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.

 Dynas wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

 Dynas wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Cheaper yes, better is depatable. Quite soft so they won't survive any serious firepower, most/all buffs work on them, no code bonuses...

Still only 11 points per T5 3+ wound.

Yes but that's not particularly tough. As I said. Quite soft. They die very fast with all the multi damage -2 good rate of fire shots around. Until meta changes dramatically they will be vaporized before getting to close combat so what they will do while alive? Not closecombat so need to do something else. No good guns so not that either. So you are basically taking them to draw firepower away from actual threat. That's the only role they have.

Also the W2 in stat line isn't all that impressive. Hopefully you don't claim it's as good as two models with 1W each because they are not. Lot softer than that.

4++ is not going to save you from high VoF incoming fire, though. It’s so low a save (50%) it’s meant for low VoF, high dog/AP Fire.

Cant you buff it to 3++ with the stratagem. What about using Veil of Darkness on them. Or dare I say a monolith. Move the monolith up and then you can TP them in, would have to be a 2nd turn thing though. Just thinking out loud, see what other options might be viable with CA out. Always good to go back and look at stuff again.

You can do all of those things, yes. But point for point, 5 Praetorians versus 5 Lychguard, you’re paying less for Praetorians for effectively the same save and lethality (actually getting more due to shooting).

If you lean into the Lychguard more with other enabling synergies (like CP expenditure, of which we don’t have a ton, or Monoliths (!!expensive)) then that’s a different question.

It the survivablity, not the lethality that is key. The invul is a must against marine AP bolter spam.

Which Lychguard will never reach without tons of resources poured into them. At least Praetorians can potentially get their points back from killing certain Primaris dudes.

I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

v0iddrgn wrote:
I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

I don’t think anyone is missing his point. Lychguard are a defensive choice which for 30% more points per T5 wound you get an average 17% more survivability. If you spent the same extra points on more Praetorians, you’d end up with more wound soaking power.

And then you add increased mobility. From a purely defensive perspective, this lets you defend far more ground at 10” move than Lychguard.

Then you add lethality, which discourages some indeterminate number of attacks and in an (admittedly ideal case) you actually kill the first threat which lets you defend against the next.

Dynas and tneva also raised some synergies Lychguard can get from Monoliths etc. Which Praetorians don’t qualify for. Likewise you mentioned the reflecting stratagem that Praetorians, again, can’t benefit from. And you’re all totally correct about that. It’s not cost effective to run the Monolith (but it is super fun and fluffy!) and our CP are way too expensive to make using that stratagem an “every turn” play—but they do exist.

As a Tactics discussion I would therefore suggest that those aren’t competitively viable reasons to suggest running Lychguard over Praetorians at the new Praetorian cost of a mere 20 pts per model. They do the same job worse and for greater cost.

Doubling down on the defensive aspect of Lytchguard they are our one way to shift wounds. Playing against Raven Guard they are needed or you will not have any HQs for more then a turnor two.

Pyrothem wrote:
Doubling down on the defensive aspect of Lytchguard they are our one way to shift wounds. Playing against Raven Guard they are needed or you will not have any HQs for more then a turnor two.

That's one army though.

sieGermans wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

I don’t think anyone is missing his point. Lychguard are a defensive choice which for 30% more points per T5 wound you get an average 17% more survivability. If you spent the same extra points on more Praetorians, you’d end up with more wound soaking power.

And then you add increased mobility. From a purely defensive perspective, this lets you defend far more ground at 10” move than Lychguard.

Then you add lethality, which discourages some indeterminate number of attacks and in an (admittedly ideal case) you actually kill the first threat which lets you defend against the next.

Dynas and tneva also raised some synergies Lychguard can get from Monoliths etc. Which Praetorians don’t qualify for. Likewise you mentioned the reflecting stratagem that Praetorians, again, can’t benefit from. And you’re all totally correct about that. It’s not cost effective to run the Monolith (but it is super fun and fluffy!) and our CP are way too expensive to make using that stratagem an “every turn” play—but they do exist.

As a Tactics discussion I would therefore suggest that those aren’t competitively viable reasons to suggest running Lychguard over Praetorians at the new Praetorian cost of a mere 20 pts per model. They do the same job worse and for greater cost.

