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.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Its a complicated situation I think (and I'm an Eldar player). Lance kicks in as a response to the QS which brings it down to 12, but at the same time while it exists, you still count the AV as being 2 points higher... does that mean that you magically end up with an AV14? Obviously, from an RAI standpoint its a no, but from a RAW standpoint its a mess.

Not really. The rule just increases the base AV by 2, bringing it up to 13. The lance doesn't change the base AV, it just lowers it down to 12 for the purposes of penetration.

zacharia wrote:The problem with all the math hammering on old v new destroyers is you are comparing them only vs a unit the new ones are better at.

As a whole the old ones are better, since the new ones are only better v something with a 3+ save since have 1 more ap. Against vehicles and anything ap2 or ap4+ the old ones are better since they had 1 more shot each.

Your argument only really applies in a practical setting if you are completely wasting your Destroyers as a resource. Immortals are Troops now, and they have regular guns with AP4. If you need your Destroyers to kill Firewarriors or Kroot or Hormagaunts, you are doing something very wasteful. However, for all those pesky Marines with a 3+ Armour Save, well, the new Destroyers mow them down by the squad. Like I mathhammer'd a page or so back, a 3-man squad of Destroyers will take out 3-4 Marines every round of shooting, while having guns that have better range than the Marines, and the Destroyers have movement that is either greater than or equals the Marines. And This should be the most relevent example, because half of all the armies are MEQs. And Competitively, most of the armies are MEQs.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

aboytervigon wrote:I think squad size of 3 is GW's way of limiting them, I mean 30 Strength 6 Ap 3 shots could destroy A lot of MEQ first turn, add a few AT in there and it could potentialy kill a whole Army turn 1.

If they had that, I'd love to have W1 T1 and I1 in the whole army. Sure I'd die if so much as a snotling coughed at me, but if I let a snotling cough then I wasn't playing right. Honestly, I wouldn't want that, and now that you point that out I understand the limit to 3, but I'm going to stick to my standpoint of wanting 5 in a squad, not because of my stubborness, which is playing a huge roll by the way, but becuase i own 15 destroyers.

I'm with you 100%. I used to field 15 Destroyers and 3 Heavy Destroyers. With regards to the new squad size, I am not a happy man. However, I begrudgingly acknowledge why the new squad size had to change, considering 15 Destroyers would wipe out 17 Marines per shooting phase. Imagine that.
Turn 1: pop transports.
Turn 2: wipe out 60% of opposing troops.
Turn 3: dance

azazel the cat wrote:

zacharia wrote:The problem with all the math hammering on old v new destroyers is you are comparing them only vs a unit the new ones are better at.

As a whole the old ones are better, since the new ones are only better v something with a 3+ save since have 1 more ap. Against vehicles and anything ap2 or ap4+ the old ones are better since they had 1 more shot each.

Your argument only really applies in a practical setting if you are completely wasting your Destroyers as a resource. Immortals are Troops now, and they have regular guns with AP4. If you need your Destroyers to kill Firewarriors or Kroot or Hormagaunts, you are doing something very wasteful. However, for all those pesky Marines with a 3+ Armour Save, well, the new Destroyers mow them down by the squad. Like I mathhammer'd a page or so back, a 3-man squad of Destroyers will take out 3-4 Marines every round of shooting, while having guns that have better range than the Marines, and the Destroyers have movement that is either greater than or equals the Marines. And This should be the most relevent example, because half of all the armies are MEQs. And Competitively, most of the armies are MEQs.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

aboytervigon wrote:I think squad size of 3 is GW's way of limiting them, I mean 30 Strength 6 Ap 3 shots could destroy A lot of MEQ first turn, add a few AT in there and it could potentialy kill a whole Army turn 1.

If they had that, I'd love to have W1 T1 and I1 in the whole army. Sure I'd die if so much as a snotling coughed at me, but if I let a snotling cough then I wasn't playing right. Honestly, I wouldn't want that, and now that you point that out I understand the limit to 3, but I'm going to stick to my standpoint of wanting 5 in a squad, not because of my stubborness, which is playing a huge roll by the way, but becuase i own 15 destroyers.

I'm with you 100%. I used to field 15 Destroyers and 3 Heavy Destroyers. With regards to the new squad size, I am not a happy man. However, I begrudgingly acknowledge why the new squad size had to change, considering 15 Destroyers would wipe out 17 Marines per shooting phase. Imagine that.
Turn 1: pop transports.
Turn 2: wipe out 60% of opposing troops.
Turn 3: dance

These are the same single-wound, 50 pt. models that were easily annihilated by ML fire on the first turn, right?

Nah there 40 points now.

azazel the cat wrote:

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

aboytervigon wrote:I think squad size of 3 is GW's way of limiting them, I mean 30 Strength 6 Ap 3 shots could destroy A lot of MEQ first turn, add a few AT in there and it could potentialy kill a whole Army turn 1.

