heavy Destroyers - 225
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Very spammy, quite uninteresting, but a lot of very tough models on the board. I split 10 warriors off the others to run as a screen against heavy assault armies. This list should do pretty well against Guard and Marine armies, just due to the sheer firepower and mobility.

Overlord, Sword - 104
Orikan - 143

20 Warriors - 240
19 Warriors - 228
10 Immortals, Tesla - 190

Triarch Stalker, THGC - 181

3 Canoptek Scarabs - 39
3 Canoptek Scarabs - 39

3 Heavy Destroyers - 225
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225
Monolith - 381

This one feels very 3e to me. I don't think it's all that good, but hey, I got a monolith in it! I think it'd likely be better off with one unit less of Heavy Destroyers and more things like Tomb Blades, but it's a start.

Mostly, I'm worried about making it to the enemy in one piece, and surviving first turn charges. There's not many lists I can build which do both, but I'm gonna keep trying.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Eyjio: The lists look not very promising. I'm sure successful Necron lists will look differently.
The phalanx is too vulnerable to play. There are several fast moving units out there which will hit a phalanx very hard.

I agree, but realistically, what can be done? I don't rate our transports at all, and the troop slots need to be filled. I guess I could just min 3x5 Immortals? I think overall we got hit a bit too hard going into 8e.

No, CCBs don't get the phase shifter.

I'm actually wondering about the Tomb Stalker rules. I know we won't find them out for around a month, but I think it could patch a hole - mobility. See, where deep striking in flayed ones is dangerous to enemy back lines (and I think people here are severely underestimating them in that regard - you can silence a guard back line if they're not exceptionally careful), they're still really quite slow. Tomb Stalkers should be faster, so if they can still deep strike (and I can't see any reason why they wouldn't be able to - it's kinda their defining thing) they're a serious threat. As long as their rules are even remotely usable, I can see them becoming very good choices.

For once, because they're playtested by the same group, the FW stuff might be pretty good. That said, if they don't make the Pylon about as good as the shadowsword at killing vehicles I'm going to be very annoyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Honestly, the current CCB really does seem like the worst of both worlds.

- It contains a character, but doesn't actually benefit from the rules for such.
- It's an Overlord, but lacks an invulnerable save and can't be upgraded to have one.
- It's fast, but is unable to buff anything other than our footslogging infantry.
- It's supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however it has no more wounds than an Annihilation Barge (which uses an identical chassis).
- It is supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however, it has the same number of attacks as the Annihilation Barge (if that can attack without an overlord, why can the CCB chassis not do the same?).
- It seems to exist only to expose the Overlord on it to enemy fire, whilst ensuring that he goes down with his craft.


It still really bugs me that the Overlord can't get out if/when the barge is destroyed.

I think part of our issue is that Quantum Shielding really doesn't help much and our vehicles are still very fragile. I would trade the Annihilation Barge for the Razorback in a heartbeat.

Morris782 wrote:
Quantum shielding seems broken. I probably ignored 20+ wounds from that alone. Its fun to watch the enemy hope for a 2 or 3 on a D6 damage roll.

Couple unresolved issues we had:
Can units coming from a monolith move? In other words do they follow transport rules for disembark or rules for coming in off the board?
Can anyone attack the monolith? You have to be within 1" to attack something, but monolith is measured from the hull not the base. I haven't based my monolith yet but I think it will put him more than 1" off the table, does that mean he can't be assaulted by ground units?
Flying units can put themselves in the 2nd floor of ruins (I think...) but certain units / vehicles can not anymore. Does this mean my Doomsday ark can fly on floor 2 and be immune to assault from those units? We had an issue with Deathwatch bikers sitting on the first floor getting blasted. Felt like cheating but seemed legal.

Interesting, I'm yet to see QS do much at all. Seems very list dependent - lots of autocannons/assault cannons/plasma seems to melt them, and I haven't seen that many lascannons yet.

1) Units from a Monolith cannot move after they arrive as per the reserve unit rules on the movement phase page.
2) Not sure I understand? The hull means the entire thing - it's quite easy to get within 1" of a Monolith. You can't model for advantage to raise it higher than that - you count it as the height it should be if modeled normally.
3) Yes, that's exactly how flying units work. Yes, it's a bit cheesy.