Eeh they get 25% less casualties against fairly common situatioe(-2 which is current meta). Can be easily 40% less or 50% less. Then if you factor in stratagem which halves vs -2, 60% less casualties vs -3.

for 18% increase 25% less casualties vs meta is cheap. You need 0 ap or -1 ap(assuming no stratagem. There lychguard takes 33% less casualties) And with bodyguard they have another role. Apart from that only thing both do is soak casualties. Neither is offensive unit as to be offensive you need to survlve to attack. And actually lychguard wins there too. Not good option but better than praetorians

tneva82 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

I don’t think anyone is missing his point. Lychguard are a defensive choice which for 30% more points per T5 wound you get an average 17% more survivability. If you spent the same extra points on more Praetorians, you’d end up with more wound soaking power.

And then you add increased mobility. From a purely defensive perspective, this lets you defend far more ground at 10” move than Lychguard.

Then you add lethality, which discourages some indeterminate number of attacks and in an (admittedly ideal case) you actually kill the first threat which lets you defend against the next.

Dynas and tneva also raised some synergies Lychguard can get from Monoliths etc. Which Praetorians don’t qualify for. Likewise you mentioned the reflecting stratagem that Praetorians, again, can’t benefit from. And you’re all totally correct about that. It’s not cost effective to run the Monolith (but it is super fun and fluffy!) and our CP are way too expensive to make using that stratagem an “every turn” play—but they do exist.

As a Tactics discussion I would therefore suggest that those aren’t competitively viable reasons to suggest running Lychguard over Praetorians at the new Praetorian cost of a mere 20 pts per model. They do the same job worse and for greater cost.

Eeh they get 25% less casualties against fairly common situatioe(-2 which is current meta). Can be easily 40% less or 50% less. Then if you factor in stratagem which halves vs -2, 60% less casualties vs -3.

for 18% increase 25% less casualties vs meta is cheap. You need 0 ap or -1 ap(assuming no stratagem. There lychguard takes 33% less casualties) And with bodyguard they have another role. Apart from that only thing both do is soak casualties. Neither is offensive unit as to be offensive you need to survlve to attack. And actually lychguard wins there too. Not good option but better than praetorians

Versus AP-2 (Which I agree is the meta), 4++ versus 3+ (becoming 5+) is 50% v. 33% chance to save. There are two scenarios by which to judge this:

If you have 100 wound rolls (at -2) ignoring cost to field versus 50 models of each:
Lychguard mean saves are 50.
Praetorian mean saves are 33.
The Lychguard saved 17 more wounds than the Praetorians. 17% more wounds saved of the 100 rolls (this is the 17% I was referring to).
Lychguard absorbed 50 wounds and lost 25 models (only 650 points lost), Praetorians absorbed 77 wounds and lost 38.5 models (770 points lost).

Except no one is fielding 50 of either of these or absorbing 100 wounds (although 100 shots isn’t impossible a lot of the time!).

If you have 200 points to spend on your backfield defense you get 7 Lychguard and 10 Praetorians, for example.

If you then have 28 wounds at -2:
Lychguard mean saves are 14 (14 unsaved wounds) and are wiped.
Praetorian mean saves are 9 (19 unsaved wounds) and have one Praetorian at one wound left.

What this means is that if cost is no object, and you want to ignore mobility and lethality, then Lychguard with 4++ could present a better cost effectiveness—which is a peculiar argument if cost is no object.

If you factor in costs, Praetorians are better value and even more survivable (Which is what Slayer was saying), and then have a bunch of ancillary benefits built into their cost.

Lychguard have ancillary benefits too, but you have to pay more points and/or CP to get them... which just adds to their cost.

A save roll of 4+ (from 4++ in this case), vs 5+ (resulting from AP-2) would arguably be a 50% improvement.

For praetorians to match lychguard in terms of survivability they would need to field 50% more models.

If you have 12 models and receive 12 AP -2 dmg 2 (for simplicity) wounds, then:

12 LG * 3/6 = 6 models alive.
12 TP * 2/6 = 4 models alive.

TP would have to start out with 18 models more to come out with 6 alive.

For this isolated case, LG would be 50% more effective in defence. Counter-balance that to the cost ratio, for this very isolated comparison.

(Just like if you were to boost Nihilakh wraiths to 2++, that would be a 100% improvement from 3++. Those 2++ wraiths soak wounds as twice as many 3++ wraiths could.)

