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 think Nebuloscopes, regardless of weapons, are an absolute no-brainer. And I think shieldvanes are a pretty obvious inclusion too.

I do get stuck on weapons though. Particle Beamers with Ignores Cover seem so amazing. I mean if you have 9ish Blades with those, it's game over for hordes. And given the lack of mobility of our other anti-horde stuff (warriors/immortals/flayed ones), this is a very compelling set up to me.

On the other hand, Wave Serpents and Imperial Knights are still prevalent. Giving up Gauss is bad news bears against these opponents. It's also cheaper to stick with Gauss.

I really haven't given any consideration to Tesla. The only benefit I can see is giving up less damage output when jinking.

Thoughts?

 The Shrike wrote:
I think Nebuloscopes, regardless of weapons, are an absolute no-brainer. And I think shieldvanes are a pretty obvious inclusion too.

I do get stuck on weapons though. Particle Beamers with Ignores Cover seem so amazing. I mean if you have 9ish Blades with those, it's game over for hordes. And given the lack of mobility of our other anti-horde stuff (warriors/immortals/flayed ones), this is a very compelling set up to me.

On the other hand, Wave Serpents and Imperial Knights are still prevalent. Giving up Gauss is bad news bears against these opponents. It's also cheaper to stick with Gauss.

I really haven't given any consideration to Tesla. The only benefit I can see is giving up less damage output when jinking.

Thoughts?

Particle Beamers suck, so do all other Blast weapons

No, he's already worked out the obvious role for Particle Beamers: if you drop ten S6 AP 5 ignores cover blasts into the middle of a huge horde on turn one, your opponent loses his chaff and has to rethink his tactics.

That said, Gauss and Scopes is the most generally useful kit. The only problem with it is AP4 ignores cover feels a little wasted in a primarily marine meta.

Forget about AP4; if you leave the Gauss on they clearly become AT unless you have a save of 4 or higher target with meaningful priority over a vehicle.

Also, how do blast weapons suck? Especially now that you can hit multiple levels of buildings 7th ed. only made them better. I guess there's a lot of stupid people running Wyverns, TFCs and IA Riptides.....

Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Fragile wrote:
Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Why are you jinking? Stick to cover if there's a lot of AP3 around. Snapfiring is almost an inexcusable loss to firepower for this unit unless you're running a minimum unit to turbo boost between objectives.

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Why are you jinking? Stick to cover if there's a lot of AP3 around. Snapfiring is almost an inexcusable loss to firepower for this unit unless you're running a minimum unit to turbo boost between objectives.

Because there is tons of AP3 or better now. You will face a choice vs a good opponent quickly. They will target that unit with AP3+ quickly to either kill it or make it ineffective. Either you will jink to save the unit or you will trust your RP rolls.

Fragile wrote:

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Why are you jinking? Stick to cover if there's a lot of AP3 around. Snapfiring is almost an inexcusable loss to firepower for this unit unless you're running a minimum unit to turbo boost between objectives.

Because there is tons of AP3 or better now. You will face a choice vs a good opponent quickly. They will target that unit with AP3+ quickly to either kill it or make it ineffective. Either you will jink to save the unit or you will trust your RP rolls.

Or I'll stick to cover, which is exactly how I handle that situation. If I'm caught out in a position where it might be a good idea to jink, I've basically already lost the unit and may as well just take the hits and lose less firepower the next turn.

Being in a Decurion and having Move Through Cover also makes it easier to keep in terrain for cover since you don't need to worry about dangerous terrain checks.

SMALL blasts suck, unless it's a multi-barrage like a thunderfire cannon. The reason for this is that any opponent who knows his stuff will always have their models in max coherency, which means you're always getting just a single hit unless the blast happens to scatter, and even then it's likely just two. There are obviously situations, like wrecking a transport, where it's not possible to spread out into max coherency, but those are too rare to really matter IMO.

