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.

col_impact wrote:
Keep in mind that the Sentry Pylons are really only terrifying in the NOVA format. They are very nerfed in the ITC format.

Can you share? I couldn't find anything about how the ITC adjusted them, but was asking. Do tell! Thanks.

Edit: Actually found it. It wasn't in their Necron FAQ, but rather their Imperial Armour section (which makes sense, i'm just a moron).

Clearly its been nerfed, because it keeps the hit counts far more limited then giving doubled hits for every single model the line covered, total. That said, if a battery of three of them rolls over even, oh... three guys within a given unit, that's still 18 Str 10, AP1 wounds, that can't be jinked, or flicker jumped away from etc...

It definitely sounds nerfed enough to not be outright broken, as per the NOVA rulings, but it does still sound like it could be competitive with those aforementioned Relentless/Teleports.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Keep in mind that the Sentry Pylons are really only terrifying in the NOVA format. They are very nerfed in the ITC format.

Can you share? I couldn't find anything about how the ITC adjusted them, but was asking. Do tell! Thanks.

Edit: Actually found it. It wasn't in their Necron FAQ, but rather their Imperial Armour section (which makes sense, i'm just a moron).

Clearly its been nerfed, because it keeps the hit counts far more limited then giving doubled hits for every single model the line covered, total. That said, if a battery of three of them rolls over even, oh... three guys within a given unit, that's still 18 Str 10, AP1 wounds, that can't be jinked, or flicker jumped away from etc...

It definitely sounds nerfed enough to not be outright broken, as per the NOVA rulings, but it does still sound like it could be competitive with those aforementioned Relentless/Teleports.

ITC/ATC/ETC



NOVA




In addition to generating more hits when you hit more than one unit, you can also hit units in combat in the Nova handling of the Sentry Pylon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Requizen wrote:
Deep Strike isn't useful. They can't move and shoot, as the BRB specifies that any weapon that doesn't roll to hit can't be Snap Shot. Walking them by themselves or Deep Striking them means they can't shoot for the turn, which makes them useless.

The list above adds a bunch of ICs to the unit. Anrakyr projects a bubble of Relentless, which allows them to move and shoot. Obyron and the Overlord bring teleports, so you jump them around the field. The Lord brings a Solar Staff, so they have pseudo-invis for a turn.

The strategy goes like this: Blob them all together, teleport down field, and then unleash hell. The Lord and Anrakyr can shoot at different unit than the Death Rays because drawing lines is stupid. Pop the Solar Staff so they can't be shot. Three Rays and an Arrow should significantly weaken even a WK, and if it charges you the next turn you have 3 Warscythes in the unit.

If they don't get locked in, you explode out the ICs - some go and slice things to death, others go hide on objectives. Anrakyr hangs out with the Pylons to let them shuffle around.

Taking "foot" or Deep Strike Pylons solo doesn't work. The Deathstar does.

If he blobs all of the ICs with the Pylons, the majority toughness of the unit drops from 7 to 5 so I am wondering if they weren't all in one blob. Majority toughness 7 is sick. My list runs a cryptek for chronometron and solar staff instead of the lord so you get majority toughness 7.

Addenda: If you read up on his match with Nanavati, it seems like his ICs got hit hard by a Warp Hunters D barrage that Nanavati walked over from a scarab unit to the solar staffed Pylon blob (otherwise the blast can't target it), so it sounds like he had them all blobbed together with majority toughness 5. If he had run a cryptek in place of the lord the list would have performed better in this juncture (5++ chronometron).

Hindsight is always 20/20. I'm sure he'll do that next time.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Hindsight is always 20/20. I'm sure he'll do that next time.

When you look at the stream, it seems they just played it wrong (and my understanding was wrong -- it's not exactly majority toughness when you shoot at an artillery unit). A single model of artillery grants its toughness to joined ICs for shooting.



They played it as if the D barrage weapon would ID the necron ICs, but as long as a gun remained, the ICs should have been immune to ID from the D weapon.