Both units seem vastly inferior to Wraith so I'm not sure I see the value in the debate. Pretorians don't do anything that Wraith can't do better. Shield Guard acting as ablative wounds for characters is a horribly inefficient use of points. The only thing remotely noteworthy you can do with either of these units is to take a 10 strong Scytheguard unit and teleport it into combat with some buffs on. At least then you've got something a lot deadlier than Wraith, or any other CC option in the codex.

torblind wrote:
A save roll of 4+ (from 4++ in this case), vs 5+ (resulting from AP-2) would arguably be a 50% improvement.

For praetorians to match lychguard in terms of survivability they would need to field 50% more models.

If you have 12 models and receive 12 AP -2 dmg 2 (for simplicity) wounds, then:

12 LG * 3/6 = 6 models alive.
12 TP * 2/6 = 4 models alive.

TP would have to start out with 18 models more to come out with 6 alive.

For this isolated case, LG would be 50% more effective in defence. Counter-balance that to the cost ratio, for this very isolated comparison.

(Just like if you were to boost Nihilakh wraiths to 2++, that would be a 100% improvement from 3++. Those 2++ wraiths soak wounds as twice as many 3++ wraiths could.)

The 50% improvement versus 17% better is a semantic point; being 17% better than 33% is a 50% improvement. Both statements are still true. Using your example, 33% of TP survived versus the 50% of LG which survived, which was a 17% survival rate drop.

What isn’t the case is your statement that the improvement translates to model count differentials—you’re accidentally double dipping on your improvement. You only need 17% more TP than LG to equal wound soaking potential. See the worked examples provided.

Then further, due to low value breakpoints applicable to max squad sizes, there are niche cases where for the same points spent, absorbing the same AP-2 shots, more Praetorians survive than Lychguard.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Both units seem vastly inferior to Wraith so I'm not sure I see the value in the debate. Pretorians don't do anything that Wraith can't do better. Shield Guard acting as ablative wounds for characters is a horribly inefficient use of points. The only thing remotely noteworthy you can do with either of these units is to take a 10 strong Scytheguard unit and teleport it into combat with some buffs on. At least then you've got something a lot deadlier than Wraith, or any other CC option in the codex.

Wraiths with 3 wounds and a 67% save chance have 2.01 effective wounds, which at 41 points are 20 points per wound.
Praetorians with 2 wounds and a 33% save chance (versus AP-2) have 0.66 effective wounds, which at 20 points are 30 points per wound.

It isn’t a “seem”; Praetorians absolutely are worse than Wraiths in an AP-2 meta.

Well ap 2 weapons with dmg one you need 40 damn shots to kill one wraith average
( str4)
Same ammount kill 3 pretorians
One wraith cost less than three pretorians
Only good chance is hop from cover to cover with prets than it's a bit better
The 40 shots will kill two so pretty even

tneva82 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

I don’t think anyone is missing his point. Lychguard are a defensive choice which for 30% more points per T5 wound you get an average 17% more survivability. If you spent the same extra points on more Praetorians, you’d end up with more wound soaking power.

And then you add increased mobility. From a purely defensive perspective, this lets you defend far more ground at 10” move than Lychguard.

Then you add lethality, which discourages some indeterminate number of attacks and in an (admittedly ideal case) you actually kill the first threat which lets you defend against the next.

Dynas and tneva also raised some synergies Lychguard can get from Monoliths etc. Which Praetorians don’t qualify for. Likewise you mentioned the reflecting stratagem that Praetorians, again, can’t benefit from. And you’re all totally correct about that. It’s not cost effective to run the Monolith (but it is super fun and fluffy!) and our CP are way too expensive to make using that stratagem an “every turn” play—but they do exist.

As a Tactics discussion I would therefore suggest that those aren’t competitively viable reasons to suggest running Lychguard over Praetorians at the new Praetorian cost of a mere 20 pts per model. They do the same job worse and for greater cost.

Eeh they get 25% less casualties against fairly common situatioe(-2 which is current meta). Can be easily 40% less or 50% less. Then if you factor in stratagem which halves vs -2, 60% less casualties vs -3.

for 18% increase 25% less casualties vs meta is cheap. You need 0 ap or -1 ap(assuming no stratagem. There lychguard takes 33% less casualties) And with bodyguard they have another role. Apart from that only thing both do is soak casualties. Neither is offensive unit as to be offensive you need to survlve to attack. And actually lychguard wins there too. Not good option but better than praetorians

Said stratagem just means they go back to the other weapons that kill them more easily for the points compared to Praetorians. Praetorians can also take advantage of not being able to be shot for a turn and charge over terrain with absolutely no support.

