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.

So, in celebration of my 100th loss, I'm starting a thread. Real original, I know.

Anyway, What does everyone think of Destroyers! I personally, don't like them. I never have luck with them, they always die and phase me out, I prefer to take more warriors or Wraiths.

So, Destroyers?

Destroyers end up like this:

Whenever i see destroyers they are taken en-masse to maximise firepower. I suppose only a few of them doesn't quite work.

I take them in units of 5 so it's hard to kill all of them in a shooting phase, I keep them close enuff to another unit of Destroyers so they can fold into them if the whole squad gets wiped, and I keep them close enuff to the Monolith to port them back if I fail ANY of my Will be back rolls.

At this point.. destroyers are an absolute must have.

cumpulsory 1 lord, 2 troops and 2 squads of destroyers.

Destroyers are one of the best units in the codex. Fast, great firepower, fairly tough, and relatively cheap. If you use them, you need to use a lot, and/or give them a support mechanic to keep them on the table, usually in the form of a rez orb equipped destroyer lord. I like to use two groups of 4-5 when I can.

My gaming group house-ruled that you could field them in units of up to ten.

Ow.

Sal4m4nd3r wrote:At this point.. destroyers are an absolute must have.

cumpulsory 1 lord, 2 troops and 2 squads of destroyers.

100% disagree.

My wraith wing and Tomb Spyder wing would like to talk to your destroyer wing. On the table.

I don't always play necrons... but if I did... I use Dos Equis, I mean destroyers. Lots and lots of destroyers!!!

This is based on how much I hate seeing 15 destroyers on the other side of the table.

I feel that Destroyers are the best unit in the codex, unless you're going wraith wing that is. than they dont fit

I too am a fan of the wraith wing...but if Im not running that then destroyers are certainly the next choice...

Kinda funny how the best units in a codex dedicated to robots who are as slow as death have all the power in their fast attack slots...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ed_Bodger wrote:Destroyers end up like this:

Rez orbs are usually pretty good at fixing this problem...

EDIT: and it appears the picture didnt show...meh you guys catch my drift

Dashofpepper wrote:

Sal4m4nd3r wrote:At this point.. destroyers are an absolute must have.

cumpulsory 1 lord, 2 troops and 2 squads of destroyers.

100% disagree.

My wraith wing and Tomb Spyder wing would like to talk to your destroyer wing. On the table.

And I ll counter your disagreement by reiterating that destroyers are great.
Maybe your wraith wing can prove us wrong when you leave your name in the next GT. Maybe...

I really respect what Dash says as he not only has a stunning tourney record but has posted prolifically on at least three other armies here on dakka. I followed his advice when putting together my tau a couple years ago and turned my army into something to be feared. I also learned a lot about running orks successfully from him, so I won't deny that wraiths could make for a great fast attack choice.

With that being said, I think that destroyers also make for a great choice, especially when taken in large multiple squads. They can move, have great range, toughness, and high strength weapons, coupled with the we'll be back rule.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Sal4m4nd3r wrote:At this point.. destroyers are an absolute must have.

cumpulsory 1 lord, 2 troops and 2 squads of destroyers.

100% disagree.

My wraith wing and Tomb Spyder wing would like to talk to your destroyer wing. On the table.

Destroyer wing doesn't have the luxary of hiding behind triple monoliths like Wraith wings so that leaves that argument out in the cold.

I feel that no necron list is complete without destroyers. When you want to do some killing get some destroyers.

Kurgash wrote:Destroyer wing doesn't have the luxary of hiding behind triple monoliths like Wraith wings so that leaves that argument out in the cold.

The hiding part is what makes the wraith wing slow. A Destroyer Wing is all about move and shoot. They are the Ying and Yang of Necron Lists. It would be interesting to see how the would fair against each other.

I would side that the Destroyer wing would eat the Wraith wing once the Monoliths are immobile and there's no place to hide. I'd like to see this battle tho

Wraith Wing vs. Destroyer Wing.

DashOfPepper vs. Fritz40k

The only thing that could be more useless than 9 tomb spyders would be 30 Pariahs but thankfully we are capped at 10.

Wraith wing can work just fine, and while Dash has done great with his, he's not the first nor the only person to make it work. It's a manner of preferance. I feel the destroyers are a bit more "plug and play" meaning that they are easier to use, but the wraiths can be just as effective in the right hands.

The problem with destroyers is that at the end of the day, they have a 3+ save.

That's it. and while they can put out massed shots, they can only do it into three units - before they get shot or assaulted in return. I play Dark Eldar....I'm wounding them on 4+ with splinter cannons or on 2+ with Blasters. Depending on who goes first, I can expect to lose 2-3 venoms on the first turn, but the attrition after that is hugely in my favor.

And as Orks....they can't do a whole lot to my battlewagons, and having them shoot at my deffkoptas or Lootas.....*shugs* They can only spend 2-3 turns out of range before I eat them.

That's the bottom line - there can only be three units of them, and this is a world of mechanized MSU armies.

