Switch Theme:

Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in de
Prophetic Blood Angel Librarian






Germany

Basically, necrons have 5 core units (~1/10). SM are all core, except characters, vehicles that arent dreadnoughts and centurions (~8/10). Necrons do have other buffing characters for their other units. But this requires an additional model, like a skorpekh lord for skorpekh destroyers. When the destroyers die the lord has no buffing unit anymore. A SM captain can buff everything that has core, greater flexibility. When its buffed unit dies he can simply move on to buff another core unit.
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/10/15 10:58:19


What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




What units are we still waiting on (after Saturday’s preorders) besides flayed ones?
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

changemod wrote:
What units are we still waiting on (after Saturday’s preorders) besides flayed ones?


Flayed ones and the two new Cryptek variations.

After that we should have everything from this update that GW has shown released. If there is any more GW hasn't shown it and there's no other new units in the book - and none of the other kit options are removed from sale on the GW webstore (eg finecast being updated to plastic).

   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

BrianDavion wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.


I can understand most vehicles not being Core, but fluffwise it seems odd that Monoliths aren't the exception.

I don't know if I'm thinking of the old fluff, but weren't almost all Necron invasions spearheaded by the arrival of Monoliths?

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 vipoid wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.


I can understand most vehicles not being Core, but fluffwise it seems odd that Monoliths aren't the exception.

I don't know if I'm thinking of the old fluff, but weren't almost all Necron invasions spearheaded by the arrival of Monoliths?


By that logic shouldn't a space marine Thunderhawk be core?

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Well the old fluff was partly for the old army which only had monoliths, warriors, immortals, destroyers and lords. The Monolith was also one of the biggest models of its time and a big "showpiece" so yeah they were fairly common back then.

But then Necrons didn't have arks and airships and more infantry and other vehicles. So like a lot of armies what was once a common "every army pretty much has one or wants one" option has now become more optional. Which is a good thing because the monolith now is more powerful and expensive to take in points and command points.

So you don't want that as an "auto include" you want it as an option you can take and build around, but which you can leave out without being weakened.

   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

BrianDavion wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.


Aren't dreadnoughts vehicles? Aren't they core?

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut





The CORE argument makes me laugh to be honest, especially all the SM apologists on here saying it's because it's fluffy blah blah blah. Like yeah, sure. Because GW write the fluff as well as the rules lol. They can make anything fluffy by simply rewriting it.

You know, like how they retcon Necrons. Every. Single. Edition.

 Venerable Ironclad wrote:
Having more Core units doesn't automatically make your army better

I can say with certaintly that if Necrons had more core units, they would be better. So......

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/15 12:44:46


 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

BrianDavion wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.


I can understand most vehicles not being Core, but fluffwise it seems odd that Monoliths aren't the exception.

I don't know if I'm thinking of the old fluff, but weren't almost all Necron invasions spearheaded by the arrival of Monoliths?


By that logic shouldn't a space marine Thunderhawk be core?


I have absolutely no idea. I don't know the fluff for Thunderhawks.

I'll say again, though, that 'Core' just seems to be a terribly non-descriptive keyword.

And that most of the supposed problems could have been expunged by simply removing auras from the game.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Wicked Canoptek Wraith




UK

The issue is not lack of Core in the Necron book, it's that a handful of abilities and stratagems are locked behind a Core requirement when they really shouldn't be.

It doesn't make any narrative or gameplay sense that the +1 S stratagem is Core only since there's only one dedicated melee Core unit, so they may as well have just restricted it to Lychguard anyway. Even the fluff behind the strat should not preclude other units from making use of it either.

Rites of Reanimation having no actual way to benefit Canoptek units inherently, despite the control of Canoptek constructs being entirely the realm of Crypteks and Technomancer's specializing in resurrection, also makes no narrative sense. If it's a gameplay concern then there could easily be an exclusion for Monster keyword units to stop free Spyder rezzes every turn and the Cryptekm Arkana would enable you to do it once per game still.

