Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't know why I assumed counter tactics gives skyfire and interceptor, so I edited my post. It's still good though in the exact ways discussed here.

I wasn't thinking of the Ethereal either, I was just thinking that you'd take a Firebase Support Cadre for the 6 Broadsides and Riptide. You get almost all the special rules you can and you get 3 Tau units capable of dealing with air targets, and you can still take a Decurion if you want for Zandrekh as your primary detachment. CAD works too but since Warrior blobs are being used near Zandrekh, the 4+ RP and re-roll 1's seems like a no-brainer.

 Therion wrote:
I don't know why I assumed counter tactics gives skyfire and interceptor, so I edited my post. It's still good though in the exact ways discussed here.

I wasn't thinking of the Ethereal either, I was just thinking that you'd take a Firebase Support Cadre for the 6 Broadsides and Riptide. You get almost all the special rules you can and you get 3 Tau units capable of dealing with air targets, and you can still take a Decurion if you want for Zandrekh as your primary detachment. CAD works too but since Warrior blobs are being used near Zandrekh, the 4+ RP and re-roll 1's seems like a no-brainer.

I do like squeezing in objective secured in there somehow, even if it is just 1 unit. How many points do you value objective secured at? I would value it as something like 200 points. Its situational though, but in those matchups where you need it, even just 1 objective secured unit can mean the difference between winning and losing. Two units is good to have once people key in how to fight you. Luckily, Tau provide you with some of the cheapest and some of the best objective secured troops in the game.


Here's a quick list for discussion . . .





Grabbing points from Tomb blades and losing a Spyder (spyders in my opinion are really good when you give them RP 4+++) but this list looks solid. And, I would prepare to add a second unit of Kroot once people start objective securing as a hard counter.

Now the only thing the Tau are giving to Zandrekh is split fire and stealth (forests), and overall they contibute one obsec unit and one antiair unit. At that point it feels like the allied Hive Fleet Leviathan will do better.

To me the core issue of Necrons is dealing with air targets. Zandrekh giving one unit per turn a few special rules is a cool bonus to an army that is filled with individually strong units, but it doesn't solve the actual issue. Still, you should maximise Zandrekh with a larger Warrior unit than 10, and you should get tank hunters in there somewhere if you're using Tau allies.

No way did the designers intend on Zandrekh getting buffs from allies. Get real.

Alcibiades wrote:
No way did the designers intend on Zandrekh getting buffs from allies. Get real.

Easy to claim, harder to prove. As written, that is how it works until FAQed.

The best Zandrekh ally would IMO be a buffmander, a kroot squad and three HYMP broadsides. It's not an overinvestment while providing good volume of S7 firepower, something most cron lists lack nowadays since most players no longer runs tesla after the nerf. You can also give the broadsides skyfire and get your anti-air.

It's a neat idea but don't think it can remove anything. Assuming you'll have rerolls on to hit and to wound/pen lets look at the numbers.

Without skyfire, you can give a blob of warriors all the buffs in the world and they still won't do much damage to a flyrant or invisible death star. Snap Shots with rerolls and 40 shots is still only 12 hits. Then you still need to wound and get past their armour saves.

Against vehicles you'll average 11 Glancing hits, which is plenty to kill anything up to an IK. Against an MC you're also looking at 11 wounds. Which will deal 4 wounds to anything with a 3+ save (Wraithknights, tyrants etc). Not enough to kill a Wraithknight but it'll hurt it. Against Dreadknights this is even worse. You'll have to rely on other elements of your army to take care of them.

Against things with lower than T6, you'll pretty much wipe them out.

So as long as you avoid shooting at fliers, invisibile units, 5+ wound MCs and MCs with 2+ armour... you'll blow stuff away. The investment to do so on the Necron side is 415 points (zandrekh, 20 warriors, ghost ark) Which isn't bad considering the HQ and at least 10 warriors are mandatory anyway. To get all the buffs, you'll have to invest in Tau. But I don't consider that to be a negative since the Tau should pull their own weight anyway.

The critical thing a fire support cadre can't give zahndrekh is hit & run. I think that rule can be extremely powerful in a big unit that also has orikan in it, as he'll (hopefully) have I4. Being super resilient is cool, but being able to get out of combat when you need to makes it a lot better.

