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.

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

Yup. Good catch. So you could use him to get some extra shooting out of a renegade knight or something like that.

 Grimgold wrote:
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.
[...]

Guys coming in late: Akar made a (correct) point about this being a discussion on "40k tactics", not "ITC tactics" (it having a modified ruleset), which on its own surely is an interesting topic, for another thread.

(If it wasn't for the fact that everybody seems to agree on wraiths, wraiths, wraiths).

Read his posts with that in mind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also there are depths to his arguments that deserve more than that kind of shallow generalization.

 skoffs wrote:
Okay, I want to hear honest opinions:
Can the Obelisk be competitive now, with the fixes to its guns?
If so, what are its uses?

I thought it´s only use was annoy flying things which now got FAQ´d to not work with FMC´s so... yeah... no thanks . I wouldn´t touch it with a rusty pole and rather take 23 more Warriors.

col_impact wrote:

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

Yup. Good catch. So you could use him to get some extra shooting out of a renegade knight or something like that.

That Why I Ask! I want to try MITM to my regegade knight.

You guys keep putting Destroyers very high on the list, yet I can not seem to ever make them work that way. Is that explains?

They have the JSJ possibility, but that means they need proper terrain to jump behind (not too ruined buildings most typically), so in that sense the JSJ aspect of it is somewhat situational.

Destroyers are boss at taking out the majority of your opponent's army, but not so much against their best stuff (Knights, Wraithknights, Deathstars, etc).

 Akar wrote:

 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.

Armies that can dish out a high volume of low AP wounds are the Wraiths Weakness, even with the buff.

The meta does not have too many of those. Which is why Wraiths are good in this meta. Also, you'll notice that just about 90% of the lists that include Wraiths, as well as mine also include a Destroyer lord (with a 2+ and a a 4+ RP) tanking for them. Prets don't get that, because that would be a waste of a Destroyer Lord, since Destroyer Lords want to be in combats that Prets don't. Or at least, I've never ever seen anyone run a Destroyer Lord with Prets.

 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.

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.

First of all, Praetorians should not by any means be compared with Wraiths. Tactically, their roles are very different. You're comparing a high damage, glass canon unit to a tough, less killy unit. Praetorians do not want to get in Assault with almost anything that the Wraiths do. Initiative 2 and no invulnerable saves is quite a deadly combination. Prets are good at making soft stuff disappear. Wraiths might get stuck in combat with soft stuff for ages if there's no destroyer lord to help them.

However, Prets can't really get in combat with MC's, vehicles, walkers, titans, GC's, deathstars or even any assault oriented units. That's what Wraiths do and they do it well.

Also, how is 4+ RP equal to two wounds, 3++ (and a situational 4+ RP) ?

 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.

As I said again, attacks are not the Wraiths' selling point. Obviously the glass-cannon prets are killier.That's not something you need to prove, it's common knowledge.

Also, Triarch Stalkers are so easy to kill it's almost laughable. More than 50% of the people play Marine and friend with melta drop pods and Grav spam. Triarch stalker is never surviving turn 2 or more.

And to add to whip coils conversation. If I could buy Whip Coils for my prets, I'd buy them even if it was more than double the price.

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.

Attacks are not their selling point means that they are not, as I already explained, considered strong due to killing stuff reliably. Their attacks are mediocre for their points cost. Because, point for point, they are very fast and durable. And that's why they shine. However, I'm not going to lose all their attacks and just let them hover, just because it's not their main selling point. What are you trying to imply? Warriors' shooting is not their main selling point, maybe drop their guns?

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.

So, you can have differing opinions, but I cannot.Or do I not have the right to defend my opinion? You only liked the responses that agreed with you, but actually having counter-arguments is something counter productive. I don't get this.

 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!!)

I did not ask for battle reports. Merely a tactic display of how you approach these kinds of games. For example how do you deal with the Deathguard Chaos warband with zombies. They outnumber you, they are all scoring, they all have FNP and fearless, so how do you win? They do the "sit on objectives" just far better than you. What is your gameplan, what do you focus?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 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 never said you didn't try out lists or anything. I just said you're sticking with a single Archetype. Obviously, if you've been stopped by your own tarpitters to table your opponent you played them wrong. Why would you tarpit something that you can otherwise kill?

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.