Destroyers not listening to MWBD makes perfect sense because they wouldn't listen to what the Overlord has to say, but a Technomancer would have no difficulties or obstacles in reconstructing one. Yet currently you have to pay 20 pts for the opportunity to do it once per game, whereas Marines are paying 15 pts to let them do it every single turn on more expensive models.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

 Bosskelot wrote:
The issue is not lack of Core in the Necron book, it's that a handful of abilities and stratagems are locked behind a Core requirement when they really shouldn't be.

It doesn't make any narrative or gameplay sense that the +1 S stratagem is Core only since there's only one dedicated melee Core unit, so they may as well have just restricted it to Lychguard anyway. Even the fluff behind the strat should not preclude other units from making use of it either.

Rites of Reanimation having no actual way to benefit Canoptek units inherently, despite the control of Canoptek constructs being entirely the realm of Crypteks and Technomancer's specializing in resurrection, also makes no narrative sense. If it's a gameplay concern then there could easily be an exclusion for Monster keyword units to stop free Spyder rezzes every turn and the Cryptekm Arkana would enable you to do it once per game still.

Destroyers not listening to MWBD makes perfect sense because they wouldn't listen to what the Overlord has to say, but a Technomancer would have no difficulties or obstacles in reconstructing one. Yet currently you have to pay 20 pts for the opportunity to do it once per game, whereas Marines are paying 15 pts to let them do it every single turn on more expensive models.


Agreed, I think this is the problem, and here we get to the confluence of inane game mechanics:
1) Targeting stratagems to a specific keyword is fine in theory if the stratagems made sense. Making things stratagems that should really be pieces of gear or unit special rules (and then putting targeting restrictions on it because fluff I guess) is less sensible.

2) The Core mechanic is so ill-defined that I'm not sure the Designers themselves know what it means. It's entirely possible that a designer might say "Well, in my opinion, Tomb Spyders and other canoptek units are Core, since the tomb world cannot function without them and almost every necron force brings loads" so they make a stratagem to target CORE on the assumption that includes Canoptek units. One other designer might say "Well, canoptek units aren't real necrons and aren't beholden to the Overlord through fealty, but rather the Tomb World through algorithm. Therefore, I don't think they're core!" and then exclude the Core keyword from their datasheet.

Which one is most correct?
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

 Overread wrote:
changemod wrote:
What units are we still waiting on (after Saturday’s preorders) besides flayed ones?


Flayed ones and the two new Cryptek variations.

After that we should have everything from this update that GW has shown released. If there is any more GW hasn't shown it and there's no other new units in the book - and none of the other kit options are removed from sale on the GW webstore (eg finecast being updated to plastic).

Necrons still have the new Overlord, Royal Warden, Skorpekh Lord, Psychomancer, Chronomancer, Plasmancer, Canoptek Reanimator and the Cryptothralls all potentially awaiting release (a few models from Indomitus may not see a separate release for a while)

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in au
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker






Wait... Flayed Ones can’t make use of the +1S Strat? Lol that seems really dumb.
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Wait... Flayed Ones can’t make use of the +1S Strat? Lol that seems really dumb.


Perhaps, but it's exactly the sort of nonsense that happens when GW insists on vomiting pointless keywords all over their game.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in ca
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard






Vancouver, BC

So, what do you guys think of normal lords with a veil taking 20 Gauss Reaper Warriors across the map? The overlord and the lord can buff them to make them 2+ BS rerolling, and with a lord there they can get command protocols. I was orginally thinking of sending my Skorpekh lord forward but I plan on playing Nephrekh so I don’t think I’ll have any issues getting him forward.

 warboss wrote:
Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
 
   
Made in ie
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





 vipoid wrote:
 Tiberius501 wrote:
Wait... Flayed Ones can’t make use of the +1S Strat? Lol that seems really dumb.


Perhaps, but it's exactly the sort of nonsense that happens when GW insists on vomiting pointless keywords all over their game.