On riptides, having played tau allies with the previous codex, I feel that a single riptide without markerlight support is pretty damn bad for it's points, at least compared to how good it would be in a proper tau army. I'm currently thinking of having marker drones in a broadside unit (with the buffmander) to support the riptide. Not sure if that'd work, it feels a bit wonky. Pathfinders are unusable IMO, so there aren't that many sources for markerlights in an allied detachment.

Here's a 1500 point list I'll be trying out tonight:

Zanhdrekh
Orikan
16 warriors
5 immortals
2x5 wraiths (all coils)

Buffmander
10 kroot
3 broadsides (all target locks) + 6 missile drones

Still not sure what I'd take for those additional 350 points. Extra warriors, wraiths (to max out all units) and a riptide with skyfire and interceptor. A unit of tomb blades would be nice too.

 MLKTH wrote:
The critical thing a fire support cadre can't give zahndrekh is hit & run. I think that rule can be extremely powerful in a big unit that also has orikan in it, as he'll (hopefully) have I4. Being super resilient is cool, but being able to get out of combat when you need to makes it a lot better.

On riptides, having played tau allies with the previous codex, I feel that a single riptide without markerlight support is pretty damn bad for it's points, at least compared to how good it would be in a proper tau army. I'm currently thinking of having marker drones in a broadside unit (with the buffmander) to support the riptide. Not sure if that'd work, it feels a bit wonky. Pathfinders are unusable IMO, so there aren't that many sources for markerlights in an allied detachment.

Tetras. Tetras are amazing for markerlight support, especially when you can give them sensor spines and keep them behind 4+ cover, with the little markerlight thingy sticking out so they can still shoot.

Yeah, I thought of tetras. Unit of 2 would be 70 points if I remember correctly. I'll have to fiddle with the list and see if I could fit them.

 MLKTH wrote:
Yeah, I thought of tetras. Unit of 2 would be 70 points if I remember correctly. I'll have to fiddle with the list and see if I could fit them.

Find the extra 5 points each to give them sensor spines. Trust me, it's well worth the investment.

What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

Well, you can't have the gauntlet and the Solar staff on the same character.

In addition, the solar staff really does nothing for you on a command barge. You get some nice AP shooting.. which you could get from Destroyers. The Warscythe is better, for opening up vehicles, and winning combats. You could be tarpitted the entire game if you end up in close combat with the solar staff.

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

If you want the CCB to sit back and support your reclamation legion instead of rushing to the assault, just save points and keep a regular Staff of Light. The solar staff is much more useful in a teleporting unit of lychguard or wraiths. AV13 behind intervening units has a 5+ cover save, and is relatively hard to crack since it's a chariot - if he's shooting at you just take the hits on the overlord (unless they're s10).

TompiQ wrote:


Easy to claim, harder to prove. As written, that is how it works until FAQed.

I know it's how it works until FAQed, but it's transparently unintended, like the CH giving you multiple Spyders.

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

Anything you can shoot at with a 12 inch gun will just move 6 inches towards you and then charge you since you are terrible in CC without a war scythe you are stuck till they kill you or you run a assault unit in to bail out your lord.

Punisher wrote:

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

Anything you can shoot at with a 12 inch gun will just move 6 inches towards you and then charge you since you are terrible in CC without a war scythe you are stuck till they kill you or you run a assault unit in to bail out your lord.

Would it then be worth giving the CCB a phylactery or Phase shifter.

oz of the north wrote:

Punisher wrote:

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

Anything you can shoot at with a 12 inch gun will just move 6 inches towards you and then charge you since you are terrible in CC without a war scythe you are stuck till they kill you or you run a assault unit in to bail out your lord.

Would it then be worth giving the CCB a phylactery or Phase shifter.

I think yes to both.

Alcibiades wrote:

TompiQ wrote:


Easy to claim, harder to prove. As written, that is how it works until FAQed.

I know it's how it works until FAQed, but it's transparently unintended, like the CH giving you multiple Spyders.

How could you possibly know it's unintended? I read the rule when it was leaked in leak thread and it took me all of five seconds to realize it would work with allies, because all Necron allies count as enemy units. I am sure many other Xenos players used to allies being enemies thought the same thing. It seems hard to believe the writers were not aware of it when writing the rule.