There is a classic list building principle that says "always take some blasts so your opponent HAS TO keep everything in max coherency". For this reason, I originally built my blades with beamers (necrons often don't have any other blasts), but as I wrote in the tactics thread, I recently decided to re-model them with gauss. It simply is not worth it having a weapon that is slow and annoying to shoot AND most of the time (against good players) gets fewer hits than twin-linked gauss, just to add another weapon type to the army and MAYBE affect the opponents decisions. Other reason was the thing someone already mentioned, it's annoying not being able to shoot at all if you jink, which makes a jetbike less than ideal platform for a blast weapon. Of course you can stay in cover, but then you might not be using the tomb blades to their full potential in terms of mobility.

As for nebuloscopes vs shadowlooms, to me it depends on the squad size and the role you plan to use them for. Big squads, something like 8+ models, that can really cause 3 glancing hits on average, nebuloscopes are the thing. For small squads that are more for objective grabbing than killing stuff, I always go with shadowlooms. And if you for some reason prefer tesla over gauss, obviously shadowlooms since you usually get very little benefit from ignoring cover.

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Why are you jinking? Stick to cover if there's a lot of AP3 around. Snapfiring is almost an inexcusable loss to firepower for this unit unless you're running a minimum unit to turbo boost between objectives.

Because there is tons of AP3 or better now. You will face a choice vs a good opponent quickly. They will target that unit with AP3+ quickly to either kill it or make it ineffective. Either you will jink to save the unit or you will trust your RP rolls.

Or I'll stick to cover, which is exactly how I handle that situation. If I'm caught out in a position where it might be a good idea to jink, I've basically already lost the unit and may as well just take the hits and lose less firepower the next turn.

If you've lost a jinking unit of Decurion Tomb Blades, then your opponent probably spent an entire round shooting everything he has at them. Those dudes are super hard to kill.

I don't think I'd much enjoy playing in a meta where max coherency is completely reliable... Moving everyone to be precisely two inches apart at all times would slow the game up like crazy, especially with horde armies.

That said, even with people not being so precise 25 mm bases it's still only probable to get two hits, maybe three on a lucky scatter. 40 mm? Forget it. Larger models such as Destroyers or Spyders? You're not going to hit two of them even with scattering.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 docdoom77 wrote:

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:

changemod wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Because you cannot fire them after you Jink

Why are you jinking? Stick to cover if there's a lot of AP3 around. Snapfiring is almost an inexcusable loss to firepower for this unit unless you're running a minimum unit to turbo boost between objectives.

Because there is tons of AP3 or better now. You will face a choice vs a good opponent quickly. They will target that unit with AP3+ quickly to either kill it or make it ineffective. Either you will jink to save the unit or you will trust your RP rolls.

Or I'll stick to cover, which is exactly how I handle that situation. If I'm caught out in a position where it might be a good idea to jink, I've basically already lost the unit and may as well just take the hits and lose less firepower the next turn.

If you've lost a jinking unit of Decurion Tomb Blades, then your opponent probably spent an entire round shooting everything he has at them. Those dudes are super hard to kill.

If I'm in a Decurion then I have even less reason to jink. Move through cover removes all reason to avoid terrain camping and even out in the open I have a solid save against AP3 weaponry.

And as I just tried to say, caught in the open I'll still likely lose more firepower by jinking than taking it on the chin unless drawing so much firepower the unit is effectively a write off.

I love particle beamers. Firing three I can typically get around six hits against a squad of infantry, from 24". That's just impossible with gauss blasters. Against Ork Boyz, Space Marines, Crisis Suits and bikes in general this is simply superior. The only common infantry units I'd rather hit with gauss blasters are Dire Avengers and Fire Warriors.

Against vehicles, gauss might be a little better. Still, to get the most out of them you have to get close, which can be risky, and particle beamers are still superior against AV10-11 and equally powerful against AV12. It's only against AV13-14 gauss really shines.

As for jinking, as others have said, use cover. It's usually not hard to hop from forest to ruin to forest, or for that matter just trailing a unit of Wraiths. Intervening models still give a 5+ save, and it's not like you'll be giving any to them.

I ran 6 at an RTT last week with scopes, vanes and beamers. Why beamers? Mostly because that's about the only way we can even get blast templates period. Also, there's a prevalence of "hey look at me with my 2+ cover save in ruins". Now I can drop 6 small pie plates on your eldar rangers or what ever those dudes were and make them disappear in a single turn. Got something tougher like a rhino or even a wave serpent? 6 hits give me a pretty good chance of doing something and guess what? I don't care about your smoke you just popped or your ability to jink. The other reason is because everyone else in my army can take gauss - what's six more guass guns gonna do when I'm already running destroyer cults out the a$$?