Ed_Bodger wrote:Destroyers end up like this:

Cept demolisher cannons wouldn't kill them outright like it would warriors. So play it smart and leave destroyers spread out or on multiple levels so you can't target them all with the d-cannon.

*Edit*
Nevermind, I was thinking of the battle cannon (I think?) that is str8.

Necrons suck that's not in debate

Dashofpepper wrote:That's the bottom line - there can only be three units of them, and this is a world of mechanized MSU armies.

and Wraiths can handle this better because of ??

General_Chaos wrote:Necrons suck that's not in debate

Dashofpepper wrote:That's the bottom line - there can only be three units of them, and this is a world of mechanized MSU armies.

and Wraiths can handle this better because of ??

And there can only be 3 units of Wraiths. Normally Dash you make sense but in this debate regarding Necrons I don't think you're making any bit of it. Wraiths are melee, are ok in combat at best case scenario but are no better than other WS4 units. Sure, hit maybe 2 times if lucky, wound and then....armor saves. Cool. Now a ton of attacks come back, look you failed 3 saves and then the Wraiths poof as I'm sure you wouldn't commit all 3 wraith units to a single combat as that is just asking for disaster.

With Destroyers you can play keep away with quite a healthy dose of str 6 shots at a great healthy range. You used DE and Orks as examples, yeah, alot of stuff can trump Necrons in regards. Hell even Necrons can trump Necrons they are that bad, I'm not going to lie. I just don't see the sense of throwing incredibly low model count fragile units into assaults that are almost guaranteed to tie/lose in the long run.

If you could enlighten us Destroyer users why you think Wraiths are better then by all means.

Wait, there is more then one build for Necrons? WOW! The more you know...

Anyway, I have never had any problems with them, but they sound good, so why not?

I watched one of the battle reports involving necrons on youtube one day and the necron player's list consisted of 15 destroyers. He kept them all together and in one round there were like 8 or 9 of them down but he was able to get like 7 or 8 back up. By the end of the game they became one giant unit and it just seemed that the opposing player just wasted his time trying to shoot them all down.

y0disisray wrote:I watched one of the battle reports involving necrons on youtube one day and the necron player's list consisted of 15 destroyers. He kept them all together and in one round there were like 8 or 9 of them down but he was able to get like 7 or 8 back up. By the end of the game they became one giant unit and it just seemed that the opposing player just wasted his time trying to shoot them all down.

The same holds true for wraiths. There are nine of them, and all nine have to go down at the same time for them to stay down.

40k comes down to this: Move, shoot, assault. Destroyers can move and shoot, but at the end of the day, they can't survive through assault. Luck might see them survive to get pulled out of combat through a webway portal, but this is a mechanized world, and if they want to move and shoot, everyone can get to them in a couple of turns. And their weapons....can pump out some shots, but at the end of the day, are pretty much going to be hoping for glances against most things.

I'm not trying to compare a wraith to a destroyer. Rather, I'm comparing a wraith wing to a destroyer wing. The units in a wraith wing all complement each others' strengths, while a destroyer wing is....just a destroyer wing. With other units in there too. Destroyers have to expose themselves to be effective; wraiths do not. Destroyers get beaten on when the inevitable happens, wraiths do not. The deceiver is slow, but God help the enemy when he gets to the first unit and starts bouncing an extra 2d6 from combat to combat after that during the enemy assault phase. A destroyer lord is just a moving rez orb for a destroyer wing; for a wraith wing he's also a vehicle killer, an ablative wound taker, and a C'tan weapon to tip the scale in combat.

Its not that a single wraith is better than a single destroyer - but that a wraith wing complements itself better than a destroyer wing, and in my opinion (which I will gladly demonstrate to anyone on a table or on Vassal) is superior. I'm not advocating that everyone should abandon their necron versions and pick up wraiths - I'm not your typical 40k gamer. But I do believe that a capable and tactically competent player can put a wraith wing to better use than a destroyer wing. I also believe that a destroyer wing is more beginner-friendly and easier to understand. But a wraith wing is truly capable of being anywhere on the table, picking and choosing its combats, utilizing hit-and-run that other armies only dream of, being on the assault EVERY turn.

When wraiths assault a mob of ork boyz, you know how many attacks it takes to statistically take down and keep down a single wraith? 72. That's right; seventy-two attacks to make that puppy stay down. They don't have a 3++, they have a 3++, then a 4+, then a 4+, and then they're back in your face attacking again.

Then again, I'm the guy who picked up DE and fleshed out 3,000 points of them 10 months before their new codex came out. I've never run my Orks like other people, nor my Dark Eldar, nor my Tau....nor my Necrons. I've never been a flavor of the month kind of player.

Dashofpepper wrote:40k comes down to this: Move, shoot, assault. Destroyers can move and shoot, but at the end of the day, they can't survive through assault. Luck might see them survive to get pulled out of combat through a webway portal, but this is a mechanized world, and if they want to move and shoot, everyone can get to them in a couple of turns.

I have played games, mind this is friendly games at my FLGS since I wouldn't dare bring Necrons to a tournament, with my Destroyer Wing that the opponent never got off an single assault. It's all about shutting down transports and knowing when to turboboost/veil/portal out of danger.