If they had that, I'd love to have W1 T1 and I1 in the whole army. Sure I'd die if so much as a snotling coughed at me, but if I let a snotling cough then I wasn't playing right. Honestly, I wouldn't want that, and now that you point that out I understand the limit to 3, but I'm going to stick to my standpoint of wanting 5 in a squad, not because of my stubborness, which is playing a huge roll by the way, but becuase i own 15 destroyers.

I'm with you 100%. I used to field 15 Destroyers and 3 Heavy Destroyers. With regards to the new squad size, I am not a happy man. However, I begrudgingly acknowledge why the new squad size had to change, considering 15 Destroyers would wipe out 17 Marines per shooting phase. Imagine that.
Turn 1: pop transports.
Turn 2: wipe out 60% of opposing troops.
Turn 3: dance

In return from the MEQ
Turn 1: cry about losing transport
Turn 2: cry about losing troops
Turn 3: ask why you are dancing when they have you in assault with what little they have left.
Turn 4: What do you mean they don't have Phase Out anymore?
Turn 5: Crying to Matt Ward about needing better stuff
Turn 6: They win.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

aboytervigon wrote:I think squad size of 3 is GW's way of limiting them, I mean 30 Strength 6 Ap 3 shots could destroy A lot of MEQ first turn, add a few AT in there and it could potentialy kill a whole Army turn 1.

If they had that, I'd love to have W1 T1 and I1 in the whole army. Sure I'd die if so much as a snotling coughed at me, but if I let a snotling cough then I wasn't playing right. Honestly, I wouldn't want that, and now that you point that out I understand the limit to 3, but I'm going to stick to my standpoint of wanting 5 in a squad, not because of my stubborness, which is playing a huge roll by the way, but becuase i own 15 destroyers.

I'm with you 100%. I used to field 15 Destroyers and 3 Heavy Destroyers. With regards to the new squad size, I am not a happy man. However, I begrudgingly acknowledge why the new squad size had to change, considering 15 Destroyers would wipe out 17 Marines per shooting phase. Imagine that.
Turn 1: pop transports.
Turn 2: wipe out 60% of opposing troops.
Turn 3: dance

In return from the MEQ
Turn 1: cry about losing transport
Turn 2: cry about losing troops
Turn 3: ask why you are dancing when they have you in assault with what little they have left.
Turn 4: stuff gets back up
Turn 5: new CC stuff that you will always take one of assaults.
Turn 6: you win.

Fixed that for you

aboytervigon wrote:We have anti-hoard and anti-mech now, thus the destroyer is irrelevant in both those jobs.

Edit: ninja'd plus he used plethora so he is obviously superior.

Negative. Marines are not horde, and their troops are not mech. Destroyers are relevant at some of the most important job titles of all:

Killing Death Company
Killing Longfangs
Killing Marine Scoring Units
Killing Marine Bikes
Killing Priests
Killing Tau Battlesuits <-- this can also be interpreted as the heading: Making Tau Completely Harmless
Killing Trygons
Killing Carnifexes <-- Nidzilla really doesn't have much punch against Necrons now
Killing Incubi

aboytervigon wrote:

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

aboytervigon wrote:I think squad size of 3 is GW's way of limiting them, I mean 30 Strength 6 Ap 3 shots could destroy A lot of MEQ first turn, add a few AT in there and it could potentialy kill a whole Army turn 1.

If they had that, I'd love to have W1 T1 and I1 in the whole army. Sure I'd die if so much as a snotling coughed at me, but if I let a snotling cough then I wasn't playing right. Honestly, I wouldn't want that, and now that you point that out I understand the limit to 3, but I'm going to stick to my standpoint of wanting 5 in a squad, not because of my stubborness, which is playing a huge roll by the way, but becuase i own 15 destroyers.

I'm with you 100%. I used to field 15 Destroyers and 3 Heavy Destroyers. With regards to the new squad size, I am not a happy man. However, I begrudgingly acknowledge why the new squad size had to change, considering 15 Destroyers would wipe out 17 Marines per shooting phase. Imagine that.
Turn 1: pop transports.
Turn 2: wipe out 60% of opposing troops.
Turn 3: dance

In return from the MEQ
Turn 1: cry about losing transport
Turn 2: cry about losing troops
Turn 3: ask why you are dancing when they have you in assault with what little they have left.
Turn 4: stuff gets back up
Turn 5: new CC stuff that you will always take one of assaults.
Turn 6: you win.

Fixed that for you

They win meant that you the necron player won, as in "they won and i lost", so other then turns 4-5, we are playing the same game. My problem was I fielded too many flayed ones and I almost lost because of it. Got any pointers so I don't have to worry about so many pyrovores killing my flayed ones?

