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.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Nobody knows. RAW he does not benefit, but that seems kinda weird, so I think people are hoping for a FAQ that says he does.

TSK doesnt benefit from his own dynasty trait. Its weird, but thats how it is. Girlyman from the UM is a MONSTER (he has that keyword), and doesnt benefit from his chapter tactic as well.

I think that used to be the case, but it isn't any more. Now all space marine models get their tactics IIRC, not just infantry/dreads/etc.

In any case it's a little different because TSK has both a dynasty keyword and a dynastic agent keyword, which is a weird combo that nothing else in the book has.

The rules are clear as written he doesn't get it, but it's GW, so it's anyone's guess whether that's intended or not given the weird combination of keywords.

Its only really a question because he has the Szarekhan tag as well as the Dyanstic Agent one.

No other Agent has a dyansty tag. At all. It serves virtually no purpose, all it allows since hes not a core or canoptek is he can be healed by a Szarekhan spider and he can use the Szarekhan strat, since iirc thats just looking for the dynasty tag and not infantry (could be wrong on that part i dont feel like digging it up atm).

Its just really weird for GW to give him the tag. Hence, the confusion. Its pretty clear RAW, but still causes questions just because its different from the other agents.

Yup it's a weird one. Fluff-wise you would assume he would benefit, but this really isn't one of those cases where you can assume it was just an oversight and play him as having it because it's *probably* what they intended because that dynasty trait actually can make a huge difference on a model like him in some matchups.

Any educated guess as to when flayed ones get released?

Surtr wrote:
Any educated guess as to when flayed ones get released?

(Shrugs) them and the cronomancer and psycomancer still haven't been announced. Next week will be SW, deathwatch, and imperial armor pre-order so the soonest they would be available in store would be 3 weeks.

What unit should I discuss next?

For me personally none.
I tried some of your video's but i don't like them.
I really can't finish them.

They are so uninspiring.
Pretty boring, no visual and audial attraction at all.
Why not just mathhammer instead of using digital dice (better use actual dice so you don't have a white screen all the time..)
Also it is you opinion.

Stalker a "B"? I dont like the abc grades but inhave to grade them its an A
It all depents what is in your list to...

It is my opinion. I wonder of others can finish the vids and think they are really helpfull.

 CKO wrote:



What unit should I discuss next?

Sadly I'd have to echo Krull's thoughts. I admire the enthusiasm and the rate these videos are getting pushed out but after the first two were around 30 minutes long I kind of lost the will to watch any more. I notice some are much shorter, but in general I think these videos are too long. The general rule for YT videos is that you need to stick to less than 10 minutes unless you have a very good reason because people are just not likely to click on something much longer than that.

I also think you need more visual appeal. Look at something like Auspex Tactics for a good example of something that's simple but visually appealing. The weird virtual battlefield and dice sim set-up in your videos looks kind of dated, as does the rapidly-rotating slideshow of images during the Good and Bad sections, and I find the dice roll sections to be far too lengthy without really explaining anything in depth. As an example, a good 25% or more of the dice roll maths in the video above was you entering the correct parameters for the calculations and counting the results, not actually talking about the on-table impact of the units from a Mathhammer POV. I'd strongly advise you to just use Mathhammer when dealing with dice rolls. You don't need to show every result, or even the process, just the outcomes. I think you also need to work on your vocal presentation. Maybe it's because of the length of the videos, but when you're talking for any length of time you need to vary your intonation and make sure the video sounds engaging. At the moment it's a bit monotonous. Again, looking at Auspex Tactics, his videos can also be a little like that but he generally does a decent job of keeping his tone varied and engaging and keeping the videos short helps too.

I think there's some good info buried in your videos but I don't think it's currently being presented in the most stimulating and viewer-friendly fashion. If you can cut the length down to around 10 minutes and improve the visuals a bit I think you'll be more successful.

 CKO wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Lokhust Destroyers




With the Triarch Stalker, I like the Particle Shredder, multiple marines dying on a 4+ is good. I also like the twin heavy gauss cannon getting -4 AP with Mephrit easily because they can move 10 and be within 16 inches. The 9th edition targeting relay says if a hit is scored.

1 Issue - Triarchs don't get dynasty traits. They do have command protocols though - so you can get ap -4 another way.

I forgot the Triarch Stalker doesn't receive the dynasty traits, which makes it less attractive. It's still a good unit though.

Are you guys having a hard time winning your games? If so please tell me what units you are having an issue playing against or what army. Also, I would like to know which units are underperforming for you.

I feel like its worth it because their price is right. Just not with a particle shredder. It's got to be the heavy gauss for standard AP-3. In fact I think it's one of the few auto include options we have in the crons.

I feel that you might be right about them being overcosted, I think 10 points less is where they should be, but this is just because of what you get with marines not when looking at other necron units, so they are probably balanced within the codex.