As for the CH, there's literally a page in the codex dedicated to a diagram of the formation, and it specifies a unit of Spyders. Most likely the writer of the formation rules was being sloppy and forgot Spyders are one of the few MCs that can come in squads and used the same formatting as the other Necron units that come alone (C'Tan, ICs etc.). The Spyder costs 50pts and is priced the same as an entire infantry squad, making it the least efficient unit in pts per $ spent for the entire Necron codex. Are we now living in some bizarro universe where GW would intentionally make it hard to field lots of a unit like that?

oz of the north wrote:

Punisher wrote:

oz of the north wrote:
What do people of putting the solar staff on a CCB. It will make him less than optimal in assault with nothing to go through armor, but an invisible armor 13 seems advantageous. Then tie in with gauntlet to mobile firing platform and can pass on the reanimation legion reroll of 1s.

Anything you can shoot at with a 12 inch gun will just move 6 inches towards you and then charge you since you are terrible in CC without a war scythe you are stuck till they kill you or you run a assault unit in to bail out your lord.

Would it then be worth giving the CCB a phylactery or Phase shifter.

On mine, I like to run it with both the invulnerable and IWND, it makes it so hard to kill by shooting it. I also like the warscythe since I think the staff leaves you too vulnerable and the option to assault is nice. I also like to give it the 1 use flamer, it always makes it points back and with the mobility of the barge you can usually get a good angle for it. 30pts is 1 teq or about 2-3 meq both of which is easy to cover with a template.

col_impact wrote:

Tekron wrote:
The Decurion isn't a CAD though, so presumably most tournaments would allow a Decurion + an allied CAD?

Triptides & Decurion & Harvest sounds fun.

If by fun you mean slaughtering everything in your way then yes lots of fun. The Zandrekh Buffmander is silly sick. It's as silly as Void Shield + Green Tide. Silly, silly, silly. Play it until its banned people!

But sure if you get a Tau CAD then by all means strip down to best of Tau (Riptide + Broadsides + Buffmander + 2 Kroot) and best of Decurion (Zandrekh, Ghoast Ark, Tomb Blades + Canopteks with TransD) and if you have the Zandrekh Buffmander combo the opponent might as well just concede and if that has been house ruled away you should dominate the match still. Adding Tau covers all your weaknesses and is the perfect Yin to your Yang. I prefer Broadside spam over Triptides since they can benefit from the buffmander directly per 7th rules.

I'm pretty rusty on my Tau, wonder if they have a tactics thread I can sneak into . Can the buffmander buff Broadsides with skyfire? That seems to be the absolute must take special super-awesome-synergy rule for Necrons, and Velocity Trackers are mega expensive on a per-model basis.

Tekron wrote:

The Spyder costs 50pts and is priced the same as an entire infantry squad, making it the least efficient unit in pts per $ spent for the entire Necron codex.

I think flayed ones might be the worst pts per $ in the game at 1.44pts per dollar (Murican price). For comparison the spyder is 1.515pts per dollar. And actually now that I do the math, naked tomb blades cost 1.31pts per dollar.

Tekron wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Tekron wrote:
The Decurion isn't a CAD though, so presumably most tournaments would allow a Decurion + an allied CAD?

Triptides & Decurion & Harvest sounds fun.

If by fun you mean slaughtering everything in your way then yes lots of fun. The Zandrekh Buffmander is silly sick. It's as silly as Void Shield + Green Tide. Silly, silly, silly. Play it until its banned people!

But sure if you get a Tau CAD then by all means strip down to best of Tau (Riptide + Broadsides + Buffmander + 2 Kroot) and best of Decurion (Zandrekh, Ghoast Ark, Tomb Blades + Canopteks with TransD) and if you have the Zandrekh Buffmander combo the opponent might as well just concede and if that has been house ruled away you should dominate the match still. Adding Tau covers all your weaknesses and is the perfect Yin to your Yang. I prefer Broadside spam over Triptides since they can benefit from the buffmander directly per 7th rules.

I'm pretty rusty on my Tau, wonder if they have a tactics thread I can sneak into . Can the buffmander buff Broadsides with skyfire? That seems to be the absolute must take special super-awesome-synergy rule for Necrons, and Velocity Trackers are mega expensive on a per-model basis.