Also, the nerfing of the Retribution Phalanx post GW FAQ will also be a big hit to the list.

col_impact wrote:


If he blobs all of the ICs with the Pylons, the majority toughness of the unit drops from 7 to 5 so I am wondering if they weren't all in one blob. Majority toughness 7 is sick. My list runs a cryptek for chronometron and solar staff instead of the lord so you get majority toughness 7.

Addenda: If you read up on his match with Nanavati, it seems like his ICs got hit hard by a Warp Hunters D barrage that Nanavati walked over from a scarab unit to the solar staffed Pylon blob (otherwise the blast can't target it), so it sounds like he had them all blobbed together with majority toughness 5. If he had run a cryptek in place of the lord the list would have performed better in this juncture (5++ chronometron).

Not putting all the ICs in a unit would make it not a star. You need Obyron and the Overlord for the double teleport (in case the first one goes badly), you need Orikan for the Rerolls, you need the DLord for tanking and PE, you need Anrakyr for the Relentless, you need the Lord for Solar Staff. It doesn't work if you don't take all of them, or at least, without them you'll be T7 but weaker in a more significant manner.

Being T7 wouldn't matter for the D Barrage. Because it's D. 5++ would have been nice to have but it wouldn't have saved him, 5++ rerolling 1s isn't even equivalent to a 4++, and D can still roll 6s anyway.

Tyler is an internationally-known player and if he thought that 40 points for a worse IC but T7/5++ against shooting was better, I think he would have taken it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Hindsight is always 20/20. I'm sure he'll do that next time.

When you look at the stream, it seems they just played it wrong (and my understanding was wrong -- it's not exactly majority toughness when you shoot at an artillery unit). A single model of artillery grants its toughness to joined ICs for shooting.

Spoiler:

SHOOTING AT ARTILLERY
If shooting at an Artillery unit, the Toughness of the guns is always used whilst at least
one gun remains.

They played it as if the D barrage weapon would ID the necron ICs, but as long as a gun remained, the ICs should have been immune to ID from the D weapon.

Also, the nerfing of the Retribution Phalanx post GW FAQ will also be a big hit to the list.

THAT'S NOT HOW MIXED TOUGHNESS UNITS WORK. Please do not spread misinformation.

col_impact wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Hindsight is always 20/20. I'm sure he'll do that next time.

When you look at the stream, it seems they just played it wrong (and my understanding was wrong -- it's not exactly majority toughness when you shoot at an artillery unit). A single model of artillery grants its toughness to joined ICs for shooting.

Spoiler:

SHOOTING AT ARTILLERY
If shooting at an Artillery unit, the Toughness of the guns is always used whilst at least
one gun remains.

They played it as if the D barrage weapon would ID the necron ICs, but as long as a gun remained, the ICs should have been immune to ID from the D weapon.

That only applies when rolling to wound. Once wounds are allocated, you use the toughness of the model being wounded to determine ID.

Requizen wrote:


Tyler is an internationally-known player and if he thought that 40 points for a worse IC but T7/5++ against shooting was better, I think he would have taken it.

It was just an oversight on his part. A chronometron is an invaluable buff on a Pylon star and it's a mistake to not have it. Even internationally-known players are fallible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Requizen wrote:


THAT'S NOT HOW MIXED TOUGHNESS UNITS WORK. Please do not spread misinformation.

What does this rule do then?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zimko wrote:


That only applies when rolling to wound. Once wounds are allocated, you use the toughness of the model being wounded to determine ID.

The rule sets the toughness of the model to 7 when you are shooting at it.

Instant Death is applied after modifiers.




I opened up a thread in YMDC. Please continue the discussion there.

There's no need to go to YMDC. The rules are very clear: for mixed toughness units, you use the majority toughness (and for artillery, you use the artillery toughness) for purposes of what to roll on the Strength<->Toughness chart. It does not change the toughness of the models.

