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.

Having internet issues with the storm so didn't see your comment. Going to leave the HQs there, but no, I don't really have a 3rd Top Tier unit. Not because there isn't one, but because our Dex is really good enough that it depends on what you're bringing.

Footslogging Warriors move Flayed Ones and Tesla Immortals up a bit.
Ghost Ark Warriors move Destroyers and Scarabs up a bit.
Immortal based lists move Praetorians and Wraiths up a bit.

It's part of what makes Crons a balanced codex, and makes it difficult to really put stuff into Tiers. Even Deathmarks, Harvests, and Lychguard move up depending on outside factors like Local Meta, Casual/Tournament play, storyline/campaign, etc. I've tried to Tier the units out with all of these in mind.

Personally, my D/Lord is usually the MVP in my games. He needs to be in either a CC unit or a deathstar, but conveying his PE buff to the group is disgusting. Additionally being T6 and kitted out right he is very hard to kill. Mine has stood up against a purestrain genestealer, 2 lictors and a Deathleaper for 2 rounds with 2 wounds left and chopped them all to pieces.

Granted on his own he is a fire magnet, and is expensive to kit out to fight weight, but his stats, wargear and buffs make him lethal when you add him to other units.

Akar,

I agree with you that Tomb Blades are top-tier. In fact, they are quite possibly the best unit in the entire Necron codex. Tomb Blades have always been number one or number two for me.

However, your placing of Warriors as top-tier seems very off since they are basically a CAD tax or a Reclamation Legion tax . They certainly are solid compared to other troop choices in other codexes, but not compared to other units in the Necron codex.

Most players view Warriors as little more than a tax. A Silver Tide list can do okay in tournament formats but is not great.

A list built entirely of Harvests is certainly more formidable than a list built entirely of Warriors.

In fact the ITC has decided to restrict the number of Harvests in their tournaments to no more than 2 in order to be fair to the other players. There is no restriction on the number of Warrior units.


Do you have any data or anything objective to back up your claim that Warriors are top-tier? My claim that Harvests are top-tier can be backed up by looking at winning Necron lists across a variety of tournament formats. And, if you look at the same Necron lists you will find that they play the minimum allowed number of Warriors.

 Akar wrote:
Having internet issues with the storm so didn't see your comment. Going to leave the HQs there, but no, I don't really have a 3rd Top Tier unit. Not because there isn't one, but because our Dex is really good enough that it depends on what you're bringing.

Footslogging Warriors move Flayed Ones and Tesla Immortals up a bit.
Ghost Ark Warriors move Destroyers and Scarabs up a bit.
Immortal based lists move Praetorians and Wraiths up a bit.

It's part of what makes Crons a balanced codex, and makes it difficult to really put stuff into Tiers. Even Deathmarks, Harvests, and Lychguard move up depending on outside factors like Local Meta, Casual/Tournament play, storyline/campaign, etc. I've tried to Tier the units out with all of these in mind.

Well said, Akar. It's not like we couldn't use a few more formations, re-written rules for C'Tan, and a buff to deepstriking Monoliths, but our dex is well written.
Warriors are the backbone... and I'd love to see armies with more of them on the table. They aren't a tax unit, but they aren't flashy either.

col_impact wrote:
Akar,

I agree with you that Tomb Blades are top-tier. In fact, they are quite possibly the best unit in the entire Necron codex. Tomb Blades have always been number one or number two for me.

However, your placing of Warriors as top-tier seems very off since they are basically a CAD tax or a Reclamation Legion tax . They certainly are solid compared to other troop choices in other codexes, but not compared to other units in the Necron codex.

Most players view Warriors as little more than a tax. A Silver Tide list can do okay in tournament formats but is not great.

A list built entirely of Harvests is certainly more formidable than a list built entirely of Warriors.

In fact the ITC has decided to restrict the number of Harvests in their tournaments to no more than 2 in order to be fair to the other players. There is no restriction on the number of Warrior units.


Do you have any data or anything objective to back up your claim that Warriors are top-tier? My claim that Harvests are top-tier can be backed up by looking at winning Necron lists across a variety of tournament formats. And, if you look at the same Necron lists you will find that they play the minimum allowed number of Warriors.

He placed Illuminor as top tier so I don't know if it is a troll or not.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

He placed Illuminor as top tier so I don't know if it is a troll or not.

If you're running a CAD with lines of troops, Szeras is the best character you can choose.

On the other hand, those types of armies don't win games.

 Akar wrote:
If you're not going to state why they're top tier then it's not going to help. They can't even be in a top tier position if you can't even say why they belong there. Especially when they've never been in that position. The current Dex gave them some much needed attention, but that's not any kind of answer to the question now is it? They needed the buff to be fieldable, and they only barely make the cut.

They've been competitive ever since the 5th edition Matt Ward codex. Very fast, durable and solving a lot of problems Necrons could not solve otherwise. (By either scaring people, eating tons of bullets or tarpitting, even killing stuff). Back then, everyone played single CAD wether you liked it or not, with no Allies and no weird stuff. All the competitive lists ever since that codex went out almost included wraiths. They were not "bearly fieldable". They were a Necron staple in any list and the very well known "wraithwing" with 18 Wraiths was a list you'd meet at almost every flgs (It was the army of the month for many consecutive months).(Although, I'm not claiming it was actually a top list, just that everyone and his dog played it and it was considered cheese). Then, came 6th edition and Balance and list-building went all in very different directions. Allies and flyers were introduced and Necron flyers were possibly the best. Arguably, not many people stuck to wraiths, when you could field as many flyers as possible (+ barges) and shoot more, but that did not mean they were "bearly fieldable", merely they were outshined by the imbalanced flyer-heavy meta, favoring any tesla in the codex over everything else. Now, in 7th edition they're brought back to life BOTH because tesla is nerfed AND because they got buffed. But, mostly, because now in 7th edition just about every army has something new and crazy, some titan, superheavy, invisible, focused shooting, big pew, shiny special unit. That unit is problem for Necrons. We lack Str D, we lack stomps, we lack special psychic powers or psychic cancell/defence. We lack any good shooting choices (How on earth do you plan to shoot a Wraithknight, Knight or Stormsurge with Necron shooting?) to deal with the things people field. So, our answer to everything is an all rounder very fast, terrain-ignoring, scoring, fearless, tough to kill tarpitter. Is that really a surprise?

Let's look at Wraiths. Keep in mind these are my opinions, based on my experiences since they showed up the first time. I expect some disagreement and that's fine, this is a tactics thread. I'm fully aware of what their stats are, what they're capable of, and I'm not questioning what makes them good. I am questioning what you guys think makes them Top Tier? Not one soul has been able to give me an answer. My experience has shown me that there isn't anything they do, that can't be done better by the other options.

