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 have been reading through the necron codex, and to be honest its pretty good. Its nicely balanced with a few tricks thrown in to keep people on their toes.

However, I just cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would take necron warriors anymore.
Immortals are 4 points more expensive than warriors and 1 point more expensive than a space marine. However for those 4 points you get a noticeably better armor save, a str 5 weapon and can choose to focus that weapon either against vehicles or infantry. The base gauss blaster to my knowledge is already better than say a standard marine bolter as its has higher strength and also has the gauss ability. I know it is wrong to compare units cross codex, but even then, I cant help but feel that Immortals greatly outclass the other troop option available which is Warriors. You seem to get quite a lot for those 4 extra points.

Is there something I am missing here?

GW knew that every Necron player already had a lot of Necron warriors and would not buy more of them thus they made Immortals cheap enough to be better than them because they knew that nobody had a real collection of Immortals.

Hey, your warriors can now ride a overpriced transporter...that is the second most-expensive unit you can buy (money-wise).

There's your reason...I'm pretty angry too. In friendlies, I will just try to bitz my warriors a bit and give them blue tubes to show that they use Tesla weapons. Guitar strings from back to weapon, add another blue plastic tube, make the weapon look a bit bulkier, plasticard shoulder pads...

Side-by-side, Immortals are better. They would be a no-brainer for me...if not for the Ghost Ark.

Footslogging Necron troops are obviously vulnerable to assault, whether they're Immortals or Warriors. But Warriors can hide in the Ark, greatly lessening that vulnerability, while retaining their ability to move/shoot effectively.

Additionally, with WBB now replaced by RP, your troops are generally less resilient than before. More will die, less will stand back up. And how can you mitigate that loss? Well, Ghost Arks can repair D3 Warriors a turn. If you have multiple Ghost Arks churning out Warriors throughout the game, you will be seeing entire units' worth of models coming back to life. Immortals have nothing that will bolster their survivability like that.

The repair ability is worth a lot, and that is built into the Ghost Ark's cost. The point cost of a Ghost Ark might seem objectionably high at first glance, but subtract the cost of the Warriors it'll be producing and it's suddenly looking reasonable. Then consider that you're removing obvious targets from dedicated assault troops...you're making your enemy's limited AT deal with even more AV13...you're making your scoring units more resilient and more mobile... Really, I would love to take all Immortals, but the more I think about it, the more Warriors/Arks make the best sense.

Warriors are cheap, effective scoring units. Nuff said!

Warriors are awesome!


They are CHEAP, super durable, effecive supporting fire, scoring unit troops!

13 points for a necron is super cheap when you look around the codex and realize units are generally high points cost when you compare to say orks. We are accustumed to paying more but getting more. QUALITY not QUANTITY. Necron warriors offer a perfect balance of both.

the are super durable troops. Toughness 4, 4+ save and RP. good toughness, average save and and chance to get back up. A Lord with RO only increases the durablilty and a GA increses that even more! With a GA you can advance and lay down some impressive fire! The GA's gauss arrays can fire while moving. As you advance a GA you can fire your flayers 24". up closes, double tap for 20 shots from the arrays and another 20 from the warrios! 40 flayer shots..yes please.

when they disembark the GA can just keep replenishing warriors. Immortals are better, but with the GA i dont see why you should take atleast..ATLEAST one unit and an ark.

saveimmortals for veiling crypteks.

Generally the better option for Crypteks, are those Necron Warriors.

Warriors are cheap, effective scoring units. Nuff said!

Basically this.

Use them to stick thremor stave cryptecs in.

Also, if all the imortals get wiped out in one turn then you get no get back up roll. That is why a huge pool of warriors will be harder to kill in a singel turn.

You will also get more milage out a resurection orb with warriors. Warriors also are better vs tanks that is AV 11+ (I am not shure if you can get a double glancing on a 6 with imortals?) as you are paying less per gause shot.

With all the parking lots out there neather warriors or imortals might be your best buy. You really want things that destroy tanks.

Do I remember hearing right that the only way to get scarabs is as extra bitz in the warrior box? There's your reason right there.

Flavius Infernus wrote:Do I remember hearing right that the only way to get scarabs is as extra bitz in the warrior box? There's your reason right there.

We got a small store selling decoration materials etc. and they also sell small, little black bugs pretty much the size of Scarabs...at ~1,60€ for 60 pieces. Boltgun metal, here we go.

See, my main problem about Warriors is their effectiveness against the common enemies I face, mostly MEQ. Gauss weapons don't do much against them and while Rapid Fire is good at 12'', Blood Angels will happily wipe out the squad after a single shooting phase. Tesla Immortals, on the other hand, are more effective, especially compared to their point cost difference.

Ghost Arks look really awesome, but 115 is a lot of points and while you can certainly replenish D3 warriors / turn, you also risk grounding your own vehicle by doing so and in an average game, you will revive about 9 Warriors...which is just as much as simply buying 10 more Warriors right from the start. Another point is melee combat: how good is 11 armor against the common enemies out there? Will the transport blow as soon as it gets assaulted or will it be able to make a stand and shoot the attackers in the next turn? How durable are they?