They should have made three different types of destroyers. Light destroyers with the old gun, regular destroyers with new gun, and heavy destroyers. Then they could have made them different unit sizes and had the same old school destroyers work in the same numbers.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:In return from the MEQ
Turn 1: cry about losing transport
Turn 2: cry about losing troops
Turn 3: ask why you are dancing when they have you in assault with what little they have left.
Turn 4: What do you mean they don't have Phase Out anymore?
Turn 5: Crying to Matt Ward about needing better stuff
Turn 6: They win.

The MEQs won't have anything to respond with until at least the Spring. JUST LET ME HAVE THIS, DAMMIT!

In all seriousness, I think having the option for smaller squad sizes will make all the difference in the world against Sweeping Advance. I mean, yeah, a 5-man squad may get swept by a marine or two, but then the 5-man squad right beside the dead crons get to open up with Rapid Fire and avenge their chrome buddies. Much better than having 50% of your troops get swept in one turn under the old Codex. And ya know what? Even if all of the troops get swept, I still don't have to figure out if the game just ended because of Phase Out or not!

Dave-c wrote:They should have made three different types of destroyers. Light destroyers with the old gun, regular destroyers with new gun, and heavy destroyers. Then they could have made them different unit sizes and had the same old school destroyers work in the same numbers.

You have to remember, that is a good idea. There is no room for good ideas except when talking about Marines in GW, only okay ideas are allowed for xenos, not good ideas.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:They win meant that you the necron player won, as in "they won and i lost", so other then turns 4-5, we are playing the same game. My problem was I fielded too many flayed ones and I almost lost because of it. Got any pointers so I don't have to worry about so many pyrovores killing my flayed ones?

My tried and true answer was always "take more Destroyers". However, I don't know if that'l work now. Hmmm... ah, yes! "Take more Immortals". 4+ saves don't stand much chance.

Also: why in the Warp are you taking Flayed Ones against Tyranids?

azazel the cat wrote:

FalkorsRaiders wrote:They win meant that you the necron player won, as in "they won and i lost", so other then turns 4-5, we are playing the same game. My problem was I fielded too many flayed ones and I almost lost because of it. Got any pointers so I don't have to worry about so many pyrovores killing my flayed ones?

My tried and true answer was always "take more Destroyers". However, I don't know if that'l work now. Hmmm... ah, yes! "Take more Immortals". 4+ saves don't stand much chance.

Also: why in the Warp are you taking Flayed Ones against Tyranids?

In my opinion, and many other seem to share it, is that the Flayed ones are the most useless unit as of now, without looking at the codex. From what I've read, the pyrovore is also a very bad unit, so I was trying to make a joke. I'm beginning to find out my humor doesn't translate well. Better keep that in mind the next time I post /sarcasm.

I got the joke.

Pyrovores = paper weights/biovore counts-as resculpts.

Flayed Ones are a melee unit without power weapons, a 4+ / 5+++ (RP...not coming into play anyway since Sweeping Advance will most likely take care of them anyway) and I2...those guys are terrible CC units! Add in the fact that 5 of them cost 35€ and you got the most useless unit in the new codex, not to mention that they look terrible.

I'd rather take another warrior for the same price any time.

Sigvatr wrote:Flayed Ones are a melee unit without power weapons, a 4+ / 5+++ (RP...not coming into play anyway since Sweeping Advance will most likely take care of them anyway) and I2...those guys are terrible CC units! Add in the fact that 5 of them cost 35€ and you got the most useless unit in the new codex, not to mention that they look terrible.

I'd rather take another warrior for the same price any time.

Not to mention that they are an elite choice, meaning that they are effectively in the same category as Lychguards, C'tan, Praetorians and Stalkers.

Imo, they are worse than mandrakes. At least mandrakes get FNP and a nice ranged attack...after you kill something.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Sigvatr wrote:Flayed Ones are a melee unit without power weapons, a 4+ / 5+++ (RP...not coming into play anyway since Sweeping Advance will most likely take care of them anyway) and I2...those guys are terrible CC units! Add in the fact that 5 of them cost 35€ and you got the most useless unit in the new codex, not to mention that they look terrible.

I'd rather take another warrior for the same price any time.

Not to mention that they are an elite choice, meaning that they are effectively in the same category as Lychguards, C'tan, Praetorians and Stalkers.

Imo, they are worse than mandrakes. At least mandrakes get FNP and a nice ranged attack...after you kill something.

Indeed. and with the new models - which are just pants - there's no real reason to get them. I bought some Mandrakes, because I liked the sculpts/designs, and used them as the basis for my converted Wracks. The new Flayed Ones though...

Anyone got any ideas for converting models to Wraiths now that you can no longer order them directly from GW (at least in Germany, that is)? Neither ebay nor Wayland provide any useful results either...and I do not want to wait until wave 2 before I can get my hands on the (seemingly) new CC stars in the Necron army.