If the 7th edition has taught me one thing, is that every time you want to play a game of 40k, you're going to either meet Wraithknights, Stormsurges, Knights, invisible deathstars, Grav Deathstars, Ridiculous cover saves, amazing saves and rerolls, big guns and whatnot.We're not playing versus Rhinos and Marines anymore. Wraiths are the only unit that provides somewhat of an answer to quite some of those threats. Beasts with 12" movement and fleet that ignore terrain are amazingly easy to navigate on enemy stormsurges. The ammount of shooting that they will draw because of that fact and the shift away from the attention from the rest of your army is priceless. Because, point for point they are VERY survivable compared to just about anything. They're only instadying to Str10 and StrD. In the Canoptek Harvest Formation that most use them, they will also get the RP roll on the first round at least for a ridiculous 3++ 5T 2W, 4+++ 40 point model. And the thing is, that most people will shoot them anyway. You can't imagine just how many times a 40k game was played in 7th edition with a TAU played wasting an entire round of shooting on a unit of Wraiths only to have them survive and assault/tarpit next turn.

Expensive as feth bike deathstar with ridiculous cover saves, possible grav abuse and lots of psychic? Wraiths are absolutely the finest and only answer our codex can bring in any context or shape or form. (not to mention how funny grav looks when it shoots wraiths)

- With the exception of maybe the Ctan and Spyders (which have other purposes), the Wraiths are the most expensive per model out of the available options. Praetorians and Lychguard are a few points more per wound, but that gap narrows as units get larger, or when Wraiths waste points on Coils, and I'll come back to this.

And they all do have their merits. I like both Lychguard and Preatorians and use them all the time, but they have different roles from the Wraiths. They serve different purposes, different goals and should mostly have different targets too. They fill different holes in Necron lists.

Whip Coils just got FAQ'ed and keep you on initiative 5 even when charging through terrain. I still, usually, stick to a maximum of 3 per unit, but they're hardly a waste of points.

- T5/2W/3+. Against the majority of non MEQ stuff, which is the majority of weapons out there, this is all Wraiths are. There seems to be a big deal made about the Invul, but that's only great against anti-MEQ stuff. My Plague Marine friend laughs at why people think that the Invul is great, as they are pretty easily dealt with by conventional weapons. Lychguard and Praetorians are also T5, have a 3+ save and come with RP. Flayed Ones get you 3W per Wraith, aren't as resilient but again, come with RP. Scarabs will give you twice the number of wounds, but I'll admit this is tricky with how common S7 is right now. For those that count Wounds, Toughness, and Saves, Wraiths aren't the Top Tier choice out of the available options.

There's obviously a huge difference between 3+ and 3++. If it was as you say, people would use the cheaper Lychguard with 5 Warscythes and wreck face with STR7 AP1 Armorbane attacks at 125 points. However, I'm going to elaborate more, since you seem like a person who enjoys arguements.

Let's go back to 7th edition meta, because all this discussion feels out of place untill we decide on context. I'm going to assume we're talking about 7th edition competitive meta. (after all, a tactics discussion is obviously always made in the context of competition, not fun and casual games, right?)

7th edition, big shiny pewpew monsters, a lot of Elite forces, very few horde, STR D shots, expensive deathstars etc. I don't know if you see where I'm going with this. But, the thing is there's not as much bolterguns as there used to be. There's no Tesla as there used to be. Where dem autocannons? People have shifted together with the meta to less bodies, less bolters, more bigger guns. Half the lists out there are 10 Grav guns, 10 melta gun and 15 bolters and the rest are stormsurge/wraithknight Destroyer shots, Ion blasts etc.

Your Plague Marine friend laughs at why people think that the Invul is great and the people laugh back because your Plague Marine friend hasn't won a game since 3rd edition.

- Fearless/Jump. Praetorians and Scarabs have the same move and are Fearless. Wraithflight is only an advantage here in that rare situation where you put yourself into a position to allow your opponent to get something in range that needs to be dealt with that the other units can't get to. Flayed Ones offset their move with Infiltrate, and played aggressively, should hit the enemy lines the same time as the Wraiths. Lychguard and Flayed Ones have enough damage output that LD10 is more than enough to keep them in a fight. With so many options available in the Dex to get Fearless, or abuse the LD10, Wraiths don't Top Tier here either.

LD10 is definetely not more than enough to keep them in a fight. Lose an assault by 2-3 wounds and you have to roll a 7, which is really easy to fail. It's possibly the worst tarpit, if it's just leadership 10 and you can't really assault anything scary.

Praetorians have a very different role on the battlefield, you certainly can't assault anything scary with them, as they will turn to dust. They're more glass-cannon, precision shot on something you want really dead.

Scarabs are honestly gak. Probably one of the worst units in the codex. A single scatbike squad with 3 bikes (at 81 points, on a very mobile and tough ObSec unit) can slaughter an entire squad of scarabs in a matter of seconds. A simple blast will make an entire unit disappear. They rarely get the charge off and when they do they will die quite easily in assault too without killing really anything (or really tarpitting anything usefull at least).

And while everything I said is enough, since prets and scarabs can't possibly do what wraiths do, wraiths also have more uses. Throw in a Destroyer lord and they actually become a quite reasonable assault threat. I, personally, have a Destroyer lord in my lists when fielding Wraiths and I decide wether or not I will field him with the Wraiths or the Lychguard based on what the Wraiths shall do each game. If they tarpit something too scary, I join him to my Lychguard. If there's nothing too scary, the Wraiths will help him assault in no-time (a very good delivery method) and he can slaughter stuff since he's quite a monster. Give him a 2+ and the unit becomes virtually immortal with him at T6 tanking any "bolter shots" (like you said) and the Wraiths "Looking out sir" on a 2+ for anything that needs an invunlerable.

- Attacks. This seems to be the big sticking point for me as people try to tell me this is a big selling point. At 3A per model, they have the lowest wound count potential of the options. Rending is nice, but with so few attacks it's not enough to be consistently reliable. Praetorians are the only ones that shoot, which alone puts the equal to Wraiths attacks per model, which is double the number of attacks per wound. Flayed Ones put out 4 Attacks per wound with Shred, with T8 being the only advantage that Wraiths have on them as far as Attacks are concerned, and only then if you're not taking enough other Necrons goodness to deal with T8. (Which I'm seeing is pretty common on Wraith dependent lists). Scarabs are the same Attacks per model, but fewer per wound. They can wound anything the Wraiths can, and still do fine against Armor. With other units providing more Attacks, or more Efficient Attacks than Wraiths, they don't Top Tier here by a long shot.

No, attacks is definetely not the Wraiths' selling point. Their speed and durability is.

** I stand by what I said when I say that Whip Coils are a waste. The recent FAQ reverted Whip Coils back to being useful, but they dont increase the number of attacks. So you pay a small number of point to insure those attacks, but this also makes the cost of Praetorians/Lychguard a more attractive option.

How does paying ~9 points for 3 whip coils (for a whooping 12 str 6 rending attacks at initiative 5) make Praetorians or Lychguard more attractive? Are 9 points too much? Do the Preatorians get anything to help them survive before they strike at Initiative 2?

- Tarpit. As a standalone unit, this is where Wraiths shine. Especially in low model count CAD based lists. In more average lists, not including Decurion, they don't have RP and Cron players will eventually find a balance where the damage output of the army as a whole, combined with RP to not need to rely on Tarpit tactics. There is one exception to this, but I'll get to that at the end. Regardless, Wraiths might Top Tier here, but as soon as a Cron player gets a handle on what the army does, or moves into a Decurion, they lose the seat here to other options, including non assault options.

