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.

 Galef wrote:
Are Immortals still considered better than Warriors?

I know this is an old debate, but I'm contemplating expanding my ~600pts or so of Necrons. Current I own 10 Warriors, 3 Destroyers, 6 Scarabs, an Overlord and a Monolith. So, basically just the "classics" In our small games at home, we always use the Warriors as Gauss Immortals because the rules are better, it bumps up our points a bit and I remember playing Necrons when Warriors had a 3+ armour.

But recently I've been thinking about getting another Warrior Box and/or maybe a box of Immortals so that we can upgrade from an Outrider to a Battalions.

So should we keep using the Warriors as Immortals (with a few actual Immortals thrown in for aesthetics) and how would the 3 units be broken up if I had about 21 total models (3x 7 or 1x 10 + 2x 5, etc). Or should we start using units of Warriors (2x 10) and 1 unit of Immortals (maybe Tesla on an objective).

Keep in mind that this is around 1000pt casual games, usually against Marines

-

Warriors are good if you give them the support they need. Its a heavy investment, but they will usually soak up a lot of fire and can lay down some gauss. At 1000 points though you probably aren't going to give them the buffs they need though.

elook wrote:
Are Necron players hopeful that there'll be something to benefit from this FAQ? We've all heard about the Castellan nerf as well as few strongly rumoured changes. Has there been any strong indication that Necrons will get something good? Perhaps an answer to when we can use the Eternity Gate or Invasion Beams?

The only things I am hoping for is clarification on a few of the major ruling issues we have.

EG/IB and turn one deploy. Right now the wording only supports Set up from Reserves then treated as disembarked, while some claim the wording supports that they are effectivly Embarked, thus can Disembark like a Transport.

Veil of darkness and MWBD is not currently covered by the FAQ about Stratagems and Persistent effects, while some claim they are.

The wording on Imotekh' ability and The Pharons will Stratagem does not allow them both to be used on Imotekh on the same turn (both reference second or twice), yet some claim they are able to do three MWBD with this combo.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Warriors are good if you give them the support they need. Its a heavy investment, but they will usually soak up a lot of fire and can lay down some gauss. At 1000 points though you probably aren't going to give them the buffs they need though.

OTOH in 1000 pts killing 20 T4 4+ isn't easiest thing in the world. In 2k that's rather easy so getting to roll RP is pretty hard.

Where warriors shine over Immortals is staying power. At the end of the day you have ten wounds on one side and twenty on the other. When it comes to mortal wounds and such the improved save of Immortals doesn't matter. Besides flayed ones, warriors and scarabs are our only "blobs" for board/objective control. If I take a big unit of them I tend to space them out at the limits of their coherency to block deep strikes. It's also easier to chain warriors to the range of a cryptek/lord/overlord or ghost ark.

On the offensive, taking them Mephrit can be fun, 40 S4AP-2 will cause problems for most things, just by weight of dice and quality shooting isn't hard to pull together with the right buffs.

Tournament coming up this weekend. Taking this list:

Imotekh
Lord

Triarch stalker with heavy gauss

3 x 10 Tesla Immortals

6 Wraiths
6 scarabs
7 scarabs

3 x doomsday ark

The list is 4/4 in practice games, though I've not faced anything I'd call top tier yet. The tournament rules nerf soup somewhat (only use relics, strats, and traits from primary detachment) so hopefully that will level the playing field a bit. I'll report back how I do.

Cool, good luck

dapperbandit wrote:
Where warriors shine over Immortals is staying power. At the end of the day you have ten wounds on one side and twenty on the other. When it comes to mortal wounds and such the improved save of Immortals doesn't matter. Besides flayed ones, warriors and scarabs are our only "blobs" for board/objective control. If I take a big unit of them I tend to space them out at the limits of their coherency to block deep strikes. It's also easier to chain warriors to the range of a cryptek/lord/overlord or ghost ark.

On the offensive, taking them Mephrit can be fun, 40 S4AP-2 will cause problems for most things, just by weight of dice and quality shooting isn't hard to pull together with the right buffs.

Technically, you're only comparing 10 wounds to 13 for the same points.

Seems big faq gives emergency beam ability to work t1 and quantum strategem to deny d1 damage among others

Also, Wraiths can Fall back & Charge now

Thats a good thing, right?

 IHateNids wrote:
Also, Wraiths can Fall back & Charge now

Thats a good thing, right?

I thought they could always do that? Pretty sure that was in the codex.
In other news, you can now deploy units with emergency teleport.

The FLY clarification helps us because a lot of our units fly. The invasion beams tweak is good, for the 1% who use Night Scythes. Otherwise I'm disappointed but not surprised that we got absolutely nothing buffed. We really need it, but they just don't care.

 IHateNids wrote:
Also, Wraiths can Fall back & Charge now

Thats a good thing, right?

They already could.

Page 110 – Stratagems, Emergency Invasion Beam
Add the following sentence:
‘Units set up with this Stratagem can be set up during
the first battle round even if you are using the Tactical
Reserves matched play rule.’

