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.

My CCB was killed in a recent fight vs the Dark Eldar. They shaved off a wound with a few str 8 ap 2 shots, then did enough wounds in close combat.
The unit that took him down was a bunch of nagas (?) including a few half snake things. There was also an archon thing with instant death (made my 2+ saves) and another HQ with ap 2 that declined a challenge.

Reavers are probably the best option. A unit of 12 w/caltrops is nearly the same points, and as others have pointed out will put a significant number of wounds on the lord. What hasn't been mentioned yet is Hit and Run, which is stock for them. Even if they don't get the job done on the first charge, there is likely to be enough of them to HnR out and do it over again.

So reavers not only offer one of the best damage outputs against it, but also provide a tar-pitting option as well. Throw in some Farseer support, and they can pretty reliably get the job done in 1/2 turns.

I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Says who?

Nowhere is it written that vehicles CANT take armor saves.

Armor saves require wounds to be allocated. How many wounds do vehicles take again?

And if you say that "not saying it CAN either", I'll point out that it never actually says vehicles can take invuls either.

Except it does. They finally fixed that in 7th edition.

I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Yeah, not seeing a great chance of killing it, even without the invul save.

edit: This also ignores Mindshackles

 adamsouza wrote:

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

 Exergy wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the
Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is
always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the
rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model
apply to both rider and Chariot.

That would be one.

When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

 Desubot wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

he still has sheildbreakers right. The model has an invuln save, so it loses it.

 Desubot wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
Just stumbled upon this thread, so I dunno if it's been stated yet, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Blast Weapons, always hit the vehicle, and cannot be allocated to the rider. So, Dark Scythes. Anything Haywire in CC will do the trick.

Aside from that, CCB are obnoxiously hard to kill.

Ooo just saw that and also Precision shots affect it to.

Hellllloooooo Vindicare.

Well, I mean, in about every aspect, screw the Vindicaire.

Hollismason wrote:
I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

I'd tend not to take the blasters on the reavers, as you'll be jinking a lot for that sweet 3+ cover. Reavers just seem like the easy choice here, as you wouldn't even be list building to bring them in. They're pretty freaking phenomenal now and pretty easy standouts in the codex, so I imagine most lists having 1/2 squads base anyway. Worst case scenario, you sac a few reavers to tie him up for 2 turns (likely killing him) while the rest of the army focuses on things it can kill.

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

well only problem with that is wyches cant take haywire grenades en mass anymore so only possibily 1 hit passed a MSS seems kinda weak sauce (unless im missing another weapon)

I believe forgeworld reapers have blast type and much stronger haywire IIRC

Actually...having read the rules for haywire again, I'm not so sure that the vehicle doesn't suffer the effect regardless of where the actual hit is allocated.

...same argument for grav weapons. Maybe this isn't so bad afterall?

 Desubot wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

well only problem with that is wyches cant take haywire grenades en mass anymore so only possibily 1 hit passed a MSS seems kinda weak sauce (unless im missing another weapon)

I believe forgeworld reapers have blast type and much stronger haywire IIRC

No such luck. You could spend the 135 points, but you would have to use the large blast, which will only do 1 haywire hit per turn, if it doesnt scatter off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Exergy wrote:
When I get home I am going to read the wording on Haywire. If it says a model hit with a haywire weapon suffers a glancing hit it would affect the chartiot. If it says vehicle, then it has no effect.

Since the Chariot rules say to allocate hits between the two profiles, Haywire works just fine (assuming CC - out of CC the Necron player will just allocate the hits to the Overlord).

haywire grenades work just fine in combat. Unfortuneatly, DE got nerfed and can only take haywire grenades on characters, who will get eaten by MSS, or the warsythe

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

I think for a Reaper's points, I would rather take a Ravager with three Dark Lances

Granted the Reaper has access to Flickerfields though, but to my knowledge it's only one shot

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

Umm, rear armor. That would probably kill it in one go with HoW.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

Umm, rear armor. That would probably kill it in one go with HoW.

Chariots resolve at front armor :/

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The S8 AP2 hits have a (no idea on WS so benefit of the doubt) 2/3 chance to hit and 1/3 chance to glance/pen so (we'll ignore the invul save for now) .11 pens and .11 glances.
3d6 St6 Rending hits? So 11 hits (assuming they don't roll to hit), 2 rends - best bet for any result.
6 St4 Rending attacks is 4 hits, 1 rend, zero glances.

Unless the Blasters caused a penetrating hit, there's no reason for them to HoW the chariot when they can HoW the Necron Lord instead.

HoW has to hit the chariot

Yeah my question would be since it all happens simultaenously wouldn't the AV 13 go away after the first penetrating hit? Just like Scarabs work? I'm pretty sure that is how it plays out. Like it's all at I10 right? So would it reduce it to 10 after the first?

There is this great quote from the movie Knight's Tale that comes to mind.

When the main villain asks another character how he would defeat the hero, his reply is "With a stick, while he slept"

Hollismason wrote:
I wouldn't think you'd need even 12 , 9 would probably do it

9 Reavers w/ 3 Caltrops , 3 Blasters is like 220.

3 ST 8 AP 2
3D6 ST6 Rending Hits
6 ST4 Rending

Also, it depends as well as what turn it is causes the Reavers get combat drugs plus the Power from the Pain and they get hit and run. He doesn't instant death them he's ST7 I believe. Put all the rending hits on the chariot. It's also a pretty big model, I doubt there would be difficulty getting it into base base.