This is where we disagree. It's impossible to not rely on tarpit. A necron list (or really, ANY list this edition) cannot deal with everything else that there is right now on the competitive scene. There's knights, there's Wraithknights, there's Riptide wings, stormsurges, invisible deathstars, flying tyranids, psycher deathstars, demons, etc etc. It's simply too much. It's not good old 5th edition where you just pack enough anti-infantry and enough anti-tank and you have it. You need psychic defence, you need something to bypass cover saves, you need GC protection, unkillable deathstar protection etc etc.
You name one thing that can deal with Wraithknights and I'll concede the point.

- "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". The combination of having strengths is each of these categories combines to make their cost sufficient enough add to lists. This makes them a great learning tool for newer players to learn the strengths and weaknesses of the rest of the army. Particularly those who don't know which of the above units to fill the role that they are taking Wraiths for. Even I recommend them at this stage for quite a few players while they decide which direction they want to take their list, what their Meta is, and how Wraiths are being used to know which of the other units to replace them. In orddify' ther to 'soliere position as Top Tier, they'd have to remain the best option or be irreplaceable. Which can happen on certain lists, but certainly not as a broad categorization.

Which is also my point. Wraiths are the Jack of all Trades. They deal with everything problematic that the necrons cannot. Even when there's nothing problematic to deal with(I mean rarely happens, but hey), they still gain a value and a presence in every game as long as you have a plan for them. Delivering a Destroyer lord in combat is quite a plan. And you can't exactly say if there's going to be anything "problematic" against you in the next game you play, so it's really hard to not include them in a list.

- Harvests/Decurion. Harvest do grant additional options to Wraiths, which are great but they are also options that already exist on other units. Now, I don't agree with the TAX mentality, but I'll point out something that I find humorous. Those that take a Harvest, especially a Double, run the minimum Scarabs with no expectation of them doing much. The Spyder is required to give the bonus, which again, already exists on units that aren't dependent on its range or even on the board. Adding those points, and picking the bonus does nothing to change those 3 attacks per model, just that they get them. When you divvy up the cost of the tax among the Wraiths, you end up making the Praetorians, Flayed Ones, and even Lychguard MORE attractive options. So in the end, the Wraiths fail to Top Tier here.

Well, you can't really expect too much from Scarabs really. Best case scenario they ruin an immobile drop pod in your deployment zone or tarpit a weak scout unit or something. They really can't do more than that no matter how many they are. If you buy more of them, you just make them easier to disappear.
-----

So where do they Top Tier? "Competetive" play is usually the best answer that someone gives as if that is supposed to change anything above. I'm going to try to keep my rant on what a joke "Competetive" play has become to a minimum, but it is a valid place where Wraiths Top Tier and for good reason. I mainly play Maelstrom missions with none of that Discard crap that is common, or I play Eternal War missions for smaller games. I occasionally play an ITC scenario when asked, and it's usually with one of the lists found online and not my own.

These events alter the Scenarios, change the mission objectives, don't play Maelstrom, include FAQs to restrict certain rules, limit the number of times a formation can be taken, reward Deathstars, and have still refused to allow Unbound. In an environment like this, the shift on which units become useful extend beyond the reasons listed above, and threats to Wraiths are reduced on non existent.

Well, certainly, when we talk about Tactics and what is strong or not, we're talking about Competitve. And competitive obviously can't mean Unbound, can it? Or do I have to also discuss this? Unbound would break the meta. A list with 9 Wraithknights would play against a list with 9 Monoliths and would table it in a turn(or versus a list with 90000 grots and they would be unable to hit/kill each other). There's different reasons why each would decide to make such a force, I would personally be actually interested in a 9 Monoliths list. Unbound would totally break the game in so many ways, it's impossible for the game to even exist. For an unbound list to have any meaning you must come to an agreement of some sort before you play and talk about it, which kind of means there's actual rules, which kills unbound. It's the single most stupid thing ever included in a Rulesbook. They just put it there to encourage beginers, it's obviously not a game mode you can discuss tactics on, as it's just bananas. There's no meaning in tactics without rules.

The ITC ruleset are modified Maelstrom missions that reduce the RNG factor as much as possible, to make it a more fair fight.

Wraiths Top Tier here because they do things that aren't normally required in Maelstrom/EW missions, where threats to them are reduced, and taking units that outperform them don't score the points needed to win.

What more? It's the same game.

So Wraiths are Top Tier, in an environment where they thrive, by players who prefer to play by a group of rules and a set of scenarios, where they feel the game is playable. A that according to the group,survey not too long ago, shows that they are the minority of the community as a whole. I deal with this a lot where I currently live, and run into these "Competetive" players often. When they step up, and start playing the missions, especially Maelstrom, the Wraiths simply don't hold up. It's too easy to either deal with them, ignore them, or throw something at them to eat through until it's too late to have an impact on the game.

So yeah, I have NO IDEA why Wraiths are considered Top Tier.

Amen on your last sentence, you really do have no idea why Wraiths are considered Top Tier.

I finally think I've got the hang of this situation. You're talking about the games you play. You go to your FLGS each week, have a group of friends (the Plagues Marine one included!) you like to hang out with and have fun. You're playing games quite often, so you think you've developped a sense for Tactics that "competitive" people are too blind to see, because they play a "different game with different missions". All this time, that you're spouting "tactics" and "strong and weak points" you meant relevant to your FLGS local meta. You meant Preatorians are better versus your friend who plays Plague Marines because he has no AP3 weapons and Prets just slaughter him, while the Wraiths just die as easily to bolter fire. Which is a fair point, I'll concede that.

However, usually, on the internet, because Local Meta is not everywhere the same, we usually talk relevant to what's generally viewed as competitive(such a dreadful word), aka the meta. But, the general meta, not your FLGS meta. That is mostly defined, like it or not, by the ITC.Are you making a point about Wraiths being subpar because you're playing versus Plague Marines and they're not helping you win?Because, that should be something that you should say before you make your point. Powerful/Weak relevant to what? Since you didn't mention anything, I assumed the "meta" (as in the ITC meta, which is the only thing we can talk about that we have in common, because local meta as I said again is different locally, which is why it's called local meta) and have responded accordingly.

Warriors are not top tier, because they have limited range, they are slow and they are not dangerous. An assault threat will make short work of them and a shooting threat will either ignore them or just outshoot them. (or just out-speed and out-score)

 Akar wrote:
Having internet issues with the storm so didn't see your comment. Going to leave the HQs there, but no, I don't really have a 3rd Top Tier unit. Not because there isn't one, but because our Dex is really good enough that it depends on what you're bringing.

I do agree with the general idea here. Each unit has a different role. Stacking up on units with the same role wouldn't benefit the list even if they were all top tier. Filling up on all the roles is more important to keep relevant in the meta. Just do it by taking as many High Tier units as possible and keep them all synergised.

Footslogging Warriors move Flayed Ones and Tesla Immortals up a bit.

No they don't. Why would they? Exept only if you mean strictly in a phalanx with a lot of necron warriors and no other legit long range shooting. Which is very limited and quite the opposite of strong.