I currently have 6 with Gauss Blasters and I run them with Vanes and Scopes. I plan on getting 2 more boxes once I follow my self set rules of getting the first 6 painted. =P

I would say it depends on the squads size. If you have a large squad 7-10 I would say go with gauss blasters if you have a small squad 3-4 I would say go with beamers(unless your using it as a objective capper and then you probably want to jink anyway). Reason is bigger squads are more durable and can get into optimal range for the blasters loosing a couple models won't cripple it whereas a small unit once it looses a few is ineffective so you don't want them getting close which is where the gauss blaster shines. So with the smaller squad you can sit 24" from your target and pepper it with blasts while staying reasonably safe usually around cover and with a large squad you can be aggressive and get models in double tap range.

Personally I prefer keeping their distance since a lot can go wrong when your 12" from the enemy such as getting assaulted and tomb blades aren't going to win any assaults. So I prefer blasts and staying at 24", I prefer smaller squads as they are easier to hide out of LOS and to all cower in cover whereas a large squad of jetbikes is hard to hide and will get shot at.

Never equip tesla, unless of course you have the immortal problem(where you have already modelled tesla on your units), tesla was nerfed so unbelievably hard its not worth using on anything unless the unit can't take another weapon.

Punisher wrote:
I would say it depends on the squads size. If you have a large squad 7-10 I would say go with gauss blasters if you have a small squad 3-4 I would say go with beamers(unless your using it as a objective capper and then you probably want to jink anyway). Reason is bigger squads are more durable and can get into optimal range for the blasters loosing a couple models won't cripple it whereas a small unit once it looses a few is ineffective so you don't want them getting close which is where the gauss blaster shines. So with the smaller squad you can sit 24" from your target and pepper it with blasts while staying reasonably safe usually around cover and with a large squad you can be aggressive and get models in double tap range.

Personally I prefer keeping their distance since a lot can go wrong when your 12" from the enemy such as getting assaulted and tomb blades aren't going to win any assaults. So I prefer blasts and staying at 24", I prefer smaller squads as they are easier to hide out of LOS and to all cower in cover whereas a large squad of jetbikes is hard to hide and will get shot at.

Never equip tesla, unless of course you have the immortal problem(where you have already modelled tesla on your units), tesla was nerfed so unbelievably hard its not worth using on anything unless the unit can't take another weapon.

I dunno, there's two loadouts I typically like. Scopes with Gauss Blasters for getting up close and killing skimmers and the like, and objective cappers with Shadowlooms and Tesla. They fly around the board, chilling in ruins for a 3+ cover, and can be max range and still get the same amount of shots. Same thing with Tesla Immortals. Against Marines they're directly better. They can be a full 24" away and still do the same amount of damage, and the AP - doesn't matter. I also use Tesla for my footslog Judicator Battalion list. BS10 Tesla Immortals (Destroyer lord for preferred enemy rerolls) does very well.

7 to 8 seems to me at least the sweet spot cause they've got a serious foot print.

I always use Gauss, Shadow Vanes, Nebuloscope. I almost exclusively because I've had to many crappy games where I had to jink with Particles and it just sucked.

I am not saying that Tesla is GOOD or that you SHOULD take it, but I think it's worth noting what Tesla is for.

Tesla was designed for the 5th ed. codex. It was not designed for Snap Shot shenanigans or overwatch. It was designed because Necrons were constructed as a short-range shooting army that is vulnerable to assault. That means that you want to shoot at the enemy but you don't want to let him get withing charge range (12"!).

Mathematically, Tesla gets 1 hit per attack with BS4. This puts it exactly in the middle between the .66 hits per attack of a Gauss Blaster in 12"-24" range and the 1.32 hits per attack of a Gauss Blaster at 1"-12" range, The point of Tesla is that it gave you an alternative to Gauss Blasters for Immortals and Tomb Blades that was superior in the 12"-24" range and so let you stay out of close combat (and also allowed you to fire full range on the move with the RF rules as they were then.)

