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.

Thanks for the great write-up. I'm hoping for a GK too, but as you said it seems to be way behind in support...

Maybe we'll see some usefull stuff from the SM write up (if you get there)

Tyfus wrote:
Thanks for the great write-up. I'm hoping for a GK too, but as you said it seems to be way behind in support...

Maybe we'll see some usefull stuff from the SM write up (if you get there)

Since I probably won't be writing a GK Escalation tactica anytime soon, I'll give you the army lists for a balanced GK Escalation army that I would use:



1750 Escalation - Grey Knights

Warhound Titan

Coteaz

3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt
5x Henchmen - 5x Meltabombs

Stormraven - TL-Lascannon, TL-MM

Psyfleman Dread
Psyfleman Dread

Void Shield Generator - 3x Shields


2000 Escalation - Grey Knights

Warhound Titan

Coteaz

3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt + Searchlights
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt + Searchlights
3x Henchmen - Razorback w/Psybolt + Searchlights
3x Henchmen - Rhino
3x Henchmen
3x Henchmen

Stormraven - TL-Lascannon, TL-MM
Stormraven - TL-Lascannon, TL-MM

Psyfleman Dread
Psyfleman Dread
Psyfleman Dread

Void Shield Generator - 3x Shields

Thanks for the GK input. I would think that cotaez with 3 plasmacannon servitors and some acolytes bodies should be good anti-droppod defence for the LoW in most armies.

Back to necron topic. I have seen several people argue over counts as Transcendent c'tan. I've seen your picture above where the original is lower than a wraith - but could you give us the exact height ? Is it no stand in the box with it ?

You could take Coteaz w/Plasmacannon servitors. Just use my list as a template and swap out 1 unit of psyback henchmen for them.

That is the actual Transcendent model. Yes, he's actually shorter than a wraith. He's probably just a little taller than a space marine dreadnought.

Honestly, I am not 100% sure if there is a stand included. I got the model already built on the Vault but dismounted him from it. There was no stand with the model I got, but then again, I didn't get the original box set.

The stand makes the TC'tan a bit taller. Its then 9.5 cm or 3,75 inches.

 jy2 wrote:
My prediction is that Escalation/Stronghold won't be allowed, at least not at the major GT's and not initially.

Maybe 6-months from now, certain tournaments may perhaps allow Escalation/Stronghold in their tournaments, but in a separate event much like Adepticon's Championships and Gladiatior events. In these types of tournaments, there will be a main tournament (i.e. the Championships) which is just regular 40K without Escalation/Stronghold. Then there will be a smaller, no-holds-barred side tournament (i.e. the Gladiator) that will allow Escalation/Stronghold.

I actually like this format and will join both if the tournament allows.

I certainly bow to your experience in these matters however I've been watching the tournament forum section here at dakkadakka and I think at least one major tournament would prefer we have all rules in play, stronghold and escalation, by manipulating the missions in order to create a more level playing field. A lot of smaller tournaments in my area use "Nova format" so goes Nova so does a lot of smaller tournaments along the east coast. I'd be curious if Adepticon and Feast of Blades has the same influence in its area.

I'm also seeing rumors of a possible 6.5E drop that may occur mid year 2014 that will include stronghold and escalation. Once it's brb it'll be a lot harder to ignore. Just before the latest meta shift GW is suggesting this month I also saw a lot of TO discussions around what to do about the 2++ rerolable deathstars that have completely taken over the tournament scene. I think stronghold and escalation is GWs answer - we just don't like it

Deathmarks may be a viable answer to GMCs. Using the example of the Transcended C'tan-

Overlord + 3 crypteks
Overlord + 3 crypteks
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
Total = 1200pts

Disembark within 12” and shoot 60 rending shots and 24 AP3 shots at BS4, wounding on a roll of 2+ for an average grand total of 11.1111 unsaved, pain inducing wounds in a single shooting phase (not counting the Night Scythes' Tesla Destructors, whom I assume the player would aim elsewhere).

They'd also mark 2 more units to be hunted down in later turns by any deathmark to survive the enemy's reprisal.