Ghost Ark Warriors move Destroyers and Scarabs up a bit.

Definetely not. Nothing can move the Scarabs up. Not even 9 Spyders can make Scarabs usefull.

Immortal based lists move Praetorians and Wraiths up a bit.

What do you mean Immortal based lists? Immortals are only fielded because you can take 5 of them in CADs and spare some tax points, otherwise, they contend with the scarabs for "worst unit of the codex". How can you base an entire list on the worst unit of the codex?

It's part of what makes Crons a balanced codex, and makes it difficult to really put stuff into Tiers. Even Deathmarks, Harvests, and Lychguard move up depending on outside factors like Local Meta, Casual/Tournament play, storyline/campaign, etc. I've tried to Tier the units out with all of these in mind.

Yes, obviously the Tiers move with the local meta. Which is why we assume we're talking for the general meta (aka competitive ICT play) and build tier lists (or at least as accurate as they can be) based on it.


I'm not going to go on and write more arguments about why I also disagree with your entire Tier list, since it seems that we're generally looking at this from a totally different PoV. I would like, however, to engage in further discussion with you and ask you if you think what you say should generally be true in other places of the world or if it is only limited to the people you play with.

Do you happen to play with a lot of people bringing Gladius (with 6+ razorbacks, generally more than 11 obsec vehicles and as many marines too) or Deathgaurd Warbands? How does your list specifically fair against them?

col_impact wrote:
Your placing of Warriors as top-tier seems very off since they are basically a CAD tax or a Reclamation Legion tax . They certainly are solid compared to other troop choices in other codexes, but not compared to other units in the Necron codex. Most players view Warriors as little more than a tax. A Silver Tide list can do okay in tournament formats but is not great.

You asked out of curiosity, so I gave my honest answer. I'll respond with my reasons, and it's not about being right or wrong here. It's about what I feel is the best decision.

The TAX mentality is probably one of the biggest flaws in any 40k army. I strongly believe that as long as you treat any unit as simply a means to get another unit, then you're doing it wrong. My approach to the formations is to reward players for playing units that they like, as opposed to trying to break them. The units are in a formation for a reason, so if you're not going to look at why they're there, then why waste the points, money, and time on a unit that you have no intention of having participate in the game? I completely understand that the bonuses are often really good, but the bonuses usually benefit these TAX units in someway. Why not learn what that is and invest in why they're there?

Since I have put my faith in Warriors, Tomb Blades, and love Immortals, the Reclamation Legion is my reward. Taking Tax units, is just an evolution of the old days where you took 2 minimum Troop Choices and filled up with the cool stuff and played a game. Again, this applies to any army, not just Crons. I'm not surprised one bit when players post 'How do I deal with X', and then notice the minimum required Warriors on their lists. It gets even more amusing when they refuse to point the finger at the unit that they treated Warriors as a tax, just to get in the first place. As long as anyone treats Warriors as a TAX, then they're never really given the opportunity to see what they actually do.

col_impact wrote:
A list built entirely of Harvests is certainly more formidable than a list built entirely of Warriors.

I respect this opinion, and I'll go with the opposite. Ignoring the that you're comparing a Formation to a Unit, Pure Wraith lists just don't have the killing power to go up against most lists out there, competitive or not. It certainly won't die, but I can't see it lasting very long. In defense of the Warriors, as above, they have way more combo options, and a good number of those don't even require a formation, so they won't don't even have to Subscribe to the TAX mentality to accomplish that.

col_impact wrote:
In fact the ITC has decided to restrict the number of Harvests in their tournaments to no more than 2 in order to be fair to the other players. There is no restriction on the number of Warrior units.

Do you have any data or anything objective to back up your claim that Warriors are top-tier? My claim that Harvests are top-tier can be backed up by looking at winning Necron lists across a variety of tournament formats. And, if you look at the same Necron lists you will find that they play the minimum allowed number of Warriors.

First bit, I'm not going to discuss much about the ITC here. It's not 40k, it's one of the least competitive formats out there, and it's been around so long that players have forgotten how to tell the difference. I'm happy to discuss it civilly if you'd like to discuss it further, feel free to PM. As this is a Tactica Necron thread, this is where I'll end on this point.

Staying on topic though, I don't think anyone thinks the 2xForm. restriction had anything to do with specifically making Wraiths fair to other players. I wasn't aware that the formation was ever Unfair once the codex after ours got released? I wasn't aware that it was still unfair in an environment that now allows assaulting from Reserve, assaulting from Outflank, Psychic powers that can move them out of the way, or cheap recycling units that will offer more than they can kill. I understand your viewpoint, but my experience says otherwise.

Unfortunately, I can't show any evidence to prove that Warriors are the best unit we have in our dex. My experience over the years has shown me that Warriors are the MVP of the dex. I've been playing Crons for 17 years now, and Warriors were the only Troop choice for the longest time. I started out like most players and ran the minimum unit to get all the good stuff, which really hurt when we had 'Phase Out'. I didn't win a single game for the first 9 months as I slowly added more and more Warriors to stop 'Phase Out'. Once I found that number, I became a powerhouse and started winning games and even a few RTTs. Landing Overall at Gamesday 2002 (or it could've been 03) was surprising to even me, as I wasn't expecting it. In fact, I completely ignored them calling out my name until my friends pointed out that my name was being said.

Fast Forward to now and having to switch to a horde mentality when running Warriors. My army has exploded from fitting into one case to needing a third. Warriors took a hit by being reduced to a 4+ save and this initially pissed me off. That was before I saw the changes to how good RP had gotten in general, and it was pointed out to me that I was still doing well. The biggest change that took me a long time to see was the point reduction. The drop to 13 pts is INSANE. I can get 100 of these guys for 1300 points and pretty much say 'Good Luck' to my opponents. Not many players look at Warriors that way, and it's easy to see when you compare them on a unit by unit basis, and I'll even admit that Warriors don't look great when you see what virtually every other unit in the Codex.

Where I'm actually having a hard time, is that I've been challenged to make a list without Warriors. Warriorless Necrons are slightly more expensive Marines, and don't perform well in most environments. This is the simplest of all reasons why they're Top Tier, it's hard to run a list without them, and not because they're a requirement. As you can see from either my army lists, or simply commenting, that this is clearly not the majority thinking of the Current Necron community. Even Skoffs and I have disagreed rather vehemently on several subjects, but he has always respected my experiences with Warriors. Like ANY unit, they do have their good days and bad days. From when I've started playing them, to now, they have more good days than any other unit I've run.

I'm not out to try and convince anyone to my way of thinking. It's a playstyle that I've found and have had a TON of fun with, and I appreciate you respecting that, asking what you don't understand, and politely offering a different opinion without assuming that I haven't tried it. I own 12 Wraiths, and they haven't seen much table time in 7th, there are simply better options. Warrior heavy is not for everyone, but it is by no means any less competitive than the standard min Rec Legion, with Harvest/Harvest or Harvest/DCult. The tragedy is that there won't be any way to prove it, until competitive events return, if they ever do.
-----
Quickly, back to my original question, which has gotten lost. Has anyone got an answer about Warriors benefiting from Triarch Stalkers while embarked?
-----
Now to dissect Necr0n's post.

