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.

pretre wrote:

nurglerulesslaneshdrools wrote:the only good tau combat units are kroot

In this codex. I think the point is that there might be new and different units in the new one.

What he said.. If there are the Dwarvish type (Dwellar?) in the next codex it will add resilience to survive combat, and I believe there was some concept are that showed a type of large Vespid, those could be good as well. In the end, Tau will get better, I am willing to be in every aspect.

@Painnen: Wow. Overreact a bit there.

I'm pretty sure Draigo by himself is fearless so if he broke of and joined a losing combat, he wouldn't have to take a morale test.

i don't usually double post but this is a seperate train of thought.

you mentioned SW, GK, and IG as the top of the field right now. I can't disagree with that. What I'm finding from the necrons is that with builds simular to your JY2, that necrons are going to be very hard to BEAT. I do mean beat. I think necron lists in this manifestation are going to win/draw a whole whole lot more than they'll ever lose. Too many targets, too mobile, too high LD/fearless to reliably break.

I believe the rule in the book states that if the model cannot be placed into coherency with the squad it is destroyed. Since this squad was indeed still on the table (albeit falling back), if the 3" placement rule kept you from sorting the cryptek into coherency (and falling back as the rest of his squad) then he would have been removed from the table completely.

I'm at work so no codex or BRB near me at the moment but the above is how i believe the rule works from the codex entry. Anyone feel free to correct me on that one if they have the info.

Painnen wrote:nice batrep but i'm not surprised that your "new necron list" won. i say this because there is a rather game changing rules issue that led to the Draigowing list being "target saturated" when it shouldn't have been.

now i'm no rules guru but how in the world do you rule that the necron warriors and ajoined crypteks don't remain one unit (under it's original deployed unit strength) just because one model has a rule that lets it stand back up? that kind of rules mongering is exactly why people stop playing against certain people who bend rules in their favor whenever it "can" benefit them. you can sight, "show me proof" but the same can be said against you...the burden of proof would be to show me how a model that joins another unit and cannot be seperated or distinguished from that unit (as an IC could) can somehow not count against a unit when it would matter? not only did you get an extra scoring unit out of the rules lawyering but you ended up with x2 scoring units when they should have just ran off the board! no need for killing, shooting, assaulting whatsoever.

I'm not entirely sure what effect it would have made on the game but not having those warriors rapid firing, swinging in CC, being in the way, etc make this game's resault void in my opinion. I think it could have been a draw at best for the GKs however.

The good and bad from the rep, in my eyes of course:

1) the flyers harrassed and getting first turn meant they got to do something positive other than harrassing.
2) the barges were not harassed and went on their merry way. very impressed with them. almost scared of them.
3) Draigo and paladins losing/tieing back to back combats vs. ID able targets is a laugher but not unheard of.
4) Mindstrikes should have been fired off by either player.
5) the ammount of 1's rolled by those Staves in CC had to of been horribly high.
6) good, close battle...all the more reason why the rules choice was a complete shame.

I believe that when you make RP or Ever Living roll, you are supposed to remove the model a place a counter where it died. A model that isn't on the board does not stay with a unit, as he is effectively a casualty, and until you make his Ever Living roll to get back up he stays where he is. If you will a character off from a unit the unit is free and not bound, If the character came back, he would be outside of the unit, as he was removed from the table. I am not a master of, and don't like to argue with RAW, but my impression here was that jy2 played this correctly.

@tetrisphreak:

"At the end of the phase, after any Morale c hecks have been taken and fall back moves have been made, roll a D6 (blah) ... On a 5 or 6, a necron reassembles itself and continues to fight - return one of the slain models to play with a single wound, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through RP this phase. Models returning from play in this fashion must be placed at least 1" from enemy models. If the model's unit is engaged in close combat, the model immediately piles in. Models that cannot be placed in this way do not return."