Cutting one of the Deathmark squads and two of the crypteks still leaves the average shooting phase at 7.654 wounds, which is still enough to take down the C'tan and reduces the point cost to 860. Could fit a Triarch Stalker in the vacated Elite slot to try and grant the Deathmarks TL, assuming it manages to survive long enough for them to arrive.

What's nice about this GMC hunting block is that it's going to be extremely difficult to prevent it from doing its damage and it works piecemeal (in case you suffer from bad reserve rolls). Once everything is said and done you're still left with a bunch of Night Scythes and the Deathmark units themselves along with the joined characters. Even ignoring the remaining Marks (only takes one to mark the GMC after all) these squads are quite potent with 10 rapid firing snipers, 6 S5 haywire shots and 3 S5 AP3 shots each (save for the third unit in the higher cost option) and they could all re-embark on their Night Scythes to rapidly close into rapid fire range of likely targets.

I used to run a smaller version of this in standard games. 5x deathmark + depairtek + NS. I very quickly became that FNG in my club That despairtek is gold when he hops out of a NS and whips out his AP2 flamer that wounds on 2's.

 necron99 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
My prediction is that Escalation/Stronghold won't be allowed, at least not at the major GT's and not initially.

Maybe 6-months from now, certain tournaments may perhaps allow Escalation/Stronghold in their tournaments, but in a separate event much like Adepticon's Championships and Gladiatior events. In these types of tournaments, there will be a main tournament (i.e. the Championships) which is just regular 40K without Escalation/Stronghold. Then there will be a smaller, no-holds-barred side tournament (i.e. the Gladiator) that will allow Escalation/Stronghold.

I actually like this format and will join both if the tournament allows.

I certainly bow to your experience in these matters however I've been watching the tournament forum section here at dakkadakka and I think at least one major tournament would prefer we have all rules in play, stronghold and escalation, by manipulating the missions in order to create a more level playing field. A lot of smaller tournaments in my area use "Nova format" so goes Nova so does a lot of smaller tournaments along the east coast. I'd be curious if Adepticon and Feast of Blades has the same influence in its area.

I'm also seeing rumors of a possible 6.5E drop that may occur mid year 2014 that will include stronghold and escalation. Once it's brb it'll be a lot harder to ignore. Just before the latest meta shift GW is suggesting this month I also saw a lot of TO discussions around what to do about the 2++ rerolable deathstars that have completely taken over the tournament scene. I think stronghold and escalation is GWs answer - we just don't like it

This is why I think tournaments will NOT allow Escalation, at least not the bigger ones. Maybe the smaller ones, but the major ones will either not allow it or they will allow it in a separate, side event. It all comes down to money. Basically, to run a large tournament, TO's need to invest a lot of money. As such, they need to cater to the majority. That is because they cannot afford to fail. They cannot afford to lose potentially thousands and thousands of dollars in an event that can potentially bankrupt them. Currently, the majority of the players are not in favor of Escalation, especially integrated Escalation in tournament play. By allowing Escalation into the tournaments just to satisfy the more hardcore gamers, TO's risk losing many of their more casual players, who make up the majority of their "customer" base. That is one thing no major tournament can really afford to do. Now this anti-Escalation sentiment will most likely change with time, but initially, it just won't be accepted by the mainstream. That's why I just don't see Escalation happening in the early tournament scene. IMO it'll take probably at least 1 year before they become more accepted, and that will probably only be with some nerfs to D weapons in tournament play.

In short, the larger the tournament, the larger the investment, the more TO's stand to lose, the less accepted Escalation will be in their tournaments. However, smaller tournaments with little investment on the part of the TO's is where you will more likely be seeing Escalation-allowed tournaments.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galorian wrote:
Deathmarks may be a viable answer to GMCs. Using the example of the Transcended C'tan-

Overlord + 3 crypteks
Overlord + 3 crypteks
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
Total = 1200pts

Disembark within 12” and shoot 60 rending shots and 24 AP3 shots at BS4, wounding on a roll of 2+ for an average grand total of 11.1111 unsaved, pain inducing wounds in a single shooting phase (not counting the Night Scythes' Tesla Destructors, whom I assume the player would aim elsewhere).