It was a bad list for sure, but even still. Okay, save ~300 points on characters, take 4 more heavy destroyers... does that even change the outcome? The majority of units will still be dead turn 2, but instead of having characters left, you get 4 lascannons which die in the next turn. This is pretty much why I complained when the indices first came out - if someone takes a bunch of tanks, we just don't have the tools to deal with it. As ridiculous as it sounds, mass lasguns are better against tanks point for point than Necron Warriors. Now sure, you won't take that many lasguns in reality, but that's because you get actual special weapons and vehicles to help out.

I don't think we can write any list which beats Reece's one in that battle. I guess we're just stuck waiting for the codex.

I dunno, Necrons seem quite internally balanced against themselves, the real issue is that we just don't have the power to do anything. I can understand why - it would be obnoxious to face an army which was both very durable and very good at shooting - but I think the mark was missed by quite a margin. Even something like "Gauss weapons do 1 additional damage against units with the vehicle keyword" would help immeasurably. If we can't have melta or plasma and our lascannon equivalent is 75 points minimum, then warriors and Immortals have to be much, much better against big units. Can you imagine facing a nid monster mash? That's got to be close to a 95% loss match up at least. Meanwhile, guard are bringing 20+ plasma guns to every game, DE can melt anything with a dozen dark lances, etc.

It takes 432 Gauss Flayer shots, or 162 Gauss Blaster shots to kill one knight. Even in rapid fire, that's 2539 points of Warriors or 1539 points of Immortals, all of which have to get within 12", not die and then all target the single model. Of course, you could always take heavy destroyers - you only need 20 of those, a snip at 1500 points. Meanwhile, if they ever hit combat you basically just lose. It's not even like Knights are the toughest units in the game to kill. Meanwhile, Knights with Gatling+BC kill ~8.2 warriors a turn (plus another 1.5 expected from morale) or ~6.5 Immortals per turn with distance shooting (~9.7 warriors, +3.2 from morale or 7.6 immortals, +1.1 from morale if you include the heavy flamer); in combat it kills another ~5.6 warriors or 4.4 Immortals, which auto wipes maxed units. Considering all the fluff is about how deadly Necron guns are against tanks, it's absurd that we're beaten by lasgun fire and can't ever realistically kill anything with T6+ W6+.

It seems pretty clear that we weren't tested particularly thoroughly. Hope the codex is better; in the meantime I'm just going to play my nids instead as they're substantially better in every way.

 skoffs wrote:
So if I understand this correctly,
For 31 points more than two Heavy D's, HGC Stalkers get the same movement, the exact same shooting, better CC cababilites, all on a more survivable platform,
AND they provide a slight buff to the rest of your army's shooting?
...
Remind me again why we're supposed to be taking Heavies?

A list with 2 Stalkers and 2-3 Doomsday Arks is looking fairly appealing right now...

Stalkers lose 1 BS from moving and firing. They're also less accurate and degrade over time. They find it much harder to take cover, whereas Heavy Destroyers, as infantry, can go into almost anything and get a 2+. Heavy Destroyers have fly if they get locked in combat; stalkers have to either fight or forfeit shooting. Heavy Destroyers can sit on top of ruins, where Stalkers can't really do anything with ruins at all. You pay more for a unit which, in essence, does less.

I like stalkers, but there's very good reasons to pick one over the other. Stalkers are quite good though.

I'm also not entirely sure why people are rating the Doomsday Ark so highly. If you move at all, the main gun becomes hilariously ineffective against vehicles. The only thing a stationary Doomsday Ark is better at killing than Heavy Destroyers or Stalkers is hordes, which we don't really struggle with. I guess there's an argument there for the durability, but then you've also got to consider that assault armies with deep strike capabilities (most of them) or highly mobile armies will render your main anti-tank silent on the first or second turn. The Ark seems to me to exist in a world where it's great if you have a very open board against a slow assault army, and worse than the other options otherwise. Bear in mind that against the vast majority of tanks, D3 S10 AP-5 shots is the same as 2 S9 AP-4 shots on average, so you're paying 53 points to become more durable and get some extra gauss flayers. I'll try them out to test my theory, but they just seem worse than the other options. I would rather take a Heat Ray/THGC Stalker for fewer points.

 vipoid wrote:
By the way, how are you guys playing RPs?

Are you saying that multi-wound models like Destroyers and Praetorians come back with full wounds or with just 1 wound?

(I know that there's a thread about this in YMDC, but last I checked it's up to 9 pages and has still gone absolutely bloody nowhere.)

They come back with full wounds, because it just says to return the models. People arguing otherwise are just inventing rules because they think it's too good - there's no basis for any other way to play it in the actual rules.