So basically, RP ignores range for rejoining the unit. THe only time you would not return if you succeed is if there is no way to place you in coherency with the remaining models in the squad and stay outside of 1" of the enemy. (i.e. your squad is completely surrounded by 30+ boys and all space within 2" of the models is covered by boyz.)

pretre wrote:@Painnen: Wow. Overreact a bit there.

if that came out harsh, it was unintended. i was just trying to be blunt when it comes to rules lawyering. i think that people in general (not you per say JY2) enjoy winning and in enjoying winning with their own creations (as everyone's individual lists are) are easily corrupted into lobbying for rules advantages when they could really REALLY use the ruling to go in their favor.

it happens all the time. i've seen it happen alot with necrons lately since people feel that w/out a FaQ that anything is possible as long as it cannot be 100% shot down by either codex or rulebook. it gets annoying. i only meant to play as the voice of reason and lay it out thick from outside the game, so that in the end everyone can see that that paticular ruling was pretty horrible.

Oh crud, Ever Living:

"If the model has joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play with a single wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in RP. "

It later says "If the model was locked in c lose combat when it 'died', and the combat is ongoing, then it must immediately pile in."

I would say the earlier passage overrides this though.

jy2 wrote:
I guess people will never agree on the top armies. It's usually one of the 3 - IG, SW or GK. That's also why I usually preface these type of statements with "arguably", "possibly", "probably" and "perhaps".

Wraiths are just awesome. IMO, they are the best unit in the codex and the strongest necron lists will use some form of "wraithwing".

No, not everyone will agree what is the top army. It depends what armies and lists are played in your area, there's a lot of mech Guard in my area and I played G.K for a small while, it's all those special weapons and tanks which do it for mech Guard. Though, I will say that G.K are definitely a top codex.

I don't think it matters if you put things in bold or italtics as you're still saying something, that's just a font effect . The best word to use is properly . Though, I do think Wraiths are a cool unit.

mercer wrote:

jy2 wrote:
I guess people will never agree on the top armies. It's usually one of the 3 - IG, SW or GK. That's also why I usually preface these type of statements with "arguably", "possibly", "probably" and "perhaps".

Wraiths are just awesome. IMO, they are the best unit in the codex and the strongest necron lists will use some form of "wraithwing".

No, not everyone will agree what is the top army. It depends what armies and lists are played in your area, there's a lot of mech Guard in my area and I played G.K for a small while, it's all those special weapons and tanks which do it for mech Guard. Though, I will say that G.K are definitely a top codex.

I don't think it matters if you put things in bold or italtics as you're still saying something, that's just a font effect . The best word to use is properly . Though, I do think Wraiths are a cool unit.

I would say the top tier army is tied between SW and Guard, Then GK, BA, DE, and Crons are right below them.

I find that it is tough to be 100% objective when playing against yourself. You don't fall for your own tricks and there is no human element (in that, there's nothing to catch you off guard, strange things you didn't account for, strange deployment - things that someone else might do that you're not used to).

I find that when I roll units against each other in a battle type setting, I find myself pulling for one side and that may affect the way I play, roll or make decisions.

Lord Magnus wrote:

I would say the top tier army is tied between SW and Guard, Then GK, BA, DE, and Crons are right below them.

I agree mostly with your assessment my good man. I would say Guard are the top army, Wolves, Angels and Knights all second and then D.E third and Necrons just a whisker behind.

puma713 wrote:I find that it is tough to be 100% objective when playing against yourself. You don't fall for your own tricks and there is no human element (in that, there's nothing to catch you off guard, strange things you didn't account for, strange deployment - things that someone else might do that you're not used to).

I find that when I roll units against each other in a battle type setting, I find myself pulling for one side and that may affect the way I play, roll or make decisions.

I agree with this. I probably test my own lists on my own once a month, there's no surprises or anything you cannot account for. All you can do is test units and see how effective they are and how your army list works. You get a good idea for things, but tactics are out the window. And of course you can be one sided, like when dice aren't working for one army and or you want your favourite one to win

Very good report as usual !

2 questions :
Why the 5 paladins from stormraven didn't used force weapon against your wraiths ?
And after why they did not hit the scarabs with force weapon to ?