And well, there's still the price. 29€ is a lot for a single model...despite it looking really awesome.

Q: why take necron warriors?

A: because you already own the models but not the nice new immortal models.

or

A: because you bought the kits to get scarab swarms

It is slightly dumbfounding the amount of times across different boards this silly question has come up but the fact is these units don't exist in a vacuum. Here's a few reasons to take Warriors which are dependant on different army choices:

- Ghost Ark (for repair and to give to a Lance Court)
- Cheaper scoring (good for lists that want to go more out on elites etc.)
- Better choice for mech lists to get more Quatum Shielding
- Cheaper option if going for flying circus SPAM with Scythes

Well, I can see the value of the Warriors and the synergy with the Ghost Ark. However, I'm more into elite armies. Thus for me, I'll go with Immortals all the way mounted in Night Scythe which make them super fast.

I've said this many times on Dakka...

Try Warrior Spam.

15-20 Warriors with a Cryptek with Res. Orb.

Not many things can shift that mass of steel.

whigwam wrote:Side-by-side, Immortals are better. They would be a no-brainer for me...if not for the Ghost Ark.

Footslogging Necron troops are obviously vulnerable to assault, whether they're Immortals or Warriors. But Warriors can hide in the Ark, greatly lessening that vulnerability, while retaining their ability to move/shoot effectively.

Additionally, with WBB now replaced by RP, your troops are generally less resilient than before. More will die, less will stand back up. And how can you mitigate that loss? Well, Ghost Arks can repair D3 Warriors a turn. If you have multiple Ghost Arks churning out Warriors throughout the game, you will be seeing entire units' worth of models coming back to life. Immortals have nothing that will bolster their survivability like that.

Good points for the most part but just wanted to point out that the italics portion is mostly wrong. Modern RP>>>>>>>WBB and it's not even close. The fact that it can't be taken away by DoubleT, PW, AP1 or really anything, and the fact that it occurs after every phase, more then makes up for the up tick from 4+ to 5+. And lets not even get into phase out... Now of course their Armor save lost a tick, but consdering you should now have almost %50 more models/point I would say that more then makes up for it as well.

I think the big kicker for warriors is the squad size. They are one of two units in the whole dex that can get 20 strong (21+ with a court) and nothing protects against the one drawback of RP better then a huge mob of bots. Also as previously mentioned squad size synergizes wonderfully with res orbs.

And haven't sat down and done the full math yet, but I'm pretty certain in terms of survivability/point of model they beat immortals. Obviously immortals are more killy, but still another thing to consider when taking warriors.


Personally I really don't buy into the conspiracy theories, as there is no question they are muchbetter then they use to be.

ShadarLogoth wrote:Good points for the most part but just wanted to point out that the italics portion is mostly wrong. Modern RP>>>>>>>WBB and it's not even close. The fact that it can't be taken away by DoubleT, PW, AP1 or really anything, and the fact that it occurs after every phase, more then makes up for the up tick from 4+ to 5+. And lets not even get into phase out... Now of course their Armor save lost a tick, but consdering you should now have almost %50 more models/point I would say that more then makes up for it as well.

I think the big kicker for warriors is the squad size. They are one of two units in the whole dex that can get 20 strong (21+ with a court) and nothing protects against the one drawback of RP better then a huge mob of bots. Also as previously mentioned squad size synergizes wonderfully with res orbs.

And haven't sat down and done the full math yet, but I'm pretty certain in terms of survivability/point of model they beat immortals. Obviously immortals are more killy, but still another thing to consider when taking warriors.


Personally I really don't buy into the conspiracy theories, as there is no question they are muchbetter then they use to be.

Well said, it is definitely not as simple as I made it out to be. When comparing the survivability of old Warriors vs. new Warriors, there are a lot of other variables to consider. For instance, many players would have a Orb-Lord on foot with its AOE covering their phalanx of Warriors, so you'd be immune to WBB-negating weaponry anyway. Plus Tomb Spyder tricks, plus the ability to tele through the Monolith for a redo of WBB rolls. But those were different times, and I'm not sentimental. New Warriors are definitely better on the whole. My main point is that you'll likely want to augment their survivability one way or another, and it's a lot less practical to do that for Immortals (squad size being one reason you touched on).

I'm also not sold on the "conspiracy theories". Warriors definitely remain viable and there are many arguments favoring them over Immortals. That said, let's hope they come up with a more economical way to purchase large numbers of Scarabs...

That said, let's hope they come up with a more economical way to purchase large numbers of Scarabs...

Couldn't agree more. I bought the original big box plus the mid size battle box, and I've always used three scarabs per base, but I didn't use more then 10 at a time in the previous dex so I'm not exactly sure how moire I can make on my existing sprues (I'm a very lazy homonucli, er machine builder :() Pretty sad I've had them for almost ten years now and they still remain unbuilt. Needless to say the new rules will encourage me more, but I very well may end up with a few bases that I might be willing to trade if anyone is interested.