So our club is running a 1K tournament and I thought, "what the hell, I'll run a nightbringer". I've owned the model for years and never played it. Just through it in naked into my list and discovered very quickly he's slow as dirt. Did a little research and found out how he should probably be kitted out although at 1k 470pts is a bit steep so I'm probably not going with the invulns on the burning one crypteks, etc.

Anyway, I started seeing YMDC type of posts on the net about GoD. Wow what a cool ability! But I'm sure I'll need some firepower to backup my claim that it's an ability and not a shooting attack since being an ability is where the magic is. So I went on a FAQ search as the most recent FAQ drop is all but banned at my club as being crazy stupid. Prior to that one I could only find one that must have come out right after 7 was released but before the Decurion dex was released. On the Black Library there is no FAQ listed for Necrons. I need something better than website posts to back me up. Other than hiring a lawyer any suggestions? I so want to shoot the crap out of a unit locked in combat or an invis unit

Requizen wrote:
There's no need to go to YMDC. The rules are very clear: for mixed toughness units, you use the majority toughness (and for artillery, you use the artillery toughness) for purposes of what to roll on the Strength<->Toughness chart. It does not change the toughness of the models.

The rule was unclear enough to merit a FAQ item in the Draft FAQ. One could say that many people frequently had this question!

ARTILLERY
Q: When firing at artillery units, does the gun’s Toughness value apply for the purposes of resolving Instant Death against any Independent Characters that have joined the unit?
A: No, Instant Death is worked out each time a Wound is allocated to an individual model.

col_impact wrote:

Requizen wrote:
There's no need to go to YMDC. The rules are very clear: for mixed toughness units, you use the majority toughness (and for artillery, you use the artillery toughness) for purposes of what to roll on the Strength<->Toughness chart. It does not change the toughness of the models.

The rule was unclear enough to merit a FAQ item in the Draft FAQ. One could say that many people frequently had this question!

ARTILLERY
Q: When firing at artillery units, does the gun’s Toughness value apply for the purposes of resolving Instant Death against any Independent Characters that have joined the unit?
A: No, Instant Death is worked out each time a Wound is allocated to an individual model.

The FAQ also had people asking whether or not you could take an army made 100% of buildings which should tell you all you need to know about how stupid the people asking the FAQs were.

If you read the rules for mixed toughness and ID you wouldn't even ask the question.

Requizen wrote:


The FAQ also had people asking whether or not you could take an army made 100% of buildings which should tell you all you need to know about how stupid the people asking the FAQs were.

If you read the rules for mixed toughness and ID you wouldn't even ask the question.

Are you claiming that GW writes rock-solid rules? It seems that only a madman would claim that GW writes rock-solid rules. Your statement gives me a chuckle.


If you read the rules you would realize they had a logical scoping problem (the Shooting at Artillery rule was applied 'if shooting . . .' and not 'while rolling to wound') so those literally following the rule would apply the rule to use the Toughness of the guns in the case of ICs and ID (since that is in the scope of 'if shooting' and there is a clear chain of permission to do so).

The question was asked and answered in the Draft FAQ because GW writes fuzzy inconsistent rules that frequently don't hold up to scrutiny and this was a case of an unclear rule.

col_impact wrote:

Requizen wrote:


The FAQ also had people asking whether or not you could take an army made 100% of buildings which should tell you all you need to know about how stupid the people asking the FAQs were.

If you read the rules for mixed toughness and ID you wouldn't even ask the question.

Are you claiming that GW writes rock-solid rules? It seems that only a madman would claim that GW writes rock-solid rules. Your statement gives me a chuckle.


If you read the rules you would realize they had a logical scoping problem (the Shooting at Artillery rule was applied 'if shooting . . .' and not 'while rolling to wound') so those literally following the rule would apply the rule to use the Toughness of the guns in the case of ICs and ID (since that is in the scope of 'if shooting' and there is a clear chain of permission to do so).

The question was asked and answered in the Draft FAQ because GW writes fuzzy inconsistent rules that frequently don't hold up to scrutiny and this was a case of an unclear rule.