His saves for the paladins were average to below average by a smidgen but his saves for those wraiths had to be psychotic! The only have 3+ at the end of the day yea its invulnerable but that's still 33% fail rate against ID force weapons.

I think given that the Paladins had a turn one assault, it was more prudent to charge the deathstar at the other wraiths and eliminate any assault potential on turn 2. Paladins just are not afraid of scarabs or spyders. That would have left the paladins able to shoot up the warriors for three turns. Yea that's right just camp 16 paladins on the two objectives on the middle and shoot up all his scoring units

Ok, with regards to the unit of warriors rallying, I've went ahead and posted this question in YMDC:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/421381.page#3756593

pretre wrote:

jy2 wrote:Yeah, that's exactly right. I made them seem as if they were phasing/tunneling through the ground. Not really a whole lot of converting so it was quite easy to do.

I dunno, I know you have them all finished up at this point, but I would have liked to see more conversion in there. Right now they basically just look like Tomb Kings models in your 40k army.

I'll see what I can do to make the 2nd batch of Sepulchral Stalkers more "necron-ish". I may well switch out the arms, as I had intended the spears to be weapons of entanglement (i.e. whip coils). I kind of like the heads so will probably keep those.

hyv3mynd wrote:I'm pretty sure Draigo by himself is fearless so if he broke of and joined a losing combat, he wouldn't have to take a morale test.

That was a mistake on my part. I'm so used to having Draigo + unit take morale tests that I forgot he was fearless. Lol.


-------------------------------------------------------


I'll respond more later, but right now, I've got a game to catch against my Crowe-Purifiers with SabrX. But there's a twist....I will let him decide which army he wants to play.

Interesting rep.... Those barges did a number on those dreads!

Did you embark the overlord and flat-out his barge during turn 3? Judging from the pictures, I'd say so. I wonder why it is so often played wrong.

The rest of the report was fine though; I especially enjoyed to see Draigowing fall.

Several things, in EL rules it says that the model with EL gets back up with his unit if it flees instead of where he died. Also you let your opponent pull a fast one on you, might of titans can only be cast durring the GK's assult phase, not durring your turn.

Zaephyr wrote:Did you embark the overlord and flat-out his barge during turn 3? Judging from the pictures, I'd say so. I wonder why it is so often played wrong.

The rest of the report was fine though; I especially enjoyed to see Draigowing fall.

Good call, it actually does look like he embarked and moved flat out over the Paladins in turn 3.

Painnen wrote:nice batrep but i'm not surprised that your "new necron list" won. i say this because there is a rather game changing rules issue that led to the Draigowing list being "target saturated" when it shouldn't have been.

now i'm no rules guru but how in the world do you rule that the necron warriors and ajoined crypteks don't remain one unit (under it's original deployed unit strength) just because one model has a rule that lets it stand back up? that kind of rules mongering is exactly why people stop playing against certain people who bend rules in their favor whenever it "can" benefit them. you can sight, "show me proof" but the same can be said against you...the burden of proof would be to show me how a model that joins another unit and cannot be seperated or distinguished from that unit (as an IC could) can somehow not count against a unit when it would matter? not only did you get an extra scoring unit out of the rules lawyering but you ended up with x2 scoring units when they should have just ran off the board! no need for killing, shooting, assaulting whatsoever.

I'm not entirely sure what effect it would have made on the game but not having those warriors rapid firing, swinging in CC, being in the way, etc make this game's resault void in my opinion. I think it could have been a draw at best for the GKs however.

The good and bad from the rep, in my eyes of course:

1) the flyers harrassed and getting first turn meant they got to do something positive other than harrassing.
2) the barges were not harassed and went on their merry way. very impressed with them. almost scared of them.
3) Draigo and paladins losing/tieing back to back combats vs. ID able targets is a laugher but not unheard of.
4) Mindstrikes should have been fired off by either player.
5) the ammount of 1's rolled by those Staves in CC had to of been horribly high.
6) good, close battle...all the more reason why the rules choice was a complete shame.