Sadly, no such thing. The buffmander provides twin-link, ignore cover, hit & run and either stubborn, monster hunter or tank hunter that's of value.

col_impact wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
No because that's adding a word to the formation that doesn't exist, unit. It simply states 1 Tomb Spyder. That's all there is to it. It references 1 Spyder in the rules, it references 1 spyder in the formation itself.

If it say 3 Wraiths would you be allowed to take 6 wraiths?

No because 6 is not 3.

Yes I would be allowed to take 6 wraiths because the Formation rules means its a unit of 3 wraiths and I can use the options in the wraith army entry list to add 3 more wraiths just like I can add a Ghost Ark to a formation that has a unit of 10 warriors.

The line would have to say 3 Wraith models to override the very specific rules that the Formation rules use that specify units and army entry lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
It's 1 Tomb Spyder, if you take that formation and you take 3 Spyders are you satisfying the requirement of it only having 1 Spyder?

No, you are not. Good luck with your games and convincing your opponent that 3 = 1, but it just doesn't.

Explain to me this then, if that is how it works then why do Every other entry in all of the formation of the Decurion for units say units and this one unit does not but instead says 1


You're cheating your opponent through a purposeful misinterpretation of the rules.

This isn't a opinion, 3 does not equal 1. That's MATH, you're arguing with me over math that you can trick your way semantically into being correct and you just can't.

We aren't arguing math. We are arguing rules. You are trying to pull the fast one here by saying the rules specify 1 Canoptek Spyder model, when it flat out obviously does not specify that. The Reclamation Legion does not have a Ghost Ark on its listing and yet I can add a Ghost Ark and seemingly break your math argument. How is it even possible for me to add a Ghost Ark. Because it is on the army entry list and the Formation rules give access to the options. I am being wholly consistent in my application of the rules. I have no problem claiming my argument is honest, logical, and consistent. I am amazed at how the counter argument can make their claim when they are being totally inconsistent and even possibly outright deceptive (although I am not accusing you of that)

In regards to the first portion of your argument, no, you are not correct,

If the formation states you are taking a unit of 3 wraiths, it means you are taking a singluar unit of only 3 wraiths. You are not allowed to add more wraiths as per a normal unit selection like you would in a CAD or normal detachment. Formations don't work that way unless given explicit permission.

An example would be the Ork's Green Tide. We are told we are allowed to take 1 Warboss and 10 units of Boyz that will merge to become a singular unit. In this example, we are allowed to max/min whatever squads we wish as they are not telling us exactly how many models we are supposed to take. It doesn't say 'take 10 units of 10 boyz', it merely says '10 units of Boyz'. So we could take a Green Tide with as few as 101 models to as many as 301 models.

So in the example with Warriors, if it says you need to take x many units of warriors, you may mix/max how you like. If it tells you to take a unit of 1 Spyder or a unit of 3 wraiths, you do not have the option to make the units larger or smaller. You can only take the exact model count. You don't need to add the word 'model' to know this.

Edit: On the topic of Necron/Tau allies, I thought you could not mix allied units together anymore? Which was why Taudar lost a lot of steam? Because you couldn't put ICs in opposing faction's units, where Eldar were getting beefed by Buffmanders and whatnaught.

Punisher wrote:

Tekron wrote:

The Spyder costs 50pts and is priced the same as an entire infantry squad, making it the least efficient unit in pts per $ spent for the entire Necron codex.

I think flayed ones might be the worst pts per $ in the game at 1.44pts per dollar (Murican price). For comparison the spyder is 1.515pts per dollar. And actually now that I do the math, naked tomb blades cost 1.31pts per dollar.

I can't believe I forgot how expensive TBs are! I'll put it down to the fact I'm currently in denial about how much money they are going to cost me. The fortunate thing about FOs is that they are easily converted from warriors.

The DESTROYER CULT has restrictions. We know this because there is actually something written in the RESTRICTIONS box of the formation. It tells us that the Destroyer units must consist of at least 3 models.