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say other than claiming that rules work the opposite of how they do. It's like you're just trying to confuse people.

Please, stop trolling threads.

Requizen wrote:


I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say other than claiming that rules work the opposite of how they do. It's like you're just trying to confuse people.

Please, stop trolling threads.

I am claiming that the rule is unclear. This can easily be proven since officially it had to be clarified. Not only does the GW Draft FAQ include it as a FAQ item but the ATC/ETC FAQ include it as a FAQ item as well.


You are claiming that the rule is clear and that people who say its unclear are trolling. This can be easily disproven by noting the inclusion of the item in two separate FAQs. Two separate rules authorities found it worthwhile to include it into their FAQs.



If you want to discuss this further feel free to PM me or take the discussion to YMDC where I have opened up a thread on it.

Yes, please.
No need to constantly fill the tactics thread with rule interpretation debate.

The pylons are even worst at Nova then people are lead to believe. The star that Tyler brought gets to teleport twice. Once while locked in combat and one only when disengaged. Meaning once you lock this star in Nova (specifically) you only have 1 chance to not get locked into combat again.

I point this out because the Pylon star, once locked in combat and uses it once time use Relic/item, it will remain locked in combat for the remainder of the game.

This happens for 2 reasons: (Because of the FW rules and the combination of Nova FAQs on this pylon star)
1) The pylon's unit can NOT swing at enemies it is in close combat with.
2) The enemy unit automatically hits the pylon star. You just roll to wound and the independent's tank the wounds for the pylons themselves. IE - The enemy gets to wound you for free and the ICs can't swing - there is no way the Necron player can get out of combat unless other Necron units join the fight.

I have no idea how or why there were so many pylon stars at Nova this year but with the nerfs Nova gave the pylon star, it is honestly one of the worst ones out there.

2 of Nova's nerfs:
1) The portion of the Canoptek Artillery special rule forcing enemies to consolidate after each round of combat is ignored while an Independent Character is joined to a Sentry Pylon unit.
2) If an independent character is joined to a unit of Sentry Pylons the unit can be locked in combat and they automatically get hit.

To elaborate on the first nerf, the pylons have a rule in the IA12 book that states pylons that are locked in combat with an enemy unit get a free consolidation rule at the end of the ASsault Phase that allows them to move 1" away from the enemy unit. However, this rule (due to the Nova ruling) makes it so the pylons and the ICs are locked in combat.

There is an additional rule that states ICs that are attached to the Pylons cannot attack.

Pre-Nova nerfs and rules as written, the pylon star was untarpittable (never able to be locked due to the free 1" consolidation). It always allowed the ICs to not get hit for free (similiar to how normal artillery crew act - Weapon Skill versus Weapon Skill)

As of right now, in Nova, the Pylon star only has one relic that allows them to teleport out of combat. After that, it will forever be locked with no chance of escaping (without a thirdy party's help).

Please let me know if you have the exact wording for the IA12's Pylon rules. I'm pretty sure all of my information is correct.

Edit: This post was in response to page before this. @NewTruthNeomaximMade - I wouldn't buy these unless you are using RAW and there are no nerfs to them. But Nova and ITC nerfed them pretty hard. That being said - I'd save your money

... well that's incredibly stupid.
How did anyone decide ruling it so attached ICs couldn't attack made any kind of sense?

It's hard to even talk about using them as a reasonable option since FW has basically decided that Necrons don't exist (probably because they're not HH models). Nightshroud got an honorable mention in the DftS update but they've made no move to do anything about the IA12 Necron units since the new Necron update made all of them either invalid or impossible to use.

Saythings wrote:


There is an additional rule that states ICs that are attached to the Pylons cannot attack.

This is not correct. The Pylons cannot attack in combat but the attached ICs can still attack. Both the Pylons and the ICs get locked in combat and are automatically hit however. So after the Veil is spent the Pylon star rests its hopes on 3 war scythes.

col_impact wrote:

Saythings wrote:


There is an additional rule that states ICs that are attached to the Pylons cannot attack.

