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.
2017/06/08 12:36:51
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
My initial excitement for necrons has dipped so much after watching battle reports. RP is not great but combined with low damage output overall my hope for competitive necrons is waning.
Yeah, the early reports are pretty bleak. I saw one which was necrons vs ad mech. Those Neutron Blasters just melted the destroyers, monolith and did a number on the warriors as well, and they were using them weaker than they have should have. They did forget command points, but it probably wouldn't have mattered.
Report is this one.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 12:41:50
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2017/06/08 12:44:56
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
Necrons had amazing internal balance in 7th, with the signature durability to make up for their lack of (insert weakness here). And even then, in 7th we had mobility (Night Scythes, teleporting, wraiths, tomb blades, JSJ destroyers, CCBs), and we had decent firepower (cheap, durable destroyers with a formation and tons of gauss).
Now we are no more durable than anyone else, and our only hard hitting units are too expensive. We also lost mobility (Necrons might as well not have transports), and a lot of our cool wargear is now gone. And internal balance? Hah. 3 A Barges is better than an Obelisk any day of the week, and the monolith and T Vault are still gak. The flyers are subpar, praetorians are inferior to wraiths again, Spyders are borderline useless, and half of our named characters still won't see the light of day (I won't even bring up the CCB and the atrocity there of). We have been forced into infantry blobs with a few particular support characters and maybe a few elite units and vehicles. Half our book might as well not exist.
But that's just my 2 cents for right now.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 12:45:57
40k:
8th Edtion: 9405 pts - Varantekh Dynasty
2017/06/08 12:45:52
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
Immortal spam funnily enough seems like the most damaging build. S5 AP-2 or Tesla is very strong, and they're still cheap enough to be spammed without it feeling too limiting. For the price of one Destroyer, you can get 3, nearly 4 Immortals. Sure, its slightly worse AP and they're slower, but the damage about equals out at long range and the Immortals smoke them with Rapid Fire.
I'm gonna try Scarab/Immortal/Night Scythe/Heavy Destroyers next. Not giving up, just feeling... Less enthused than previously. Still have my AoS army at least.
Everything else kind of ranges from "okay" to "bad"
(I'm still not sure if Flayed Ones fit into the above list)
How Night Scythe? Unless I'm missing some key thing that makes them good, well, they're not good.
For the price, they're probably our best vehicle. Good shooting, good defenses, can't be locked down. Not... the most feared unit in the game, but pretty ok. Doubling the shots was a huge buff as was starting on the table and the defense buff.
Ghost Arks with 10 Warriors don't seem too bad. I want to try them more.
Now that I think of it, doomsday arks are probably our best combat vehicle. For only 203 points you get a T6 14W quantum shielded vehicle with a gun that hurts most vehicles on a 3+, can deal multiple wounds and comes with some anti-infantry weapons. Its slightly more cost effective than destroyers. Unlike last edition, its weaker profile is actually somewhat decent.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 15:09:27
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
Requizen wrote: Ghost Arks with 10 Warriors don't seem too bad. I want to try them more.
If they fix the entry to give them open topped (to allow the occupants to fire out), then yes, I'd be interested, too. But as is *shrug*.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Now that I think of it, doomsday arks are probably our best combat vehicle.
For only 203 points you get a T6 14W quantum shielded vehicle with a gun that hurts most vehicles on a 3+, can deal multiple wounds and comes with some anti-infantry weapons.
Its slightly more cost effective than destroyers.
Still not sure on this one, myself.
Doomsday seems like it's better against key big things, but the equivalent points in Heavy D's can target more things at once.
I wanna see the mathhammer on it again.
Both on offence and durability.
Everything else kind of ranges from "okay" to "bad"
(I'm still not sure if Flayed Ones fit into the above list)
How Night Scythe? Unless I'm missing some key thing that makes them good, well, they're not good.
For the price, they're probably our best vehicle. Good shooting, good defenses, can't be locked down. Not... the most feared unit in the game, but pretty ok. Doubling the shots was a huge buff as was starting on the table and the defense buff.
Ghost Arks with 10 Warriors don't seem too bad. I want to try them more.