Q: Are units that are set up on their tomb world using the
Invasion Beams and Eternity Gate abilities considered to be on
the battlefield for the purposes of the Tactical Reserves matched
play rule?
A: No, they do not count as being set up on the
battlefield and are considered to be reinforcements for
the purposes of the Tactical Reserves rule.

While these two describe different rules, they appear like they should have the same answer but have the exact opposite... Seems odd..

MrPieChee wrote:

Page 110 – Stratagems, Emergency Invasion Beam
Add the following sentence:
‘Units set up with this Stratagem can be set up during
the first battle round even if you are using the Tactical
Reserves matched play rule.’

Q: Are units that are set up on their tomb world using the
Invasion Beams and Eternity Gate abilities considered to be on
the battlefield for the purposes of the Tactical Reserves matched
play rule?
A: No, they do not count as being set up on the
battlefield and are considered to be reinforcements for
the purposes of the Tactical Reserves rule.

While these two describe different rules, they appear like they should have the same answer but have the exact opposite... Seems odd..

That's hardly a real life problem, right? You'd likely only ever risk one unit in tomb world from fear of losing the other

MrPieChee wrote:

Page 110 – Stratagems, Emergency Invasion Beam
Add the following sentence:
‘Units set up with this Stratagem can be set up during
the first battle round even if you are using the Tactical
Reserves matched play rule.’

Q: Are units that are set up on their tomb world using the
Invasion Beams and Eternity Gate abilities considered to be on
the battlefield for the purposes of the Tactical Reserves matched
play rule?
A: No, they do not count as being set up on the
battlefield and are considered to be reinforcements for
the purposes of the Tactical Reserves rule.

While these two describe different rules, they appear like they should have the same answer but have the exact opposite... Seems odd..

It means you can bring stuff out of gate on t1 only by strategem if it is destroyed. No t1 out without losing all gates. No deceiver reposition monolith and come out t1 unless monolith dies

Hooray! They fixed monoliths slightly!

Also, knights FINALLY got the bat. Meaning our anti tank just got more reliable since they're capped at 4++ now.

Also apparently they clarified that the Veil does not remove MWBD, according to a reddit comment.

They did clarify it in the main rulebook ruling for stratagems, relics and things that move. They say bubbles stop working but the rest sticks.

 Draco765 wrote:

elook wrote:
Are Necron players hopeful that there'll be something to benefit from this FAQ? We've all heard about the Castellan nerf as well as few strongly rumoured changes. Has there been any strong indication that Necrons will get something good? Perhaps an answer to when we can use the Eternity Gate or Invasion Beams?

The only things I am hoping for is clarification on a few of the major ruling issues we have.

EG/IB and turn one deploy. Right now the wording only supports Set up from Reserves then treated as disembarked, while some claim the wording supports that they are effectivly Embarked, thus can Disembark like a Transport.

Veil of darkness and MWBD is not currently covered by the FAQ about Stratagems and Persistent effects, while some claim they are.

The wording on Imotekh' ability and The Pharons will Stratagem does not allow them both to be used on Imotekh on the same turn (both reference second or twice), yet some claim they are able to do three MWBD with this combo.

Well two out of three were covered.
No turn one setup via mono/NS, with work around for vehicle being destroyed.
Veil of Darkness and my will be done still works.

 iGuy91 wrote:
They did clarify it in the main rulebook ruling for stratagems, relics and things that move. They say bubbles stop working but the rest sticks.

Yeah well specifically it is things work as long as rule says it does. Bubbles work while you are in bubble so if you go out of bubble range you are out. But if you teleport out of bubble range and into range of new bubble the bubble still is on. Not important always but sometimes has effect.

Imperial Knights will now be taking more than double the amount of damage than they used to. With a 3+ Rotate Ion Shield and a re-roll, it's only 11.111 % chance of failing a save. With the 4+ maximum, it's 25% chance of failing a save.

Anti-tank weaponry will be worth taking again finally!

Yeah overall this FAQ is great for us between the nerfs to Knights and the Veil changes.

I'd kill for the monolith to be changed to be able to deploy on the turn it deep strikes, though. With the new FAQ making it even more clear that they want deep strikes only on turn 2, the monolith just sounds worse and worse. You have to have the deceiver to even have a hope of dumping units out turn 2.

Yeah overall this FAQ is great for us between the nerfs to Knights and the Veil changes.

I'd kill for the monolith to be changed to be able to deploy on the turn it deep strikes, though. With the new FAQ making it even more clear that they want deep strikes only on turn 2, the monolith just sounds worse and worse. You have to have the deceiver to even have a hope of dumping units out turn 2.

 Werekill wrote:
Yeah overall this FAQ is great for us between the nerfs to Knights and the Veil changes.

I'd kill for the monolith to be changed to be able to deploy on the turn it deep strikes, though. With the new FAQ making it even more clear that they want deep strikes only on turn 2, the monolith just sounds worse and worse. You have to have the deceiver to even have a hope of dumping units out turn 2.

There's still the stratagem to bring an on board unit up to the monolith, right? So deceiver up the mono, beam up lychguard, move em and charge em and wreck havoc

Of course the usual complications for T1 charges still apply (schaff in front of tanks etc)

Hopefully he'll be busy enough clearing those that you could bring on something else turn 2. At least they're not lost turn 1 any more.