What. You actually did give the impression that Wraiths are bad. Noone actually said they are "auto-include, answer to everything", that's just you again. People, including myself have suggested that Wraiths are a Top Tier choice. They are fielded for very specific reasons and they solve some problems that I don't think other units of the same codex would solve efficiently. You wrote word for word " They needed the buff to be fieldable, and they only barely make the cut."

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.

I'm not going to abandon a discussion we're having simply because you think said discussion is derailing. It's not, it's an on-going discussion on a claim that you made that Wraiths are borderline fieldable. I'm trying to invalidate all your arguments to support my claim, that they are indeed a Top Tier choice, since they are both multi-role (which is invaluable in most games, especially in this edition where there's huge differences/requirements from army to army) and probably top in the codex at all of their roles. (sucking bullets, tarpit, assault delivery system for Destroyer Lords and MC/GC/SHV hunting)

torblind wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
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.
[...]

Guys coming in late: Akar made a (correct) point about this being a discussion on "40k tactics", not "ITC tactics" (it having a modified ruleset), which on its own surely is an interesting topic, for another thread.

(If it wasn't for the fact that everybody seems to agree on wraiths, wraiths, wraiths).

Read his posts with that in mind.

ITC is 40k, it's not a different game. This is a Tactics thread and as a Tactics thread, we're supposed to discuss competitive games, which mostly happen in the environment of tournaments. All the competitive games and GTs run the ITC format. Do you just want to ignore every legit Tournament arround and talk about something different? There's also very few differences Tactics wise and the lists that do well in ITC also do well in Rulesbook missions. The only thing the ITC does is limit the list building cheese to SOME degree and remove some RNG from the missions.

Instead, what do you suggest we talk about? One of my LGS meta is litteraly only MEQ/TEQ. They've been playing DA/Templars/BA without too much shooting every since 3rd edition and won't change it since(it's gone to an extend where even when new people start armies at this store, everyone arround tells them what's "op" so they also buy assault focused stuff. Like, for christ sake, people think the eldar Avatar is OP). They think anything capable of CC is OP (Like TWC, Wraiths, Mephiston, Terminators, etc). Do you want me to talk relevant to my meta? Litteraly fielding 2 Doomsday Arks is enough to reliably table 90% of the lists someone would face in there. I can't really come here and claim that Doomsday Arks are Top Tier because I have internet and I can move to see what other people play with. So, instead I have to focus my attention on what is generally considered as "meta". What people all arround the world play. That would have to be ITC, merely because it's so broadly accepted. Besides everything else, when there's lists that win GT's people are bound to copy them and the meta spreads. So, why is it off-topic to talk ITC? Like it or not, ITC is competitive play. That's not an opinion. It's not up for discussion. If it's broken or not is up for discussion, surely. If you like it or not? Also discussion. But, ITC is the meta, even if you think it's broken, at least because it is so broadly accepted.

Also there are depths to his arguments that deserve more than that kind of shallow generalization.

There is actually not nearly enough depth as implied to his arguments. He's comparing units with different tactical roles in a non-defined environment. It's not ITC meta, but we don't know what it is, it's a secret.
To explain myself: Instead of taking two similar units and see how they would fair against a common opponent you expect to face, he's denying ITC meta and lists so there's no background and he's also comparing units with completely different roles. The apples and oranges metaphor would suit perfectly here.

 skoffs wrote:
Destroyers are boss at taking out the majority of your opponent's army, but not so much against their best stuff (Knights, Wraithknights, Deathstars, etc).

As well as anything with stealth / shrouded which gets 3+ / 2+ cover save. They have so few shots for their points.

Pylon Star will actually shred thru most DG stuff and ignore their FNP. Wraiths are actually good at taking down zombies since their S6.

Destroyer Lord is probably running with the Wraiths, Orikan can go with either Star.

I wonder how much the Warriors + the Ark was worth it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I wonder how much the Warriors + the Ark was worth it.

I personally rather take a scarab and spider for the harvest formation, you get more units on field to contest objectives and keep the wraiths more durable for a few turns until the spider dies.

 necr0n wrote:

ITC is 40k, it's not a different game.... [too much text for a simple point] ...broadly accepted.

So...

Guy1 says: [Tons of text]... btw this PoV applies to a non-tournament/ITC setting... [and then another ton of text]

Guy2 says: Hey, that PoV doesn't hold up in a tournament/ITC-setting.