It's like GW saw other games doing keywords and decided to shove them in with no real idea of how to implement them.



https://mobile.twitter.com/SewerWatch 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

 Sim-Life wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 Tiberius501 wrote:
Wait... Flayed Ones can’t make use of the +1S Strat? Lol that seems really dumb.


Perhaps, but it's exactly the sort of nonsense that happens when GW insists on vomiting pointless keywords all over their game.


It's like GW saw other games doing keywords and decided to shove them in with no real idea of how to implement them.


Exactly.

I think a big part of the problem is that GW keeps changing design philosophies. So rather than having a single, small group of commonly-used keywords, we instead have an ever-expanding mess of niche ones.

First it was the broad allegiances that were important (Imperium, Chaos, Eldar etc.). Plus Infantry, Vehicle, Monster, and all the other things that should have just been unit-types.

Then they narrowed it down and made individual armies important (Space Marines, Sisters of Battle, IG etc.)

Then it was narrowed even more and the most vital thing was what subfaction a given unit was <Chapter>. Except in the case of Dark Eldar, which cared not only about a given unit's subfaction but also about its sub-subfaction. Because that is totally necessary for a codex with fewer total entries than the Marine codex has HQs. Incidentally, the DE codex also has the 'Incubi' keyword. A Keyword that applies to all of 2 units.

Now we seem to be moving towards each army having keywords based on subfactions of units, except that these are a different sort of subfaction to the <chapter>-type ones (do keep up, old boy).

But at the same time, we're also basing things around the new and entirely arbitrary keyword 'Core'. Except that, even though there are only 2 codices out at the moment, the question of what 'Core' is supposed to mean and why it is necessary seem entirely up in the air.

Oh, and we've also got keywords like 'Noble' and 'Phaeron', because that's something else we really needed, apparently.

It just seems that the game is accumulating more and more redundant keywords (either new ones that serve no purpose or old ones that have been effectively replaced), because GW still haven't made up their minds about how they want to use them.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut





I really do like the idea behind keywords, they are just executed badly. Which is classic GW. Add a new mechanic to bestow special rules and slowly but surely fiddle with it until it's a mutated husk of what it should have been
   
Made in gb
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Is it a bird?

Is it a plane?

Faster than a speeding tortoise!

Able to leap minor obstacles in maybe a single bound!

It’s.....


CAPTAAAAAAAAAAAAIN OBVIOOOOOOOUS!

So, in terms of list building, I’m guessing we’ll tend to see Canoptek, Core, or Destroyer builds?

It’s not a knock against the Codex. That there’s no “clearly best” build is a good thing - even if solid builds still number fairly low?

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives?Why not join us?

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Having no "clear best" is a good state for a codex with armies as diverse in models as 40K has. Sure power-game wise chances are only a few will be viable, but having several viable builds means there's going to be a good healthy bulk of middleweight lists that will have a variety of units and strategies.

That's basically the near ideal you want for a codex/battletome. Nothing that is an auto-include; nothing that's an auto-win or superpower compared to everything else.

It lets you have variety, choice and a degree of versatility.




   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought






 vipoid wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Generally speaking, if the necron unit in question is :

Not a HQ
Not an aberration (Destroyer or flayed one)
Not a dynastic agent
Not a canoptek
Not a vehicle

Then its core. So basically "ordinary" necrons.

Vehicles not being core is an odd one because they're being piloted by ordinary Necrons, which are supposed to be core.

Lorewise its fine, but gameplay wise its a little clunky because Necron buffs are more limited compared to say, marines, and that's a huge weakness.
Rites of Reanimation may seem good, until you remember that it doesn't work on the true damage dealers of a necron force, destroyer units.


vehicles not being core is by design, space marine vehicles aren't core eaither.


I can understand most vehicles not being Core, but fluffwise it seems odd that Monoliths aren't the exception.

