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.

On paper Tomb Blades look half decent, maneuvrable Immortals (when given shield vanes) with TL guns and options for stealth and BS5. But everytime I use them, they flop, epically so do they really work on the table, or is it a case of leave them out for more Wraiths because they're in an FA slot

From my experiences, they have limited uses and there are better options for the points in our codex.

If I play them, I tend to give them the Particle Beamer upgrade and keep them on the flank. Crons don't have a lot of blast weapons so having a squad of bikes that can drop S6 plates on infantry can definitely disrupt a few things. In addition, they ARE disruptive and I've noticed that my opponents tend to redirect their attention to the bikes from my Immortals after they realize the bikes drop blast templates.

That said, I rarely field them now since they are a fast attack slot which I tend to fill with either Wraiths and or Heavy Destroyers. By not having or scaling back Wraiths or HDs, it limits my options on handling the MCs my opponents tend to field now.

I have not had any luck in using the bikes for anything other than anti-infantry and running ABs tend to provide ample support in that area since its twin-linked S7 Assault 4 Tesla tends to do more consistent damage point for point. If you were focusing on a strategy where you wanted to contest or annihilate all scoring units of your opponent's, they provide great AI support that compliments the AB; however, they offer little when dealing with non-infantry models.

When i did run them i did like running them with particle beamers. before the model came out i used the old destroyer model. with the seated cylon looking guy. when the actual model came out i stopped using them. bad looking model with too many little parts to me. they seemed like a one trick pony for me. soon as everyone at the store saw what they did, from then on they were focused fired down turn one every game from there on. they are great fun though. it is better to spend the points else where for sure for a serious list. more warriors with ghost ark backup. warrior spam still works pretty well.

The issue with them is they are in the FA slot, which is the most competitive slot in the codex. They have to contend with Wraiths, Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers, Scarabs, and if counting FW, the Tomb Stalker and Canoptek Acanthrites.

The Tomb blades fall in with the Tomb Stalker as the two weakest units in the slot, everything else is more effective for the point cost.

RivenSkull wrote:
The issue with them is they are in the FA slot, which is the most competitive slot in the codex. They have to contend with Wraiths, Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers, Scarabs, and if counting FW, the Tomb Stalker and Canoptek Acanthrites.

The Tomb blades fall in with the Tomb Stalker as the two weakest units in the slot, everything else is more effective for the point cost.

This.

A full unit of Tomb Blades with Particle Beamers is 150pts.

For 150pts, you could also get the following:

10 Scarab bases

1 Squad of 2 Destroyers and 1 Heavy Destroyer (140)

3 Wraiths with whip coils (135)


Point v Point compared only to other fast attack options, they are decent for anti-infantry; however, Anti-Infantry is one thing we have an abundance of in other areas between Night Scythes and Annihilation Barges.

So in short, not worth it? Or is there a viable reason to run them?

I like them as MSU 3 blades blast template delivery, rather cheap if you think you could use some S6 blasts and have just a tiny bit of points left. Couple them with triarch stalker's twinlinked marking and you can reroll those scatters too.

^
Or just give them Scopes with their blast makers.
Actually works out rather nicely.

RivenSkull wrote:
The issue with them is they are in the FA slot, which is the most competitive slot in the codex. They have to contend with Wraiths, Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers, Scarabs, and if counting FW, the Tomb Stalker and Canoptek Acanthrites.

The Tomb blades fall in with the Tomb Stalker as the two weakest units in the slot, everything else is more effective for the point cost.

Tomb Sentinel is FA, Stalker is Elite.


But yes, they provide Anti-infantry which Necrons really don't have an issue with, and there are better options available.

They are quite fast and have relatively big profiles. If you are looking for mobile cover for big things (like Monoliths or GAs), they work rather well.

That's about the only time I think of reaching for them in this edition though.

I'd like to chime in with: 'They aren't bad so much as thoroughly out-classed by the other options available in the Fast Attack slot'

Strength 6 blasts just really aren't all that great unless they are AP-3 or lower. (which these aren't.) In most situations where they'd be useful, you'd be better off taking destroyers. Along with this, in most situations where they'd be weak (ie: everything else not involving ranged combat) You are assuredly better off with wraiths and/or scarabs.

I like the concept of them; but they just cost too much for what they do especially if you pile on the upgrades.

 Neorealist wrote:
In most situations where they'd be useful, you'd be better off taking destroyers.

Actually, I'd be interested to see a direct comparison between rough equivalent Tomb Blade / Destroyer units, if anyone can oblige with some math hammer.

Sure thing. Working with the assumption that you upgraded the tomb blades with just shield vanes (so they are as close as possible)and a particle beamer:

They are functionally identical defensively; with the same statline, unit size, and cost.

Special abilities:
A nod to the Destroyers (Preferred enemy vs. 'nothing')

Ranged weapons:
Tomb Blades - 24" Str - 6, Ap - 5, Blast
Destroyers - 24" Str - 5, Ap - 3, Assault 2, Gauss

Tomb blades - using a prototypical Marine shooting dummy:
3+ to hit (66%)
2+ to wound (55%)
3+ save to bypass (19%)
= 19% chance of any given hit translating into a successful wound

Destroyers - using a prototypical Marine shooting dummy:
3+ to hit (66%)
3+ to wound (44%)
= 44% chance of any given hit translating into a successful wound.
Advantage: Destroyers (really, advantage = Low AP, which is what the tomb blade lacks in it's infantry hunting role)

The tipping point for the tomb blade is it wounds more often vs ork armour (5+), and very slightly more often vs. terminators (2+), provided you can get the blast template to land on 2 or more of them.

So against MEQ Destroyers are the better call but against guard/orks/termis the tomb blade is the better call?

Only if they are blobbed up. The blast template really needs to hit multiple models (with a toughness of 4 or more) in order to be definitively superior. (so yeah it's probably better vs orks)

Alright thanks, commonly I run Destroyers Tomb Blades and Wraiths if I can for variety. Good idea?