I don't see this competitively but casual games might get more fun


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Werekill wrote:
Yeah overall this FAQ is great for us between the nerfs to Knights and the Veil changes.

I'd kill for the monolith to be changed to be able to deploy on the turn it deep strikes, though. With the new FAQ making it even more clear that they want deep strikes only on turn 2, the monolith just sounds worse and worse. You have to have the deceiver to even have a hope of dumping units out turn 2.

Apparently Necrons found a niche in the knights-heavy meta, with QS. This might be even stronger if the meta stocks up on more AT with knights limited to 4++ (and higher quality shots worth taking)

Cynista wrote:
The FLY clarification helps us because a lot of our units fly. The invasion beams tweak is good, for the 1% who use Night Scythes. Otherwise I'm disappointed but not surprised that we got absolutely nothing buffed. We really need it, but they just don't care.

 IHateNids wrote:
Also, Wraiths can Fall back & Charge now

Thats a good thing, right?

They already could.

These FAQ's generally clarify or nerf only. Rarely is something improved beyond fixing the odd broken mechanic. I'd say we came off as expected. A lot of other factions got flat nerfed.

barontuman wrote:
Imperial Knights will now be taking more than double the amount of damage than they used to. With a 3+ Rotate Ion Shield and a re-roll, it's only 11.111 % chance of failing a save. With the 4+ maximum, it's 25% chance of failing a save.

Anti-tank weaponry will be worth taking again finally!

Sorry for my naivete, but I'm confused by this math. A 3++ means they fail on a 1 or 2. That's a 33.33% chance of failing a save. 4++ means 50% chance of failing. That's a 16.67% chance increase, which is a 50% or half again above the original 33.33%. Not double or more than double... Was this comment made in different context?

He factored in a reroll

wisetiger7 wrote:

barontuman wrote:
Imperial Knights will now be taking more than double the amount of damage than they used to. With a 3+ Rotate Ion Shield and a re-roll, it's only 11.111 % chance of failing a save. With the 4+ maximum, it's 25% chance of failing a save.

Anti-tank weaponry will be worth taking again finally!

Sorry for my naivete, but I'm confused by this math. A 3++ means they fail on a 1 or 2. That's a 33.33% chance of failing a save. 4++ means 50% chance of failing. That's a 17.67% chance increase, which is a 50% or half again above the original 33.33%. Not double or more than double... Was this comment made in different context?

Note he talks with reroll from command CP. 50% rerolled is 1/4 chance of failing. 3+ rerolled is 1/9 chance of failing.

Of course that only applies to first failure. Though it takes quite a long time to generally get past shield so the fact it's only one reroll doesn't hurt as much. Especially for necrons who have small amount of big shots as general(about 5 shots to get failure one failure)

tneva82 wrote:

wisetiger7 wrote:

barontuman wrote:
Imperial Knights will now be taking more than double the amount of damage than they used to. With a 3+ Rotate Ion Shield and a re-roll, it's only 11.111 % chance of failing a save. With the 4+ maximum, it's 25% chance of failing a save.

Anti-tank weaponry will be worth taking again finally!

Sorry for my naivete, but I'm confused by this math. A 3++ means they fail on a 1 or 2. That's a 33.33% chance of failing a save. 4++ means 50% chance of failing. That's a 17.67% chance increase, which is a 50% or half again above the original 33.33%. Not double or more than double... Was this comment made in different context?

Note he talks with reroll from command CP. 50% rerolled is 1/4 chance of failing. 3+ rerolled is 1/9 chance of failing.

Of course that only applies to first failure. Though it takes quite a long time to generally get past shield so the fact it's only one reroll doesn't hurt as much. Especially for necrons who have small amount of big shots as general(about 5 shots to get failure one failure)

Ahh, that makes more sense. Thanks for the explanation.

As usual GW don't know their own rules. A roll cannot be modified below 1, unless you are Necrons I suppose.

I love the change to flyers, I think it makes our Flyers completely garbage though, no reason to ever take one.

Deathwatch losing bolter discipline is pretty huge for Wraiths. So many nerfs for other factions as well, the 3++ being gone for Knights is a big deal for Pylons I feel. The removal of the mega-dakka Ork squad is really great for QS-heavy lists. The volcano-lance nerf means more small and medium-Knights, which means more of a melee threat. Also, suck it Daemon Prince spam.

I'm not sure if they missed it but you can still farm CP for putting units into reserves with Stratagems, since deployment is after the battle has begun AFAIK, doesn't matter for Necrons I suppose.

AAAAND YEEESSSS. Obyron tesla spam is back in business, feth you ITC head judge and feth your stupid GW connections. WAHAHAHA. I wasn't getting any better at League of Legends anyways and now I can go back to playing 40k.

Well that's special excemption for the quantum shield stratagem then. Nice necrons got something.

Deployment is most definitely before battle begins.

How did Obyron change? (not familiar with necron SC's especially as my dynasty doesn't have much access plus noob with necrons anyway waiting for first game. At least models for that are painted)