That seems to be the grand point you're missing. Lychguard only appear better as you're constantly saying you should pour resources of Characters and CP into them, both of which are better off being used on Wraiths. Praetorians have just enough independence to be a distraction and tie units up in melee to force them to fall back, all for 10-11 points per T5 3+ wound. Also the bodyguard ability for Lychguard is largely pointless so trying to bring that up as a benefit is pretty silly don't you think?

If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

demonwalker wrote:
So I just decided to skim this to see if there are any good Necron tactics that might make me want to play them again, and now i'm curious on a few things (Please bare with me, I haven't gotten to play in over a year, and it's been longer since I touched Necrons).

DDA are good? I had it in my head once the codex dropped that they were slightly overcosted for a unit that couldn't move. I was taking instead for my Anti Tank 3 squads of Destroyers with a single Heavy in each. I also was just using VOF from other units to take more worrying ones down. Should I actually go out and buy some DDA then?

And are TB any good still? I remember running 6 man squads with Gauss, Shadowlooms, and Shieldvanes.

I'm also seeing a lot of QS being stated as really good, but I know in my meta everyone would use D2 or D3 weapons, so I rarely actually got my QS save. I take it my meta is just a one off then?

I don't see anyone saying anything about the Voltaic Staff, so I guess it's a crappy Relic? I was taking it on my Destroyer Lord and it worked out okay.

Now I don't even know what to take anymore. Anyone know a good spot I can relearn what in my book is actually good and what isn't?

3 DDa is pretty standard fare for Necrons like Exorcists in a Sisters army.

Tomb Blades are QUITE good as they can deliver a lot of pain and are very hearty and very fast, cant get tapped in combat, can be resurrected, and the list goes on. Strong unit.

I like the Voltaic Staff. I think our relics usually are almost picked FOR us. Veil is making it into 80% of lists. So...

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

sieGermans wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
I think you're missing the point Dynas is making, Lychguard are a defensive unit, not an offensive one. You want to remove our support characters LG soak up the wounds, so shoot them and watch as they pop their strategem and bounce MW's back. Killing with them is rare BUT keep in mind that most players' primary method of dealing with our infantry is by locking them down in assault, so LG have some counter assault viability there.

I don’t think anyone is missing his point. Lychguard are a defensive choice which for 30% more points per T5 wound you get an average 17% more survivability. If you spent the same extra points on more Praetorians, you’d end up with more wound soaking power.

And then you add increased mobility. From a purely defensive perspective, this lets you defend far more ground at 10” move than Lychguard.

Then you add lethality, which discourages some indeterminate number of attacks and in an (admittedly ideal case) you actually kill the first threat which lets you defend against the next.

Dynas and tneva also raised some synergies Lychguard can get from Monoliths etc. Which Praetorians don’t qualify for. Likewise you mentioned the reflecting stratagem that Praetorians, again, can’t benefit from. And you’re all totally correct about that. It’s not cost effective to run the Monolith (but it is super fun and fluffy!) and our CP are way too expensive to make using that stratagem an “every turn” play—but they do exist.

As a Tactics discussion I would therefore suggest that those aren’t competitively viable reasons to suggest running Lychguard over Praetorians at the new Praetorian cost of a mere 20 pts per model. They do the same job worse and for greater cost.

Eeh they get 25% less casualties against fairly common situatioe(-2 which is current meta). Can be easily 40% less or 50% less. Then if you factor in stratagem which halves vs -2, 60% less casualties vs -3.

for 18% increase 25% less casualties vs meta is cheap. You need 0 ap or -1 ap(assuming no stratagem. There lychguard takes 33% less casualties) And with bodyguard they have another role. Apart from that only thing both do is soak casualties. Neither is offensive unit as to be offensive you need to survlve to attack. And actually lychguard wins there too. Not good option but better than praetorians

Versus AP-2 (Which I agree is the meta), 4++ versus 3+ (becoming 5+) is 50% v. 33% chance to save. There are two scenarios by which to judge this:

If you have 100 wound rolls (at -2) ignoring cost to field versus 50 models of each:
Lychguard mean saves are 50.
Praetorian mean saves are 33.
The Lychguard saved 17 more wounds than the Praetorians. 17% more wounds saved of the 100 rolls (this is the 17% I was referring to).
Lychguard absorbed 50 wounds and lost 25 models (only 650 points lost), Praetorians absorbed 77 wounds and lost 38.5 models (770 points lost).