Pointing out the obvious here was the only right thing to do. (Guy2 missed that one crucial statement in all that text)


Please go on and discuss whatever you want, wherever you like, but pulling in other people's statements on other topics is bad for you. Not to mention that innocent bystanders like me get annoyed enough by it to make posts like this.

 necr0n wrote:

Also there are depths to his arguments that deserve more than that kind of shallow generalization.

There is actually not nearly enough depth as implied to his arguments. He's comparing units with different tactical roles in a non-defined environment. It's not ITC meta, but we don't know what it is, it's a secret.
To explain myself: Instead of taking two similar units and see how they would fair against a common opponent you expect to face, he's denying ITC meta and lists so there's no background and he's also comparing units with completely different roles. The apples and oranges metaphor would suit perfectly here.

... And you have spent several forum meters conveying your opinion on the matter. Now let others convey theirs.

torblind wrote:

So...

Guy1 says: [Tons of text]... btw this PoV applies to a non-tournament/ITC setting... [and then another ton of text]

Guy2 says: Hey, that PoV doesn't hold up in a tournament/ITC-setting.

Pointing out the obvious here was the only right thing to do. (Guy2 missed that one crucial statement in all that text)

I never said that it doesn't hold up in tournament/ITC setting. I disagree with what he wrote on all possible levels. Rulesbook missions too, fluffy list games and even unbound.
I think Guy 3 missed the entire meaning of my post and has to read it again.

Please go on and discuss whatever you want, wherever you like, but pulling in other people's statements on other topics is bad for you. Not to mention that innocent bystanders like me get annoyed enough by it to make posts like this.

I don't get this. I really, actually, don't understand what you were annoyed by. Really honestly and no sarcasm or irony intended. I quoted your text to respond it. You wrote "hey guys, this is a tactics thread for 40k, let's talk 40k and not ITC" and I made a post where I quoted you and answered to you that I believe ITC/40k is not different. It was a direct answer to the direct proposal you made. Please explain how I am annoying and I'll try to fix it. I'm only trying to discuss tactics politely and in an informative manner.

torblind wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
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.
[...]

Guys coming in late: Akar made a (correct) point about this being a discussion on "40k tactics", not "ITC tactics" (it having a modified ruleset), which on its own surely is an interesting topic, for another thread.

(If it wasn't for the fact that everybody seems to agree on wraiths, wraiths, wraiths).

Read his posts with that in mind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also there are depths to his arguments that deserve more than that kind of shallow generalization.

When you have the numbers, you should argue the facts, when you have the precedence, you should argue the history, when you have neither you're left with attacking your opponent's data set. ITC is the same animal as 40k only played at the highest levels of efficacy, the ITC FAQ has no big changes for Necrons, so our top list are effectively identical in and out of ITC. As for his arguments deserving more, I read his posts, and he has some legitimately bad ideas about how the game functions currently. I choose those two examples because they were the easiest to disentangle, with logic and precedence. Another is his insistence on the unimportance of initiative for wraiths, eg, his argument against whipcoils (and if he doesn't use whipcoils on wraiths that might explain why he doesn't like them). I believe he is sincere in his beliefs and his desire to be helpful, but I don't think he is able to see beyond his local meta, which is not reflective of how necrons are played at the highest levels. A tactics thread by its nature should be about the highest level of play. So I suppose my desire is for you to show me the wrongness of my "shallow generalizations" , or quit complaining about them.

For instance, do you believe opponents capable of correctly prioritizing targets are infrequent enough that his 3++ isn't much better than 3+ argument is defensible? Do you believe his spiel about the percentage of low AP weapons is actually a useful heuristic for determining the type of saves one should bring? You cared enough to call me out, so here I am and I'm all ears.

I usually always play some combo of a decurion with d cult and canoptek harvest. I cannot see how wraiths can be anything but top tier in our codex. What unit is your opponent going to be worrying about if they know they are playing Necrons? What Necron unit gets discussed the most in opponents tactic threads? I know some have mentioned watching an opponent panic and waste a turn of shooting on wraiths. However you are also likely to see an opponent use some kind of alpha strike or all their shooting trying to kill your 50 point Spyder. Which again works to your advantage.