This is not correct. The Pylons cannot attack in combat but the attached ICs can still attack. Both the Pylons and the ICs get locked in combat and are automatically hit however. So after the Veil is spent the Pylon star rests its hopes on 3 war scythes.

I believe it reads along the lines of the Pylon's unit, or the unit of the Pylons can not attack. Therefore, when you attach ICs to it, you lose the ability to swing. Either way, that's how the ruling was at Nova via emails pre-event. My gaming group stopped running the list after they added the FAQ I listed above to their official FAQ. We were the ones that asked the questions and that's how they ruled it.

I don't have the IA12 book, so I wouldn't be able to quote it. But either way, the star is neutered. I just didn't want anyone to go around thinking it's broken with ITC/Nova rulings in effect. Without the nerfs, it's a deadly star.

Saythings wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Saythings wrote:


There is an additional rule that states ICs that are attached to the Pylons cannot attack.

This is not correct. The Pylons cannot attack in combat but the attached ICs can still attack. Both the Pylons and the ICs get locked in combat and are automatically hit however. So after the Veil is spent the Pylon star rests its hopes on 3 war scythes.

I believe it reads along the lines of the Pylon's unit, or the unit of the Pylons can not attack. Therefore, when you attach ICs to it, you lose the ability to swing. Either way, that's how the ruling was at Nova via emails pre-event. My gaming group stopped running the list after they added the FAQ I listed above to their official FAQ. We were the ones that asked the questions and that's how they ruled it.

I don't have the IA12 book, so I wouldn't be able to quote it. But either way, the star is neutered. I just didn't want anyone to go around thinking it's broken with ITC/Nova rulings in effect. Without the nerfs, it's a deadly star.

The IA12 book says 'Canoptek Artillery that are charged' not 'the Canoptek Artillery unit that is charged'.

Can you post the e-mail response you got?

@col_impact, I'll ask my friend if he still has the email, it was several months ago when we cut the pylons outta "Nova-use".

It doesn't have to say "Canoptek Artillary unit", it is implied when they are attached as a unit - at least by Nova's definition. Which is why they added the FAQ " If an independent character is joined to a unit of Sentry Pylons the unit can be locked in combat and they automatically get hit.".

The ICs joined the "Canoptek Artillary". Since there are no grounds on crewless Artillery in the BRB, FW came up with their own rules. Hence, the free consolidation away from the Artillery at the end of the phase. When you allow ICs to join it, they follow the same rules. They can't attack and they automatically are hit.

This is all an interpretation of course, one that was made by Nova. I don't agree or disagree with any rulings from any event. I simply play by their rules and build the appropriate lists. In the case of Nova, Necrons got the short end of the stick with their only "viable" deathstar. I'm just surprised someone made it to top tables with it.

Not really surprised too much - given how many people probably didn't question how this particular star works.

I definitely appreciate the conversation my question generated, and it has given me a lot to mull over. That said, I can't see how people would be so quick to dismiss the, even nerfed, lists that used these, as the proof of its validity is sort of right there. At NOVA, among the top two competitive 40k events we have, Pylons held their own and ended up in a Top-8 list. It can't have been that ineffectual, right? :-p

Saythings wrote:
@col_impact, I'll ask my friend if he still has the email, it was several months ago when we cut the pylons outta "Nova-use".

It doesn't have to say "Canoptek Artillary unit", it is implied when they are attached as a unit - at least by Nova's definition. Which is why they added the FAQ " If an independent character is joined to a unit of Sentry Pylons the unit can be locked in combat and they automatically get hit.".

The ICs joined the "Canoptek Artillary". Since there are no grounds on crewless Artillery in the BRB, FW came up with their own rules. Hence, the free consolidation away from the Artillery at the end of the phase. When you allow ICs to join it, they follow the same rules. They can't attack and they automatically are hit.