Because I didn't have my codex with me? My brother had borrowed it and still has it, thus I couldn't reference the rule.


But after asking in YMDC, it seems as if the correct way to play it would have been this:


Cryptek makes its Ever-living "save" and moves back into coherency with the unit falling back (no distance restriction here). The unit is now 4 models out of 7 and thusly, would have regrouped, with the cryptek as part of the squad again.

How that would have affected the game? I think necrons would have still probably won as they had a lot of units that could contest, though perhaps they wouldn't have been able to table the grey knights.

Painnen wrote:i don't usually double post but this is a seperate train of thought.

you mentioned SW, GK, and IG as the top of the field right now. I can't disagree with that. What I'm finding from the necrons is that with builds simular to your JY2, that necrons are going to be very hard to BEAT. I do mean beat. I think necron lists in this manifestation are going to win/draw a whole whole lot more than they'll ever lose. Too many targets, too mobile, too high LD/fearless to reliably break.

Yeah, agreed. Here you have an ultra-fast army that gets up in the enemy's face in just 2 turns. It's got good offense, great resiliency and units that won't break. It also gets protected from shooting with night-fight and by virtue of locking itself in combat. It gets free units every turn via spyders. Finally, it's got such a high mobility that probably only the fastest armies can get away from it.

This really is a tough necron build to play against.

Painnen wrote:
if that came out harsh, it was unintended. i was just trying to be blunt when it comes to rules lawyering. i think that people in general (not you per say JY2) enjoy winning and in enjoying winning with their own creations (as everyone's individual lists are) are easily corrupted into lobbying for rules advantages when they could really REALLY use the ruling to go in their favor.

it happens all the time. i've seen it happen alot with necrons lately since people feel that w/out a FaQ that anything is possible as long as it cannot be 100% shot down by either codex or rulebook. it gets annoying. i only meant to play as the voice of reason and lay it out thick from outside the game, so that in the end everyone can see that that paticular ruling was pretty horrible.

No worries. It's ok if people think my reports (or the results of my reports) is not good or if they voice out something they don't like...as long as they give reasoning behind it. I'm ok with that, even if sometimes, I disagree with or challenge back the poster. My main concern is that the readers don't repeat my mistakes (or at least that they are aware of it) so I would gladly admit my mistakes when I make them (and if I am aware of it). That is also the reason why I presented a situation I wasn't fully sure of to the readers to consider. I'm glad to have been proven wrong.

I don't really consider it rules-lawyering though. It is basically coming up with a decision based on what little information you have (as I didn't have the codex with me). Unfortunately, in a game against yourself, there is no other person to give a counter-perspective. Basically, this is how I thought it would've been played whether or not I was playing necrons or not. In other words, if I was to play against another necron player and this situation came up (and without the knowledge that I have now), I would've let him play it this same way as well.

But I do find it amusing that I would try to take advantage of myself.


------------------------------------------------------


Ok, I'm finding that a number of mistakes have been made this game, and I will address this.


Some of my mistakes, as pointed out by readers:

- Embarking onto a vehicle and moving flat-out afterwards.

- Casting Might of Titans in the opponent's Assault phase.

- Forgetting Draigo was Fearless.

- Forgetting to fire the mindstrike missiles.

- Messing up the turns (I skipped a turn).


Basically, these mistakes stem from me playing against myself. It's one thing when you just have to play 1 army. It's something else when you're trying to play both armies and play them competitively - yours and your opponents. You have to consider the best tactics for both armies, the best counter-tactics, how to achieve your mission objectives, how to stop your opponent from achieving his mission objectives, the rules for both armies intimately, etc., etc. I think I was so intent on the strategic part of the game when playing against myself that I overlooked a lot of the little stuff/rules.

For that, I apologize. I will try to do better next time. Playing against oneself is usually mainly done when you really want to test out a certain battle/scenario but no one else has the time, experience and/or army build to do it properly. Thus, on occassions, I may setup up test games such as this one.