Wow, this is the most gone-horribly-wrong little clarification helper-post I have ever done. Apologies.

So 3 points on this post's agenda:

Point 1:

 necr0n wrote:
I never said that it doesn't hold up in tournament/ITC setting. I disagree with what he wrote on all possible levels. Rulesbook missions too, fluffy list games and even unbound.
I think Guy 3 missed the entire meaning of my post and has to read it again.

I assume I'm Guy 3. You on the other hand, have not been rewarded with a number yet, because you are absolutely right, you never said this.

If you kindly go read again, you will see that I quoted Grimgold saying this.

So if you please, seeing as he got the address...


Point 2:

 Grimgold wrote:
[... a lot of material for Akar should he ever choose to answer ...]

You cared enough to call me out, so here I am and I'm all ears.

So yeah, in case you missed it, (most mortals would), he specifically does not talk about the ITC/tournament scene, where you don't need to handle lists that are a wraithknight, 5 flyrants and 20 eldar jetbikes or some other shenanigans.


I'm sure you did, or you didn't, in either way you are now duly informed.


Seeing as his replies are super long and somewhat repetitive and people's counter replies are even longer and sometimes repetitivier, I figured I could quickly step in to avoid all that noise and keep the thread focused (because I thought it was very interesting).


Boy did that backfire.


I happily withdraw any accusation that your statement was shallow, that is really for Akar to comment on. If you have read it all and that is how you feel the issue is best addressed, then no worries.


Seeing as he had chosen to step out of the thread, again I thought I'd step in and nudge the discussion in a more fruitful direction in stead of it dropping right there and then. Boy did that backfire, etc...


For the respect of the sanity of this thread, it is for Akar to answer your post, not me, I don't feel anywhere near as strongly about it as he does thought I enjoyed very much reading his reasoning.

Point 3:

 necr0n wrote:
I don't get this. I really, actually, don't understand what you were annoyed by.

Grimgold discussed ITC, when Akar specifically said he addressed a non-ITC setting. I thought Grimgold had simply missed that one fact. See most of above. Though backfire etc.

I fully endorse arguing without sarcasm and emotionally laden statements, and I happily admit that I myself fail miserably at it.

For what it's worth, there is so little activity in this thread normally (i.e., 1-3 posts per day, max), that if people want to "go off on tangents" specific to ITC, there's still plenty of oxygen left in the room for other discussion (and it's interesting reading anyway).

I would suggest that if there's to be a discussion about what tiers units fall into, that it would be useful to define the criteria.

Ubiquity is an interesting and common choice, but I don't think it's useful as a metric since it's only indicative of performance.

Performance of a Role is useful, but is usually non-transferable to a broader metric since the Utility of the Role is incredibly meta dependent.

Absolute Strength/Resilience can frequently descend into a performance argument, but has the merit of being the most objective in its initial assessment. Nonetheless, metas can very much affect its relative, and therefore final assessment value.

Fun and Fluff are absolutely valid bases for expressing value, but will not likely be warmly received in a Tactics forum/thread.

Are there others I missed? What do you guys think? I suggest we could probably toss these into a multi-variable rubric and gauge the general attitude towards each of the codex options.

I'm not certain how to incorporate or control these assessments for formations, however. It feels like the formations would need their own evaluation, and that would apply weights to an Alternate Rubric for the units?

All of this would be "for love of numbers," of course. No one should seriously just try slamming a bunch of highly rated, potentially non synergistic units together, so this tier list would be a totally pointless, fun exercise.

Question, how do you unlock the full potential of Praetorians? I seem to have quite a bit of trouble with it...

Neophyte2012 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
Destroyers are boss at taking out the majority of your opponent's army, but not so much against their best stuff (Knights, Wraithknights, Deathstars, etc).

As well as anything with stealth / shrouded which gets 3+ / 2+ cover save. They have so few shots for their points.

Which is where your scoped Tomb Blades come in handy!
(assuming you brought more than the bare minimum)

Exactly. Tomb Blades and Destroyers just compliment each other stupidly well.

FireSkullz2 wrote:
Question, how do you unlock the full potential of Praetorians? I seem to have quite a bit of trouble with it...