This is all an interpretation of course, one that was made by Nova. I don't agree or disagree with any rulings from any event. I simply play by their rules and build the appropriate lists. In the case of Nova, Necrons got the short end of the stick with their only "viable" deathstar. I'm just surprised someone made it to top tables with it.

Not really surprised too much - given how many people probably didn't question how this particular star works.

Their reasoning would imply that ICs attached to Wraiths get Wraithflight and all sorts of other shenanigans. The IC Special Rules rule says that special rules of a unit do not automatically confer unless specified as in stubborn (ie using clause like 'a unit that contains at least one model with').

Still, you can't argue with a specific and official pre-event ruling on the matter even if its not consistent with their rulings elsewhere.

It would be cool if you could track down that e-mail so we could see exactly what NOVA said pre-event. If you watch the Nova stream you see that the players were talking about the star as if the IC warscythes mattered.

col_impact wrote:

Saythings wrote:
@col_impact, I'll ask my friend if he still has the email, it was several months ago when we cut the pylons outta "Nova-use".

It doesn't have to say "Canoptek Artillary unit", it is implied when they are attached as a unit - at least by Nova's definition. Which is why they added the FAQ " If an independent character is joined to a unit of Sentry Pylons the unit can be locked in combat and they automatically get hit.".

The ICs joined the "Canoptek Artillary". Since there are no grounds on crewless Artillery in the BRB, FW came up with their own rules. Hence, the free consolidation away from the Artillery at the end of the phase. When you allow ICs to join it, they follow the same rules. They can't attack and they automatically are hit.

This is all an interpretation of course, one that was made by Nova. I don't agree or disagree with any rulings from any event. I simply play by their rules and build the appropriate lists. In the case of Nova, Necrons got the short end of the stick with their only "viable" deathstar. I'm just surprised someone made it to top tables with it.

Not really surprised too much - given how many people probably didn't question how this particular star works.

Their reasoning would imply that ICs attached to Wraiths get Wraithflight and all sorts of other shenanigans. The IC Special Rules rule says that special rules of a unit do not automatically confer unless specified as in stubborn (ie using clause like 'a unit that contains at least one model with').

Still, you can't argue with a specific and official pre-event ruling on the matter even if its not consistent with their rulings elsewhere.

It would be cool if you could track down that e-mail so we could see exactly what NOVA said pre-event. If you watch the Nova stream you see that the players were talking about the star as if the IC warscythes mattered.

Ahh, my mistake. They can attack. Truly sorry. Finally heard back from my friend. They just get auto hit with no free consolidation (as we mentioned above). Big mix up on my part. His email only contained the 2 FAQs that I previously mentioned. When we were play testing the pylon star we were using RAW and they couldn't be locked (due to the free 1") and the ICs were swinging like normal Artillery Crew would do. After we received the FAQ responses from Nova, we stopped running it as it was a lot easier for the Necron's opponents to just lock them in combat for the rest of the game.

That being said, any dedicated unit with a decent psychic power (invis/veil) or decent invulnerable will be able to tarpit them after the one-use teleport out of combat.

@NewTruthNeomaxim, the list is fine. I never thought the list was bad or the pylon star was bad. I just wouldn't personally bring it to Nova. There are too many Deathstars and scarier lists that (imo) are stronger then the pylon star. I've only been to Nova 3 times so far and each time it seems more of a match up game, then a strategy game. Obviously skill has something to do with it, but match up via army comp and missions are much more important - unfortunately.

I even went 3-0 with Orks this year before running into a 2nd Tau list (on the 4th round). It was Points and Regions (my list's favorite mission-type), I just went against Target Lock heavy Tau. I was one good match up away from Top16. My list was a little unusual and does better against CC stars/Elite Army-types but the match ups are the key to doing well in Nova.

Sorry about the confusion, col_impact! Didn't mean to derail the conversation. My opinion towards the star hasn't changed. I still think it's too weak to bring to Nova/ITC missions, but at least those ICs get there attacks - albeit they probably won't do much against proper melee.

Requizen wrote:
It's hard to even talk about using them as a reasonable option since FW has basically decided that Necrons don't exist (probably because they're not HH models). Nightshroud got an honorable mention in the DftS update but they've made no move to do anything about the IA12 Necron units since the new Necron update made all of them either invalid or impossible to use.

Yeah. It's pretty frustrating. I'd love to buy some more FW Necron stuff, but if I can't field them, having more than 1 of anything is pointless.

We don't even have models for the two named HQs in that book!

I hope this is the right place for this.

I'm in the process of building my necron army and I've decided that I want a destroyer cult in there. I like the models and I want my army to be very shooty. I'm planning on potentially pairing it with a judicator battalion in a decurion because I want the synergy between the triarch stalker and heavy destroyers. Just looking at the options, it looks like I will always need a Destroyer Lord and 6 Destroyers. Beyond that, what composition of destroyers/heavy destroyers would you initially buy? I play against a lot of marine variants. I remember reading one person suggesting a max squad of destroyers, two squads of 3/1 and another squad of heavies. I've read a lot of suggestion of 3 squads of 2/1 and a max squad of heavies to basically max out on heavy destroyers. I guess I'm looking for feedback from people who have played with or against the formation. How would you build it and why?

I usually run a min D Cult with 3 units of 3 regular destroyers. This allows me to put more points into supporting multiple units of Tomb Blades and a Wraithstar.

Tomb Blades are really good!



Lots of people match up some kind of D Cult with one or two Canoptek Harvests for a strong yet predictable list.



If you are wanting to build a gunline Necron list and are really looking to keep your Stalker(s) alive you should consider running a single/dual CAD and a Void Shield Generator or a Skyshield Landing Pad.

Skoffs had an interesting list to this effect. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/676964.page

You could probably switch a few points around to get a Judicator Battalion in there.

If you're running a Cult, you might not need to go for a full HD squad. With their shooting being do effective, two is usually enough to take car of vehicles. Often times the third shot might just go to waste.
If you keep a unit of 5 regulars together they can work well as your MEQ hunters.
Having the other two units mixed with 2-3 regulars and 1 heavy works as support for the main two units, in case someone needs help finishing something off. Otherwise they can work with each other to eliminate basically anything you point them at.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Note: DO NOT keep your Destroyer Lord with your Destroyers.
He is of very little use to them.
He is better off attaching to something that needs help improving their shooting or a close combat deterrent (or CC help, in the case of Wraiths or Lychguard).

You have come to the right place.
Destroyer cult is very shooty. Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers want to shoot at different things... keep them in different units. I don't have enough trust that a single Heavy Destroyer shot (even with PE) will get what I need it to. I generally don't think that they are worth their points, and 180 for three of them seems excessive.)
Regular Destroyers are going to kill your opponents marines with ease. You'll either want to run minimum 3 or more than 5 for morale reasons. (At 4, you'll need to take a test if you lose one... which is not the case for either 3 or 5+).
I haven't played with Praetorians... not much advice there for you. I don't even own a Stalker (they were bad... really bad when I got into Necrons. Now, not so much).
I can talk about the Decurion however. I used to run 2 units of 10 warriors in Ghost Arks, but the FAQ makes me sad. I've switched to 3 units of 10 on foot, and had better results and freed up more points doing it.
I run a minimum Tesla Immortal squad for camping backfield objectives. If you spend more points here, you really need them to do work, and that means Gauss in the main part of the attack.
I only have three Tombblades... spending a few more points here is always good. The 3 or 5+ rule applies here too, and I wish that I had 2-3 units of them. People always underestimate how durable they are.
I typically run a lychstar. 7-8 Lychguard with swords and 3++ because I don't trust myself to tank with the characters like I should. Add in a Royal Court with Obyeron and Orikan and you can have a lot of fun. Just make sure to have 2 Veils... not optimized, but it prevents them from being stranded somewhere. Books could be written here, but you aren't interested in a Lychstar.
For fun, I run a bunch of Flayed Ones and Imotekh to fill out my points.