From what I've seen from the Necron Codex (I don't own one myself, but perused the Games Workshop Customer Copy), Reanimation Protocols are highly dependent on the unit not getting killed outright. While Ten Immortals at T5 are considerably tough to crack, having twenty Necron Warriors with a Phaeron or Lord w/ a Res Orb or a Cryptek w/ a Viel of Darkness makes them pretty difficult to kill outright.
Ghost Ark aside, not many armies can pump out enough shots to overwhelm the mob of twenty Warriors and even if they do, the other two twenty-count Warrior units are left alone.

So I see Warriors as more of a relentless, recycling, objective grabbing unit.

KplKeegan wrote:From what I've seen from the Necron Codex (I don't own one myself, but perused the Games Workshop Customer Copy), Reanimation Protocols are highly dependent on the unit not getting killed outright. While Ten Immortals at T5 are considerably tough to crack, having twenty Necron Warriors with a Phaeron or Lord w/ a Res Orb or a Cryptek w/ a Viel of Darkness makes them pretty difficult to kill outright.
Ghost Ark aside, not many armies can pump out enough shots to overwhelm the mob of twenty Warriors and even if they do, the other two twenty-count Warrior units are left alone.

So I see Warriors as more of a relentless, recycling, objective grabbing unit.

Immortals are T4.

KplKeegan wrote: While Ten Immortals at T5

Immortals are T4

I run warriors and immortals together. Warriors are cheaper. If you buy ten mans out of both you spend 40 extra points, buy three squads and you spend an extra 120 points. That's actually a lot. I take one or two units of immortans and one or two units of warriors becauase I can get more back in points. I would like to say that you don't need that much S5 AP4 shoots, but i'd be lying .

I just like the points...

...




...


and i have 90 warriors built and painted and only ten new immortals...but I"m not biased or anything!

Hmmmm, at 1000 pts...3 x 14 Warriors, each squad with a Lord (Warscythe, Mind Control Scarabs, Regenerator Sphere) and a Overlord with Warscythe and Tesla Barge...well, that list would certainly look awesome but it would not get anything done. At all.

Razerous wrote:

KplKeegan wrote: While Ten Immortals at T5

Immortals are T4

Oh... Well then fielding Ten Immortals might be a little rougher than I had thought. (Thanks for the fix).

Warriors overall are a better choice for 90% of lists as of now. Now, if the change in rapid fire weps thats rumored is true for 6th Immortals will be friggin AMAZING.... but as of now, I think Warriors are just better all around. 'Sides, most people just stick Crypteks in there and shoot away with lances anywho.

Zid wrote:Warriors overall are a better choice for 90% of lists as of now. Now, if the change in rapid fire weps thats rumored is true for 6th Immortals will be friggin AMAZING.... but as of now, I think Warriors are just better all around. 'Sides, most people just stick Crypteks in there and shoot away with lances anywho.

Hmmm, why would you say that they are better overall?

Ok, I am getting the general idea.
Warriors having larger squad sizes are less vulnerable to squad wipe.
That said though, I would like to bring up two points.
1: Immortals have 3+ saves. Now I mainly play orks, against marines, and I must say that 3+ saves are pretty annoying. Add to that they resurrect (I assume you are using an orb) they have what is basically a superior version of FNP. What are the views on this?

2: The ghost arc synergy makes a lot of sense. However, wont that make ghost arcs into massive point sinks that still die pretty easily. They are AV11 open topped. One penetrating shot to drop the shields and it would have the survivability of an Ork Truck without being as fast.

These are my opinions though. I am just trying to understand the bigger picture here.

Sigvatr wrote:

Zid wrote:Warriors overall are a better choice for 90% of lists as of now. Now, if the change in rapid fire weps thats rumored is true for 6th Immortals will be friggin AMAZING.... but as of now, I think Warriors are just better all around. 'Sides, most people just stick Crypteks in there and shoot away with lances anywho.

Hmmm, why would you say that they are better overall?

Cheaper, you pay about 30% less for a squad of 10 (which I think is best to keep rolling RP's), which means more goodies elseware. I love immortals, don't get me wrong, I just can't justify using them over warriors tho :(

As others said, ghost arks are awesome. Av13, open topped means that with a lord and overlord attached you have a landraider like vehicle. Healing warriors is just a bonus!

Immortals imho are best taken for tesla weapons at 24 when moving. Perhaps 1 unit max. The rest of the troops should be warriors... Cheaper and better transport options.

DevianID wrote:As others said, ghost arks are awesome. Av13, open topped means that with a lord and overlord attached you have a landraider like vehicle. Healing warriors is just a bonus!

Immortals imho are best taken for tesla weapons at 24 when moving. Perhaps 1 unit max. The rest of the troops should be warriors... Cheaper and better transport options.

Could be true. But I'm not going to field Warriors. It appears that an army based on Immortals is more challenging to pull off. This is the path I'll go...

In lower points games the warriors are amazing. I've been using Illuminor Szeras to boost a 20 man unit. T5, BS5 or Str5 are amazing but he also brings defensive grenades to the unit (as well as a lance). I then back this unit up with a pair of 5 man warriors in barges. I've only lost them once and that was against an IG player that got lucky killing my transport.