Clearly, we're talking in relevant to different Rules/Meta when we speak, so any sort of tactical discussion is, probably, fruitless. I will concede that Silver Tide can be competitive, but it really misses not being ObSec and there's armies that do it better. (I feel at least. That would be Gladius Marines like Ultramarines, Dark Angels, White Scars and Deathguard Chaos Warbands with fearless, ObSec, FNP zombies (at 4points per model)).

So, I feel like we're not particularly good at being a silver tide, due to missing ObSec (and honestly, we're less tough too) on said tide. However, there's nothing stopping people from pulling it off with extra necrony goodness.

Listen, I've played a lot of Necrons too, not as much as you, but I played my fair share. I did play back when Phase out was a real problem. Back then, it was a numbers game. Literally. I played a list with 8 Destroyers, 2 Heavy D's, 2 Monoliths, 1 Necron Lord with Resorb (1750)and all the remaining points were just warriors and I'd still get tabled a lot of times to phase out, because I didn't have enough warriors.Man, I really didn't want to field more warriors.

The thing is I did not enjoy this numbers game. I do not like it as an idea, to be forced into playing many of the same model, especially when they are the simplest, most boring just regular troops. I like scary ghosts (wraiths), I like stronger versions of Warriors with snipers (deathmarks), I like diversity. (that's not tactics, just personal preference).

So as soon as the Matt Ward codex hit and almost everything was not subpar and we could field whatever we liked, I went nuts. I'm not a huge fan of fluff, I really enjoy the minis and the games. That codex was the best thing that ever happened in 40k for me. I had countless options to field assault oriented necrons, shooty necrons, teleporting necrons, flyers necrons, Scarabfarm, Wraithwing. I went nuts on 5th edition, it was my favorite time, tried everything out, bought a ton of models, played 1000 different lists and had a lot of fun.

Where am I going with this? No clue, just wanted to mention Matt Ward was a king.

I'd like to say the following to Akar however:

You're limiting yourself and only play a single archetype of list for a long time. It's obviously getting buffed a lot, but so is everything else. (Hello powercreep)

The fact that your personality, practice, character and mind help YOU do better with only that type of list also doesn't mean the rest are useless. Obviously, playing one archetype of list for 17 years is a lot of practice, you've a gak ton of experience with warrior lists and can make it work even in places where it shouldnt. Obviously, it works better for you than other lists do, but that definetely doesn't mean it would work better for everyone else too.

I'd like to point out here, that while list building is important, giving a cheesy Eldar list to a random player does not mean he will do well. Understanding your lists strengths and weaknesses, its ability to deal with the rest of the meta lists, practicing and having a plan is just as important as "having a strong list".

Making a Tier List, I'll admit is kind of impossible, as it really matters what else is included in your list (aka, synergy). But, since we had some rough drafts, I'll say the following:
You can't really put on a Tier list based on a single archetype of army. How can warriors be top tier for non-silver tide armies?
Note that listing them at Top Tier obviously means fielding way more than the required 20 is going to provide you with a powerful advantage. And I say that this is only going to be the case if the rest of your list is also Silver Tide and it's made to support Warriors. If I go in my Destroyer Cult/Canoptek Harvest and simply add a lot of Warriors, I will not have points to make my Destroyers or Wraiths an actual threat.

I'd also like to add that 7th edition heavily nerfed Warriors and Warrior lists due to giving EVERYTHING scoring. (Heck, they don't even get ObSec in Decurions)

Now, they are not needed to score, they are going to compare normally in role efficiency versus every other unit in the codex without adding anything extra.

At 13 points per model, Marine stats, RP and Gauss, they make a SWEET troops choice. (Well, not scatbike sweet, but sweet) We're lucky the Necrons are a faction with one of the best troops available right now. I'll give you that.

However, warriors can accomplish very few roles, mostly. Basicly, there's not many things they can achieve. They are very slow, so they can't really score well (move to and from objectives). They can't shoot well. 24" rapid fire weapons are very limited and a very big number of them is needed before they become a threat to anything. A whole squad can fire at 2 Marines and they still won't die. Being able to wound and glance vehicles on 6s is nice, but, most of the times, it's just something that you say "Hey, my warriors can kill Land Raiders", but rarely happens. Someone would need to have 30 Warriors in 24" range from a rhino to half-reliably shoot it down (if it doesn't get cover from any of the squads).

Obviously, assault isn't something they do. Thanks to being tougher in Decurions they can survive assault better, but being Iniatiative 2 and not fearless means that sometimes they'll get run down TOO easily. And that gets scarier the bigger squads you make.

So, their role is "deploy in key positions, try to contest objectives, block off strategic parts of the table, try to draw fire on that crazy good tough statline and Gauss things that need Gaussing." It's kind of limited and won't deal with what most lists bring on the table. They have no real answer to kill stuff that is hard to kill (Anything with good saves) or big toughness. They have no range and they're too scared to get close because of assault reasons. But, my biggest issue with them is being slow and 24" rapidfire weapons makes them really harmless, to the point where opponents don't ever have to deal with them.

However, in the context of a silver tide army, their effectiveness at 13ppm shines, their stats are amazing, opponents are forced to deal with them and that's how you get to see those tough to kill 13ppm shine. They are definetely top Tier in a silver tide army, they're the best unit in the codex efficiency wise.

In non-silver tide armies, their really efficient toughness is hard to make use of, since people will generally ignore them unless you make some very good and strategic moves with them. Block certain pieces of terrain, Camp certain paths of the map etc, use them as LoS cover to other units, etc.

In my lists, I really see them shine inside Ghost Arks however, since it boosts their shooting significantly and they get to move a lot. That is a price that you pay though, because in order to boost my warriors value a lot, I have to field a unit of mediocre-at best efficiency (the Ghost Ark). The Ghost Ark costs 105 points and it's just too easy for a lot of armies to remove. It gives Destroyer Shots and high strength shots a target they previously did not have in a Decurion with only infantry models. However, I really like it when it draws a LOT of bullets to its Jink save, and draws attention away from Destroyers/Wraiths/Prets.

So, would the warriors be a generally top tier choice? I think not, because of their limited capabilities at dealing with anything.

Obviously, I feel like I'm talking to a person who does know what he's talking about (akar), but the coversation we're having is vague.We're talking relevant to different types of competition and trying to make a Tier List, as I said, I think is impossible, due to the complications of list building.

I'd like instead, maybe for this thread we can make several "archetypes" based on which you can make lists. Then, we would discuss its pros and cons and what each unit brings to the table for that certain archetype. Then, we'd jump to conclusions based on experience of how to deal with certain meta lists with said archetype.

EG: Silver tide: strong vs eldar scatbike spam, weak vs Deathguard comp. Warriors add this, Immortals will add advantage in case of Wraithknight (not actually, just an example). Lychguard help this list deal with Vehicles (not really, just an example) and so on.
But more analytical. I'm not sure if we can do that, or if it's too much work, but it's worth suggesting.

EDIT:

 Akar wrote:



Quickly, back to my original question, which has gotten lost. Has anyone got an answer about Warriors benefiting from Triarch Stalkers while embarked?