I'm curious about this as well. They seem to be outdone by other units in everything but the Judicator formation (where you need them)

The Judicator Battalion gives them MtC, which (correct me if I'm wrong) allows them to deep strike or deploy from a Night Scythe directly into cover. Which is something, though I've never tried it as I feel that Praetorians and Destroyers have similar enough targets that I don't try to bring both.

Were I to run them I feel that they would be an offensive complement to a Canoptek Harvest, assaulting into chaff while the Wraiths hold up the things that would otherwise perforate the Praetorians.

But Destroyers can do that, too, from 24" away, and anything camping a high cover save to thwart the Destroyers can (probably) be dealt with by Tomb Blades, which a Decurion is likely to already have.

---

Another question: has anyone considered the Gauss Pylon, in order to deal with things like the War Sect? It really freakin' blows that it can't fire at ground targets at full efficiency, and that is a very understandable reason to never field it until/unless that changes. But I don't know what other options we really have for dealing with the Sect if it stays in the air, and for other lists you can throw it into their face with its 3rd edition Deep Strike protection and wish it into being something besides a paperweight that costs a quarter of your points.

Drakmord wrote:
The Judicator Battalion gives them MtC, which (correct me if I'm wrong) allows them to deep strike or deploy from a Night Scythe directly into cover. Which is something, though I've never tried it as I feel that Praetorians and Destroyers have similar enough targets that I don't try to bring both.

Were I to run them I feel that they would be an offensive complement to a Canoptek Harvest, assaulting into chaff while the Wraiths hold up the things that would otherwise perforate the Praetorians.

But Destroyers can do that, too, from 24" away, and anything camping a high cover save to thwart the Destroyers can (probably) be dealt with by Tomb Blades, which a Decurion is likely to already have.

---

Another question: has anyone considered the Gauss Pylon, in order to deal with things like the War Sect? It really freakin' blows that it can't fire at ground targets at full efficiency, and that is a very understandable reason to never field it until/unless that changes. But I don't know what other options we really have for dealing with the Sect if it stays in the air, and for other lists you can throw it into their face with its 3rd edition Deep Strike protection and wish it into being something besides a paperweight that costs a quarter of your points.

You kinda have to ignore Magnus and just go after the other DPs and taking out all the summoned daemons. Honestly running Necron Stars against Rehati War Sect is a very bad matchup, they are more mobile and can summon crap load of daemons every turn to control the board.

Definitely go after the dudes contributing the most Warp Charges for the points. It is how you neuter Magnus and then just tie him up with Wraiths.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Definitely go after the dudes contributing the most Warp Charges for the points. It is how you neuter Magnus and then just tie him up with Wraiths.

Nick's latest GT winning list has 18 base WCs, 14 of them are from Magnus + DPs. The FMCs are always up in the air, you will not get the chance to tie them up unless you get lucky and snap shot wound and he fails grounding check.

I would run a Decurion with multiple Harvests. The warriors and immortal hold down the back field objectives and send the Wraiths towards his back field to take out the brimstones and any summoned units then contest his objectives. The DPs are used mainly for summoning and shrieking. Shriek is not that good against Necrons due to LD10 unless he also rolls Doombolt or something, so basically Magnus will be his main offensive work horse. Majority of Magnus' spells are 18" range, so spread out your Wraiths units so he can only range one or a turn. Another strat is you wait for Magnus to fly up towards your line, then veil a unit of Wraiths into your back field. But then he has the Masque who can shut down the movement of at least 1 Wraith unit every turn OUCH.

Hmm, maybe there is a case for Gauss Sentry Pylons (the ones with Skyfire) in competitive after all...

 skoffs wrote:
Hmm, maybe there is a case for Gauss Sentry Pylons (the ones with Skyfire) in competitive after all...

But will they have enough targets in the meta? Magnus/Demons are the only armies using fliers/skimmers/FMC's in the metal. Nids are largely gone, no Waveserpent Spam, and no Dark Eldar. Tau have their tetras and Chaos take Dreadclaws sometimes. You can't even use Interceptor against Droppods, right?

It has the makings of a really good Spoiler list though.

The DftS made it so that you hit Jetbikes at normal BS right?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The DftS made it so that you hit Jetbikes at normal BS right?

Its still a 2 shot lascannon, not sure if its worth it. Cursed earth gives them 3++(2++ for Magnus) re-roll 1s and honestly I don't think its enough to take down Magnus, maybe a DP.