Necrons are not as vulnerable to assault as they were then, and the fire on the move aspect is no longer important.

However, it is still true that, against anything that gets a save, Tesla Carbines are superior to Gauss Blasters at the 12"-24" range. Staying at this range (and Tomb Blades, given their speed, can pretty much choose their distance) 1) makes you unchargeable and 2) keeps you out of RF range (and melta range) of the enemy.

That's the point of Tesla Carbines.

Whether you think this makes them worth taking is another issue.

On the other hand, with the changes to how Rapid Fire worked, snap shot shenanigans was the entire reason to take Tesla. Not only that, it was the last codex before the edition change, and likely designed with some of the major upcoming changes known.

That aside, the gigantic unit footprint is actually a huge boon. Combining that with a 12 inch move and potentially turbo boosting makes for impressive board control options.

changemod wrote:
On the other hand, with the changes to how Rapid Fire worked, snap shot shenanigans was the entire reason to take Tesla. Not only that, it was the last codex before the edition change, and likely designed with some of the major upcoming changes known.

Well, I've just explained why this is not the case. The reason to take Tesla is because it is superior (50% superior in fact) from 12"-24" against everything that gets a save, which allows you to stay out of charge and rapid-fire range, this reducing incoming damage by usually about half.

Only the designers or a telepath knows for sure, but since all the snap shot shenanigans have bene removed and Tesla is back to exactly what it was in 5th (with the exception of enabling full-range firing on the move) I think it's unlikely that it was designed with them in mind.

In a straight S vs T comparison you are correct. However, when you add in Gauss vs vehicles or high Toughness mobs, then Tesla really loses to Gauss.

Fragile wrote:
In a straight S vs T comparison you are correct. However, when you add in Gauss vs vehicles or high Toughness mobs, then Tesla really loses to Gauss.

Well, Tesla is 50% superior to Gauss from 12"-24", and Gauss 50% superior to Tesla from1"-12", against AV10 or 11. AV12 Tesla can't hurt at all of course. I'm not sure what you mean by "high Tougness mobs." ? The Gauss rule for a Gauss Blaster doesn't kick in until T9, and not a lot of mobs have that.

By the way, something that argues against the idea that the 5 ed. codex was written for 6th ed. is that the changes to RF gutted Phaeron.

Whether Gauss is superior to Tesla really depends on how the unit is going to be used, what it is going to be shooting at, and what is going to be shooting at it. The point with Tesla is that, against most targets (assuming only armour saves, against everything that does not have a 4+ or 5+), it is 50% superior to Gauss at 12"-24" and 50% inferior at 1"-12". However, to get that 50% superiority from Gauss, you increase the damage you suffer by 100%, assuming that you are being RF'd, and become vulnerable to charges.

I am not saying that people SHOULD take Tesla, just that it does have a role that the designers had in mind and that you can discern from its stats. It is not a coincidence, I think, that getting 3 hits on a 6 (and not 2 or 4 at BS4) puts you at the exact middle point between 1 and 2 Gauss BS4 shots.

5th Necrons was definitely written with 6th in mind, although obviously without knowing the final wording of the 6th rules. There were quite a few things in the codex that suddenly made sense when 6th arrived. MSS for example.

For every 2 hits on a gauss shot tesla will land 3, but gauss can double tap for hits to the 3 tesla. The big loss for tesla is the lack of ap. Gauss murders light and medium infantry, and there are a lot of 4+ saves in 7e. Furthermore ignore cover from scopes is less effective when the weapon has no ap. A simple 5+ armor save negates the extra hits from gauss, 3 tesla hits will only do as much damage as 2 gauss against GEQ. It gets far worse when 4+ saves are involved, then 3 tesla hits is only as good as 1.5 gauss And a gauss double tap is 233% better than a tesla shot.

If an army plays with zero blasts it gives opponents freedom to bunch up. That allows opponents to have a huge increase in cover. A ruins that would normally protect 10 models in a maximum 2" dispersion now protects 40 models crowded together. Being crowded together also maximizes firepower, overwatch, and cc attacks. An Army has zero blasts or templates can be severely punished for showing up without them. It's really amazing how a single tfc or beamer squad forces an opponent into maximum dispersion like there was 9 earth shakers on the board.