The Necrons FW stuff seems REALLY good. Pylons look incredibly good. It's not entirely clear whether they're supposed to pay for the teleportation matrix, but assuming they are then for 485 points you get a serious weapon. To put its firepower into perspective, against a T8 tank, it expects to deal (7/2)(2/3)(5/6)(8)=~15.6 damage per turn and needs to lose 17+ wounds to lose effectiveness - 16 wounds dealt heals with living metal. Even if the enemy has a 5++, that cripples almost anything in one turn. Better still, it basically ignores combat - whilst you don't want to get hit by a strong unit, combat doesn't stop you firing. Against aircraft it just melts them - ~19.4 damage per turn. It also gives you a cryptekesque save bubble (only to models though, not units), and at T8 W30 3+/5++, it's one of the most durable things in the game for its cost. I'm super excited, it's my favourite super heavy in the game and now it's finally got good rules!

I'm not super impressed by sentry pylons, heavy destroyers just seem a bit better. However, the heat ray one teleporting near an enemy tank might be a nasty trick to pull off once or twice. Otherwise, Death Rays are a short range single shot thing (why so bad?) and the gauss ones have a penalty to fire at the ground. Meh.

Tomb stalkers and tomb sentinels are quite interesting. Sort of discount trygons really - they pop up and threaten to wreck the backfield. I really like the sentinel's gun, but realistically you're probably not getting it into the 12" range of the super juicy targets as they'll be bubblewrapped. Still, they seem good for their cost for sure, especially as the Stalker is an elite. Drop them in and they need to be killed outright, as their profiles don't degrade. Take 3 sentinels for 525 points, and all of a sudden your anti tank can drop anywhere and is still good in combat. Brutal.

Acanthrites are short range heavy destroyers with less accurate shooting, a worse gun and no RP for 2/3rds the cost. Seems okay to me. The gun is particularly brutal up close and they're now much better in combat. I dunno how I feel about them - I certainly prefer them to Destroyers, but would I take them and not Heavy Destroyers? Probably not, which leaves them in an odd place.

Night shrouds seem a bit meh with one trick - the bombs are great. You can deal up to 12 mortal wounds, or 3 to a vehicle once per game. It's not incredible, but super mobile mortal wounds are a good trick. Otherwise, it's a tough Night Scythe for a high cost. I feel the bombs will be pretty hard to use in reality, as you risk flying off the table, but it's something. Overall, eh, I'll pass.

Tesseract arks got a lot better. They're surprisingly few wounds, and it's a shame they degrade, but oh man. For 246 points, you get 6 S6 tesla shots (or 260 for 2 gauss cannons, but then you're penalised for moving) and the big gun. The gun is now either a wounding on 2+ AP-2 flamer, a 24" D6 S5 AP-4 dam3 assault gun or a 48" D6 S8 AP-3 damD6 heavy gun. That last one in particular is great considering it used to be 3 S7 ap2 templates - whilst not quite a bunch of lascannons, it's a pretty good impression. It's also got trollish saves - 3+/5++ and QS means that even an overcharged plasma gun, usually a severe threat, does ~0.5 damage per shot. 12 of them would get about 6 wounds but also kill 2 bearers on average too. Lascannons expect to do ~0.61 damage per shot, autocannons ~0.28. It's crazy. Oh, and it's hard to charge (usually 3d6 pick lowest 2), plus can fly away anyway. I love it. Might not be great, but it certainly looks funny.

Tomb citadels are a thing I'll probably never use to be honest. Might be fun for narrative, seems to point heavy for a normal matched game, with not enough return on investment.

Both special characters seem overcosted. Kutlakh now has essentially a force sword, advance+charge seems fine but not amazing, and the other stuff seems cool. Worth 200 points? Nah, I'd rather take a tomb sentinel for that. Very tough though with a 2+/4++. I dunno, maybe I'll try him instead of a regular overlord but I doubt it's going to be worth it usually - just Imotekh mk2. Toholk is a cryptek who gives a vehicle a phylactery and rerolls initiative, with different shooting and melee which I think usually work out to be worse than a staff of light, and 61 points more. The initiative thing is great, no doubt, and the vehicle buff is surprisingly relevant (imagine a tesseract ark regaining 3 wounds... or a pylon). Worth the extra cost? Meh, probably not. Szeras fights better, shoots better and I prefer the unit buff to the vehicle+5++ buffs. Worth a try but I'm not expecting miracles.