RAW
The CANOPTEK HARVEST has no listed restrictions, it literally says "none"
We know that it MUST consist of 1 Spyder, 1 unit Canoptek Wraiths, and 1 unit of Canoptek Scarabs.
It doesn't say no more than 3 Wraiths, 3 Scarabs, 1 Spyder.
We know that Wraiths and Scarabs have a minimum unit size of 3, and can include additional models.
The Spyder has a minimum unit size of 1, and can include additional models.
The requirement calls for at least 1 Spyder be included.
Since the requirement is singular, it is listed in it's singular form.
There is no RAW Restriction on the Spyder unit size, because NO Restrictions are listed.

The Canoptek Harvest being limited to no more than a singular spyder would indeed be a "restriction" since it would overide the Canoptek Spyder dataslate allowing for additional Spyders, and therefore should be listed as a restriction.

RAI
Page 34 states "unit of Canoptek Sypders", instead of the singular Sypder.
The language of the Judicator Battalion requirements states "unit of Triarch Stalkers" instead of the singular.
The language of the Judicator Battalion states "within line of sight of a Triarch Stalker", while the Canoptek Harvest's language states "within 12" of the Canoptek Spyder"

It's sloppy editing any case. Either the language of the two formations should match, or there should be something listed in the restrictions section of the Canoptek Swarm.

I am unaware of any other formation in 40K that has a restriction limiting the maximum unit size. It would be an unprecedented restriction.

Melevolence wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
No because that's adding a word to the formation that doesn't exist, unit. It simply states 1 Tomb Spyder. That's all there is to it. It references 1 Spyder in the rules, it references 1 spyder in the formation itself.

If it say 3 Wraiths would you be allowed to take 6 wraiths?

No because 6 is not 3.

Yes I would be allowed to take 6 wraiths because the Formation rules means its a unit of 3 wraiths and I can use the options in the wraith army entry list to add 3 more wraiths just like I can add a Ghost Ark to a formation that has a unit of 10 warriors.

The line would have to say 3 Wraith models to override the very specific rules that the Formation rules use that specify units and army entry lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
It's 1 Tomb Spyder, if you take that formation and you take 3 Spyders are you satisfying the requirement of it only having 1 Spyder?

No, you are not. Good luck with your games and convincing your opponent that 3 = 1, but it just doesn't.

Explain to me this then, if that is how it works then why do Every other entry in all of the formation of the Decurion for units say units and this one unit does not but instead says 1


You're cheating your opponent through a purposeful misinterpretation of the rules.

This isn't a opinion, 3 does not equal 1. That's MATH, you're arguing with me over math that you can trick your way semantically into being correct and you just can't.

We aren't arguing math. We are arguing rules. You are trying to pull the fast one here by saying the rules specify 1 Canoptek Spyder model, when it flat out obviously does not specify that. The Reclamation Legion does not have a Ghost Ark on its listing and yet I can add a Ghost Ark and seemingly break your math argument. How is it even possible for me to add a Ghost Ark. Because it is on the army entry list and the Formation rules give access to the options. I am being wholly consistent in my application of the rules. I have no problem claiming my argument is honest, logical, and consistent. I am amazed at how the counter argument can make their claim when they are being totally inconsistent and even possibly outright deceptive (although I am not accusing you of that)

In regards to the first portion of your argument, no, you are not correct,

If the formation states you are taking a unit of 3 wraiths, it means you are taking a singluar unit of only 3 wraiths. You are not allowed to add more wraiths as per a normal unit selection like you would in a CAD or normal detachment. Formations don't work that way unless given explicit permission.

An example would be the Ork's Green Tide. We are told we are allowed to take 1 Warboss and 10 units of Boyz that will merge to become a singular unit. In this example, we are allowed to max/min whatever squads we wish as they are not telling us exactly how many models we are supposed to take. It doesn't say 'take 10 units of 10 boyz', it merely says '10 units of Boyz'. So we could take a Green Tide with as few as 101 models to as many as 301 models.

So in the example with Warriors, if it says you need to take x many units of warriors, you may mix/max how you like. If it tells you to take a unit of 1 Spyder or a unit of 3 wraiths, you do not have the option to make the units larger or smaller. You can only take the exact model count. You don't need to add the word 'model' to know this.

Edit: On the topic of Necron/Tau allies, I thought you could not mix allied units together anymore? Which was why Taudar lost a lot of steam? Because you couldn't put ICs in opposing faction's units, where Eldar were getting beefed by Buffmanders and whatnaught.