My overall fear is that once the other marine books are out necrons will feel underpowered and need some points reductions in chapter approved

I think the particle caster is a fine option...if you've got that high AP elsewhere in your army. It's important to have significant sources of AP 3 or above to be able to deal with stuff that reduces AP2 to AP0 - valorous heart, custodes, etc. And the stalker isn't a bad platform for it, given its general resilience. But if your army is full of other stuff that has AP3+, I think it's perfectly defensible to save 10% on the cost of the model and get a gun that's actually better at killing a lot of stuff.

Honestly this is one of the nicest things about the book - with a few small exceptions (e.g. swords & pistols on praetorians being just bad compared to rods), most of the weapon options actually feel like a choice now. There is less of a sense of being clear obvious loadouts and obvious units that are just much better than the alternatives.

 buddha wrote:

Surtr wrote:
Any educated guess as to when flayed ones get released?

(Shrugs) them and the cronomancer and psycomancer still haven't been announced. Next week will be SW, deathwatch, and imperial armor pre-order so the soonest they would be available in store would be 3 weeks.

So boring. Marine snowflake chapters...

Unfortunately with the amount of information in the videos, it is hard to make them short. I did add a section that summarizes the video.

 wuestenfux wrote:

Immortals are also quite easy to wipe in one go negating rp fully.

How that?

It's 10 wounds with no inv save.

40k lethality has gone up so much units gets wiped out in a blink.

10 wounds. No inv save.

In 40k durability is measured in pts per wound and in inv saves. Immortals neither is good. Thus they are soft.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Its only really a question because he has the Szarekhan tag as well as the Dyanstic Agent one.

No other Agent has a dyansty tag. At all. It serves virtually no purpose, all it allows since hes not a core or canoptek is he can be healed by a Szarekhan spider and he can use the Szarekhan strat, since iirc thats just looking for the dynasty tag and not infantry (could be wrong on that part i dont feel like digging it up atm).

Its just really weird for GW to give him the tag. Hence, the confusion. Its pretty clear RAW, but still causes questions just because its different from the other agents.

You just listed reasons why he has the keyword...

Or would you prefer him to be unhealable and miss out on stratagems?

tneva82 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

Immortals are also quite easy to wipe in one go negating rp fully.

How that?

It's 10 wounds with no inv save.

40k lethality has gone up so much units gets wiped out in a blink.

10 wounds. No inv save.

In 40k durability is measured in pts per wound and in inv saves. Immortals neither is good. Thus they are soft.

Here is where I do not agree. How would a 5++ in any way make them more durable? That would require guns with more than 2 AP to be fired at them. 3 AP or more if in cover or buffed by a Cryptek. And on the provision the squad is not wiped in one go, they have a 5+++. I do not think they are "soft". If so, the only "non-soft" unit we have is Wraith.

Obviously the feel of lethality is subjective, but in the 3 games I got to play in the new edition so far, the increased points and focus on objectives led to less lethality, not more.

tneva82 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

Immortals are also quite easy to wipe in one go negating rp fully.

How that?

It's 10 wounds with no inv save.

40k lethality has gone up so much units gets wiped out in a blink.

10 wounds. No inv save.

In 40k durability is measured in pts per wound and in inv saves. Immortals neither is good. Thus they are soft.

Wiping Immortals out would require a larger amount of fire power concentrated on this unit.

If the enemy is able to do that, something in your gaming plan went wrong.
We are Necrons and should keep the pressure high on the enemy units.

tneva82 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:

Immortals are also quite easy to wipe in one go negating rp fully.

How that?

It's 10 wounds with no inv save.

40k lethality has gone up so much units gets wiped out in a blink.

10 wounds. No inv save.

In 40k durability is measured in pts per wound and in inv saves. Immortals neither is good. Thus they are soft.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Its only really a question because he has the Szarekhan tag as well as the Dyanstic Agent one.

No other Agent has a dyansty tag. At all. It serves virtually no purpose, all it allows since hes not a core or canoptek is he can be healed by a Szarekhan spider and he can use the Szarekhan strat, since iirc thats just looking for the dynasty tag and not infantry (could be wrong on that part i dont feel like digging it up atm).

Its just really weird for GW to give him the tag. Hence, the confusion. Its pretty clear RAW, but still causes questions just because its different from the other agents.

You just listed reasons why he has the keyword...

Or would you prefer him to be unhealable and miss out on stratagems?

Your equation is off. Durability is a part of it certainly. Can you give some examples of things that wipe 10 immortals? What about 20? 340 pts of immortals vs 340 pts of many things in the game are not close.

The best weapon and unit to shot at immortals I could think of is the Redemptor Dreadnaught with the 2 onslaught gatling cannons, which in the ideal scenario would be 20 shots s6 ap-2 d1 buffed to BS2+ with re-roll 1s to hit and wound, this would on average kill 8 immortals out of 10 (not in cover) and then 3~ should stand back up leaving you with 5 casualties with a single round of fire of a perfect weapon against them in the perfect scenario. sure here there's some chance that with some pretty bad rolling on the receiving end the unit will get wiped entirely and no reanimation is rolled, but that will not be the majority of the times.
Though I think they are tough enough

I don't think there is much that can kill 10 immortals in one go.