But it's a glorified A Barge. For 20ish points cheaper, you could get an A Barge with not as fast, but over all better maneuverability, and more Tesla Shots. And Quantum Shielding. The Hard to Hit rule really does not do a whole lot.
And 10 warriors in a ghost ark is wasting points on 10 warriors. They won't utilize RP due to squad size, and they can't shoot out of it. Ghost arks and Night Scythes aren't realistically transports anymore.
Requizen wrote: Ghost Arks with 10 Warriors don't seem too bad. I want to try them more.
If they fix the entry to give them open topped (to allow the occupants to fire out), then yes, I'd be interested, too. But as is *shrug*.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Now that I think of it, doomsday arks are probably our best combat vehicle. For only 203 points you get a T6 14W quantum shielded vehicle with a gun that hurts most vehicles on a 3+, can deal multiple wounds and comes with some anti-infantry weapons. Its slightly more cost effective than destroyers.
Still not sure on this one, myself. Doomsday seems like it's better against key big things, but the equivalent points in Heavy D's can target more things at once. I wanna see the mathhammer on it again. Both on offence and durability.
But why would you want to split targets with Heavy Ds? Most vehicles have 6+ wounds, so its going to take multiple heavies to destroy one vehicle. Spitting fire just isn't efficient. The equivalent points of heavies is actually 2. A 3rd one is 22 points more expensive than a D ark. You can at most deal 18 damage with a trio. Which isn't bad, mind you.
However, with a D ark you can deal at most - 9 damage with a mobile main gun + 10 damage from the flayers (long) / 20 damage (short) = 19-29 damage or 18 damage with a stationary main + 10 damage from the flayers (long) / 20 damage (short) = 28-38 damage You can deal more potential damage with the ark than the destroyers at relatively less points, complete with living metal, QS, higher toughness and even more wounds. The only real downsides are that it suffers a -1 to hit if it moves with the main gun and that it has a 4+ save, and doesn't quite perform as well against heavy armor saves due to the poor pen stat on the mobile gun.
That's not to say destroyers are terrible. You do have a higher chance of hitting with them, they benefit from the D Lord buff and they have higher pen. Its just that they aren't quite as cost effective as the d ark, which can deal greater potential damage.
I would actually field both destroyers and the d ark, as they both cover each other's weaknesses; the d ark is relatively tougher and has better anti-infantry capabilities and decent anti-armor capabilities, whilst the destroyers are more accurate, buffable, mobile and can deal with heavy armor a little better.
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 15:33:26
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Now that I think of it, doomsday arks are probably our best combat vehicle.
For only 203 points you get a T6 14W quantum shielded vehicle with a gun that hurts most vehicles on a 3+, can deal multiple wounds and comes with some anti-infantry weapons.
Its slightly more cost effective than destroyers.
Unlike last edition, its weaker profile is actually somewhat decent.
I agree. I'm tempted to try them over heavy destroyers
Both pretty close equivalent in points, both look like pretty decent damage "formations" with accompanying force multipliers.
Which one works out best for offensive output? (and durability, too)
Could probably give the Destroyer Lord a Warscythe for even closer point equivalency, but his wound reroll ability only applies in the shooting phase, so I like the idea of keeping that applicable to him.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 15:39:36
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Now that I think of it, doomsday arks are probably our best combat vehicle.
For only 203 points you get a T6 14W quantum shielded vehicle with a gun that hurts most vehicles on a 3+, can deal multiple wounds and comes with some anti-infantry weapons.
Its slightly more cost effective than destroyers.
Unlike last edition, its weaker profile is actually somewhat decent.
I agree. I'm tempted to try them over heavy destroyers
Me too, mines getting painted up now.
That coupled with a stalker? Two lots of long range high strength that gives destroyers reroll to the ark? Yes please
Klowny wrote: twin arks and a stalker cheaper than 6 HD? I like this
That's 6 HDs + D.Lord.
(could always drop him for an additional 2 HDs (bumps price up to 600, still relatively close to the 2xDDA + HGC Stalker), but maybe rerolling 1s to wound on the other 6 might be the better investment? Someone would need to crunch the numbers)
Both pretty close equivalent in points, both look like pretty decent damage "formations" with accompanying force multipliers.
