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.

I am just curious. Haven't played with or against Necrons, but they are on my list as my second army when I finish with my Nids.

How does the new characters/rules for Maynarkh Dynasty stack up against the base Necrons? Is there a reason to take any of the characters? How about their detachments/formations? Anyone tried socketing them into a Decurion? Can you?

Bump.

Nobody has an answer for any of this?

The Conclave formation is awesome. Other than that, if you didn't want to do Decurion, might as well just pay for the extra troop choice and get the minor benefit.

Maynarkh, not Mephrit, Slayer-fan.

The Maynarkhs are meh, to answer the OP's question. They were always a 'fun' rather than 'power' variant in the first place.

Poorly. The new codex changed too much for it to even work "correctly" with the special rules/ICs, and lots of units are using the old, worse statlines.

Toholk is pretty useless since most of his Wargear doesn't exist anymore. All he has is IWND for vehicles. Kutlakh is pretty decent with his SoL and ID sword, but he doesn't have the BS5 of the new Overlords and his CCB upgrade and some of his Special Rules don't really make sense.

I'd skip it, it's a hassle to make work without a lot of house ruling, and even then it doesn't offer anything overly powerful over the regular Codex since it's missing quite a bit.