Also, please take into consideration that people do make honest mistakes. I know I do it once in a while and so do many of my opponents, even the more experienced players. But I am glad when mistakes such as these are spotted in my battle reports. Hopefully, we can all learn from them. After all, to err is only human.

i didn't realize that you were in fact playing against yourself until others mentioned it.

as far as the teleporting back to coherency thing, yeah, i can see that. you should have also mentioned that in the YMDC, there were sentiments that said that the cryptek would not be placed with the unit if it was >5" away however.

until a faq, i'd be happy to play with your ruling but it is my opinion (and who really cares about that) that the crytek would go bye-bye since the warriors were too far away for the cryptek to join.

thanks for addressing the post! battlereps should be about information giving and recieving. it helps others gather needed info on an oppoenent that they might have little familiarity with but anticipate seeing much MUCH more often with new dex's popping up.

again, thanks for the reply.

puma713 wrote:I find that it is tough to be 100% objective when playing against yourself. You don't fall for your own tricks and there is no human element (in that, there's nothing to catch you off guard, strange things you didn't account for, strange deployment - things that someone else might do that you're not used to).

I find that when I roll units against each other in a battle type setting, I find myself pulling for one side and that may affect the way I play, roll or make decisions.

All so true. You can try to stay objective, but it is tough. People usually always have an army that they favor more.

However, if you're playing another good, experienced general, normally they won't fall for "tricks" as well. All I can say is that when playing both armies, play it strategically as if you want to win. Go for the throat with each army. Good generals won't rely on parlor tricks. They will force the opponents (even if themselves) to make difficult decisions.

Like my necrons offering up the warriors to the paladinstar. Go after the scoring warriors or help from your fellow paladins stuck in combat with the wraiths. In this case, I decided as the GK player that the best thing to do was to play the mission and go for the jugular by trying to take out the warriors. It turned out to be a good move for the necrons.

tetsuo666 wrote:Very good report as usual !

2 questions :
Why the 5 paladins from stormraven didn't used force weapon against your wraiths ?
And after why they did not hit the scarabs with force weapon to ?

I think either I cast Hammerhand or I forgot to activate the force weapon. I don't quite remember.

As for scarabs, I did activate the force weapon. It's just that I only managed to wound it once.

Red Corsair wrote:His saves for the paladins were average to below average by a smidgen but his saves for those wraiths had to be psychotic! The only have 3+ at the end of the day yea its invulnerable but that's still 33% fail rate against ID force weapons.

I think given that the Paladins had a turn one assault, it was more prudent to charge the deathstar at the other wraiths and eliminate any assault potential on turn 2. Paladins just are not afraid of scarabs or spyders. That would have left the paladins able to shoot up the warriors for three turns. Yea that's right just camp 16 paladins on the two objectives on the middle and shoot up all his scoring units

It was a combination of the paladins (and Draigo) whiffing in combat and my wraiths making their saves.

As the necron general, I was forcing "myself" to make a difficult choice - either go for the kill (wraiths) or go for the win (warriors). Either help out your teammates, or take away your opponents ability to win. I think as the GK general, I made the tactical choice that most prudent generals would have made - I was playing for the mission rather than just to kill the opponent. Of course, now looking back at it in hindsight, maybe the other choice may have been better. Still, IMO the good generals will always try to play the mission first.

Zaephyr wrote:Did you embark the overlord and flat-out his barge during turn 3? Judging from the pictures, I'd say so. I wonder why it is so often played wrong.

The rest of the report was fine though; I especially enjoyed to see Draigowing fall.

bagtagger wrote:Several things, in EL rules it says that the model with EL gets back up with his unit if it flees instead of where he died. Also you let your opponent pull a fast one on you, might of titans can only be cast durring the GK's assult phase, not durring your turn.

Thanks for pointing out some of my messups.

I really did pull a fast one on myself.

jy2 wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:His saves for the paladins were average to below average by a smidgen but his saves for those wraiths had to be psychotic! The only have 3+ at the end of the day yea its invulnerable but that's still 33% fail rate against ID force weapons.