Except no one is fielding 50 of either of these or absorbing 100 wounds (although 100 shots isn’t impossible a lot of the time!).

If you have 200 points to spend on your backfield defense you get 7 Lychguard and 10 Praetorians, for example.

If you then have 28 wounds at -2:
Lychguard mean saves are 14 (14 unsaved wounds) and are wiped.
Praetorian mean saves are 9 (19 unsaved wounds) and have one Praetorian at one wound left.

What this means is that if cost is no object, and you want to ignore mobility and lethality, then Lychguard with 4++ could present a better cost effectiveness—which is a peculiar argument if cost is no object.

If you factor in costs, Praetorians are better value and even more survivable (Which is what Slayer was saying), and then have a bunch of ancillary benefits built into their cost.

Lychguard have ancillary benefits too, but you have to pay more points and/or CP to get them... which just adds to their cost.

Great break down!!

I have been running 10 S/B Lychguard for about a year now and all this talk about which is better is pointless. They are totally different units that do totally different things.

I run them as shock troops that stand in front of my army and absorb things coming at me from the front. Their first obj it to guard the army, 2nd to guard characters, and 3rd to deal with stuff when they do get into combat. Praetorian, have mostly 1 obj which is to kill some stuff.

In most of my games they end up dead at some point but the amount of fire they can absorb is fantastic. For example the 1 time they died on turn one it took an entire guard army shooting everything at them. Sure they died but then nothing else did, which left everything else to shoot back.

I cannot say enough about taking wounds off of characters. I have a good amount of snipers I play against and these guys just counter that.

Lastly, dealing with a demon prince or BDrone with Lychguard around is just so much easier. I have had them take a charge from both and make and a squad of these guys just doesnt really care. Not to mention when the charge happens to a character and they drop a bunch of attacks on your overlord only to see them converted to mortal wounds on your lychguard.

Its apples and oranges and you should be using one or the other based on what you need them to do.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

People that play 3 Doomsday Arks, what are your thoughts on replacing one for a unit of Heavy Destroyers with a regular Lord (using the spare points from Imotekh's point drop)?

3 shots hitting on 2s (MWBD), rerolling 1s and wounding on 3s re-rolling 1s against most tanks. What are your thoughts on this?

For pure anti Tank they work fine I tested them in some games after ca now.
But they aren't Doomsday arcs.
No blocking no gauss and less survivable.
But 3x3 desrtroyer are 336 3 ddas are 480.

You can easy hide 3x3 heavy destroyer come out and shoot and hold them in cover. For the points the output is great

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you just fear mongering?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

elook wrote:
People that play 3 Doomsday Arks, what are your thoughts on replacing one for a unit of Heavy Destroyers with a regular Lord (using the spare points from Imotekh's point drop)?

3 shots hitting on 2s (MWBD), rerolling 1s and wounding on 3s re-rolling 1s against most tanks. What are your thoughts on this?

Don't Lords only affect Infantry with that bubble? I'm probably remembering wrong.

In either case, the three shots from the Heavy Destroyers will go much further mostly because of their innate reroll to hit anyway. What's the rest of the list?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you just fear mongering?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

elook wrote:
People that play 3 Doomsday Arks, what are your thoughts on replacing one for a unit of Heavy Destroyers with a regular Lord (using the spare points from Imotekh's point drop)?

3 shots hitting on 2s (MWBD), rerolling 1s and wounding on 3s re-rolling 1s against most tanks. What are your thoughts on this?

Don't Lords only affect Infantry with that bubble? I'm probably remembering wrong.

In either case, the three shots from the Heavy Destroyers will go much further mostly because of their innate reroll to hit anyway. What's the rest of the list?

Heavy Destroyers are infantry

The post in context is asking about removing Heavy Destroyers for a Lord to babysit the Doom Arks, hence my question about clarification.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The post in context is asking about removing Heavy Destroyers for a Lord to babysit the Doom Arks, hence my question about clarification.

Incorrect, he specifically mentions taking the lord with the HD, as well as giving the reroll 1s to them

Kahi the Uncertain wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The post in context is asking about removing Heavy Destroyers for a Lord to babysit the Doom Arks, hence my question about clarification.

Incorrect, he specifically mentions taking the lord with the HD, as well as giving the reroll 1s to them

WOW I completely misread that. My apologies for trying to post at 2 in the morning.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you fear mongering

Crypteks are egregiously overcosted for their stats. 80 points for T4 4W 4+Sv! Mortis rounds will shred a Cryptek, heaven forbid you actually invest in additional wargear on him. Lords should become more common since they are the cheapest option we have and pass out a very useful buff, most of the time they are sitting with T5 4W 3+Sv because everyone already runs VoD and Weave is not worth it 19 times out of 20. Overlords are barely better than that with a 4++ and an extra wound. Unless all you run are Imotekh, OL's and DLords you're giving up head hunter for basically free. Even without snipers most opponents want to assault us because we are weak there. All our HQ's go *poof* in assault. You don't need math hammer to know I'm right unless you're daft.

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you fear mongering

Crypteks are egregiously overcosted for their stats. 80 points for T4 4W 4+Sv! Mortis rounds will shred a Cryptek, heaven forbid you actually invest in additional wargear on him. Lords should become more common since they are the cheapest option we have and pass out a very useful buff, most of the time they are sitting with T5 4W 3+Sv because everyone already runs VoD and Weave is not worth it 19 times out of 20. Overlords are barely better than that with a 4++ and an extra wound. Unless all you run are Imotekh, OL's and DLords you're giving up head hunter for basically free. Even without snipers most opponents want to assault us because we are weak there. All our HQ's go *poof* in assault. You don't need math hammer to know I'm right unless you're daft.

I don’t think the answer to “our HQs are too weak for 80+ pts!” Is to add 163% more points to your list to give them effectively 3 more wounds.

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you fear mongering

Crypteks are egregiously overcosted for their stats. 80 points for T4 4W 4+Sv! Mortis rounds will shred a Cryptek, heaven forbid you actually invest in additional wargear on him. Lords should become more common since they are the cheapest option we have and pass out a very useful buff, most of the time they are sitting with T5 4W 3+Sv because everyone already runs VoD and Weave is not worth it 19 times out of 20. Overlords are barely better than that with a 4++ and an extra wound. Unless all you run are Imotekh, OL's and DLords you're giving up head hunter for basically free. Even without snipers most opponents want to assault us because we are weak there. All our HQ's go *poof* in assault. You don't need math hammer to know I'm right unless you're daft.

Nobody is talking about Crypteks because we all already know they're garbage for the points. Nobody takes them so we aren't gonna bother to math them out.

Did you, yes or no, do the math on our HQs dying to various Sniper units, or are you fear mongering? It's a fairly simple question. You seem to have answered it in the post (no you didn't do the math and yes you're fear mongering) but clarification would be good.

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
If your meta has no Snipers then yes Lytchguard are not as appealing. Mine has at least a few in every SM and Admech list I play and our characters melt really fast and without buffs our infantry are just so so with a short range.

THIS^
I rely on my characters to actually buff my units. With the new meta being SM with easy access to lethal sniper fire I find myself willing to sink points into ablative wounds so that it is more of a waste of time than a game winning tactic.

Oh please. Even Eliminators aren't THAT dangerous. Plus if they're running Raven Guard they won't get a bonus until T2, and trust me as a Raven Guard player when I say you got a LOT more to be afraid of than some Snipers trying to kill a Cryptek.

Bwahahaha! Our characters are paper! Whatever, think what you want.

Well did you do the math on various Snipers trying to kill the characters or are you fear mongering

Crypteks are egregiously overcosted for their stats. 80 points for T4 4W 4+Sv! Mortis rounds will shred a Cryptek, heaven forbid you actually invest in additional wargear on him. Lords should become more common since they are the cheapest option we have and pass out a very useful buff, most of the time they are sitting with T5 4W 3+Sv because everyone already runs VoD and Weave is not worth it 19 times out of 20. Overlords are barely better than that with a 4++ and an extra wound. Unless all you run are Imotekh, OL's and DLords you're giving up head hunter for basically free. Even without snipers most opponents want to assault us because we are weak there. All our HQ's go *poof* in assault. You don't need math hammer to know I'm right unless you're daft.

Is Head Hunter some tournament thing, ITC maybe?
I just play with the brb, Codex and CA's for missions and terrain rules.

Yes, headhunter is an ITC thing. You get 1 pt. for every character you kill.