The problem with your argument is that no where does it actually say to take 'exactly' X spyders. If the rules wanted to specify that it would specify that. What the rules do specify is that we are dealing unequivocally with units, unequivocally with an army entry list, and unequivocally have access to the options on that army entry list, and unequivocally have 'no restriction'. So the rules exactly give me permission to do exactly what I am claiming I can do. And you miss something that says '1 Canoptek Spyder model' or a restriction that says 'This formation can only have 1 Spyder'. What makes you think you can willy nilly make up rules and count your argument as RAW?

Also take a look at page 36. It says 'unit of spyders'. Sure it's in the fluff, but we actually have solid textual evidence in the Codex certifying our argument, where you have conjecture at most. Conjecture does not fly against unequivocal permission in the rules from start to finish and a picture in the freaking Codex proving our claim. Seriously, why is this even an argument? Is mob thinking that prevalent on this forum. Seriously?

Melevolence wrote:

Edit: On the topic of Necron/Tau allies, I thought you could not mix allied units together anymore? Which was why Taudar lost a lot of steam? Because you couldn't put ICs in opposing faction's units, where Eldar were getting beefed by Buffmanders and whatnaught.

Only battle brother level allies can mix units, and 7th removed that from tau/eldar and tau/sm. Necrons have never been battle brothers with anyone, so what changed is that Nemesor Zahndrekh now steals a number of USRs from enemies within 24", and all Necron allies count as enemies for the purpose of this.

So now Necrons gain a synergy from allies they never had before, and with the meta shift to FMC spam some decent AA looks very tempting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TompiQ wrote:

Sadly, no such thing. The buffmander provides twin-link, ignore cover, hit & run and either stubborn, monster hunter or tank hunter that's of value.

Thanks, that is very helpful to know!

col_impact wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
No because that's adding a word to the formation that doesn't exist, unit. It simply states 1 Tomb Spyder. That's all there is to it. It references 1 Spyder in the rules, it references 1 spyder in the formation itself.

If it say 3 Wraiths would you be allowed to take 6 wraiths?

No because 6 is not 3.

Yes I would be allowed to take 6 wraiths because the Formation rules means its a unit of 3 wraiths and I can use the options in the wraith army entry list to add 3 more wraiths just like I can add a Ghost Ark to a formation that has a unit of 10 warriors.

The line would have to say 3 Wraith models to override the very specific rules that the Formation rules use that specify units and army entry lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
It's 1 Tomb Spyder, if you take that formation and you take 3 Spyders are you satisfying the requirement of it only having 1 Spyder?

No, you are not. Good luck with your games and convincing your opponent that 3 = 1, but it just doesn't.

Explain to me this then, if that is how it works then why do Every other entry in all of the formation of the Decurion for units say units and this one unit does not but instead says 1


You're cheating your opponent through a purposeful misinterpretation of the rules.

This isn't a opinion, 3 does not equal 1. That's MATH, you're arguing with me over math that you can trick your way semantically into being correct and you just can't.

We aren't arguing math. We are arguing rules. You are trying to pull the fast one here by saying the rules specify 1 Canoptek Spyder model, when it flat out obviously does not specify that. The Reclamation Legion does not have a Ghost Ark on its listing and yet I can add a Ghost Ark and seemingly break your math argument. How is it even possible for me to add a Ghost Ark. Because it is on the army entry list and the Formation rules give access to the options. I am being wholly consistent in my application of the rules. I have no problem claiming my argument is honest, logical, and consistent. I am amazed at how the counter argument can make their claim when they are being totally inconsistent and even possibly outright deceptive (although I am not accusing you of that)

In regards to the first portion of your argument, no, you are not correct,

If the formation states you are taking a unit of 3 wraiths, it means you are taking a singluar unit of only 3 wraiths. You are not allowed to add more wraiths as per a normal unit selection like you would in a CAD or normal detachment. Formations don't work that way unless given explicit permission.

An example would be the Ork's Green Tide. We are told we are allowed to take 1 Warboss and 10 units of Boyz that will merge to become a singular unit. In this example, we are allowed to max/min whatever squads we wish as they are not telling us exactly how many models we are supposed to take. It doesn't say 'take 10 units of 10 boyz', it merely says '10 units of Boyz'. So we could take a Green Tide with as few as 101 models to as many as 301 models.

