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.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
ShadarLogoth,

You may want to buy a rule book and take a look at how cover saves work, and the ranges needed for Stealth and Shrouded to have any effect and under what circumstances night fighting rules actually come into play.

These are topics you clearly don't understand.

Yeah, I've only been playing the game for 12 years, but there's no Throne of Skulls champion in my meta, so what do I know?

Stealth is greater the 12", Shrouded greater then 24". Given TPs and a Dlord have a threat range of 24" what percentage of your opponents firepower are they going to place in harms way to take away Stealth or Shrouding. You're really grasping at straws here man. Might be a good time to tap out of a conversation and read from the side lines for a bit.

G. Whitenbeard

Agree with most of your post, and that is precisely why I think it's best to have both, particularly if your committed to running a lot of JI in the first place. One thing I would contend:

The fact is, Wraiths have the necessary save and power to fight through heavy las-cannon, rail cannon, plasma cannon, assault cannon, battle cannon, demolisher cannon, and melta gun fire that TPs just don't have with their lack of an invul save.

Keep in mind TPs will still get their RP roll, which basically acts as an Invuln against all the big guns. With cover, you could be talking about a 5+/4+ 4+/4+ or even 3+/4+, which work out to even, better then, and much better then just a 3++. I generally use a unit of Wraiths to screen the unit of TPs with the DLord, so some form over cover for the TPs is almost always going to be their whether they are out in the open or not.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skoffs wrote:

ShadarLogoth wrote:

FO are still utter trash

You've obviously never run FO's with a Dlord .

of all the glorious things you could attach a DLord to, Flayed Ones rightly deserve to be considered "trash" tier.
(now, if they had been given Rending, which would have made sense, what with their giant blades for fingers, obviously things would be vastly different and GW might actually see people buying those god awful overpriced models. but alas, much like the C'tan and the Monolith, GW decided it had had enough of people buying FO, and had Ward nerf them into mediocrity)

Attaching PE and RO to 20 bases and 60/80 attacks is really where that combination shines. I agree it's not the best place for the DLord, but a large group of Flayed Ones isn't a bad place for him to end up if his Wraith or TP escort gets shot down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NecronLord3 wrote:
And cost which TP vastly fail at, where Wraiths obviously succeed.

I think you are forgetting that your Flayed Ones lack fearless, and that expensive D. Lord will get swept along with your twenty models, when they fail their leadership roll for losing the combat. That's if they don't start falling back from a failed morale check from shooting alone. FOs suck C'tan sized balls.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
I think you are forgetting that your Flayed Ones lack fearless, and that expensive D. Lord will get swept along with your twenty models, when they fail their leadership roll for losing the combat. That's if they don't start falling back from a failed morale check from shooting alone. FOs suck C'tan sized balls.

Riveting analysis. Because 10 Leadership sucks and stuff right? And losing combat is real easy when you're throwing 60 to 80 Preferred Enemy attacks plus a Dlord at a unit right? Right? And you've actually run this combination in games to have some perspective right? Or played against it? Or have ever seen Flayed Ones fielded at all? Or run the math? Or have any single actual reason for your opinion other then mindless speculation?

Goodness.

Yes I have. It doesn't take much for 20 man Necron squads to lose a CC or a majority if not all to be dropped just from ranged combat. FOs are sitting ducks on the turn they are deployed, regardless of how you drop them or start them on the board, and their options are even more limited with the D. Lord attached. Going against any decent cc unit in the game, your Failed Ones will flee or be swept easily before rolling for a single RP. Yes, in my 14 years of experience I have given this a try, and yes my 10,000+ points of Necrons includes 20 FOs, but none are Finecast.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
Yes I have. It doesn't take much for 20 man Necron squads to lose a CC or a majority if not all to be dropped just from ranged combat.

Res Orbed Flayed Ones are the tied with Res Orbed Warriors as the most resilient units in the entire codex. If your opponent was unloading shots on your 20 Res Orbed Flayed Ones and you still lost you did something tragically wrong.

FOs are sitting ducks on the turn they are deployed, regardless of how you drop them or start them on the board, and their options are even more limited with the D. Lord attached.

Every single unit in the game is a "sitting duck" the moment they are deployed. This is such a poor and asinine argument I can't believe otherwise intelligent people actually try to parade it around. The difference with the Flayed Ones is they have extremely flexible deployment, so your chances of getting them in a prime spot are actually quite good if you understand how to play the game and stuff.

Going against any decent cc unit in the game, your Failed Ones will flee or be swept easily before rolling for a single RP. Yes, in my 14 years of experience I have given this a try, and yes my 10,000+ points of Necrons includes 20 FOs, but none are Finecast.

Cool story. Would love to see the bat rep for this one. 10,000+ points of crons means you're clearly good at the games. Do you have a blog I can follow?

I also have 20 metal FOs, they have been a steady fixture in my main army since the new dex dropped, and I know for a fact while what you are describing happens on occasion, it's extremely unlikely. Most armies simply don't bring a unit that can handle 20 FOs and a Dlord in CC. There is a very short list of units out there that can easily handle 20 Flayed Ones and a DLord in CC, and most of them are in the Death Star category.

Considering your advocacy for using Triarch Praetorians, and Flayed Ones, I'm pretty sure anyone reading this tactics thread has already disregarded all of your bad advice. And no I don't have a blog as I don't feel the need to display my strategy with the entire world, nor the need to gloat. But I did place dead center of the 2010 Adepticon championships using the 3rd edition codex in a 5th edition tournament. That was 2wins and a draw, by the way. So, yeah I think I know what I'm talking about.

And please answer this question from one of your earlier misspoken remarks. How exactly are Wraiths, on average the same cost as TPs?

 NecronLord3 wrote:
Considering your advocacy for using Triarch Praetorians, and Flayed Ones, I'm pretty sure anyone reading this tactics thread has already disregarded all of your bad advice. And no I don't have a blog as I don't feel the need to display my strategy with the entire world, nor the need to gloat. But I did place dead center of the 2010 Adepticon championships using the 3rd edition codex in a 5th edition tournament. That was 2wins and a draw, by the way. So, yeah I think I know what I'm talking about.

And please answer this question from one of your earlier misspoken remarks. How exactly are Wraiths, on average the same cost as TPs?

I'm quite infamous on these boards for my defense of both TPs and FOs. Over the last year and a half its been pretty consistent that the people who actually run the units regularly enough to understand how to use them like them, and the ones who have never touched them in their lives, or run them once or twice and had their negative pre-conceived notions confirmed by bad tactics or bad die rolls, don't. I really don't care either way. You can open your mind to possibilities you haven't fully considered or stubbornly cling to false perceptions. It truly makes no difference to me.


50% of Wraiths have Whip Coils. The non WC Wraiths cost 35 points, the WC cost 45 points. That averages out to (maths maths maths maths) 40 points right? What do TPs cost again? I forget, and don't have my dex on hand.

Misspoken indeed. I eagerly await your next rebuttal.

Yeah your TP cost 40pts a wound. My wraiths cost 20 a wound. (logic, logic, logic). I can field 3 full squads of Wraiths for the same cost as not even two full squads of TP.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
Yeah your TP cost 40pts a wound. My wraiths cost 20 a wound. (logic, logic, logic). I can field 3 full squads of Wraiths for the same cost as not even two full squads of TP.

What does that have to do with cost per base? What does the relative cost of 6 man squads of Wraiths compared to 10 man squads of TPs have to do with anything?

The amount of wounds you get per Wraith is irrelevant. That's already been demonstrated. Wow.

What does a rending 3 attack, 3++, 2W jump infantry model have to do with anything? Um... Everything, all 36 wounds of them.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
What does a rending 3 attack, 3++, 2W jump infantry model have to do with anything? Um... Everything, all 36 wounds of them.

Awesome. Somewhere in there I'm sure there is the part where you explain how 40 points per model != 40 points per model. I'm sure if I keep re-reading your post that explanation will emerge eventually.

It'd be best if we take a step back, take a breath and calm it down a bit please. No need for such hostility.

Thanks.

ShadarLogoth wrote:

 NecronLord3 wrote:
What does a rending 3 attack, 3++, 2W jump infantry model have to do with anything? Um... Everything, all 36 wounds of them.

Awesome. Somewhere in there I'm sure there is the part where you explain how 40 points per model != 40 points per model. I'm sure if I keep re-reading your post that explanation will emerge eventually.

1 Triarch Praetorian =/= 1 Wraith in game play, survivability, number of attacks, armour save or even initiative.
1 Triarch Praetorian = 1 Wraith in point cost(on average). This is the only way they are equal

10 Triarch Praetorian = 6 Wraiths in Combat effectiveness this I will agree to in many situations, though they both excel in areas where the other fails.
10 Triarch Praetorian =/= 6 Wraiths in Points cost. There is no argument about this at, this is a fact and this is where Wraiths excel over Triarch Praetorians.

TP simply cannot compete due to their cost versus effectiveness. In order for them to be effective you must spend more points on them than you can achieve for the same level of effectiveness as a Wraith squad, which is 160 points less. 165 points buys you a 5 man Squad of Warriors and a Night Scythe. So I'll take my 5 Warriors and a Night Scythe plus 6 Wraiths against any mathhammer of 10 TP any day. I will always win.

@ ShadarLogoth

All my Mathammer was dead on Shadar.

Yes it takes 18 bolter shots to take down a Wraith and 27 to take down a TP with a Res Orb
100/ 5.6 = 17.86
100 / 3.7 = 27.03

All my data was pretty much just that... data. Data to look at and for people to draw their own conclusions. Only once did I add a "Wraiths for the Win" at the end of one of those posts.

So lets analize the data then...

Vs Bolter fire TPs beat Wraiths
Vs Plasma fire Wraiths are WAY better
Vs S8 AP3(or better) Wraiths are WAY better
Vs S5 AP4 TP are better if they have an Orb
Vs S6 AP4 TP are better if they have an Orb
Vs S7 AP4 Wraiths and TPs(with an Orb) are tied

Now he following is MY OPINION

Yes TPs are more survivable than Wraiths. But only be a SLIM margin., and only if you plan on using them for Counter Assault so they can stay in cover to dodge the big guns. This makes Wraiths faster(especially when they ignore all terrain and TPs don't) and more flexible. Plus if I want a unit to counter an incoming assault I will just take scarabs.

As far as points go they are dead equal if you take the Res Orb for the TPs and Max WCs for the Wraiths(but who would ever take max WCs? it is just a waste).

My conclusion from all the debate is that Triarch Praetorains are probably the WORST unit in the codex simply because they offer no benefit that other units can't for less points. But don't get me wrong I still like TPs for other reasons(fluff, cool models, that fact that nothing in the codex doesn't have a use).

Cheers

*just wanted to add this*

I don't mean to pick on Shadar, I think his argument is valid and for the most based on real life game play and not statistic crunching. I would field TPs(and even Flayed Ones when the need arises) and not have second thoughts in doing so. But in truth I believe Wraiths are a way better option. Not to mention that in 1 out of the 6 missions they are actually a scoring unit, this is the over the top reason why I think Wraiths are better.

I don't think that taking TPs over Wraiths though would handicap a list. And in some cases it would be a suprise factor since not alot of people field TPs, so your enemy would be less familiar with what they can do.

Jesus, I tried quoting your post but dakkas new quote system gives me cancer!

So, abridged:


Small volume fire / bolter shots at Wraiths: You can't calculate this in such a way. 18 Bolter shots is an entire squad firing at an enemy unit within double tap range whereas 27 Bolter shots means 1 entire squad plus 7 "remaining" shots. That's why I used 20 shots in my calculation, vs. a normal volley of bolter shots, neither have a significant advantage. Works similary to the Heavy Bolter shots - when was the last time you faced an entire squad of Heavy Bolter shots? You are likely to maybe face 1 or MAYBE 2 heavy bolter bases per squad.

That's either 3 or 6 Heavy Bolter shots. 3 shots, hit at 3s, thus you got 2 hits in.

Wraiths: wounded on 3s, 1.33 wounds, 3++, 0.4 lost wounds.

TP: wounded on 4s, 1 wound, 3+, 0,p3 lost wounds.

Again, really minor difference while TP are more expensive.

TP *are* more expensive. Nobody taks 6 WC, you mostly see 2-3 WC equipped.

Furthermore, terminators are MUCH more resilant to shooting due to their 2+ and 3++ save (we are still looking at cc troops, aren't we?).

And again: you keep not acknowledging the Wraith's special rule that allows them to ignore difficult terrain. That is a giant advantage as you go wherever you please where as TP still suffer from it.

...and on a less related issue: Wraiths look like 100x more badass than TP. Word, brah.

1 Triarch Praetorian =/= 1 Wraith in game play, survivability, number of attacks, armour save or even initiative.
1 Triarch Praetorian = 1 Wraith in point cost(on average). This is the only way they are equal

10 Triarch Praetorian = 6 Wraiths in Combat effectiveness this I will agree to in many situations, though they both excel in areas where the other fails.
10 Triarch Praetorian =/= 6 Wraiths in Points cost. There is no argument about this at, this is a fact and this is where Wraiths excel over Triarch Praetorians.

TP simply cannot compete due to their cost versus effectiveness. In order for them to be effective you must spend more points on them than you can achieve for the same level of effectiveness as a Wraith squad, which is 160 points less. 165 points buys you a 5 man Squad of Warriors and a Night Scythe. So I'll take my 5 Warriors and a Night Scythe plus 6 Wraiths against any mathhammer of 10 TP any day. I will always win.

That's not even remotely accurate, as the math on this thread has proven. Saying you need 10 TPs to equal 6 Wraiths is comically bad. No real point in discussing this further if you can't understand how wrong that is.

All my Mathammer was dead on Shadar.

You said "Final results means that Bolter fire is only slightly(0.7%) more effective vs Wraiths." Sorry, that's what I took the most issue with. 50% more shots is significant. The way you worded it does make it seem so, and in fact I don't think its accurate either. Each Bolter shot kills (1/18) of a Wraith and (1/27) of a TP. That's 5.6% of a Wraith versus 3.7% of a TP. Again, that means your killing 50% more Wraith with each bullet.

However, most of your core numbers were correct, I just didn't think they illustrated the actual relative strengths very well, and ignoring cover makes the data largely irrelevant.

Vs Bolter fire TPs beat Wraiths
Vs Plasma fire Wraiths are WAY better
Vs S8 AP3(or better) Wraiths are WAY better
Vs S5 AP4 TP are better if they have an Orb
Vs S6 AP4 TP are better if they have an Orb
Vs S7 AP4 Wraiths and TPs(with an Orb) are tied

Again, those numbers are meaningless as long as you ignore cover. I can count on one hand the amount of time in the last year and a half my TPs have been shot at with no cover. Once cover is in play, the TPs clearly win the resiliency argument.

Yes TPs are more survivable than Wraiths. But only be a SLIM margin., and only if you plan on using them for Counter Assault so they can stay in cover to dodge the big guns. This makes Wraiths faster(especially when they ignore all terrain and TPs don't) and more flexible. Plus if I want a unit to counter an incoming assault I will just take scarabs.

It's not a SLIM margin though. An entire squads worth of firepower per base difference is not slim at all. That means for a group of 6 TPs versus 6 Wraiths ~54 more Bolter shots will have to be expended through out the course of the game. The Wraiths are a tad faster, but not with the Dlord, which was the entire purpose of this comparison. Scarabs compete with Wraiths for FA and don't really factor into this comparison.

As far as points go they are dead equal if you take the Res Orb for the TPs and Max WCs for the Wraiths(but who would ever take max WCs? it is just a waste).

The Res Orb goes on the Dlord, who almost justifies the investment by himself, and can easily benefit other units once the TPs are downed. It would be inaccurate to "charge" the TPs for the full price.

My conclusion from all the debate is that Triarch Praetorains are probably the WORST unit in the codex simply because they offer no benefit that other units can't for less points. But don't get me wrong I still like TPs for other reasons(fluff, cool models, that fact that nothing in the codex doesn't have a use).

/sigh Why are people so hell bent in trying to identify a "worst" unit, as if there was any real objective way of making such an assessment.

Wraiths are great, right? TPs are basically Wraiths, that come from a different FOS, are more resilient, and can be specialized for either anti Term (Rods) or anti vehicle (VB/PC). How can one unit be so good, and another unit, which is extremely similar, be "worst." Notions such as this one never cease to amaze me.

The two units compliment each other very well. If you're running a Dlord and two groups of JI, and you go with two groups of Wraiths instead of one of each, your army will be weaker because of it. Wraiths+TPs simply have more flexibility and less vulnerabilities then Wraiths+Wraiths. If nothing else, the TPs justify the aforementioned Res Orb investment, and I could write a novel on how powerful having a Dlord with a Res Orb on the table that he can hop around and add to any unit (along with PE) he wants is. Try it out. Run a unit of 6 Wraiths with a unit of 6 to 8 TPs with a Dlord, and sprinkle in a few more large units that would love some RO+PE action. It's an extremely powerful list, and the TPs are a huge reason why (mostly because they keep the Dlord alive doing his thang).

Unless you are running around getting 2+ Cover Saves they only time cover applies is againt Plasma and Missile/Melta/Las. Even if you are ALWAYS getting 4+ cover Wraiths are still more resistant to Plasma while TPs are Slightly better against Missile/Melta/Las. Again I admited that TPs are more survivable than Wraiths, but the real question is...

Just how much Survivability do you need man?

Never have I lost more than 2 Wraiths to incoming fire, because in reality that is how much small arms fire you are probably ever gonna take. That's why I only put WCs on 4 out of 6. I mean come on, if you are letting your Wraiths or TPs get shot up with more than 36 bolter shots(the amout to lose 2 Wraiths) before they get into the assault then you just suck as a general.

On the mathammer side of things, everyone of the TP results can be lowered by 1/6th since the last TP standing won't get the effect of the Res Orb(of course this is assuming 6 TPs in the unit to make points comparisons equal).

Again I would like to add that TPs are NEVER scoring units while Wraiths are in the mission that always has the most objectives making this advantage very very important.

And finally all the debate I have been involved in I have yet to weigh in on the Offense of said units which puts Wraiths heads and tails abover TPs. In a straight up Assault(starting in base to base with no one getting a charge bonus) Wraith will demolish a unit of TPs. They strike first, have more attacks, and have more wounds(which cannot be countered in this instance), This is OVERLY obvious.

Of course you will probably bring up that the TPs would get to shoot at the Wraiths first. In a stand off test against anyone who knew what they were doing this would never, NEVER, happen. Starting 24" apart(which is as close as the 2 units could ever get to each other at the start of a game) it would take a mistake by the Wraith player for you to get any shots with the RoC, and since I didn't put WCs on 2 of my guys I could buy 2 particle casters and still be under by 10pts. You would actually be better of with the VB/PC but even then everything I said about Wraiths before in the assaut stands true.

Look, I don't deny the fact that TPs are good units. There are other reasons why I put them at the bottom of the codex.

1. can never score
2. Wraiths are a better close combat offensive option
3. Scarabs are a better close combat defensive option
out of the Elite section:
4. Deathmarks are better
5. Triarch Stalkers are better(we are a shooty army after all)
6. Lychguard are better(the better counter assault option that is)
7. C'tan serve another purpose
8. Flayed Ones serve another purpose

If the book didn't have Wraiths and Scarabs in it then TPs would be the best Unit in the codex! But sadly that is not the case and TPs are left as a good unit that has no real place in a list since there are better options.

Would I play TPs? YES! But I also play Monoliths and Flayed Ones even though I know they aren't the best thing in the codex, and I still win alot more than I lose.

i happen to like Flayed ones, Lych guard and TP's more than i do wraiths. i will not deny that wraiths are probaly the best option of the 3 on a model by model basis if you are just comparing the stats, but the clincher for me that stops wraiths being absolutely awesome is their size. Wraiths are huge. and while you could debate all day about who is better in what circumstances, and what benefits cover has for whom, wraiths are almost impossible to hide, there will always be a bit of a wraith that your enemy can draw LOS to, the same cannot be said of TP's, with their smaller base size, and not being so tall, you can actually hide them completely, and therefore not have to worry about getting shot at all.

There is also the fact that everyone knows how lethal wraiths are, and what their rules are, and obviously, how to deal with them. the same cannot be said for the less used troops in the necron codex, namely, flayed ones, lychguard and triarch praetorians. they obviously aren't the most obvious units to take, but that can work in your favour, since your opponent will regard them as an unknown quantity.
At the end of the day, in my experience at least, games are won by headology more than they are won by mathhammer and optimal unit choices.

maths only helps you calculate what your chances are for something to succeed, whereas outsmarting your opponent guarantees something will

madtankbloke wrote:
i happen to like Flayed ones, Lych guard and TP's more than i do wraiths. i will not deny that wraiths are probaly the best option of the 3 on a model by model basis if you are just comparing the stats, but the clincher for me that stops wraiths being absolutely awesome is their size. Wraiths are huge. and while you could debate all day about who is better in what circumstances, and what benefits cover has for whom, wraiths are almost impossible to hide, there will always be a bit of a wraith that your enemy can draw LOS to, the same cannot be said of TP's, with their smaller base size, and not being so tall, you can actually hide them completely, and therefore not have to worry about getting shot at all.

There is also the fact that everyone knows how lethal wraiths are, and what their rules are, and obviously, how to deal with them. the same cannot be said for the less used troops in the necron codex, namely, flayed ones, lychguard and triarch praetorians. they obviously aren't the most obvious units to take, but that can work in your favour, since your opponent will regard them as an unknown quantity.
At the end of the day, in my experience at least, games are won by headology more than they are won by mathhammer and optimal unit choices.

maths only helps you calculate what your chances are for something to succeed, whereas outsmarting your opponent guarantees something will

This is one of the reasons why I still use the old metal Wraith models and not the new plastic ones.

Any chance we can uh... switch topics?

The Wraith v TP argument has been thoroughly fleshed out (thank you, btw) in these last few pages. They each have their use and while Wraiths seem to be the more popular choice - not all of us are playing constantly at a competitive setting vs perfect opponents. Necron Codex is versatile enough that you can field either effectively in different situations and builds of units.

You can keep going if you want but I'm sure people are going to start tuning out your duel of words and Mathhammer. You've both managed to convince me that both these units are worth fielding.

I have a question for you guys. How the hell do you run Obyron. I've tried using him several times against friends and I have no idea how to use him. He seems rather slow even with GWM. It takes at least 2 turns to get into combat. What do you guys do when you field Obyron and what do you do to make him successful in your army?

 sounddemon wrote:
I have a question for you guys. How the hell do you run Obyron. I've tried using him several times against friends and I have no idea how to use him. He seems rather slow even with GWM. It takes at least 2 turns to get into combat. What do you guys do when you field Obyron and what do you do to make him successful in your army?

The best tactics I have used or scene him used with are treating Nemesor as a mobile homing beacon, either in a CCB(one of its few uses) or in a night scythe. You can then attach Obyron to what ever nasty unit you want across the board fast via deep strike with the mishap. I personally like Nemesor in a decent squad of Immortals or Warriors then have Obyron bring twenty warriors into rapid fire range. This can easily net you 60-70 shots. Though this must be managed well enough to keep them free of being assaulted as the blob squads are terribly vulnerable to being swept.

Use Obyron as a tooled up close combat upgrade. I have him attached when I use any foot Deathstar (royal courts, lychguard). I find he adds a vital Warscythe to the Sword/Board unit of Lychguard, along with 2 Lords and another Overlord. He ain't too slow, he's all fast! DEEP STRIKE!!!

 Brymm wrote:
Use Obyron as a tooled up close combat upgrade. I have him attached when I use any foot Deathstar (royal courts, lychguard). I find he adds a vital Warscythe to the Sword/Board unit of Lychguard, along with 2 Lords and another Overlord. He ain't too slow, he's all fast! DEEP STRIKE!!!

The only problem with that is it is around 700pts just for Nemesor, Obyron, a decently equipped Overlord and 2 RC Lords. What point value are you using this at effectively or are you doing something else to minimize the cost?

Deep striking with Obyron is usually not such a great idea (unless you do what the above post suggested and attach him to a large unit of Warriors).
Deep striking him with a melee unit will just see them sitting there for a turn, unable to shoot or assault (meaning they will more often than not be shot and assaulted in your opponent's turn).
Sticking your Royal Court deathstar in a Ghost Ark, however, will allow you to move then assault (open topped transport, after all).
Yes, it's not as fast as teleporting to the other side of the board, but at least you know they're not going to spend an entire round being useless)

Someone pouring fire into my super resilient Death Star, that after they live through it, can assault 3 different targets in my opponents deployment zone, while my annihilation barges and wraiths advance unmolested... Well just isn't so bad.
Sure I'm light in scoring, but you can do this under 2k. With a few night scythes too. And you get to use Lychguard!

Well that's just the thing, though. You've devoted enormous resources into this one unit that a Rune Priest using Jotww, or hell, even a lucky pie plate, can absolutely decimate.
Not only that, but you'll be sitting there through your opponent's assault phase too, before you're able to do anything. Any halfway intelligent player will know you'll be sending the deathstar after prime targets. Said intelligent players would then most likely throw something disposable at them, thus tying them up, and frustrating your plans.
Suddenly you find your elite point sink stuck in combat with zombie cultists.
Yeah, Obyron can Ghostwalk them out of there, but you're just going to keep running into this problem: teleport, sit there for a turn, get charged while waiting, teleport away, repeat.
All the while, your opponent is gradually whittling down the rest of your meager forces.

It's just... better to have them foot slog (of at least use the Warrior blob pinpoint teleport tactic)

ShadarLogoth wrote:

I'm quite infamous on these boards for my defense of both TPs and FOs. Over the last year and a half its been pretty consistent that the people who actually run the units regularly enough to understand how to use them like them, and the ones who have never touched them in their lives, or run them once or twice and had their negative pre-conceived notions confirmed by bad tactics or bad die rolls, don't. I really don't care either way. You can open your mind to possibilities you haven't fully considered or stubbornly cling to false perceptions. It truly makes no difference to me.

I am actually interested in hearing your points for flayed ones. I personally as a necron player can't seem to fit them into any list I make simply due to warriors seeming soo much better. They cost the exact same and come in similar squad sizes. The warriors can score(capture objectives), take out tanks, and most importantly shoot. For the same price flayed ones don't have ranged weapons or any special CC rules/weapons, 2 extra attacks in CC but warriors get 2 shots at 12" or a shot at 24 which is the same strength as a flayed one CC. They are no more durable than a warrior, they have special deployment options but the warriors can take dedicated transports. If you were to attach a D.Lord as suggested by someone above the warriors would be arguably better with him for PE on their shots and he makes them half-decent at CC. So I just can't think of a way that flayed ones make it into a list, warriors are just superior, scoring wins you games in this edition and flayed ones don't score and don't do enough to justify them not scoring to take them over warriors. So unless your somehow using up all 6 troop slots I can't even begin to see why you would include flayed ones (unless of course your just having fun with a friend, but tactically no reason to have them). So if you could shed some light as to why take flayed ones I would be interested in hearing it.

I was looking at the rules for skimmers in the main rule book, of 83 to be precise "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it." So from what it seems like to me the monolith has a lot more deep strike survivability. As long as the monolith doesn't scatter off the table you can pretty much put it anywhere. And with the rise of plasma av14 is more powerful.

Hypothetically if you played 3 maxed squads of flayed ones infiltrated them all you could put some hurt on any foot slogging units. But I agree in all regards, point for point I would rather have warriors everyday of the week.

I believe triarch praetorians are pretty sweet. I want to run a full 10 man squad of PC and void blades with destroyer lord because that's a squad that can put the hurt on pretty much anything, and if you fight in the honorable ways of battle you wouldn't use canoptek units ( haha some fluff based tactics for you).

Has anyone bought and used acanthrites in a game Im thinking about getting some. They seem quite good I just wondered if anyone had a second opinion.

Punisher wrote:

ShadarLogoth wrote:

I'm quite infamous on these boards for my defense of both TPs and FOs. Over the last year and a half its been pretty consistent that the people who actually run the units regularly enough to understand how to use them like them, and the ones who have never touched them in their lives, or run them once or twice and had their negative pre-conceived notions confirmed by bad tactics or bad die rolls, don't. I really don't care either way. You can open your mind to possibilities you haven't fully considered or stubbornly cling to false perceptions. It truly makes no difference to me.

I am actually interested in hearing your points for flayed ones. I personally as a necron player can't seem to fit them into any list I make simply due to warriors seeming soo much better. They cost the exact same and come in similar squad sizes. The warriors can score(capture objectives), take out tanks, and most importantly shoot. For the same price flayed ones don't have ranged weapons or any special CC rules/weapons, 2 extra attacks in CC but warriors get 2 shots at 12" or a shot at 24 which is the same strength as a flayed one CC. They are no more durable than a warrior, they have special deployment options but the warriors can take dedicated transports. If you were to attach a D.Lord as suggested by someone above the warriors would be arguably better with him for PE on their shots and he makes them half-decent at CC. So I just can't think of a way that flayed ones make it into a list, warriors are just superior, scoring wins you games in this edition and flayed ones don't score and don't do enough to justify them not scoring to take them over warriors. So unless your somehow using up all 6 troop slots I can't even begin to see why you would include flayed ones (unless of course your just having fun with a friend, but tactically no reason to have them). So if you could shed some light as to why take flayed ones I would be interested in hearing it.

In my extraordinarily humble opinion, flayed ones are only a good choice when utilized in a small number of niche situations.

1. When Imotekh is also used to make use of the Bloodswarm rule. The no-scatter aspect can be a massive boon, especially if the FO can be craftily placed to cut off tight terrain corridors or draw claiming units off opposing back field objectives. However, they can become an expensive speed-bump in certain situations.
2. When intentionally placed to force a match up that will lose to high-volume low-ap cc attacks, even if the FO get assaulted. Ideally this is against smaller, token units largely left un-supported in the backfield. Hard/soft doesn't matter much due to sheer volume of attacks. (Even Terminators will roll a bunch of 1's if given 20+ saves to roll) If this match up also draws a claiming unit off an objective, double win.
3. You need to take 10+ (15+ being preferable) to make them hardy enough to be worthwhile. Though I can easily see a use for a throw-away unit of 5 to mess with the enemy.

However, the biggest issues for flayed ones are:

1. Expensive models. $9 a pop for finecast is rough, though a box of warriors and some crafty green-stuff work could rectify this.
2. Ugly models. $9 a pop for finecast is even worse when the models are the worst in the Necron line. I love every single model that the Necron line has, especially the new stuff put out since NOV 2011 except for the flayed ones. The old flayed ones were truly way better and way the heck scarier. It's weird though, the new ones are more graphic (skinless bodies, skulls, blood vials) but way less scary because the skin looks like crud. The old metal ones were really phenomenal.
3. Most importantly, the better use that those points can be put to that synergizes better with the rest of the Necron forces and provides better overall point efficiency. Specifically, another scoring unit, bigger scoring units, more fast attack power, another support unit like a stalker or an ark, etc...