They'd also mark 2 more units to be hunted down in later turns by any deathmark to survive the enemy's reprisal.

Cutting one of the Deathmark squads and two of the crypteks still leaves the average shooting phase at 7.654 wounds, which is still enough to take down the C'tan and reduces the point cost to 860. Could fit a Triarch Stalker in the vacated Elite slot to try and grant the Deathmarks TL, assuming it manages to survive long enough for them to arrive.

What's nice about this GMC hunting block is that it's going to be extremely difficult to prevent it from doing its damage and it works piecemeal (in case you suffer from bad reserve rolls). Once everything is said and done you're still left with a bunch of Night Scythes and the Deathmark units themselves along with the joined characters. Even ignoring the remaining Marks (only takes one to mark the GMC after all) these squads are quite potent with 10 rapid firing snipers, 6 S5 haywire shots and 3 S5 AP3 shots each (save for the third unit in the higher cost option) and they could all re-embark on their Night Scythes to rapidly close into rapid fire range of likely targets.

Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

 jy2 wrote:
Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Wouldn't attaching the Storm-teks help in making it TAC-ish?
(or would it be better to split them up? 3 Nightscythes with Deathmarks and 3 Royal Courts full of nothing but Storm-teks (either in Nightscythes of their own or with attached Veils of Darkness).)

 jy2 wrote:

 necron99 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
My prediction is that Escalation/Stronghold won't be allowed, at least not at the major GT's and not initially.

Maybe 6-months from now, certain tournaments may perhaps allow Escalation/Stronghold in their tournaments, but in a separate event much like Adepticon's Championships and Gladiatior events. In these types of tournaments, there will be a main tournament (i.e. the Championships) which is just regular 40K without Escalation/Stronghold. Then there will be a smaller, no-holds-barred side tournament (i.e. the Gladiator) that will allow Escalation/Stronghold.

I actually like this format and will join both if the tournament allows.

I certainly bow to your experience in these matters however I've been watching the tournament forum section here at dakkadakka and I think at least one major tournament would prefer we have all rules in play, stronghold and escalation, by manipulating the missions in order to create a more level playing field. A lot of smaller tournaments in my area use "Nova format" so goes Nova so does a lot of smaller tournaments along the east coast. I'd be curious if Adepticon and Feast of Blades has the same influence in its area.

I'm also seeing rumors of a possible 6.5E drop that may occur mid year 2014 that will include stronghold and escalation. Once it's brb it'll be a lot harder to ignore. Just before the latest meta shift GW is suggesting this month I also saw a lot of TO discussions around what to do about the 2++ rerolable deathstars that have completely taken over the tournament scene. I think stronghold and escalation is GWs answer - we just don't like it

This is why I think tournaments will NOT allow Escalation, at least not the bigger ones. Maybe the smaller ones, but the major ones will either not allow it or they will allow it in a separate, side event. It all comes down to money. Basically, to run a large tournament, TO's need to invest a lot of money. As such, they need to cater to the majority. That is because they cannot afford to fail. They cannot afford to lose potentially thousands and thousands of dollars in an event that can potentially bankrupt them. Currently, the majority of the players are not in favor of Escalation, especially integrated Escalation in tournament play. By allowing Escalation into the tournaments just to satisfy the more hardcore gamers, TO's risk losing many of their more casual players, who make up the majority of their "customer" base. That is one thing no major tournament can really afford to do. Now this anti-Escalation sentiment will most likely change with time, but initially, it just won't be accepted by the mainstream. That's why I just don't see Escalation happening in the early tournament scene. IMO it'll take probably at least 1 year before they become more accepted, and that will probably only be with some nerfs to D weapons in tournament play.

In short, the larger the tournament, the larger the investment, the more TO's stand to lose, the less accepted Escalation will be in their tournaments. However, smaller tournaments with little investment on the part of the TO's is where you will more likely be seeing Escalation-allowed tournaments.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galorian wrote:
Deathmarks may be a viable answer to GMCs. Using the example of the Transcended C'tan-

Overlord + 3 crypteks
Overlord + 3 crypteks
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
10 Deathmarks + Night Scythe
Total = 1200pts

Disembark within 12” and shoot 60 rending shots and 24 AP3 shots at BS4, wounding on a roll of 2+ for an average grand total of 11.1111 unsaved, pain inducing wounds in a single shooting phase (not counting the Night Scythes' Tesla Destructors, whom I assume the player would aim elsewhere).