You can't split up the hits, it's in the chariot rules.
When in combat, you choose for each model, to either hit the rider, or the chariot. To put the S6 rending hits on the charge, you also have to put the S6 non-rending hits, the S4 hits, and all those S3 attacks on the chariot. If you can pop the quantum before you hit, put it all on the chariot. If you can't I'd put it all on the rider.

 Frozocrone wrote:
I think for a Reaper's points, I would rather take a Ravager with three Dark Lances

Granted the Reaper has access to Flickerfields though, but to my knowledge it's only one shot

They cost about the same, but the Reaper strips more hull points per turn, is more surviable, and has a nifty blast option if you want. It also has a chance to ID T5, 6, 7, even 8.

The ravager is more consistant (lowever variance), is good at reliable ID T4, and is AP2.

col_impact wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

The SW codex has very little to do for the INTENTION of the necron codex, given that they were written two editions apart, and chariot rules changed massively between the two.

And in any case, nothing in the way the SW chariot is written brings any information on if invul saves are transffered from the "rider" to "chariot" and vice versa.
To quote "Stormrider has a 4+ invulnerable save" this is quite unquestionable that its the chariot itself that enjoys the 4++, not logan.
Logan himself has the "belt of russ" that grants him a 4++. ("A Belt of Russ confers a 4+ invulnerable save.")
Now, its quite clear that if the intention was that the effects of items from one are transferred to the other, there is no reason to have the double entry of stormrider's invul on top of "belt of russ" that the rider has.

However, in the necron codex, to quote "A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save"
This brings forth a simple consideration-when this codex was written there was no "dual profile" chariot, but the rider and chariot were separate models so the intention is clear that the wearer alone gains the save, and the chariot itself is definitely not wearing it.

So while yes, RAW (read as written), its quite clear that it does transfer under current rules, RAI (read as intended) its quite clear it is not the original intention, as the rules when it was originally wirtten did not support a transfer, the two were totally separate models.

 BoomWolf wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
I stand corrected on the armor/invul thing.

Still, saw what you want about the RAW, the RAI is still quite obliviously not intended, as its nowhere near the effect it had back when the rule was fresh.

Read the Space Wolves codex closely. It makes RAI clear. Invul saves confer from wargear to the chariot. The USR of abilities confer from the wargear of the rider to the chariot unless specifically blocked (e.g. deep strike ability of the terminator armor).

For people to go directly against RAW they need a solid RAI argument. The Space Wolves codex has effectively taken away your RAI argument in the case of the 3++ on the chariot. All you can do now is propose a house rule that power level edits the CCB. However a CCB with a 3++ compares favorably to other units of similar point costs with many units exceeding it in terms of power.

The SW codex has very little to do for the INTENTION of the necron codex, given that they were written two editions apart, and chariot rules changed massively between the two.

And in any case, nothing in the way the SW chariot is written brings any information on if invul saves are transffered from the "rider" to "chariot" and vice versa.
To quote "Stormrider has a 4+ invulnerable save" this is quite unquestionable that its the chariot itself that enjoys the 4++, not logan.
Logan himself has the "belt of russ" that grants him a 4++. ("A Belt of Russ confers a 4+ invulnerable save.")
Now, its quite clear that if the intention was that the effects of items from one are transferred to the other, there is no reason to have the double entry of stormrider's invul on top of "belt of russ" that the rider has.

However, in the necron codex, to quote "A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save"
This brings forth a simple consideration-when this codex was written there was no "dual profile" chariot, but the rider and chariot were separate models so the intention is clear that the wearer alone gains the save, and the chariot itself is definitely not wearing it.

So while yes, RAW (read as written), its quite clear that it does transfer under current rules, RAI (read as intended) its quite clear it is not the original intention, as the rules when it was originally wirtten did not support a transfer, the two were totally separate models.

The Necron codex was updated by the Necron FAQ after 7th edition came out. The FAQ provides fresh rules for dealing with the Necon chariot and they certified it for use in 7th. They very much intend for us to use the FAQ as written. Your claim is that they made a mistake and missed an unintended interaction. However, what we find out in the Space Wolves codex is that there is no unintended interaction. The Space wolves codex points out that the deep strike ability of the terminator armor that Logan wears would confer to the chariot so they explicitly block that ability. This is because the ability to deep strike is conferred to the model (which in this case is the chariot model) that wears the terminator armor. The interaction between rider wargear and the chariot model is what the Space Wolves codex elucidates.

Your argument only makes sense in those days prior to the Necron FAQ being updated for 7th. GW took a deliberate and conscientious pass at updating the codex for 7th. The burden of proof is on you to prove that a mistake was made where otherwise everything works perfectly fine by RAW. Do you have any proof beyond mere suspicion that a mistake was made in the updated for 7th FAQ with regards to the rules that clearly grant the phase shifter 3++ to the chariot?

I never argued about the RAW, and you play by the RAW no matter what the RAI says, as long the RAW "works" in game, and in this case it does.
Poorly, clearly unintended interaction, but from a mechanical standpoint it works, even if totally unbalanced.

However, while you point out that the deepstrike is clarified against making so it must transfer, it completely ignore that if so than the belt of russ should also transfer, yet they felt the need to give stormrider its own 4++ regardless.

What it brings us to, is that while rules are generally shared when its a a "model" basis, as the two are technically one model, the dual profile means that things like saves are not generally supposed to cross over, and they only does so in the necron case due to the aged wording.

Pointing out the FAQ does not say anything about it means little, given how many codices had 7th edition FAQs not fix glaring holes (for example, tau trait 1 makes your warlord's precision shots to be impossible to LoS, too bad you dont HAVE precision shots on ICs anymore and only if you take a very specific wargear choice available only to suits.)