I don't know if I'm thinking of the old fluff, but weren't almost all Necron invasions spearheaded by the arrival of Monoliths?
That was the idea, yeah. Monoliths descend from the sky and just start teleporting armies onto the ground.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:

By that logic shouldn't a space marine Thunderhawk be core?
Do the Thunderhawks follow the front-line commander into battle?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/15 19:58:22


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin




Roswell, GA

 p5freak wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Matt Swain wrote:
Now that the new monolity is apparently going to be 170USD and the silent king is going to be 150USD do you think many of the new monolith models will be selling?

I just see the silent king as a better buy if i had to pick one.


the only way the Monolith will sell is if they tweek detachments to enchourage people to be able to take a LOW. put a single LOW slot in a battalion and it'll be a bit tempting to take that and then a supreme command detachment with the SK


Even then i will not buy the monolith, because it has no FLY, and its nearly impossible to move it around the battlefield with its huge 130, or 160mm base. Cant end its movement on top of a fuel pipe, or barricade, because of unstable position. Has to subtract 2" from its movement when it moves across craters, fuel pipes, barricades, because of difficult ground. Cant move over/through a ruin.


What does Titanic grant it?
   
Made in de
Prophetic Blood Angel Librarian






Germany

 Vash108 wrote:
 p5freak wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Matt Swain wrote:
Now that the new monolity is apparently going to be 170USD and the silent king is going to be 150USD do you think many of the new monolith models will be selling?

I just see the silent king as a better buy if i had to pick one.


the only way the Monolith will sell is if they tweek detachments to enchourage people to be able to take a LOW. put a single LOW slot in a battalion and it'll be a bit tempting to take that and then a supreme command detachment with the SK


Even then i will not buy the monolith, because it has no FLY, and its nearly impossible to move it around the battlefield with its huge 130, or 160mm base. Cant end its movement on top of a fuel pipe, or barricade, because of unstable position. Has to subtract 2" from its movement when it moves across craters, fuel pipes, barricades, because of difficult ground. Cant move over/through a ruin.


What does Titanic grant it?


It grants you the cost of CP when you want to use it, and it gives away 10 VP, when your opponent picks titan slayer as secondary.
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




Not to mention specific weapons that do bonus damage vs. titanic
   
Made in us
Unhealthy Competition With Other Legions




Australia

Ophydians come with 6 heads in the box - not much in the way of customisation but better than nothing!

Sons of Horus 29th Company
Emperor's Children
Legio Magna + House Morbidia 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




BrianDavion wrote:
 Matt Swain wrote:
Now that the new monolity is apparently going to be 170USD and the silent king is going to be 150USD do you think many of the new monolith models will be selling?

I just see the silent king as a better buy if i had to pick one.


the only way the Monolith will sell is if they tweek detachments to enchourage people to be able to take a LOW. put a single LOW slot in a battalion and it'll be a bit tempting to take that and then a supreme command detachment with the SK


Lol
The reason 40k rules are always sub par, and everything thing keeps getting more expensive is because price doesn't matter at all to the fan boys.

GW make a kit, and lots of people buy it. Rules can be crap. Plastic can be ten times the price of gold. They still buy them.

If crap units never sold the GW would put more effort into internal balance. If sales fell as prices went up, they wouldn't go up.

To be fair to GW, they have put more effort into 9th so far... But it looked that way at the beginning of 8th...
   
Made in de
Ladies Love the Vibro-Cannon Operator






Hamburg

What's the opinion about Ophydian Destroyers?
Nice models, nice rules (tunneling horrors, melee rules), but no inv. save.
They compete in the FA slot with Wraiths, Spyders and whatnot.

Former moderator 40kOnline

Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!

Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."

Armies: Eldar, Necrons, Blood Angels, Grey Knights; World Eaters (30k); Bloodbound; Cryx, Circle, Cyriss 
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought






$170 for the new Monolith!? Gosh I'm extra glad I picked up two of the old ones off ebay now. Geez.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: