Switch Theme:

Old INDEX Necron 8th Tactica - link to new codex tactics thread in OP  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




 deltaKshatriya wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
 deltaKshatriya wrote:
I haven't been following the thread, so I'm curious what the general consensus is on Necrons.

Are they better or worse than 7th?

What units seem to really shine?

Which ones not so much?


Horribly worse, bottom tier codex.

Scarabs and vehicles are our best units, infantry is okay, but all combos/fun tricks are too cost prohibitive to pull off.


Odd. I just played a game at 35 power (approximately 1000 points) and tabled the guy. Might've been a one off. Necrons seemed pretty well rounded to me. I'm curios what specifically got worse? What'd they change that really made Necrons bottom tier?


Necrons actually do better at lower point totals as opponents cant focus fire and deny reanimation protocols as well. At higher point totals, oponents will generally have enough firepower to reliably blow away entire units in a single turn and thus make RP a fairly minor concern. In smaller games it can be more difficult to consistently accomplish this, allowing RPs to actually affect the outcome of the game. Honestly that is my biggest complaint about RP - it is much more fluffy and interesting this edition, but it scales very poorly (from very potent in small games to almost useless in large games), yet pointwise we pay for it the same regardless!

This is not the "issue" with necrons making them a low tier codex per-se, just an explanation as to why a smaller game may have felt unremarkable.

As to WHY we are struggling - there is an excellent writeup discussing it from grimgold in this forum i recommend checking out - titled something along the lines of "why necrons got 46th at the BAO"

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/09 03:08:25


 
   
Made in ca
Proud Triarch Praetorian





Could you link to that write up?

 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





 Karhedron wrote:
 skoffs wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:
The release schedule I have seen has Necrons in December so we get a shiny new Codex just in time for Christmas.
Got a link for that seen schedule?
(All the things I'd seen so far had listed only marine books coming out this year)


Yup, here it is. I can't vouch for the provenance so take with a pinch of salt.

Spoiler:

Erm, isn't this already incorrect? The CSM and Grey Knights codex comes out this week, not the 19th...
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Arachnofiend wrote:
 Karhedron wrote:
 skoffs wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:
The release schedule I have seen has Necrons in December so we get a shiny new Codex just in time for Christmas.
Got a link for that seen schedule?
(All the things I'd seen so far had listed only marine books coming out this year)


Yup, here it is. I can't vouch for the provenance so take with a pinch of salt.

Spoiler:

Erm, isn't this already incorrect? The CSM and Grey Knights codex comes out this week, not the 19th...

Perhaps they mixed up with preorders? I dunno.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Should be noted the second Destroyer Lord has the Warscythe and Phylactery as well, and that you could lose the Sentinel for another Ark or several more Scarabs.


Okay. Out of interest, do you find Phylactery useful on your Destroyer Lords?

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Wicked Canoptek Wraith



United States

 deltaKshatriya wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
 deltaKshatriya wrote:
I haven't been following the thread, so I'm curious what the general consensus is on Necrons.

Are they better or worse than 7th?

What units seem to really shine?

Which ones not so much?


Horribly worse, bottom tier codex.

Scarabs and vehicles are our best units, infantry is okay, but all combos/fun tricks are too cost prohibitive to pull off.


Odd. I just played a game at 35 power (approximately 1000 points) and tabled the guy. Might've been a one off. Necrons seemed pretty well rounded to me. I'm curios what specifically got worse? What'd they change that really made Necrons bottom tier?


Could just be who you play.
   
Made in au
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Perth

So I listen to the FLG podcasts a lot. Just listened to the chaos review, and the guys mentioned something curios.

They said in the most recent one that their gag order is now been lifted due to the codex's being available. They also hinted that the codex's were written well after the index's.

In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.

It's pure speculation ATM, but I'm hoping they are referring to playtesting the codex necrons being powerful. It doesn't make sense saying that necrons are very strong in their meta if playing off index. But if our codex is powerful and they've been playtesting that for a while......

12,000
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 vipoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Should be noted the second Destroyer Lord has the Warscythe and Phylactery as well, and that you could lose the Sentinel for another Ark or several more Scarabs.


Okay. Out of interest, do you find Phylactery useful on your Destroyer Lords?

Kinda. The moment you roll a 3 you get a Scarabs worth of wounds back, meaning it basically paid itself back in 1 turn. If the Destroyer Lord is out in the open it isn't going to help. With the Sacarb screen, it heals the few wounds he takes.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Kinda. The moment you roll a 3 you get a Scarabs worth of wounds back, meaning it basically paid itself back in 1 turn. If the Destroyer Lord is out in the open it isn't going to help. With the Sacarb screen, it heals the few wounds he takes.


Nice.

I really want to try that sort of list but sadly I don't have anywhere near enough scarabs (even if I proxy some Rippers I'll still only have about 15 bases).

Is there anything else that could work - like Wraiths or Praetorians?

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Freaky Flayed One




If you want a durable Warlord and are not banking on a Dlord for your list. Get CCB and get Toholk the Blind to give it that d3 regen. It hits on 2s the Dlord hits on 3s and it has more wounds. Just a thought.
   
Made in us
Pile of Necron Spare Parts





 skoffs wrote:
Could you link to that write up?


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/734869.page
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 vipoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Kinda. The moment you roll a 3 you get a Scarabs worth of wounds back, meaning it basically paid itself back in 1 turn. If the Destroyer Lord is out in the open it isn't going to help. With the Sacarb screen, it heals the few wounds he takes.


Nice.

I really want to try that sort of list but sadly I don't have anywhere near enough scarabs (even if I proxy some Rippers I'll still only have about 15 bases).

Is there anything else that could work - like Wraiths or Praetorians?

Hmm, only 15 bases?

I'd say make them 5 squads of 3 them, and use something quick. Are Wraiths still able to be taken in squads of one? I don't think so...

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Hmm, only 15 bases?


I can proxy about 10 more with spare bases but it's still not even half of what you used.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I'd say make them 5 squads of 3 them, and use something quick. Are Wraiths still able to be taken in squads of one? I don't think so...


No, Wraiths are minimum 3 per squad.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/09 16:26:48


 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




 Klowny wrote:
So I listen to the FLG podcasts a lot. Just listened to the chaos review, and the guys mentioned something curios.

They said in the most recent one that their gag order is now been lifted due to the codex's being available. They also hinted that the codex's were written well after the index's.

In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.

It's pure speculation ATM, but I'm hoping they are referring to playtesting the codex necrons being powerful. It doesn't make sense saying that necrons are very strong in their meta if playing off index. But if our codex is powerful and they've been playtesting that for a while......


Thanks for this info...its very interesting. I really cant imagine theyd be referring to the index list being overpowered, especially given one of the excellent datasets weve seen showing necron index being subpar comes from someone over there. But who knows. So if we really are getting a codex in the distant but not too distant future as is rumored it sure is reasonable to think theyd already be playtesting a version of it.

Honestly i am fearful if so, id hate for gw to drop an op codex on us, people have a lot of negative connotations in regards to necrons as it is, i think id rather be solidly mid tier! I dont think i can deal with another edition of "OP" whines...heck i feel like i still hear them now despite all evidence to the contrary just because RP kinda irritates people!
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 vipoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Hmm, only 15 bases?


I can proxy about 10 more with spare bases but it's still not even half of what you used.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I'd say make them 5 squads of 3 them, and use something quick. Are Wraiths still able to be taken in squads of one? I don't think so...


No, Wraiths are minimum 3 per squad.

You can probably do the empty bases and use the remaining points on Wraiths or a squad of Deathmarks I guess?

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in ca
Proud Triarch Praetorian





 Klowny wrote:
In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.
Have they ever mentioned WHY they think that?
(Like, what exactly do they think makes them borderline OP?)

 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





Propo Fol wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
So I listen to the FLG podcasts a lot. Just listened to the chaos review, and the guys mentioned something curios.

They said in the most recent one that their gag order is now been lifted due to the codex's being available. They also hinted that the codex's were written well after the index's.

In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.

It's pure speculation ATM, but I'm hoping they are referring to playtesting the codex necrons being powerful. It doesn't make sense saying that necrons are very strong in their meta if playing off index. But if our codex is powerful and they've been playtesting that for a while......


Thanks for this info...its very interesting. I really cant imagine theyd be referring to the index list being overpowered, especially given one of the excellent datasets weve seen showing necron index being subpar comes from someone over there. But who knows. So if we really are getting a codex in the distant but not too distant future as is rumored it sure is reasonable to think theyd already be playtesting a version of it.

Honestly i am fearful if so, id hate for gw to drop an op codex on us, people have a lot of negative connotations in regards to necrons as it is, i think id rather be solidly mid tier! I dont think i can deal with another edition of "OP" whines...heck i feel like i still hear them now despite all evidence to the contrary just because RP kinda irritates people!


I think you're gonna have to deal with OP whines regardless of how strong Necrons actually are. It's one of the "perks" of being a durability army, it tends to upset everyone else when your units don't just fall over like they're used to happening when they shoot at something.
   
Made in no
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





Propo Fol wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
So I listen to the FLG podcasts a lot. Just listened to the chaos review, and the guys mentioned something curios.

They said in the most recent one that their gag order is now been lifted due to the codex's being available. They also hinted that the codex's were written well after the index's.

In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.

It's pure speculation ATM, but I'm hoping they are referring to playtesting the codex necrons being powerful. It doesn't make sense saying that necrons are very strong in their meta if playing off index. But if our codex is powerful and they've been playtesting that for a while......


Thanks for this info...its very interesting. I really cant imagine theyd be referring to the index list being overpowered, especially given one of the excellent datasets weve seen showing necron index being subpar comes from someone over there. But who knows. So if we really are getting a codex in the distant but not too distant future as is rumored it sure is reasonable to think theyd already be playtesting a version of it.

Honestly i am fearful if so, id hate for gw to drop an op codex on us, people have a lot of negative connotations in regards to necrons as it is, i think id rather be solidly mid tier! I dont think i can deal with another edition of "OP" whines...heck i feel like i still hear them now despite all evidence to the contrary just because RP kinda irritates people!


Nevertheless I have the impression Reece wants to convey that Necrons are a very strong army, but they need to be played right, they're a "finesse army". In the competitive meta this no longer holds true, but who knows if that was all there was to what they now said.

   
Made in au
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Perth

torblind wrote:
Propo Fol wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
So I listen to the FLG podcasts a lot. Just listened to the chaos review, and the guys mentioned something curios.

They said in the most recent one that their gag order is now been lifted due to the codex's being available. They also hinted that the codex's were written well after the index's.

In previous times they have mentioned that in their meta, they think necrons are very powerful, maybe bordering on a bit too powerful.

It's pure speculation ATM, but I'm hoping they are referring to playtesting the codex necrons being powerful. It doesn't make sense saying that necrons are very strong in their meta if playing off index. But if our codex is powerful and they've been playtesting that for a while......


Thanks for this info...its very interesting. I really cant imagine theyd be referring to the index list being overpowered, especially given one of the excellent datasets weve seen showing necron index being subpar comes from someone over there. But who knows. So if we really are getting a codex in the distant but not too distant future as is rumored it sure is reasonable to think theyd already be playtesting a version of it.

Honestly i am fearful if so, id hate for gw to drop an op codex on us, people have a lot of negative connotations in regards to necrons as it is, i think id rather be solidly mid tier! I dont think i can deal with another edition of "OP" whines...heck i feel like i still hear them now despite all evidence to the contrary just because RP kinda irritates people!


Nevertheless I have the impression Reece wants to convey that Necrons are a very strong army, but they need to be played right, they're a "finesse army". In the competitive meta this no longer holds true, but who knows if that was all there was to what they now said.



He did mention exactly that lol.

12,000
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You can probably do the empty bases and use the remaining points on Wraiths or a squad of Deathmarks I guess?


Do either of these lists look any good?

List 1
Spoiler:
Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe, Phylactery - 150
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Wraiths - 114
5 Scarabs - 65
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe - 135
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Patrol Detachment
Overlord w/ Voidblade - 107
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
1500pts (5 CP)


List 2
Spoiler:
Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe, Phylactery - 150
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe - 135
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225


(I'm doing 1500pt lists because that's what we usually play in my group.)

The main difference is that List 1 has an Overlord and Tesla Immortal squad, whilst List 2 has a third Heavy Destroyer squad (I don't own any Doomsday Arks) and more scarabs. List 2 is probably truer to your list but I thought I might as well get your opinion anyway.

If you're wondering, I left Phylactery off one Destroyer Lord just to differentiate them a bit mechanically (my favourite one gets the extra regeneration ).

Anyway, can I ask how you play your list? Do you send the Destroyer Lords and their Scarab retinues up separate flanks or do they go together up the middle or such? Do you try to engage as many units in combat as possible or do you try to surround and eliminate a few units before moving on?

Oh, one other thing - since I'm running Destroyers would you recommend keeping them with the Destroyer Lords as they advance (to get their buff), or keeping them back (where they'll be less exposed to enemy fire)?


You've been a great help, by the way. I've been looking for ages for a way to run my Destroyer Lords without just having them sit next to a unit or two of Destroyers. This has made me enthusiastic about playing Necrons again so thanks for that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/09 21:28:28


 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 vipoid wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You can probably do the empty bases and use the remaining points on Wraiths or a squad of Deathmarks I guess?


Do either of these lists look any good?

List 1
Spoiler:
Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe, Phylactery - 150
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Wraiths - 114
5 Scarabs - 65
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe - 135
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Patrol Detachment
Overlord w/ Voidblade - 107
10 Immortals w/ Tesla
1500pts (5 CP)


List 2
Spoiler:
Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe, Phylactery - 150
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Wraiths - 114
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225

Outrider Detachment
Destroyer Lord w/ Warscythe - 135
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Scarabs - 39
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225
3 Heavy Destroyers - 225


(I'm doing 1500pt lists because that's what we usually play in my group.)

The main difference is that List 1 has an Overlord and Tesla Immortal squad, whilst List 2 has a third Heavy Destroyer squad (I don't own any Doomsday Arks) and more scarabs. List 2 is probably truer to your list but I thought I might as well get your opinion anyway.

If you're wondering, I left Phylactery off one Destroyer Lord just to differentiate them a bit mechanically (my favourite one gets the extra regeneration ).

Anyway, can I ask how you play your list? Do you send the Destroyer Lords and their Scarab retinues up separate flanks or do they go together up the middle or such? Do you try to engage as many units in combat as possible or do you try to surround and eliminate a few units before moving on?

Oh, one other thing - since I'm running Destroyers would you recommend keeping them with the Destroyer Lords as they advance (to get their buff), or keeping them back (where they'll be less exposed to enemy fire)?


You've been a great help, by the way. I've been looking for ages for a way to run my Destroyer Lords without just having them sit next to a unit or two of Destroyers. This has made me enthusiastic about playing Necrons again so thanks for that.

I might suggest list one because it has more tools, but I would lean towards using list two myself, as it is closer to the one I have. I'd suggest using List 1, and make changes as you see fit when you play a few games,

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

Before you go with an Outrider Detachment, you may want to check on some of the changes coming in the new Chapter Approved book due in December.

Spoiler:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/09 22:11:38


'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 Ghaz wrote:
Before you go with an Outrider Detachment, you may want to check on some of the changes coming in the new Chapter Approved book due in December.

Spoiler:


That's fine. If the army works then I'll nibble my opponents off the objectives. If not, I'll use my standard army with 4 full units of Immortals.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Ghaz wrote:
Before you go with an Outrider Detachment, you may want to check on some of the changes coming in the new Chapter Approved book due in December.

Spoiler:

Changes nothing, basically.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Freaky Flayed One




Changes nothing and confirms we are not getting a dex this year. The night will be long and full of terrors...
   
Made in us
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker





Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high

 deltaKshatriya wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
 deltaKshatriya wrote:
I haven't been following the thread, so I'm curious what the general consensus is on Necrons.

Are they better or worse than 7th?

What units seem to really shine?

Which ones not so much?


Horribly worse, bottom tier codex.

Scarabs and vehicles are our best units, infantry is okay, but all combos/fun tricks are too cost prohibitive to pull off.


Odd. I just played a game at 35 power (approximately 1000 points) and tabled the guy. Might've been a one off. Necrons seemed pretty well rounded to me. I'm curios what specifically got worse? What'd they change that really made Necrons bottom tier?



IMO the reason we struggle is the meta has shifted violently to the strongest possible alpha strike....first turn assaults, massive board wiping shooting
We've always been an mid range shooting attrition army. Keep the enemy at arms length, and shoot them with decent shooting until only we're still standing. We just don't fit well right now in meta...that...and most of our stuff is wildly overpriced for what it brings to the table.

Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts

MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum. 
   
Made in au
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Perth

 iGuy91 wrote:
 deltaKshatriya wrote:
 Klowny wrote:
 deltaKshatriya wrote:
I haven't been following the thread, so I'm curious what the general consensus is on Necrons.

Are they better or worse than 7th?

What units seem to really shine?

Which ones not so much?


Horribly worse, bottom tier codex.

Scarabs and vehicles are our best units, infantry is okay, but all combos/fun tricks are too cost prohibitive to pull off.


Odd. I just played a game at 35 power (approximately 1000 points) and tabled the guy. Might've been a one off. Necrons seemed pretty well rounded to me. I'm curios what specifically got worse? What'd they change that really made Necrons bottom tier?



IMO the reason we struggle is the meta has shifted violently to the strongest possible alpha strike....first turn assaults, massive board wiping shooting
We've always been an mid range shooting attrition army. Keep the enemy at arms length, and shoot them with decent shooting until only we're still standing. We just don't fit well right now in meta...that...and most of our stuff is wildly overpriced for what it brings to the table.


We have a BRUTAL alpha strike if you build it right.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also, making whoever finishes deploying first gets +1 to their roll for who goes first means MSU is better than it was before, and reducing your drops to the lowest as possible isnt as necessary now.

Obsec is good sure, but I still dont think it warrants warriors. Immortals yes, but warriors no.

Finally, obsec isnt htat important if you have scarabs surrounding the objective preventing them from getting on it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/10 02:02:28


12,000
 
   
Made in no
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





Well, now we must bring troops to counter enemies bringing troops, further weakening our position
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Some of our lack of power this edition I feel is due to how our units interact with each other. Like Destroyers for example. If you have a QS heavy list along with destroyers, your opponent is going to focus all of their high damage weapons on the destroyers and will remove them quicky instead of wasting high damage shots on QS. On the flip side if you do not have alot of QS in a lost your opponent is still going to use all the higj d weapons on the destroyers.
   
Made in au
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Perth

Claas wrote:
Some of our lack of power this edition I feel is due to how our units interact with each other. Like Destroyers for example. If you have a QS heavy list along with destroyers, your opponent is going to focus all of their high damage weapons on the destroyers and will remove them quicky instead of wasting high damage shots on QS. On the flip side if you do not have alot of QS in a lost your opponent is still going to use all the higj d weapons on the destroyers.


Destroyers sit in this weird spot, they are very good at what they do if you have a maxed squad with a D/lord around, but also are fragile.

Realistically, we now dont look to T values for safety anymore, you focus on the amount of wounds a model has. 3 base is okay against infantry, but there is a plethora of D6 damage weapons that will 1-shot a destroyer.... these are also easily spammable. Just not okay.

Tomb blades are only slightly better due to having access to an invuln, bigger squad sizes and better movement, but again are expensive.

Our units interact well with each other, we are just paying too much for the interactions (or lack thereof if RP is bypassed). Either RP needs buffing, which I cant see happening due to the outcry from the playerbase as a whole thinking it will make us too OP, or our points need dramatic reductions across the board. The latter is much more likely to happen, and while stuff wont go back to 7th ed cost levels, it needs to get better.

500 points for 9 maxed TB is just way too much, 420 for 20 flayed ones is laughable, Destroyers need much attention.

Like grim said in the other post, we need alot more mobility (cheaply) and damage if we are to stay at our current point cost. By the looks of it CP are going to be very usefull for stratagems once the codexes are out, and we wont have access to many at our current points cost, so we will need alot more bang for our buck.

12,000
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: