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.

This would be great if a reasonably costed melee option were available with an overall point reduction to Destroyers and Heavy's. It would also be nice if the vehicle portion of the model did not look like the rear end of a 1968 VW Bug.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


1. This thread now has too many lists.
2. There's nothing wrong with writing 2 twice.
2. See?

Actually, you wrote 2 thrice.

1. Necrons, necrons!
10. We don't need Tyranid-lists.
11. Why are we complaining about numbers?
100. C'mon, let's go binary on them.
101. We need more rumours that are not from Natfka.

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, it's only been the iBook edition on there for some time now.

Another small note is that Destroyers have been listed as Jetbikes for a few weeks now. I don't know if this was a long-existing error or if we'll see them moved to that type in the future.

This isn't true. I have the iBook and it's updated and since 5th edition they have always been jump infantry.

Kangodo wrote:
1. Necrons, necrons!
10. We don't need Tyranid-lists.
11. Why are we complaining about numbers?
100. C'mon, let's go binary on them.
101. We need more rumours that are not from Natfka.

31 3a 20 48 65 78 61 64 65 63 69 6d 61 6c 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 74 72 75 65 20 6d 61 63 68 69 6e 65 20 6c 61 6e 67 75 61 67 65 2e

 NecronLord3 wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, it's only been the iBook edition on there for some time now.

Another small note is that Destroyers have been listed as Jetbikes for a few weeks now. I don't know if this was a long-existing error or if we'll see them moved to that type in the future.

This isn't true. I have the iBook and it's updated and since 5th edition they have always been jump infantry.

I meant that the Destroyer pack is listed as Jetbike on the Webstore. If you go to the GW store, go to Necrons, and then under "Miniature Type" choose "Bikes and Jetbikes", the options that show up are Tomb Blades and Destroyers.

As I said, this could be an error, or it could be a sign of things to come.

 Tokhuah wrote:
This would be great if a reasonably costed melee option were available with an overall point reduction to Destroyers and Heavy's. It would also be nice if the vehicle portion of the model did not look like the rear end of a 1968 VW Bug.

I like the look of Destroyers, one of the more iconic Necron models.

More customisable Destroyers absolutely would fit their body modification obsessed death cult fluff better though. Telsa Cannons! Particle Beamers! One of those Exile things! Warscythe Bayonets! A Shooty option for the Lord so he actually has reason to hang with his cult subordinates!

But yeah, I'd settle for them just being a quarter to a third cheaper.

changemod wrote:

 Tokhuah wrote:
This would be great if a reasonably costed melee option were available with an overall point reduction to Destroyers and Heavy's. It would also be nice if the vehicle portion of the model did not look like the rear end of a 1968 VW Bug.

I like the look of Destroyers, one of the more iconic Necron models.

More customisable Destroyers absolutely would fit their body modification obsessed death cult fluff better though. Telsa Cannons! Particle Beamers! One of those Exile things! Warscythe Bayonets! A Shooty option for the Lord so he actually has reason to hang with his cult subordinates!

But yeah, I'd settle for them just being a quarter to a third cheaper.

^ This. Murder machines need more toys to murder with.
Also, they need two wounds. I never understood how such a big model could only have 1 wound...

Yeah. Destroyers perfectly fit to the Necron fluff and the models are still good, but they were so overpriced since 5th, it's not even funny. Worse, they were one of the few AP2 weapons Necron had.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
1. Necrons, necrons!
10. We don't need Tyranid-lists.
11. Why are we complaining about numbers?
100. C'mon, let's go binary on them.
101. We need more rumours that are not from Natfka.

31 3a 20 48 65 78 61 64 65 63 69 6d 61 6c 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 74 72 75 65 20 6d 61 63 68 69 6e 65 20 6c 61 6e 67 75 61 67 65 2e

Are Necrons switching to hex bases?

It's the way of the future. Binary proved too restrictive for personality functions and having more than 7 guns available.
Software drivers, you know.

[quote=I never understood how such a big model could only have 1 wound...

It just occured to me that they are not likely to reprint the Mephrit Dynasty Material in the new codex.

Considering that the Mephrit Dynasty Force Org Chart is a nice upgrade, what do you think they will do for the main codex ?

What book is that from? Second Shield of Baal book?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What book is that from? Second Shield of Baal book?

Shield of Baal: Exterminatus

I have a preview of all of Mephrit Dynasty Datasheets up on my blog

Oh I have the book, I've just not yet opened it.

Thanks for letting me know though.

 Zande4 wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:


1. Terrible list.
2. Little to nowhere is 3 CAD ever allowed.
2. The actual lists that features 5 tyrants is 1 CAD with 2 flyrants + sky blight

1. You wrote 2 twice.
2. Your third point is dead wrong which is funny considering how condescending you came off in that post. The actual list is Hive Fleet Leviathan from Shield of Baal (3 Hqs / 3 Troops) + a normal CAD (2 Hqs / 2 Troops). Skyblight adds 1 Flyrant when used...
3. How annoying is it when some one retorts in this format?

1. Oh noes! A minor mistake surely dismisses my entire point (it didn't).
2. Oh no, i was only 99% correct!
3. Not annoying for me, but I'm sure you have a point somewhere?

1. I
2. Like
3. Lists

... but we need to stop.

 adamsouza wrote:

Considering that the Mephrit Dynasty Force Org Chart is a nice upgrade, what do you think they will do for the main codex ?

-Rumors of Resurrection Protocols being dropped for Feel No Pain are false.

-Considering that any reasonably sized Necron list I run meets the Mephrit Restrictions why would I not always use this for the Benefits? This makes me wonder what will be in the Codex to encourage alternate lists and playstyles.

 Tokhuah wrote:


-Rumors of Resurrection Protocols being dropped for Feel No .

For everyone who keeps saying this.

If we were getting FnP, wouldn't it be called FnP instead of Reanimation protocols as listed under the new Mephret Dynasty command benefit and the new Monolith formation? Deathstorm and that WD just came out. They wouldn't keep coining it Reanimation if they wanted to use a generic USR. It would be +1 to FnP rolls, just like it's named FnP in every other codex and supplement.

Is this flying over everybody's head but me? Or is this just a troll?

Maybe you should not respond to your own misquote, but rather to what the person you are calling a troll actually wrote.

The Mephrit Dynasy looses Obj Secured while not gaining some equally powerful benefit.
Being able to re-roll 1s on RP isn't that powerful or beneficial and what you give up for it is.
Unless I am mistaken, it raises RP from 33% (5+) to 38.6%(.33 + .17*.33= 38.6%) or around a 5% boost to RP to give up Obj Sec.

I have to say that the Relics and the burning one formation appear great without question.
I suppose if you conjoin relics, command benefits, warlord traits and formations (specifically the conclave of the burning one formation with the God shackle), I agree on the whole that a Mephrit Dynasty has a lot going for it.
Just not the pro/cons of the command benefits that were lost/gained.

Gunther wrote:
The Mephrit Dynasy looses Obj Secured while not gaining some equally powerful benefit.
Being able to re-roll 1s on RP isn't that powerful or beneficial and what you give up for it is.
Unless I am mistaken, it raises RP from 33% (5+) to 38.6%(.33 + .17*.33= 38.6%) or around a 5% boost to RP to give up Obj Sec.

I have to say that the Relics and the burning one formation appear great without question.
I suppose if you conjoin relics, command benefits, warlord traits and formations (specifically the conclave of the burning one formation with the God shackle), I agree on the whole that a Mephrit Dynasty has a lot going for it.
Just not the pro/cons of the command benefits that were lost/gained.

I find Objective Secured almost never comes up.

There is also the intriguing "Tesseract vaults cannot be taken as part of this formation."

What is a tesseract vault? Is it known at this stage?

 RFHolloway wrote:
There is also the intriguing "Tesseract vaults cannot be taken as part of this formation."

What is a tesseract vault? Is it known at this stage?

Uh... yes.
It's a T Ctan inside an Obelisk.
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/NecronsTesseract-Vault

 Nyghoma wrote:
If we were getting FnP, wouldn't it be called FnP instead of Reanimation protocols as listed under the new Mephret Dynasty command benefit and the new Monolith formation? Deathstorm and that WD just came out. They wouldn't keep coining it Reanimation if they wanted to use a generic USR. It would be +1 to FnP rolls, just like it's named FnP in every other codex and supplement.

I don't think GW has any sort of track record to expect that they would anticipate that sort of change. Lots of things have come out only to be immediately changed or reprinted thereafter. On this one, I even think that's basically justified: With the books coming out almost a quarter year or more before the codex, that's too much lead time to incorporate that kind of change. It would be super awkward to address that in the formation rules and bridge between codex changes like that.

 Nyghoma wrote:

 Tokhuah wrote:


-Rumors of Resurrection Protocols being dropped for Feel No .

For everyone who keeps saying this.

If we were getting FnP, wouldn't it be called FnP instead of Reanimation protocols as listed under the new Mephret Dynasty command benefit and the new Monolith formation? Deathstorm and that WD just came out. They wouldn't keep coining it Reanimation if they wanted to use a generic USR. It would be +1 to FnP rolls, just like it's named FnP in every other codex and supplement.

Is this flying over everybody's head but me? Or is this just a troll?

If it does happen, it will likely be some altered form of FnP, such as "Reanimation Protocals grant models with this rule FnP as long as one other model of the same type remains in the unit". It wouldn't be the first time GW has taken a USR and added a stipulation and called it a new special rule.

 Nyghoma wrote:

 Tokhuah wrote:


-Rumors of Resurrection Protocols being dropped for Feel No .

For everyone who keeps saying this.

If we were getting FnP, wouldn't it be called FnP instead of Reanimation protocols as listed under the new Mephret Dynasty command benefit and the new Monolith formation? Deathstorm and that WD just came out. They wouldn't keep coining it Reanimation if they wanted to use a generic USR. It would be +1 to FnP rolls, just like it's named FnP in every other codex and supplement.

Is this flying over everybody's head but me? Or is this just a troll?

Since you edited my post to make it seem like I was saying the opposite of what I wrote are you trolling?

Back on topic, maybe we will have a reason to play with some of the name HQ's in the new Codex. To that end, can someone give Anykr a Res Orb please?!

changemod wrote:

DaKKaLAnce wrote:
so is this old news? The necron rumours have been very quiet....

Well there is that single Ancient Evil line in white dwarf if you conveniently forget that could apply to about 50% of Games Workshop's armies and Necrons haven't been universally evil in years.

Decent odds it applies, but it's far from the only thing that line could refer to.

Consider the fact it would have been just as easy to scan and post the actual Necron article, if it existed, from that issue instead of a line that most likely applies to Warhammer undead.

Gunther wrote:
The Mephrit Dynasy looses Obj Secured while not gaining some equally powerful benefit.
Being able to re-roll 1s on RP isn't that powerful or beneficial and what you give up for it is.
Unless I am mistaken, it raises RP from 33% (5+) to 38.6%(.33 + .17*.33= 38.6%) or around a 5% boost to RP to give up Obj Sec.

Add in a Res Orb +1 to make it 4+ (50%), reroll the 1's 58.5% (.5 + .17*.5=58.5%) for a 8.5% boost.

Obsec is more valuable when you play MSU.

Let my opponent try to clear my 20 Necron Warrior unit, who is bubble wrapping the objective, when 38.6-58.5% get back up at the end of the phase, just to get close enough to contest the objective with his Obsec unit.

There is also often overlooked value of the psychological aspect of reanimation protocol has demoralizing your opponent. It's quite annoying to line up a shot, roll to hit, roll to wound, watch you fail saves, and then a minute later you roll and undo whatever he accomplished. Now, to add further insult to injury, you go, oh wait, I get to reroll those 1's.