So in the example with Warriors, if it says you need to take x many units of warriors, you may mix/max how you like. If it tells you to take a unit of 1 Spyder or a unit of 3 wraiths, you do not have the option to make the units larger or smaller. You can only take the exact model count. You don't need to add the word 'model' to know this.

Edit: On the topic of Necron/Tau allies, I thought you could not mix allied units together anymore? Which was why Taudar lost a lot of steam? Because you couldn't put ICs in opposing faction's units, where Eldar were getting beefed by Buffmanders and whatnaught.

The problem with your argument is that no where does it actually say to take 'exactly' X spyders. If the rules wanted to specify that it would specify that. What the rules do specify is that we are dealing unequivocally with units, unequivocally with an army entry list, and unequivocally have access to the options on that army entry list, and unequivocally have 'no restriction'. So the rules exactly give me permission to do exactly what I am claiming I can do. And you miss something that says '1 Canoptek Spyder model' or a restriction that says 'This formation can only have 1 Spyder'. What makes you think you can willy nilly make up rules and count your argument as RAW?

Also take a look at page 36. It says 'unit of spyders'. Sure it's in the fluff, but we actually have solid textual evidence in the Codex certifying our argument, where you have conjecture at most. Conjecture does not fly against unequivocal permission in the rules from start to finish and a picture in the freaking Codex proving our claim. Seriously, why is this even an argument? Is mob thinking that prevalent on this forum. Seriously?

Second paragraph: I could use the same argument when it came to the Gorkanaught's weapon. In the weapon profile page, it was listed as a S6 weapon. In the back of the book where it shows wargear, it was listed as S5. It was until recently they FAQ'd it to finally cement the weapon as a S6 weapon.

In short, it's damn near impossible to tell exactly what it is SUPPOSED to be until they actually FIX it. We were playing it as a S6 weapon because my group didn't midn and that SEEMED to be the correct profile. But until GW outright clearifies, sadly everyone will have to play it strictly as HIWPI. Because, lets' face it. Both sides seem to have a leg to stand on, yet neither leg seems very strong right now.

I honestly have no investment in it either way. I personally feel that taking more than one spider is overkill for the formation and a waste of points.

Melevolence wrote:

I honestly have no investment in it either way. I personally feel that taking more than one spider is overkill for the formation and a waste of points.

Aside from making it much harder to remove RP from a wraith-star, a unit of 3 Spyders with 9W between them, T6 3+/4+++ with Smash and Fearless and HoW is extremely deadly, tough to kill and incredibly cheap at 150pts. Plus they can spawn more than their point cost in Scarabs over the course of 3 turns.

So it's actually a very important issue for anyone who wants to play a Harvest.

Re: The Canoptek Harvest, determining intent in this particular case isn't actually hard, and regardless of what some of you keep insisting, the legislative intent is what we should go by whenever a rule can be interpreted in a variety of ways and is therefore poorly written.

All the formations follow the same logic. For example, in the Judicatior Batallion, it is written that you must have '1 unit of Triarch Stalkers'. Triarch Stalker units are identical to Spyders in the sense that they have just one model by default. Clearly since they mention you must have a unit, and immediately follows below that there's no restrictions, and use the plural of Triarch Stalker, you can use the option to add up to two additional Triarch Stalkers if you wish. The Canoptek Harvest could easily have been worded identically to be '1 unit of Canoptek Spyders', but instead they opted for the singular term '1 Canoptek Spyder', as they did with '1 Overlord' in the Reclamation Legion formation. It is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the intent is that the Canoptek Harvest has 1 Canoptek Spyder and no more or less. Naturally, GW's rules writers take a very casual approach to the game so you can argue a lot of rules with any agenda for your benefit, but personally I don't use any ambiguous rules to my benefit. Especially when this one isn't really crucial to anyone playing Necrons, so my suggestion is that you err in the side of caution and use one Canoptek Spyder in the formation untill otherwise stated in a FAQ or an Errata.

And to the guy above, no, it isn't important for anyone playing the Harvest to use ambiguous rules to their benefit, especially when it's quite likely they are in the wrong. The formation is strong as is, and it's in fact arguable if having 150 points of Spyders is actually beneficial to a power gamer tournament army.