I think given that the Paladins had a turn one assault, it was more prudent to charge the deathstar at the other wraiths and eliminate any assault potential on turn 2. Paladins just are not afraid of scarabs or spyders. That would have left the paladins able to shoot up the warriors for three turns. Yea that's right just camp 16 paladins on the two objectives on the middle and shoot up all his scoring units

It was a combination of the paladins (and Draigo) whiffing in combat and my wraiths making their saves.

As the necron general, I was forcing "myself" to make a difficult choice - either go for the kill (wraiths) or go for the win (warriors). Either help out your teammates, or take away your opponents ability to win. I think as the GK general, I made the tactical choice that most prudent generals would have made - I was playing for the mission rather than just to kill the opponent. Of course, now looking back at it in hindsight, maybe the other choice may have been better. Still, IMO the good generals will always try to play the mission first.

It's tough playing a game yourself and I think that is the main reason you hadn't assaulted the other wraith unit to be honest. I think it is playing the mission to eliminate the best threat to your own scoring units. Again I think if you were only playing the GK this choice would have been easier to make but juggling two hats makes you question the right decision in order to make the 'common decision" based on the scenario. Honestly I try not to self play as I find it doesn't make you better or really allow you to test things out properly as you are at war with every decision you make! Still seemed entertaining though.

I still want to see a MS scarab combat court take on that deathstar! I think it is a sub-par list overall but that it would be incredibly flavorful and entertaining. Who knows though I haven't seen anyone really test out a full strength court held together yet. Imagine two full courts veiling in for the kill! Would be devastating I bet!

Red Corsair wrote:It's tough playing a game yourself and I think that is the main reason you hadn't assaulted the other wraith unit to be honest. I think it is playing the mission to eliminate the best threat to your own scoring units. Again I think if you were only playing the GK this choice would have been easier to make but juggling two hats makes you question the right decision in order to make the 'common decision" based on the scenario. Honestly I try not to self play as I find it doesn't make you better or really allow you to test things out properly as you are at war with every decision you make! Still seemed entertaining though.

Agreed. I don't see any point in playing with yourself... Strategies, tactics are an important part of the game.

Isseyfaran wrote:Agreed. I don't see any point in playing with yourself... Strategies, tactics are an important part of the game.

Playing with yourself has many uses. Don't be so hard on jy2.

pretre wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:Agreed. I don't see any point in playing with yourself... Strategies, tactics are an important part of the game.

Playing with yourself has many uses. Don't be so hard on jy2.

I've played with myself on many occasions.

Painnen wrote:as far as the teleporting back to coherency thing, yeah, i can see that. you should have also mentioned that in the YMDC, there were sentiments that said that the cryptek would not be placed with the unit if it was >5" away however.

And, as noted in the YMDC thread, those sentiments are wrong. There's no limit on the "teleport" into coherency as long as the unit is still completely standing. The "within 3"" rule only comes about if there is no unit to stand back up into.

until a faq, i'd be happy to play with your ruling but it is my opinion (and who really cares about that) that the crytek would go bye-bye since the warriors were too far away for the cryptek to join.

You're welcome to your opinion, but that would be against the rules, as noted.

I was also unaware that you were playing against yourself. I can imagine you don't get a lot out of the experience since when you play vs another opponent you don't know what they are thinking, what tactical hiccups ploys they have planned etc etc. That said I think Necrons had this quite easily. Doom Scythes were priority 1 to be dealt with, but with short range psycannons, night fight, low numbers and not a lot of support units it seemed they would almost be guaranteed a decent shot each. Combined with the fact Necrons did have a lot of support it put it easily in the Neconrs favour. At 2k my A. Barges are being replaced with Doom Scythes for the Alpha Strike capability.

Even with the mistakes (everyone makes them, wouldn't worry too much about it) it was a good read. Congrats on the win, lol.

I never thought mine eyes would see the day! Draigowing, TABLED! and by Necrons no less! I'd say Necrons are a high level army now! Just wait until second wave increases our strength! GLORY TO THE MACHINE!