Overall, I'm extremely pleased. This really patches up the AT capabilities. Even if all you do is take a Pylon, you're now expecting to kill a tank per turn and it's very hard to shut down. That's a pretty major improvement. The tesseract ark puts out withering amounts of fire, like a tougher, longer ranged ground doom scythe. Acanthrites can rush down vehicles even as small units. Stalkers can pop in and charge from behind. Overall, it's a dream update.

Godeskian wrote:

The Gauss Pylon has a different gun that is muuuuuch bigger.

Well, I do like big guns, I cannot lie

Guass pylon has a godlike supakannonfrom he'll with the macro rule it will 1 shot a knight on average.

I can dig that. Was there a rules leak for it yet as the imgur page up thread only included the sentry gun

Requizen linked it in a spoilered post just above. The thing is absolutely crazy good for 475/485 (unclear) points. It's also pretty cool how they gave it a "pistol" for combat whilst allowing it to be automatically hit and not fight back. The big gun averages 8 damage per wound, or 16 against titanic units and has to die to stop firing. Not only does the big gun deal more damage on average than when it was Str D, it fires more shots on average now too.

But yeah, as Actinium said, it's pretty funny that 6+D3 damage means it can't hurt Necron vehicles with quantum shielding at all with its main gun. I guess if they get within 18", it can fire it's S6 profile.

Irrumare wrote:
I simulated it over a few million trials, didn't use average math.

Your 'average math' doesn't add up, either.

3.5 (attacks) * (4/6) to hit * (5/6) to wound * (4/6) invuln * 8 avg dmg = 10.4.

You're missing that as a Macro gun that it does double damage per shot, so average 16 damage. That puts it at ~20.7 wounds per volley.

Mutter wrote:
Is there a model for the Gauss Pylon yet?

There's been a model for the Pylon since I began playing in 3e...

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Necron-Pylon

Well, is warriors are an A (I disagree myself, I think they should be a B personally) then Immortals are an A+ for sure. One of the best troop unita in the game, having exceptionally good guns and durability. The only downside is the lack of special weapons and the slight weakness (as every MEQ has) to low AP guns.

Likewise, Heavy Destroyers should probably be an A; you basically need at least 3 of them if you're not running FW, and a super fast better-than-lascannon is pretty nice.

Tesseract Vault should be a D, because it's just bad, and Deathmarks should probably be a B-: useful, but pricey for a unit unlikely to actually complete its job.

I disagree with the ratings for Szeras and Orikan. Szeras is a very potent unit buff. Losing the 5++ is a shame, but you're getting an almost-lascannon on a durable body which can hide in a blob. The unit buffs are nearly always good too - even S5 on a warrior buff is extremely effective, especially if the units has Anrakyr nearby; if you roll T5 or BS 2+, you're laughing. Conversely, I've often not found the 5++ to be worth the points - all the small arms fire is going into the unit regardless, and you usually get your normal save against that; it's only really beneficial against AP-2 or better, which usually targets our vehicles instead. Considering he patches up a hole in the army with his weapon, plus hands out RP buffs and potentially multiple unit buffs, I think he deserves a B rating.

The invuln bit is also why I don't rank Orikan so highly. For a significant point increase, you gain the invuln in combat - which you shouldn't be in anyway. Then, the invuln only does anything in combat against weapons of at least AP-2. In my eyes, you're paying extra points to buff units in a situation they don't want to find themselves in, and for some good durability (plus a really random ability I guess). He's okay as a Cryptek, but I'd struggle to rank him above Szeras; I'd probably put him on the same level, a B. I certainly don't think he's close to an autotake unless you're running scythe Lychguard.

 skoffs wrote:
I'll cede you the Szeras point, but I disagree on Orikan. If you're taking him you're sticking him with expensive infantry that will likely be seeing a lot of dangerous AP damage (Lychguard, Destroyers, etc), at which point he's invaluable. Anyone who sticks with Warriors doesn't know what they're doing.

Right, but you're not taking Lychguard in every list, and he's a poor fit with Destroyers because he gives them nothing a Cryptek wouldn't plus has terrible movement comparatively. That makes him situationally excellent, but miles away from an auto-take, and often just ends up being quite a lot more points for the same function as a Cryptek. I really think that all the Crypteks are on about the same level, and that level is not on par with other top tier things like Immortals, Pylons, DDArk, etc. I've not played with Toholk, so he may be a little better, but he's also about 5 warriors more expensive than a normal Cryptek so probably also the same. I dunno, the only buff which has consistently made a difference in all my games has been the Overlord MWBD; nothing else has come close other than Szeras, and that's a bit too random to be relied on.