The issue is more as the unit degrades - because the amount of things that can kill say 4-5 immortals is quite high. But realistically, that's just an issue of RP. Its not like killing 6 warriors is that difficult either. Its just that with a starting pool of 20, you might get to cycle through more times.

Really I think warriors and immortals are reasonably balanced (although Tesla looks over nerfed to me).

Tesla in itself is fine, it allows you to advance and still shoot (and proc tesla!). The +2 p price hike was unnecessary, however.

In general I am very happy how the book turned out and how it has adressed a lot of the small things, that made Necrons subpar in the past.
Quality of life improvements like increased ranges on auras and buffs, increased range on staff of light, possibility to actually use the shock rules and stratagems for the Monolith...
As long as it is just points, we can have it fixed with the next CA. If it was a problem with the datasheets, we would have to wait another 3 years.

I'm really liking the Rad-Wreathed trait. It turns out that -1 toughness is incredibly relevant against T4 for most of our close combat units. S6 things like Lychguard with Swords, Wraith, Skorpekh Lord and Skorpekh Destroyers (w/plasmacite) go to 2's to wound. Scarabs go up to 4's to wound, and Flayed ones go to 3's.

My sword and board Lychguard were murder machines in a recent game vs T4 stuff; hitting on 2's (MWBD) wounding on 2's (Rad-Wreathed) with 4 attacks each (Eternal Protectors). Also, my Ghost Arks that were assaulted after moving onto objectives (a common occurrence) enjoyed rapid firing into combat and wounding on 3's in my subsequent turn.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
I'm really liking the Rad-Wreathed trait. It turns out that -1 toughness is incredibly relevant against T4 for most of our close combat units. S6 things like Lychguard with Swords, Wraith, Skorpekh Lord and Skorpekh Destroyers (w/plasmacite) go to 2's to wound. Scarabs go up to 4's to wound, and Flayed ones go to 3's.

My sword and board Lychguard were murder machines in a recent game vs T4 stuff; hitting on 2's (MWBD) wounding on 2's (Rad-Wreathed) with 4 attacks each (Eternal Protectors). Also, my Ghost Arks that were assaulted after moving onto objectives (a common occurrence) enjoyed rapid firing into combat and wounding on 3's in my subsequent turn.

Indeed, rad-wreathed should not be overlooked.
Together with the 6'' pre-game move you get a great ancient dynasty.

What I really want is rad weathered and ObSec but that's not possible.

 buddha wrote:
What I really want is rad weathered and ObSec but that's not possible.

Would be a perfect combination.
I'd like running Wraiths and both dynastic traits would be equally useful.

I am new to Necrons but have just finished building the Necrons models in the Indomitus box. They are:

HQ
Overlord with Tachyon arrow
Royal Warden
Plasmancer
Skorpekh Lord

TROOPS
20 Necron Warriors

Elite
3 Skorpekh Destroyers
Canoptek Plasmacyte
2 Cryptothralls
Canoptek Reanimator

Fast Attack
6 Canoptek scarab swarms

This army is almost 1000 points but has too few troops with too many headquarters and elites to be battle forged. I am planning to add another 10 warriors so I can make 3 troops for a battalion detachment. What should I add and what should I subtract to make it a reasonably competitive 1000-point battle-forged army? What should I add to make it a 1500-point battle-forged army?

I just started a necron army here is the route I went-

Overlord
Skorpekh lord
Plasmancer
Technomancer

20 warriors
20 warriors
10 Immortals

6 Skorpekh destroyers
Plasmacyte
2 crypto thralls
Triarch stalker
Triarch stalker

Doomstalker
Doomstalker

This totals 2000 points give or take some wargear options or I use the remaining points to squeeze in some scarabs.

I am thinking about adding szeras, or getting a catacomb command barge

russellmoo wrote:
I just started a necron army here is the route I went-

Overlord
Skorpekh lord
Plasmancer
Technomancer

20 warriors
20 warriors
10 Immortals

6 Skorpekh destroyers
Plasmacyte
2 crypto thralls
Triarch stalker
Triarch stalker

Doomstalker
Doomstalker

This totals 2000 points give or take some wargear options or I use the remaining points to squeeze in some scarabs.

I am thinking about adding szeras, or getting a catacomb command barge

Solid list. You can swap Sezarez for the scorp lord easily its only a 20 points difference. A thrid doom stalker would go a long way too. Only way to fit is to drop plasmamancer and reduce something else.

How do you guys feel about the combo I showed in the video where you can turn Immortals into flayed ones?

I tried but didn't get there.
I gave up watching your vids. But at least i tried

Maybe type it out? It can be a good idea, but i'm not going to search through 30min of dicecounting not seeing anything happening.

Maybe you should switch to batreps or something? Seeing actually models, in actual terain fighting a real army?