Why would they not benefit?



EDIT 2:

Just for the keks: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2013/04/22/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2013-top-16-lists-ton-pics/
Only like 12 out of 16 top armies have 2+ units of Wraiths(while lots also have 3 maxed out units). Probably because they were "bearly fieldable". And back then, there were no ITC differentiations, it's pure 40k. I don't think you can argue with that being competitive.

Well this is intense.

I have a question about how we deal with Tzeench deamon summoning.

how do we deal with Tzeench deamon summoning?

Klowny wrote:
Well this is intense.

I have a question about how we deal with Tzeench deamon summoning.

how do we deal with Tzeench deamon summoning?

Haha cute. You don't really, for both of you it's just a game of trying to cover the objectives with your bodies and keep the other off. You by being Necrons and not dying, him by flooding it with free bodies. Neither of you have ObSec (well, his Troops will, but not the Summoned ones afaik), so it's just a grind to see who holds objectives.

Spoiler alert, it's usually the army with 1000 free points backed up by superbuffed Princes (and now Magnus).

So I want to brush the cobs webs off of orikan. I was thinking of running a decurion with a royal court, d cult and 6 wraith harvest at 1850. I was thinking Orikan with a overlord (war scythe, shroud, phase shifter) overlord (veil) and solar staff lord. I love sticking a void reaper d lord with my wraiths but would like to give the court PE. Would using a heavy destroyer with the court be a crazy idea?

No, adding a D-Lord is a typical load out for an Orikan-star.
But be aware that you may want to stick Obyron in there, too, to give yourself a second Veil in case you need to get out of a combat you don't want to be in.

 skoffs wrote:
No, adding a D-Lord is a typical load out for an Orikan-star.
But be aware that you may want to stick Obyron in there, too, to give yourself a second Veil in case you need to get out of a combat you don't want to be in.

Obyron can not teleport out of a combat. The Veil wearer can. (they switched them around from the old dex)

 necr0n wrote:

 Akar wrote:
Quickly, back to my original question, which has gotten lost. Has anyone got an answer about Warriors benefiting from Triarch Stalkers while embarked?

Why would they not benefit?

It seems to switch back and forth, usually in the General FAQ. Banners, Psychic Powers, abilities. It comes up every now and again, and it really boils down to if models in the Transport count as being on the board. I've gotten rid of my Ghost Arks, and I'm trying to help a new Cron player out. I didn't see a BRB FAQ in the recent release. That's all really.
----------------------------------------------------------
There was a TON to sort through. I know mine are long responses as well, so I'll cover the ones that haven't already been answered, or are worth answering. Several of them have been condensed, so I've tried to group them all.

 necr0n wrote:

- There's obviously a huge difference between 3+ and 3++.
- The amount of shooting that they will draw because of that fact and the shift away from the attention from the rest of your army is priceless. Because, point for point they are VERY survivable compared to just about anything. They're only instadying to Str10 and StrD.

* You left out Force Weapons. The first part of this I've already covered. Our approach to the 3++ is from opposite sides. I stand by what I said above. The 3++ ONLY comes into play when being hit with AP 3- Weapons. All other weapons, that 3++ doesn't make a single bit of difference. With the exception of 'Iyanden', Imp. Knights, and maybe Ad. Mech, AP 3- Weapons are not the majority of the weapons that are in an opponents army. I'm sure there are others, but they're not common, and I wouldn't expect to see them in typical games. AP 3- weapons that have the shorter range, are even less common, but those usually come with a reliable delivery system like Bikes, Deep Strike, Transports, etc. I'm really curious how you get your opponents to blow the AP 3- weapons on the Wraiths and not go for something in a higher Tier? Grav weapons aside (I'll get to that), I can't think of many opponents that will bring an Alpha Strike reserve unit, look at all the targets on the board, and then decide to blow it on the Wraiths.

Armies that can dish out a high volume of low AP wounds are the Wraiths Weakness, even with the buff. (See below for Harvests) This was the extent of the Plague Marine reference. The T5, 3+ doesn't seem to bother those same players when they play him, and his biggest death is to small arms, not AP 3-. It was never about whether he wins/loses, just that the complaints don't make sense. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons can all reliably stack so many wounds on Wraiths, that the 3++ isn't going to make a difference. Against certain matchups, this can be a handicap, as it can just as easily force those high AP shots into the Top Tier units.

Grav is the odd exception. From what I've seen, the Grav units that are common are popular because they can pump out a high volume of low AP shots. They also have the advantage of avoiding Toughness much like Poison weapons do. So in this particular instance, using an AP 3- weapon makes sense, and having the 3++ has an impact. I get the same satisfaction when Grav is used on Warriors/Flayed Ones though. 1/2 the shots don't wound as opposed to the 2/3 vs. Wraiths. I get a 1/3 reduction off of that, and smile when my opponent realizes he's spent a good investment of points, to kill a fraction of the damage he was hoping for.

 necr0n wrote:

In the Canoptek Harvest Formation that most use them, they will also get the RP roll on the first round at least for a ridiculous 3++ 5T 2W, 4+++ 40 point model.

The Harvest comes with the drawback of needing a Babysitter, which isn't as resilient, or as fast as the Wraiths. Majority of Opponents know this, so I don't need to say too much more. Since Harvests aren't usually taken outside of a Decurion, that 3++/4+ RP does look attractive. Of course, virtually every other unit also gets the 4+ RP, and doesn't need a babysitter or lose this bonus.

Praetorians are the closest comparison to Wraiths, so I'll just use them as a simple example. In a Decurion both units are Fearless, T5, with a 3+ save. Both units will have the 4+ RP. The Wraiths win by having the 3++. The Praetorians win by keeping their 4+ RP, and they're not tethered to anything to get that. It's an fair trade.

 necr0n wrote:

How does paying ~9 points for 3 whip coils (for a whooping 12 str 6 rending attacks at initiative 5, make Praetorians or Lychguard more attractive? Are 9 points too much? Do the Preatorians get anything to help them survive before they strike at Initiative 2?

I'll admit after reading the above, this needs some explaining.

I'll use Praetorians in this example, but the same approach applies to Lychguard/Flayed Ones.

A full unit of 6 Wraiths (strip down) is 240 Points. It's 18(24) Attacks.
8 Praetorians is 224 points. It's 16(24) Attacks,+8 Shots. *Not reliant on Rending.

Add Whip Coils to all of them for 258pts, and you get 18(24) Attacks.
9 Praetorians is 252 points. For 18(26)pts, +9 Shots.

Take a Harvest (min +110 Pts). Wraiths get 18(24) Attacks.
Now you're up to a min Judicator of 10 Praetorians for 20(30) Attacks, +10 Shots.
The Stalker is going to improve those attacks, and benefit the rest of the army. Harvest won't.

Same approach for Lychguard, and Flayed Ones. The difference with these two units, is that they are already in the Decurion either as a part of the formation already, or not required.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Then you make these statements.

 necr0n wrote:

- No, attacks is definetely not the Wraiths' selling point. Their speed and durability is.
- Whip Coils just got FAQ'ed and keep you on initiative 5 even when charging through terrain. I still, usually, stick to a maximum of 3 per unit, but they're hardly a waste of points.