And their weapons....can pump out some shots, but at the end of the day, are pretty much going to be hoping for glances against most things.

But that's the bread and butter of Necrons "anti-tank"

A destroyer lord is just a moving rez orb for a destroyer wing

I don't even use a rez orb it's kinda pointless in a destroyer wing. Hard to double out toughness 5 and it's easy to shutdown anything that can (i.e Vindicators, Demolisher, etc) But on the other hand, the Lord in a Wraith Wing is a lynch pin. If you can take him down you can start to break the Wraiths down with strength 8 which is more common.

My standard list (which I stole from Fritz) is Lord with Veil, Immortals, 2x10 Warriors, 3x5 Destroyers, and one Mono.

General_Chaos wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:40k comes down to this: Move, shoot, assault. Destroyers can move and shoot, but at the end of the day, they can't survive through assault. Luck might see them survive to get pulled out of combat through a webway portal, but this is a mechanized world, and if they want to move and shoot, everyone can get to them in a couple of turns.

I have played games, mind this is friendly games at my FLGS since I wouldn't dare bring Necrons to a tournament, with my Destroyer Wing that the opponent never got off an single assault. It's all about shutting down transports and knowing when to turboboost/veil/portal out of danger.

And their weapons....can pump out some shots, but at the end of the day, are pretty much going to be hoping for glances against most things.

But that's the bread and butter of Necrons "anti-tank"

A destroyer lord is just a moving rez orb for a destroyer wing

I don't even use a rez orb it's kinda pointless in a destroyer wing. Hard to double out toughness 5 and it's easy to shutdown anything that can (i.e Vindicators, Demolisher, etc) But on the other hand, the Lord in a Wraith Wing is a lynch pin. If you can take him down you can start to break the Wraiths down with strength 8 which is more common.

My standard list (which I stole from Fritz) is Lord with Veil, Immortals, 2x10 Warriors, 3x5 Destroyers, and one Mono.

One mono. o.O That means only one unit is getting Monolith support.

Your preference is to shoot stuff with STR6....mine is to assault it with STR6. And for heavy lifting, I've got a Deceiver and triple monoliths to back me up. My ultimate goal is obviously to end up with one gigantic wraith unit so that I only have to use a single monolith for WBB support.

What makes the wraiths works is the monolith support - they have a 46" assault threat radius depending on board position and can really reach out and touch someone.

I'm not claiming that Necrons are awesome. I started playing them precisely because they are (IMHO) the worst codex. While people can scream at me that my codex is overpowered when I'm playing Orks and Dark Eldar (the old DE), I figured that beating on them with Necrons was about the only way to demonstrate that the game has more to it than luck of the dice rolls and people abusing overpowered codexes.

Dashofpepper wrote:My wraith wing and Tomb Spyder wing would like to talk to your destroyer wing. On the table.

Dashofpepper wrote:I've got a Deceiver and triple monoliths to back me up

Which is it? And your talking 2000 points? Cause if you are I could have two Monoliths.

I had this really detailed explanation behind my opinion on Destroyers, but then my net crashed and wouldn't let me back into Dakka. :(

So here goes - fifth attempt...

I have recently become jaded with the performance of my Destroyers. They just do not earn their points back.

Look at what they do - Jetbike plus up-scaled Heavy Bolter.

Yes that is good for fifty points, but then look at the huge downside - 1 Wound.

No matter how you look at it, 1 Wound for a fifty point unit in an army where numbers mean a slim line between Victory and Defeat, just doesn't cut it.

Now these guys are taken in units of 5. 250 pts.
Now most folk take two units of them. 500 pts.

No matter how much you look at it, thats a ton of points to try and earn back. You will most likely lose all your Destroyers a long time before you gain those points back.

In the current Mecha Meta which is dominating 40K, Destroyers are sub-par. They're meant to kill infantry at range. Against horde type armies they are amazing, but against MEQs they are a lot harder to justify their massive points cost as MEQs usually have an outer-shell called a Rhino.

Think of it like this old chestnut from an old film:

"First we crack the shell, then we crack the nuts inside".

This is the way 40K works ATM and with that in mind, is it worth taking an expensive unit or two that will probably not earn their points back and will get killed off quite easily???

Well lets look at what I've gleaned from my games:

Expensive and rarely earn their points back - check.
Lack of numbers in an army where numbers are uber important - check.
Glass Cannon in a "tough" army - check

IMO, after looking at and experiencing all of that, Destroyers are just not worth it.

Immortals seem to be better here.

Ive had success mixing the two units. Put 6 wraiths together with destroyer lord as an offensive wing, and a unit of 4-5 destroyers to move behind for fire support. The wraiths provide cover saves to the destroyers from majority of angles. I ran destroyers all the time, but with mech guard out there....I had to come up with a way to get at the gunlines, and wraiths is what I decided to use. Scarabs supporting a lord can work, but against some armies the unit is worthless.

If either the destroyers or wraiths could take larger units they would be a lot more devestating. If the fast attack selections spread out it would also be good for the Crons.