They'd also mark 2 more units to be hunted down in later turns by any deathmark to survive the enemy's reprisal.

Cutting one of the Deathmark squads and two of the crypteks still leaves the average shooting phase at 7.654 wounds, which is still enough to take down the C'tan and reduces the point cost to 860. Could fit a Triarch Stalker in the vacated Elite slot to try and grant the Deathmarks TL, assuming it manages to survive long enough for them to arrive.

What's nice about this GMC hunting block is that it's going to be extremely difficult to prevent it from doing its damage and it works piecemeal (in case you suffer from bad reserve rolls). Once everything is said and done you're still left with a bunch of Night Scythes and the Deathmark units themselves along with the joined characters. Even ignoring the remaining Marks (only takes one to mark the GMC after all) these squads are quite potent with 10 rapid firing snipers, 6 S5 haywire shots and 3 S5 AP3 shots each (save for the third unit in the higher cost option) and they could all re-embark on their Night Scythes to rapidly close into rapid fire range of likely targets.

Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Dropping 6 stormteks next to a super-heavy should KO it no?

 skoffs wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Wouldn't attaching the Storm-teks help in making it TAC-ish?
(or would it be better to split them up? 3 Nightscythes with Deathmarks and 3 Royal Courts full of nothing but Storm-teks (either in Nightscythes of their own or with attached Veils of Darkness).)

While you can put storm-teks with your deathmarks, it really is the despair-teks combined with them that makes the deathmarks stand out. If I were to run deathmarks, I would put 1 despair-tek in with them and the storm-teks in with the regular troops.

 Galorian wrote:
Dropping 6 stormteks next to a super-heavy should KO it no?

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend overloading on the storm-teks either. Why?

1. Storm-teks are basically on the opposite spectrum of despair-teks insofar as Escalation is concerned. They are good against super-heavies but not good against gargants so you really don't want to spam them in a TAC Escalation build. I would recommend no more than 1 per unit.

2. By adding more than 1 storm-teks to a unit, you are approaching Elite status for that unit. You want to keep the unit cheap because elite units really aren't optimal in games of Escalation.

3. By adding more storm-teks, it encourages you to risk your troops more often. Remember, that is basically 1 scoring unit that you will be sacrificing when you disembark them to try to take out a titan.

4. On the flip side, if you don't disembark the unit to try to take out a titan, then you've just added 25-pt to the unit that is basically not going to do anything but hide and then disembark on Turn 5.

5. If you keep the storm-teks together as a suicide unit, you run into logistical problems such as no transport. So unless you also take an expensive Veil-tek to teleport them close to the enemy titan, basically, they will be out of action for a few turns and risk getting shot off the table.

 jy2 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Wouldn't attaching the Storm-teks help in making it TAC-ish?
(or would it be better to split them up? 3 Nightscythes with Deathmarks and 3 Royal Courts full of nothing but Storm-teks (either in Nightscythes of their own or with attached Veils of Darkness).)

While you can put storm-teks with your deathmarks, it really is the despair-teks combined with them that makes the deathmarks stand out. If I were to run deathmarks, I would put 1 despair-tek in with them and the storm-teks in with the regular troops.

 Galorian wrote:
Dropping 6 stormteks next to a super-heavy should KO it no?

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend overloading on the storm-teks either. Why?

1. Storm-teks are basically on the opposite spectrum of despair-teks insofar as Escalation is concerned. They are good against super-heavies but not good against gargants so you really don't want to spam them in a TAC Escalation build. I would recommend no more than 1 per unit.

2. By adding more than 1 storm-teks to a unit, you are approaching Elite status for that unit. You want to keep the unit cheap because elite units really aren't optimal in games of Escalation.

3. By adding more storm-teks, it encourages you to risk your troops more often. Remember, that is basically 1 scoring unit that you will be sacrificing when you disembark them to try to take out a titan.

4. On the flip side, if you don't disembark the unit to try to take out a titan, then you've just added 25-pt to the unit that is basically not going to do anything but hide and then disembark on Turn 5.

5. If you keep the storm-teks together as a suicide unit, you run into logistical problems such as no transport. So unless you also take an expensive Veil-tek to teleport them close to the enemy titan, basically, they will be out of action for a few turns and risk getting shot off the table.

Putting the Stormteks with the Deathmarks makes the units viable counters to both GMCs and SHs. Stormteks are also rather cheap and their 4 shots mesh quite well with the Deathmarks' Hunters from Hyperspace special rule. You could go for 1 veiltek and 1 stormtek per squad if you really want to, but I figure you could look elsewhere for your anti-TEQ needs (4 destructeks split among your troops could be a nice start).

 jy2 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Wouldn't attaching the Storm-teks help in making it TAC-ish?
(or would it be better to split them up? 3 Nightscythes with Deathmarks and 3 Royal Courts full of nothing but Storm-teks (either in Nightscythes of their own or with attached Veils of Darkness).)

While you can put storm-teks with your deathmarks, it really is the despair-teks combined with them that makes the deathmarks stand out. If I were to run deathmarks, I would put 1 despair-tek in with them and the storm-teks in with the regular troops.

I guess the other question would be, if one is making a Necron anti-titan TAC list for Escalation, how many Deathmark/Despair-tek sqauds versus Storm-tek units to take? (eg. would 3 D&D and 2 Storm be sufficient to handle anything and everything?)

 Galorian wrote:

Putting the Stormteks with the Deathmarks makes the units viable counters to both GMCs and SHs. Stormteks are also rather cheap and their 4 shots mesh quite well with the Deathmarks' Hunters from Hyperspace special rule. You could go for 1 veiltek and 1 stormtek per squad if you really want to, but I figure you could look elsewhere for your anti-TEQ needs (4 destructeks split among your troops could be a nice start).

While you can put a storm-tek with your deathmarks, the role I see for them is a little more specialized. Namely I will use them to hunt down enemy troops or enemy gargantuans. In this case, it is not optimal to give them a storm-tek. The key to their success isn't flexibility. Rather, it is to focus on what they are good at. There is no need to hunt super-heavies with deathmarks + storm-tek when warriors + storm-tek will do almost the same job for less and they are scoring as well.

Also, while deathmarks are good, the problem you will encounter in Escalation, and especially if you bring a necron titan of your own, is having enough points for both the necessity units - the troops - as well as utility units like deathmarks and wraiths, especially if you are playing at 2K or below. Thus, you have to weigh very carefully in a TAC Escalation list what you want more - a specialized but non-scoring unit to deal with certain "threats" or a non-specialized but scoring unit.

 skoffs wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Spamming Deathmarks is certainly 1 solution to GMC's (unless they're flying). However, this is more of a tailored list rather than a TAC necron build. Why? Because GMC's are only half of the equation. Probably more prevalent will be the super-heavies, of which spamming deathmarks will be more of a liability than an asset.

Wouldn't attaching the Storm-teks help in making it TAC-ish?
(or would it be better to split them up? 3 Nightscythes with Deathmarks and 3 Royal Courts full of nothing but Storm-teks (either in Nightscythes of their own or with attached Veils of Darkness).)

While you can put storm-teks with your deathmarks, it really is the despair-teks combined with them that makes the deathmarks stand out. If I were to run deathmarks, I would put 1 despair-tek in with them and the storm-teks in with the regular troops.

I guess the other question would be, if one is making a Necron anti-titan TAC list for Escalation, how many Deathmark/Despair-tek sqauds versus Storm-tek units to take? (eg. would 3 D&D and 2 Storm be sufficient to handle anything and everything?)

That is a tough question. At higher points, it wouldn't be a problem. However, at 2K or below, it really becomes an issue. If you take the TC'tan + Void Shield Generator, that's a minimum of 820-pts (most likely higher if you take 2x Waves or Wave + Seismic Assault). You only really have about 1100+ for th rest of your army. Taking even 1 unit of deathmarks + cryptek in flyer will either cost you 1 troop + scarabs or 2 annihilation barges.

Personally, if I were to run deathmarks in Escalation, I would run no more than 1 at 2K and none at 1750 or lower.

But what if you're not running any Titans, but your opponent is?
What would be the best anti-Titan TAC build in that case?

That would be easy. The best Necron non-titan build to bring to Escalation would be the Necron Airforce. It is a very competitive build, both in regular 40K and Escalation. There is perhaps only 1 other build that is just as good in both games and that is FMC-spam daemons.

This is what I would bring to a game of Escalation if I were to run a normal Necron list. Now this list is highly optimized, but you can swap out units to add more "flavor" to this list and to appeal more to your palate.

Also, don't build a anti-titan list. Rather, build the best TAC list that you can and play to win on objectives, not in killing the opposing enemy titan.


1750 Escalation - Necrons

Overlord - Warscythe, MSS
4x Crypteks - Voltaic Staves (Storm-teks)
1x Cryptek - Abyssal Staff (Despair-tek)

5x Deathmarks - Night Scythe

5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors

3x Scarabs (hide them to ensure you don't get tabled on Turn 1)
3x Scarabs
3x Scarabs

Doom Scythe
Doom Scythe

Void Shield Generator - 3x Void Shields



2000 Escalation - Necrons

Anrakyr
Overlord - Warscythe, MSS
5x Crypteks - Voltaic Staves (Storm-teks)
1x Cryptek - Abyssal Staff (Despair-tek)

5x Deathmarks - Night Scythe

5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe
5x Warriors - Night Scythe

3x Scarabs (hide them to ensure you don't get tabled on Turn 1)
3x Scarabs

Doom Scythe
Doom Scythe

Void Shield Generator - 3x Void Shields


Basically, you need to hide until your flyers come in. Scarabs are easy to hide. You can also deploy and hide your HQ as well. The VSG provides you with some BLOS terrain. Being a building, you can also deploy a unit within. Then when your flyers come in, you can embark your HQ onto the flyer.

Question:

Where does it say you can have to LoW in your 40k Army? Does it increase by one at the 2k mark?

Check out the Escalation book. You should only be able to take a LoW if you are playing with Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules. That is what I know, but I don't have either of the books. If I have this wrong let me know.

Wana know a dirty necron trick i came up with for my friend? Deep strike a monolith onto the table then next turn use the eternity gate to sling shot your ascendant c'tan across the table. As far as i can tell its %110 legal and scary as f*** when your on the recieving end...

That sounds awesome! Could someone verify if that is truly legal?

Il post in ymdc and see what the feedback is.

I can't remember: can you not have something exit the eternity gate on the same turn that the Monolith deep strikes?
(I just assume no, but I'm not 100% sure as to why)

 skoffs wrote:
I can't remember: can you not have something exit the eternity gate on the same turn that the Monolith deep strikes?
(I just assume no, but I'm not 100% sure as to why)

this is true. Abilities that happen at the start of the turn cant be used the turn you deep strike. You would have to wait till the monolith has been on the table for a turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
From what i can tell its totally legal to pull the transcendant c'tan through the monolith.

 jy2 wrote:
That's why I just don't see Escalation happening in the early tournament scene. IMO it'll take probably at least 1 year before they become more accepted, and that will probably only be with some nerfs to D weapons in tournament play.

Slightly OT, but I think it is a huge mistake to remove D as it is now, and I just don`t get the fear of D that so many seem to have. Almost anything that can take D can take weapons which are much worse for normal lists, like 10" S10 AP1 ignore cover, S6 AP2 18" torrent hellstorm and 6D6 S8 AP3 shots. D is only really good against other super heavies, expensive vehicles, MC`s and things that rely on invulnerable saves. Escalation without D is just a playground for GMC`s, which are mostly much better against standard lists than the tanks and titans because they can never be killed by 3 meltaguns and can`t be tied down in close combat because they kick ass there too.