Tactics changes greatly with weapons. Tesla and beamer are good for staying at maximum range. That's good for increasing the survivability of the squad so it can later turbo boost for maelstrom objectives. Gauss is more aggressive. If you're close enough to double tap you're close enough to charge. Gauss squads are perfect for maneuvering to attack soft back field units.

Arguments about tesla effectiveness this codex aside, I don't see how the tesla is a better option over the beamer. Both have the same threat range, beamers have an extra str, depending on opponent beamers average the same or more hits, beamers have some ap, the only thing that tesla does is let you snapshot which isn't that great since you loose 3/4 of your firepower(a unit of 10 snapshotting only gets 3 hits)

I don't think I'll run Tesla ever but I may go back to running some Beamers as someone pointed out it's other benefits which I like.

 schadenfreude wrote:
For every 2 hits on a gauss shot tesla will land 3, but gauss can double tap for hits to the 3 tesla.

Yes I know, that's why Gauss is usually 50% superior within RF range and Tesla 50% superior outside it. Almost as if this finding of an exact middle point were done on purpose.

Assuming no cover or invuln saves (and of course Nebuloscopes remove the former concern), Gauss is equivalent to Tesla at 12"-24" for 5+ and 4+ saves (and slightly worse against 6+). Against everything else (so, MEQ and TEQ), Gauss is 50% worse than Tesla at this range.

The point that I've been making about Tesla is not that it's super-awesome, but that it is designed as a weapon that is superior at the range bracket that keeps you out of double-tap range and out of charge range (and out of melta range incidentally) of the enemy. If your Gauss guys want to exploit their double-tap (giving them a 50% advantage over Tesla for most things), they have to move into charge range, as well as double-tap range (increasing incoming damage by 100% in most cases).

I think the guy above, I can't be bothered to check who it was , had the right idea of using Tesla Tomb Blades wirh Shadowlooms as objective grabbers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
All this concerns Tesla Carbines, not Cannons or Destructors or Spheres.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Punisher wrote:
Arguments about tesla effectiveness this codex aside, I don't see how the tesla is a better option over the beamer. Both have the same threat range, beamers have an extra str, depending on opponent beamers average the same or more hits, beamers have some ap, the only thing that tesla does is let you snapshot which isn't that great since you loose 3/4 of your firepower(a unit of 10 snapshotting only gets 3 hits)

The standard reasons -- can't shoot flyers, can't jink and shoot, can get multiple hits on one target. I'm pretty sure TL tesla carbines (or TL gauss blasters) are more accurate than a BS4 Blast in most circumstances.

I fully agree that the cautious unit that plinks at 24" has much to offer, and cautious jet bikes live long enough that they are around to take maelstrom objectives. I just don't think tesla is the way to go. Tesla is ok, but particle is really good.

TL tesla averages 1.3 hits per shot at bs4 or 0.3555 shots while jinking/snap shots. The penalty is harsh and costs about 77% reduction in firepower.

A small pie should be able to average 1.3 hits per shot. Over a game that average would look something like this.

2 complete missed, 3 single hits, 3 double hits, 1 triple hit.

A small blast easily competes with 1.3 hits per turn.

Last but not least, possible most importantly if an army lacks ignore cover blasts it's not going to be able to shoot out dug in light units like scouts or camouflage vet guardsmen who go to ground in solid cover. Tesla ignores a 2+ cover but They still have a 5 or 4+ armor. The unit can laugh at pies shot from other units because of a 2+ cover save. Ignore cover pies forces units to spread out, and that makes it harder to optimize cover and makes the unit more vulnerable to being charged by wraiths. The presence of a quad particle squad alters an opponent's deployment and movement in the same way the presence of a tfc. That provides a huge tactical advantage without ever firing a shot.

So:
• Shadow Loom + Gauss/Tesla to run around grabbing objectives
• Scopes + P.Beamers to clear out enemies on objectives (in that it will punish anyone who clumps up in an attempt to use cover)