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.

I like what others have said: Warriors need to be commited to make then work. If you want warriors, you should probably be playing big blobs of them for a silver tide. But a 20 man teleported unit is fine in other armies.


Inmortals are more flexible as 10 man squads in other kind of lists.

thanks all... this was really helpful.

i struggle a bit with synergy... i like units to stand alone and not have to rely on X Y and Z to happen for them to be good.

having said that, i have a couple of new questions.

assuming i go warrior heavy...
whats everyone thought on the reanimator and what synergies makes a good warrior blob?

i feel that since the reanimator is so tall it will be easy to pick out and destroy.

lastly, reaper vs flayer?
i'm sure its situational though. in a blob marching down the field is it better to shoot sooner or hit harder later?
maybe a mixed unit?

KurtAngle2 wrote:

Darsath wrote:
Immortals are easily the best choice, and one of the best units in the Codex. Warriors are a trap.

Somebody with a brain finally says this: the difference between Immortals and Warriors is pretty much LARGER than 4 mere points which get you more tankyness (because T5 is better than 1 and half more Warriors back thanks to RP don't kid yourself with that reroll 1s), more ranged output AND more melee output.
Now IF you manage to get 20 Warriors with Reapers in range (Nephrekh deepstrike says hello) you get the damage output of 20 Immortals at a fraction of the price but aside from that I wouldn't even consider putting them on the table the standard way


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Warriors are better overall, having better RP odds as well as access to the gauss reaper which has the same damage output as the Immortals' gauss blaster at 12" or less, making it more or less identical for fighting over the mid-board at a cheaper cost. The Immortals at first glance might look better due to only being 4 points more expensive with an extra attack, a 3+, and T5, but Warriors have more synergies to revive them between their better RP odds as well as things like the Technomancer. They're a good tarpit unit that still has punch in the shooting phase.

"Better RP odds" as in "you just ress 1 more model on average out of a 20 man blob but you get to take 33% more damage off any S4/S5/S8 with an AP not higher than 4 weapon that wouldn't have damaged you in the first place", right?

Better odds because you actually get to roll.　10 wounds with no inv=dead unit. Check rules for　rp. Unit dies, no rp　roll

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
thanks all... this was really helpful.

i struggle a bit with synergy... i like units to stand alone and not have to rely on X Y and Z to happen for them to be good.

having said that, i have a couple of new questions.

assuming i go warrior heavy...
whats everyone thought on the reanimator and what synergies makes a good warrior blob?

i feel that since the reanimator is so tall it will be easy to pick out and destroy.

lastly, reaper vs flayer?
i'm sure its situational though. in a blob marching down the field is it better to shoot sooner or hit harder later?
maybe a mixed unit?

Warriors are not great without any sort of support. But with a 5++ from a Chronomancer and help in melee they are really useful.
I like the reaper better, as the flayer only gets even comparable when it is in RF range. The 10 - 20 shots from non RF flayers I do get from warriors have seldom decided a game for me.

So far it seems the consensus, that the reanimator is bad. For the same price you get 8 warriors, and it does not do much on its own, neither in shooting nor in melee. So I would rather invest 30 points in a res orb somewhere, as that seems to be more flexible and the potential upside is huge.

Buffs in close combat would be either being Novokh, using Anrakyr, the silent king or simply accompany them with something that delivers the punch, while they act as the punching bag

"that the reanimator is bad."

It's only bad because of its cost and defensive profile. The effect is quite powerful.

SecondTime wrote:
"that the reanimator is bad."

It's only bad because of its cost and defensive profile. The effect is quite powerful.

Yeah. Thats the definition of being bad

 Galas wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
"that the reanimator is bad."

It's only bad because of its cost and defensive profile. The effect is quite powerful.

Yeah. Thats the definition of being bad

Even the effect is arguably bad because it really should be an ability you trigger in the command phase that lasts until the start of the next command phase without it having to survive. The fact that it needs to remain alive and keep the unit within 6" of its aura has way to many hoops to go through on top of its inadequate defense and lack of efficient pricing.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Galas wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
"that the reanimator is bad."

It's only bad because of its cost and defensive profile. The effect is quite powerful.

Yeah. Thats the definition of being bad

Even the effect is arguably bad because it really should be an ability you trigger in the command phase that lasts until the start of the next command phase without it having to survive. The fact that it needs to remain alive and keep the unit within 6" of its aura has way to many hoops to go through on top of its inadequate defense and lack of efficient pricing.

This. The way the ability works is a trap. It looks good in theory, but the practical application of it coupled with how fragile it is means those points are better spent elsewhere.

Basically, you were always better off buying that equivalent of Immortals or Warriors.

Well, in the 6th and 7th edition, when I played tourneys with Necrons, my standard list contained 2x10 Warriors and 2x10 Immortals.

Today, I'd take larger blocks of Warriors for shock and awe and small units of Immortals for objective holding.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, in the 6th and 7th edition, when I played tourneys with Necrons, my standard list contained 2x10 Warriors and 2x10 Immortals.

Today, I'd take larger blocks of Warriors for shock and awe and small units of Immortals for objective holding.

Do you arm your Objective holding Immortals with Gauss or Tesla?

I think there's merit in 1-2 Warrior Death Stars. One of my theory lists is 3×10 Immortals and a single 1×20 Warriors with the new weapon.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, in the 6th and 7th edition, when I played tourneys with Necrons, my standard list contained 2x10 Warriors and 2x10 Immortals.

Today, I'd take larger blocks of Warriors for shock and awe and small units of Immortals for objective holding.

Do you arm your Objective holding Immortals with Gauss or Tesla?

They all have tesla and I will keep it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think there's merit in 1-2 Warrior Death Stars. One of my theory lists is 3×10 Immortals and a single 1×20 Warriors with the new weapon.

My new list will contain 2x20 Warriors and at least 2x5 Immortals.