So the Wraiths attacks aren't their selling point, but you're still going to make sure they get them? It's contradictory, but I'll agree that coils are a great use of filler points.

 necr0n wrote:
You name one thing that can deal with Wraithknights and I'll concede the point.

Flayed Ones. Just because it's easier to list the one thing that CAN'T deal with Wraithknights. Everything else has just as much chance to wound T8, most of which doesn't have to wait until it gets into base contact. Since you're not bringing Wraiths for their damage output, then any unit with a higher damage output would be a better choice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 necr0n wrote:
- After all, a tactics discussion is obviously always made in the context of competition, not fun and casual games, right?
- Well, certainly, when we talk about Tactics and what is strong or not, we're talking about Competitve. And competitive obviously can't mean Unbound, can it? Or do I have to also discuss this?
- Which is why we assume we're talking for the general meta (aka competitive ITC play) and build tier lists (or at least as accurate as they can be) based on it.
- Obviously, it works better for you than other lists do, but that definetely doesn't mean it would work better for everyone else too.

One of us is confused about what a Tactica Thread is. A Tactica thread should be about how to use each unit available and make them work. In order to do that, we have to play 40k. This includes EW, Maelstrom, Mysterious Objectives, RNG in general. It also has to include the possibility of Unbound, which doesn't break the Meta any more than the ITC chokes it. This alone makes it the most 'competetive' advice, and easier to adjust when you choose to adjust to the removal/addition of rules, like the ITC. This is why I ignore any of the ITC lists, and have no merit outside of the ITC. Being good at the ITC means you're good at the ITC. Im sure that these players are top notch players, but their ITC ranking doesn't translate outside of that format.

Going to go a bit Off Topic, but cover the points relevant. I don't like Unbound Abuse, but I'm also not seeing it being abused. I've met 3 players who have abused it, one of them admitted that he did, but he just loved the models/fluff/painting. They've run out of people to play real fast. There are players who build Battleforged lists that can't find people to play, so I don't even see why that's a factor anymore. Im well aware that they're out there, I don't agree with it, but there is nothing Illegal about it. Most players, competetive or not, are actually pretty civil about Unbound when it comes down to it, because they use that grey matter to decide that investing money into something they won't be able to use is usually enough of a deterrent to prevent, and often a good enough reason to allow it.

If you're going to impose ITC (or any Independent event) in a Tactica thread, then you aren't playing 40k. This isn't a 'Build the best Cron' list thread. This isn't an ITC Cron Tactica thread. When a player asks the question on how to play a certain unit, even Scarabs. 'They suck, just run Wraiths' isnt the answer. If it is, then the title of the thread needs to change to reflect that. Or they should the existing Army Lists forum, where players other players list what parts of 40k they aren't playing for whatever reason.

If we can't share our differing opinions in a Tactica Thread, so that those looking for information on those units can find it, then what is it's purpose? I don't normally Tier units but was asked how I would. I enjoyed the exercise, and explained why. The good responses have been 'Interesting, why do you think that?'. This not only encourages discussion, but is why I subscribe to 'Tactica' threads. Nobody wins when it degrades into 'Why you're wrong', especially when the statement end up there.

 necr0n wrote:
-Do you happen to play with a lot of people bringing Gladius (with 6+ razorbacks, generally more than 11 obsec vehicles and as many marines too) or Deathguard Warbands? How does your list specifically fair against them?

I will concede that Silver Tide can be competitive, but it really misses not being ObSec and there's armies that do it better. (I feel at least. That would be Gladius Marines like Ultramarines, Dark Angels, White Scars and Deathguard Chaos Warbands with fearless, ObSec, FNP zombies (at 4points per model)).

Quite often, and I do decent against them. A bit off Topic, but a large part of this is due to the fact that I play straight Maelstrom, and sit in the camp that it's the BEST thing to happen to 40k. My last game went 13/11 so it was close, but he also only had 1 Thunderfire cannon, 1/2 a Dev Squad and 2 Techmarines left on the board. A recent 2.9k Relic game vs. SW with all the Wulfen/TWolf cav goodness, ended in a Draw. I was Wraithless, still had well over 1/2 my army. He only had 1 wound clutching onto the relic at the end of Turn 6, and a lone Scout that we both left alone for the story. (He lost all of his Brothers to the first volley of Tomb Blades, but survived the 10 Tesla Immortals and 20 Warrior shots after that. I let him live to witness the horror!!)

ObSec is powerful, and I have a few ObSec/CAD lists that win quite often. In Maelstrom missions, you claim objectives by controlling it at the end of your turn. This is something that Wraiths do not excel at. If my opponent is on an objective that I need to score, I rely on the Decurion to blow everything off, and it works very well. Vs. ObSec opponents, like the Gladius, I can't stop him from getting it. Since I'm on it, and I'm incredibly difficult to move, it usually costs him the unit. This is exactly what happened in the above game. He had to choose to keep his line, or break the line and go after the point. It was much more challenging and competetive for the both of us in this format than the ITC. He's looking forward to the rematch.

I've got plenty of more stories, but virtually all of them are from playing un-neutered 40k. It's just Off Topic. They don't serve to prove a point, just that my experience has shown me otherwise, and is limited to playing Maelstrom/EW missions, which is the basis of the advice I give.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 necr0n wrote:

- They were a Necron staple in any list and the very well known "wraithwing" with 18 Wraiths
- So, our answer to everything is an all rounder very fast, terrain-ignoring, scoring, fearless, tough to kill tarpitter.
- Wraiths are the only unit that provides somewhat of an answer to quite some of those threats. Beasts with 12" movement and fleet that ignore terrain are amazingly easy to navigate on enemy stormsurges.
- Wraiths are absolutely the finest and only answer our codex can bring in any context or shape or form.
- Scarabs are honestly gak. Probably one of the worst units in the codex.
- Nothing can move the Scarabs up. Not even 9 Spyders can make Scarabs useful.
- Well, you can't really expect too much from Scarabs really.
- This is where we disagree. It's impossible to not rely on tarpit.
- Wraiths are the Jack of all Trades. They deal with everything problematic that the necrons cannot.
- (Akar: Footslogging Warriors move Flayed Ones and Tesla Immortals up a bit)No they don't. Why would they?
- What do you mean Immortal based lists? Immortals are only fielded because you can take 5 of them in CADs...
- You can't really put on a Tier list based on a single archetype of army.
- Obviously, assault isn't something they do.
- Would the warriors be a generally top tier choice? I think not, because of their limited capabilities at dealing with anything.

ALL of this.

 necr0n wrote:

-You're limiting yourself and only play a single archetype of list for a long time. It's obviously getting buffed a lot, but so is everything else.

Then you go with this? I'm referencing things that I've run, and you choose to rationalize them off, then state that I'm down to a single Archetype list? Interesting.