Which one works out best for offensive output? (and durability, too)
Well, in terms of durability the Doomsdays are probably better due to the sheer amount of wounds. You're looking at 28 wounds as opposed to 18. in terms of potential damage once again the dooms days have more, as you're looking at most something like 76 damage + 12 from the heavy gauss, as opposed to 36 potentional damage. However, keep in mind that the heavy D's are all carrying around heavy gauss, which would mean that most of that damage will get through in practice, especially if targeting a vehicle. The flayers, at least, can be used effectively against infantry which does give the D arks a bit of an edge.
In terms of offensive output though, against a vehicle - Both formations wound on a 3+ (most vehicles have T6-T7 nowadays. Against T8 the destroyers fair better UNLESS the D Ark is immobile) Assuming immobile - The D Arks can deal up to 36 wounds + 12 from the THGC. Armor is irrevelent due to -5 pen Assuming mobile - The D arks can deal up to 18 + 12. Armor will affect damage output the Arks benefit from rerolls in all cases.
Destroyers don't care if mobile or not, so it will always be a max potential of 36 wounds. They only get rerolls in case of a 1, but they also get rerolls to wound in case of a one, which does mean that more of the 36 wounds get through. Slightly less armor pen, but then again it doesn't matter because most targets will have a 3+ save.
So its a toss up. If you can keep them still D Arks + stalker slightly outdamages the destroyers against heavy targets. If not the destroyers fair better against vehicles. Keep in mind though that in all cases, immobile or not, the D arks will always have better anti-infantry capability due to the flayers and have a greater wound pool. Destroyers + lord are better in cc though, but why would you want them there? Once again, I would actually field both as they compliment each other.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/06/08 15:52:58
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2017/06/08 16:00:44
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
I've played 3 games and I've won three games, none of them have been cakewalks but I've never felt outmatched. Still the plural of anecdote isn't data, so I'm willing to accept that my experiences might not be typical. It's weird being in the minority, but I accept my opinions are less likely to be true because of that.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2017/06/08 16:05:22
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
Grimgold wrote: I've played 3 games and I've won three games, none of them have been cakewalks but I've never felt outmatched. Still the plural of anecdote isn't data, so I'm willing to accept that my experiences might not be typical. It's weird being in the minority, but I accept my opinions are less likely to be true because of that.
Lists and opponents? I would like some good news.
2017/06/08 16:50:44
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
9*3 Scarabs ahs Shield and annoying melee force / objetive grapbbers and so on. You know what our little bugs do ;-).
30 Immortals with Testla. Too good to pass on. This is my "mass" shooting.
Anakyr (+1 Attack Aura and buff for Immortals of +1 shooting)
Overlord with Scythe (also buff + shooting)
Orikan (later Melee monster, but mostly for 5+ save and buff on RP)
5 Destroyers + Heavy Destroyer: 6 Models with many wounds, so I am hoping on RP nd saves here. They will follow Orikan behind the Immortals and the Scarabs.
3* Heavy Destroyers: Will sit in cover on an objective. Hopefolly save....
My biggest concern is my missing melee power and that I ahve no way to keep the destroyers alive. As opponent I would target them as quick as possible, becaue the other models of the army iwll not mean much trouble.
So I am also thinking on taking 2 Doomsday Arcs + Stalker. Then I have one large infantry Bubble with my HQs (and buffs) and the vehicles that just stay back and shoot as long as posisble.
Just how requisite IS a D. Lord for Destroyer shooting?
Is rerolling 1s to wound worth the 142 points?
If so, should he go with regulars or Heavies? (if you have separate Fast and Heavy slot units... though I guess you could space them out like:
.........................Des...........................................
....HDs....D.L........................................Enemy....
.........................Des...........................................
So he can still buff them both).
Yes, he's a "fast combat guy", but sticking him with anything else kinda feels like a waste of his only buff.
2017/06/08 17:28:28
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
Grimgold wrote: I've played 3 games and I've won three games, none of them have been cakewalks but I've never felt outmatched. Still the plural of anecdote isn't data, so I'm willing to accept that my experiences might not be typical. It's weird being in the minority, but I accept my opinions are less likely to be true because of that.
Lists and opponents? I would like some good news.
Blood angels and super annoying tau with this list:
As I said none of them were cakewalks, but I didn't feel outmanned in any of the battles. Also Reece from FLG dropped by to comment on the second list after I commented on Frankie's list from that batrep, I might have been a tad over the top (I said there was a better chance of the game gettign called on account of earhtquake than frankie reaching Reece's backline), but he was super cool.
The Tau was so frustrating I didn't bother taking pictures or notes, I beat him 7 to 4 on points but the game got called before I could finish him off. The dark angels brought a mix of different units trying things out, so might not have been the best list possible for dark angels, it was actually the most enjoyable as there was a lot of back and fourth. No pictures of that one as it was using my house terrain, which is not great.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
2017/06/08 17:39:42
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
skoffs wrote: Hmm, I wonder how equivalent points would fare without their force multipliers?
8 HDs = 600 (no rerolling 1s to wound)
3 DDAs = 606 (no rerolling 1s to hit)
(a little over a quarter of your points is not a ridiculous number to spend on the heavy slot, right?)
Put a Lord/Cryptek with the 3 DDAs and you can field them as a Spearhead Detachment to get an Extra CP. 700pts or less doesn't sound to bad for 3 high-damage high-AP models.
Could try DS them via the Deceiver (if you field one).you get lucky with his DS rolls. 3 DDA behind my enemies units does not sound like a fun time for my enemy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 17:41:34
skoffs wrote: Hmm, I wonder how equivalent points would fare without their force multipliers?
8 HDs = 600 (no rerolling 1s to wound)
3 DDAs = 606 (no rerolling 1s to hit)
(a little over a quarter of your points is not a ridiculous number to spend on the heavy slot, right?)
The DDA still outperform the HDs in term of wounds and potential damage. Its also overkill
Alright, quick notes about the HD vs DArk conversation since I have meetings and can't totally catch up:
-Each Ark averages 2 shots per big gun since they're D3. Comparing max damage to max damage is not average
-Moving makes the big gun trash. Even with the stalker to reroll 1s, you're a 200 point model that's getting a couple shots on 4s, and that's bad.
-The damage is only "higher" than equivalent points of HDs if you have the Flayers in range
The game is objective based. You can reasonably expect there to be one in your DZ, but if you're sitting back, your Flayers won't be in range for a good portion of the game I'd wager. If you move up, the Destroyers are better since their guns don't suck on the move. They also are better in combat. And if you get charged and want to fall back and shoot, the DArk's gun sucks again.
On a "firing range", the DArks are probably better. In practicality, it's a lot closer.
skoffs wrote: Just how requisite IS a D. Lord for Destroyer shooting? Is rerolling 1s to wound worth the 142 points? If so, should he go with regulars or Heavies? (if you have separate Fast and Heavy slot units... though I guess you could space them out like: .........................Des........................................... ....HDs....D.L........................................Enemy.... .........................Des...........................................
So he can still buff them both).
Yes, he's a "fast combat guy", but sticking him with anything else kinda feels like a waste of his only buff.
Honestly, its not absolutely mandatory, but its nice to have because it might turn a disaster into victory. I think I said somewhere before in this thread that if you take a D Lord you should take destroyers, but you don't really have to take a D Lord if you're taking destroyers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/08 17:44:01
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2017/06/08 17:43:56
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
Grimgold wrote: I've played 3 games and I've won three games, none of them have been cakewalks but I've never felt outmatched. Still the plural of anecdote isn't data, so I'm willing to accept that my experiences might not be typical. It's weird being in the minority, but I accept my opinions are less likely to be true because of that.
Lists and opponents? I would like some good news.
Blood angels and super annoying tau with this list:
As I said none of them were cakewalks, but I didn't feel outmanned in any of the battles. Also Reece from FLG dropped by to comment on the second list after I commented on Frankie's list from that batrep, I might have been a tad over the top (I said there was a better chance of the game gettign called on account of earhtquake than frankie reaching Reece's backline), but he was super cool.
The Tau was so frustrating I didn't bother taking pictures or notes, I beat him 7 to 4 on points but the game got called before I could finish him off. The dark angels brought a mix of different units trying things out, so might not have been the best list possible for dark angels, it was actually the most enjoyable as there was a lot of back and fourth. No pictures of that one as it was using my house terrain, which is not great.
Same link twice
2017/06/08 17:48:51
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
skoffs wrote: Hmm, I wonder how equivalent points would fare without their force multipliers?
8 HDs = 600 (no rerolling 1s to wound)
3 DDAs = 606 (no rerolling 1s to hit)
(a little over a quarter of your points is not a ridiculous number to spend on the heavy slot, right?)
The DDA still outperform the HDs in term of wounds and potential damage. Its also overkill
Alright, quick notes about the HD vs DArk conversation since I have meetings and can't totally catch up:
-Each Ark averages 2 shots per big gun since they're D3. Comparing max damage to max damage is not average
-Moving makes the big gun trash. Even with the stalker to reroll 1s, you're a 200 point model that's getting a couple shots on 4s, and that's bad.
-The damage is only "higher" than equivalent points of HDs if you have the Flayers in range
The game is objective based. You can reasonably expect there to be one in your DZ, but if you're sitting back, your Flayers won't be in range for a good portion of the game I'd wager. If you move up, the Destroyers are better since their guns don't suck on the move. They also are better in combat. And if you get charged and want to fall back and shoot, the DArk's gun sucks again.
On a "firing range", the DArks are probably better. In practicality, it's a lot closer.
The main isn't trash on the move though. Its still wounding most vehicles on a 3+. What does get affected is the pen (-2, reduces most vehicle saves to 5+), damage (D3, not terrible) and accuracy (yeah, 4+ isn't great)
Its not amazing, but its not terrible either.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2017/06/08 17:50:59
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
8 HDs
vs
6 HDs + D.L
vs
3 DDAs vs
2 DDAs + HGC Stalker
They're all close to the same cost.
I honestly can't tell what setup would be the scariest to play against.
If we were going to mix them (assuming that would be the best option for a TAC build), what would be the best combo of units? (say for around 500-600 points)
2017/06/08 17:54:01
Subject: New Necron Tactica Thread - 8th ed. leak discussion pg.25 / new stats mathhammer pg.29
skoffs wrote: Hmm, I wonder how equivalent points would fare without their force multipliers?
8 HDs = 600 (no rerolling 1s to wound)
3 DDAs = 606 (no rerolling 1s to hit)
(a little over a quarter of your points is not a ridiculous number to spend on the heavy slot, right?)
The DDA still outperform the HDs in term of wounds and potential damage. Its also overkill
Alright, quick notes about the HD vs DArk conversation since I have meetings and can't totally catch up:
-Each Ark averages 2 shots per big gun since they're D3. Comparing max damage to max damage is not average
-Moving makes the big gun trash. Even with the stalker to reroll 1s, you're a 200 point model that's getting a couple shots on 4s, and that's bad.
-The damage is only "higher" than equivalent points of HDs if you have the Flayers in range
The game is objective based. You can reasonably expect there to be one in your DZ, but if you're sitting back, your Flayers won't be in range for a good portion of the game I'd wager. If you move up, the Destroyers are better since their guns don't suck on the move. They also are better in combat. And if you get charged and want to fall back and shoot, the DArk's gun sucks again.
On a "firing range", the DArks are probably better. In practicality, it's a lot closer.
The main isn't trash on the move though. Its still wounding most vehicles on a 3+. What does get affected is the pen (-2, reduces most vehicle saves to 5+), damage (D3, not terrible) and accuracy (yeah, 4+ isn't great)
Its not amazing, but its not terrible either.
A 200 point gun (because let's face it, the big gun is the only one we really care about) that averages 2 shots that hit on 4s isn't good. At all. When it sits still it's great, but hitting on 4s is bad. Look at the Monolith - the Particle Whip is nearly the same (slightly weaker but double the max shots, triple the average), and it hits on 4s. Everyone agrees it's not worth taking.
~4100
~1660
12,000 