Sigvatr wrote:Anyone got any ideas for converting models to Wraiths now that you can no longer order them directly from GW (at least in Germany, that is)? Neither ebay nor Wayland provide any useful results either...and I do not want to wait until wave 2 before I can get my hands on the (seemingly) new CC stars in the Necron army.

I'm planning on using the Warriors from the Ghost/Doomsday Ark set. If you look, you'll see they have an extended spine thing going on, and a little green stuff, a little resculpting, voila! Wraiths, 10 of them.

Just went onto the GW website and looked at Necrons under the armies tab. there was a tab for dedicated transports. Oh, how things are changing. *sniff*

King Pariah wrote:

I'm planning on using the Warriors from the Ghost/Doomsday Ark set. If you look, you'll see they have an extended spine thing going on, and a little green stuff, a little resculpting, voila! Wraiths, 10 of them.

Good sir, that sounds like a brilliant idea to me...and an extremely cheap one too compared to the price you usually pay for a single Wraith. And the now missing Warriors on the Ark could simply be replaced by the Warrior models actually riding the transport. Genius, idea is much appreciated.

Sigvatr wrote:

King Pariah wrote:

I'm planning on using the Warriors from the Ghost/Doomsday Ark set. If you look, you'll see they have an extended spine thing going on, and a little green stuff, a little resculpting, voila! Wraiths, 10 of them.

Good sir, that sounds like a brilliant idea to me...and an extremely cheap one too compared to the price you usually pay for a single Wraith. And the now missing Warriors on the Ark could simply be replaced by the Warrior models actually riding the transport. Genius, idea is much appreciated.

I like the idea. I will be able to fill out two squads that way since i currently own 2 wraiths.

FalkorsRaiders wrote:

Sigvatr wrote:

King Pariah wrote:

I'm planning on using the Warriors from the Ghost/Doomsday Ark set. If you look, you'll see they have an extended spine thing going on, and a little green stuff, a little resculpting, voila! Wraiths, 10 of them.

Good sir, that sounds like a brilliant idea to me...and an extremely cheap one too compared to the price you usually pay for a single Wraith. And the now missing Warriors on the Ark could simply be replaced by the Warrior models actually riding the transport. Genius, idea is much appreciated.

I like the idea. I will be able to fill out two squads that way since i currently own 2 wraiths.

Your welcome good gentlemen.

King Pariah wrote:

Sigvatr wrote:Anyone got any ideas for converting models to Wraiths now that you can no longer order them directly from GW (at least in Germany, that is)? Neither ebay nor Wayland provide any useful results either...and I do not want to wait until wave 2 before I can get my hands on the (seemingly) new CC stars in the Necron army.

I'm planning on using the Warriors from the Ghost/Doomsday Ark set. If you look, you'll see they have an extended spine thing going on, and a little green stuff, a little resculpting, voila! Wraiths, 10 of them.

Out of sheer curiosity, will you sculpt new shoulder blades on the Ghost Ark Warrior models with green stuff or will you try and kit-bash something together?

Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

Amaya wrote:Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

That'll be pretty impressive, considering how no-one really knows what they look like.

Both are completely new, and they have just been announced.

Amaya wrote:Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

Yes, i have converted a nightscythe. I stuck a croissant onto a valkyrie base. Tasty and tactical.

Amaya wrote:Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

I'm hoping they follow a look sort of like the BFG ships, this guy in particular:


I hope they don't cop out and just do a simple crescent, that would make it so dull, particularly at the $60 it will probably cost.


I'm still in disbelief that the transport got paired with the tank and they decided that instead of averaging the two costs they'd charge you the higher one for both!
That's a kit I'll be avoiding if at all possible and hoping the sales suck so hard they bring it down.

Amaya wrote:Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

I have seen some people taking their left over Destroyers and turning the body around so it is facing the rear of the hull. Tiny bit of greenstuff and they make convincing jet bike models for tomb blades. Since destroyers were suppose to be jet bikes when the model was made there really isnt much difference. As for night scythes most people don't seem to be talking about them at all. Model/fluff/rules/ anything. I bet most people forget it is even in the codex until someone posts about it.

IcedAnimals wrote:

Amaya wrote:Has anyone converted any Tomb Blades or Night Scythes? Or done a concept art/mock up?

I have seen some people taking their left over Destroyers and turning the body around so it is facing the rear of the hull. Tiny bit of greenstuff and they make convincing jet bike models for tomb blades. Since destroyers were suppose to be jet bikes when the model was made there really isnt much difference. As for night scythes most people don't seem to be talking about them at all. Model/fluff/rules/ anything. I bet most people forget it is even in the codex until someone posts about it.

Sorry, but that sounds like it would look like crap. i am picturing it in my mind as i have destroyers, and it just seems really off to me. I would rather swap some arms and weapons and then call them tomb blades.