You never asked if I ran 'Wraithwing'. I have. You never asked if I've run a 'Wraithstar'. I have. You never asked what my experience with Ghost Arks is, when I've seen enough before selling them to give advice. You've never asked if I've ever played or tried anything other than the 'Silver Tide' archetype. I have. I've seen the Tarpit units actually prevent me from tabling my opponent because they were the only unit left in combat, and wouldn't die. I've seen my opponent feed Wraiths 2 units of generic Marines to protect what they were going after, only to end up getting out of combat right before the game ended, while forcing the rest of my force to deal with the bigger threat. Here I learned that it's not only possible, but quite common that I do have an answer to these threats, and don't need Wraiths in any of it's inclusions to deal with the threats that I'm constantly being told they can't deal with.

I've played an Immortal based list with 50 Immortals (30G/20T) that leaves you with enough points to have an HQ of your choice and fit at 1000 points. This leaves you with plenty of points to fill it with Destroyers and Wraiths which all become Top Tier in this setup. Anti-Meq tactics work well enough against it. I'm fine tuning (ie past theorycrafting) a list that has my opponents absolutely hating Scarabs. I've run a ~100 man CAD with Zahndrekh/Szeras (or both) Even had enough points left over to take non-commital Wraiths to handle anything that managed to get too close.

NONE of this makes me any more right than you are right. None of this proves you in any way, shape or form that Wraiths aren't the best answer. I've never intended to give the impression that Wraiths are bad or that they're wrong. All I've questioned is why people think that they're a Top Tier, Auto-include, answer to everything, and hoping for some answers I'm not here to prove why they're bad when I already know they're not. Ie, using a Tactica Thread for the actual tactics. I KNOW they're popular and I'm looking for something that I'm maybe missing. Something that I can actually TAKE to a game and observe, and find out why I would take them over another unit.

EDIT: After seeing how long this has gotten, I'm going back off before I cross anymore into 'Warning' Territory. You won't see much more on this from me. I respect your views, but lets get this back on the track before it completely derails.

You're missing a lot. One of the things that wasn't covered though was the low cost of investment though.

In order to get just two squads of Praetorians and the Stalker (which is a mild tax) is 405 points. For just 55 points more, I get two Canoptek Harvests. In order to get Lychguard anywhere, you have to invest in a lot for them. Wraiths don't need the support even though they still make a fantastic deathstar.

Draco765 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
No, adding a D-Lord is a typical load out for an Orikan-star.
But be aware that you may want to stick Obyron in there, too, to give yourself a second Veil in case you need to get out of a combat you don't want to be in.

Obyron can not teleport out of a combat. The Veil wearer can. (they switched them around from the old dex)

Yes, which is why you have both of them in there, so Obyron can use his turn one to get the unit into position, and the Veil is there to move them again after/in emergencies.

There is a lot here to unpack,

First let me start with an observation, harvest and lych stars are both very common in top placing Necron armies, if wraiths and lychguard are as bad as you say why would that be the case? You could blame it on bias but bias rarely makes it into the winners circle.

The rather obvious answer is they don't suck. Wraiths are a tough, hard hitting and fast unit. They can either be a tarpit or a scalpel. Used correctly they can jam up an opponent's gunline, draw fire to themselves, and slow down an opponent's death star. Your complaints about lychguard would be valid if you only used lychguard by themselves. When taken with a O-Lord and a veil, they are capable of turn two charges just about anywhere on the board. Their presence is very disruptive to gunline enemies. Even if you can't catch your opponents, you can still use them to herd your opponent into your kill zones. Even a basic lych star is capable of jamming up a death star that didn't bring unit wide hit and run, so they are excellent at deterrence.

Another observation, if there is no large difference between a 3+ and a 3++ , why do so many top placing death stars have a 3++? Surely it's not a coincidence, since top lists are purpose built, as opposed to haphazard?

The answer here is simple, when your opponent is correctly choosing targets, he will use the correct AP on targets to get the most bang for his buck. In short when you have an expensive unit without an invul, the opponent will use his low AP weapons to remove them, it's common sense. Your argument that nobody brings much AP 3 is absolutely the wrong way to think about it, they certainly bring enough to kill your squad of prats in a turn. If wraiths were 3+ as opposed to 3++ you see them get merc'd by missile launchers or grav before they could get close. Instead you never see those weapons fired at wraiths because those weapons are inefficient against them.

A Necron army just came in 3rd at the golden sprue GT.

Basically a Pylon Star(3 pylons) and a Wraith Star(6 wraiths).

Wraiths could get tar pitted by a couple units of marines if your not careful and don't position well. A wraith star however shouldn't be stuck for more than 1 round unless they are against another deathstar. A destroyer lord with scythe and Orikan should be enough AP2 to slice thru a bunch of marines or termies a long with the rending attacks. Wraiths are auto take for sure but if a player can't use them correctly then they could be a big failure

Did that 3rd place list have a Destroyer Lord + Orikan with the Wraiths?
(or even better, do you have a link to said list?)

I have been messing around with an ITC legal Pylon/Wraithstar. Is the Golden Sprue GT an ITC event?


PylonWraithStar (1850pts)

Royal Court (Primary)
Anrakyr the Traveller
Orikan the Diviner
Vargard Obyron
Cryptek (Chronometron, The Solar Staff)
Lord (The Veil of Darkness, Warscythe)

Canoptek Harvest
3x Canoptek Scarab
1x Canoptek Spyder (Gloom Prism)
6x Canoptek Wraiths

Allied Detachment
Destroyer Lord (Phase Shifter, Resurrection Orb, The Nightmare Shroud, Warscythe)
5x Immortal
5x Tomb Blades (Nebuloscope, Shield Vanes, Twin-linked Gauss Blaster)
3x Sentry Pylon (Focussed Death Ray)

Can't have an allied detachment the same faction as your primary.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Can't have an allied detachment the same faction as your primary.

ITC allows it. But I will have to confirm that. It looks like that may have been dropped in the ITC with 7th edition.

Then ignore me!

Found the winning lists.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/01/25/the-goldensprue-cup-gt-aftermath/


Necron CAD
D Lord (NS, WS, PS, RO)
7 immortals (Pyrrhian Eternals)
10 Warriors, Ghost Ark
6 Wraiths (2 WC)
3 Sentry Pylons with focused death rays

Royal Court
Anrakyr (Warlord)
Obyron
Lord (Veil)
Cryptek (Solar Staff)
Orikan

col_impact wrote:
Found the winning lists.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/01/25/the-goldensprue-cup-gt-aftermath/

Not a bad take, but an extra Necron Lord instead of the extra Cryptek might have gone better in the long run. I dunno.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Found the winning lists.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/01/25/the-goldensprue-cup-gt-aftermath/

Not a bad take, but an extra Necron Lord instead of the extra Cryptek might have gone better in the long run. I dunno.

I think that makes it easier to keep the unit majority toughness 7.

col_impact wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Found the winning lists.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/01/25/the-goldensprue-cup-gt-aftermath/

Not a bad take, but an extra Necron Lord instead of the extra Cryptek might have gone better in the long run. I dunno.

I think that makes it easier to keep the unit majority toughness 7.

I miacounted the Lords so that actually makes sense.

So what's the setup with that list?
Is it just a case of Destroyer Lord with the Wraiths and everyone else with the Pylons, or is there some other shenanigans at play here?

Can Anrakyr use mind in the machine to Allie of Convenience ?