D is hardly a huge issue for normal lists. It is mostly 5" blast, with all the weaknesses that has: you can spread out, it can only hit one level, it is poor vs hordes, it can`t kill a transport and the content in the same turn, you don`t want to fire it close to your own stuff, it can scatter off, can`t fire on aircraft or FMC`s and most of the D-carriers are absolutely terrible in close combat. For most units, D won`t feel much different from riptides with ignore cover.

I`ve had six games vs D-weapon eldar with an escalation-ready TAC space marine build at 1850 pts. 4 against the revenant and 2 against the lynx, 5 wins for the marines this far. The damage output of super heavies just don`t match their cost most of the time when they are up against an escalation-ready list and the cost of the revenant makes the eldar list hopelessly unbalanced. Sure, it will have som great match-ups, but I don`t see revenant lists winning tons of tourneys sub 2k pts, because they will always have many bad matchups. The eldar player (regular tourney winner) has given up on the revenant for this pts level. The lynx on the other hand seems very nice for its pts, but it is very fragile for the pts too.

 Illumini wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
That's why I just don't see Escalation happening in the early tournament scene. IMO it'll take probably at least 1 year before they become more accepted, and that will probably only be with some nerfs to D weapons in tournament play.

Slightly OT, but I think it is a huge mistake to remove D as it is now, and I just don`t get the fear of D that so many seem to have. Almost anything that can take D can take weapons which are much worse for normal lists, like 10" S10 AP1 ignore cover, S6 AP2 18" torrent hellstorm and 6D6 S8 AP3 shots. D is only really good against other super heavies, expensive vehicles, MC`s and things that rely on invulnerable saves. Escalation without D is just a playground for GMC`s, which are mostly much better against standard lists than the tanks and titans because they can never be killed by 3 meltaguns and can`t be tied down in close combat because they kick ass there too.

D is hardly a huge issue for normal lists. It is mostly 5" blast, with all the weaknesses that has: you can spread out, it can only hit one level, it is poor vs hordes, it can`t kill a transport and the content in the same turn, you don`t want to fire it close to your own stuff, it can scatter off, can`t fire on aircraft or FMC`s and most of the D-carriers are absolutely terrible in close combat. For most units, D won`t feel much different from riptides with ignore cover.

I`ve had six games vs D-weapon eldar with an escalation-ready TAC space marine build at 1850 pts. 4 against the revenant and 2 against the lynx, 5 wins for the marines this far. The damage output of super heavies just don`t match their cost most of the time when they are up against an escalation-ready list and the cost of the revenant makes the eldar list hopelessly unbalanced. Sure, it will have som great match-ups, but I don`t see revenant lists winning tons of tourneys sub 2k pts, because they will always have many bad matchups. The eldar player (regular tourney winner) has given up on the revenant for this pts level. The lynx on the other hand seems very nice for its pts, but it is very fragile for the pts too.

How about squeezing a Transcended C'tan into a 1,000pts game?

You'd be hard pressed to find a 1,000 army that could survive 5 turns on the table with that thing making 18" S D moves and dropping dual S D hellstorm templates each turn...

fill the remainder of the list with the minimum troop and HQ options and keep them in reserve to stroll up to backfield objectives in later turns. Odds are your enemy won't have all that much firepower left to concentrate on them or the ability to get it into range by the time they show up.

Yeah, the C`tan seems to be the worst matchup for non-superheavy lists, but it is not because of D, it is because it is insanely tough. You need 95ish meltaguns to kill it. It is also totally self-contained. Most other super heavies need something to cover all their weaknesses, but the C`tan really only fears D

The C`tan is the number one reason to include D in the game.

 Illumini wrote:
Yeah, the C`tan seems to be the worst matchup for non-superheavy lists, but it is not because of D, it is because it is insanely tough. You need 95ish meltaguns to kill it. It is also totally self-contained. Most other super heavies need something to cover all their weaknesses, but the C`tan really only fears D

The C`tan is the number one reason to include D in the game.

It's so cheesy I never actually play mine, and I've had a beautifully painted one sitting on my desk for months now.

Illumini would you be able to share some marine list building strategies for escalation tac. Cheers