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.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

I really just don't expect Necrons to be that bad. Especially since 8e seems to really be favoring infantry hordes, and that just isn't something Necrons do if they want to field anything other than Warriors.

Necrons aren't going to be OP unless your own list is critically under-supplied with dakka (in which case you're also going to have problems with 'Nids, Guard, and Orks) or you're really bad at focusing fire (in which case you might have a problem with superheavy lists, and all the wound regeneration that AdMech can bring).

Both of those are problems that can generally be corrected by optimizing your list and putting some thought into making your shots count.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

Ehh, i don't think were that bad. We've always excelled at killing elite armies, with our high quality, but low quantity attacks. We can still do this, and have gotten even better at it. Our basic weapons will shred marines, especially in the number of shots that will be going down range, and we can also obliterate them in CC with 1st turn Scytheguard charges striking first being a thing now. Seriously, our CC has been given an enormous buff, with most of our CC being super mobile, and the rest being able to deepstrike/be moved about the board by other units very faste. Our tesla is back to being strong again, and our vehicles are now hilariously tough to crack compared to what they used to be.

Sure some stuff has taken a nerf (FO and TB) due to being very expensive, but overall the majority of our index has been buffed.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

I would actually be really interested to see what that tier list shakes out to be, and his logic behind it, because you rarely learn something from people you agree with.

Also, everyone else is starting their 8th ed threads, why not make this one ours. There is something amusing about taking over a complaint thread and making it our place to have a good discussion of the 8th ed changes.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

 Klowny wrote:

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

I agree with your comments - in fact, I think you are kind of agreeing? Not sure.

Crons are good, but they are no where near to being "a bit too good for their points". There are a lot of inherent limitations built into the army.
(even our "beatstick" CCB, is no where near as tough as a abbadon, or a swarmlord - we have nothing in that class).

Oh, and as a fellow Necron enthusiast - did you notice our glorious monliths, while they can now shoot, sadly - its at BS3


Basically, crons are decent, have similar strengths and weaknesses - but are no means OP or broken.



Going to take some clever play and positioning to get the most of them.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

that and humans like to rank stuff, even if the differance between armies is 0.00000001% people'll still rank em by that differance

 ross-128 wrote:
I really just don't expect Necrons to be that bad. Especially since 8e seems to really be favoring infantry hordes, and that just isn't something Necrons do .

Lol, you would be supersized how many necron players do just that and have been doing that since they started their army years ago.

davethepak wrote:

 Klowny wrote:

davethepak wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

You are right; marines and their variants will always be top tier - partially because they are "the good guys", partially because well...we are humans and the get good stuff, and lastly - they have the most ally options in matched play (xenos are very limited due to faction keyword requirements for matched play).

Necrons however? not worried about them. They have a LOT of expensive models, warriors can only do so much, their HQ choices, while force multipliers are not actually that dangerous, and they have a strong lack of diversity of long range weapon options (build a list or two, you will see - my crons are very jealous of my marines - which only got better this edition).

Having looked over most of the indexes - some things stand out here and there - but overall its looking a lot better.

Of course, some people will become fixated with the RP - which is only mildly better than 6th (and worse than 7th), and lose site of how to beat the other player.

But that is the key to this game - getting in the mind of your opponent - I have won many games that way - (as tau in 5th, no less) you don't have to beat the other army, you just have to instill defeat in the other player.

Anrakyr is a terrifying force multiplier and has a S8 warscythe.....

D/Lord is a good force multiplier and will still be a good beatstick.

CCB is a very good force multiplier and will be a good beatstick, although it doesn't synergise well with much at all.

Orikan synergises incredibly well with the army, gives out really good buffs, is a beast in CC once super sayain.

Stalker is nasty, heavy weapons hitting on 3's rerolling 1's? Yes please.

Monolith will be beastly, puts out a lot of dakka.

HD's backed by a D/Lord can do lots of damage.

We have never had good long range weaponry, we do now. Yes they are expensive, but you can get good synergising combos off for relatively cheap (unsure how we compare to other armies). And we never had the ability to put meltas in our basic squads, or have heavy weaponry. We have always had tools for almost every situation, but you needed to build around that idea to have it work.

Our whole shtick was close range brutal shooting, which is still around. Why would they give us long range diversity in 8th, after not having it in any other edition?

I agree with your comments - in fact, I think you are kind of agreeing? Not sure.

Crons are good, but they are no where near to being "a bit too good for their points". There are a lot of inherent limitations built into the army.
(even our "beatstick" CCB, is no where near as tough as a abbadon, or a swarmlord - we have nothing in that class).

Oh, and as a fellow Necron enthusiast - did you notice our glorious monliths, while they can now shoot, sadly - its at BS3


Basically, crons are decent, have similar strengths and weaknesses - but are no means OP or broken.



Going to take some clever play and positioning to get the most of them.

Haha, I'm not sure whats going on I thought you were saying that we were "not good for our points" rather than "a bit too good for our points". Both statements I think are false.

I feel we are pretty well balanced. Sure we dont have any crazy CC HQ's like abbadon or a swarmlord, but we never have, and its not how our army plays. Comparing our HQ's to them is redundant. Swarmlord is crazy in CC, but our shooting is 1000x above theirs. Its a trade off we have to make to have our army play our way.

I personally dont see many armies that are broken OP? The top has been brought down and the bottom up, each army seems fairly even overall. As you said, there are a lot of inherent limitations built into every army.

Tyranids are terrifying, but I like the meta changing.

And yea, the monolith hits on 4's base, 3 with a stalker (I think the way they have changed it is vastly improved its useability). But it can gate in troops, is a solid brick that the army can hide behind, does mortal wounds when charged on top of all its overwatch etc etc. I cannot wait to use it, its 10000000000000000 times better than it was in 7th.

Aside from some first turn shenanigans Necrons are a very slow army with mostly very short range in an edition where everything is moving very fast and assault can be devastating . The game is 5 turns long so many necrons will being playing for objectives from turn one. A good player will take out fast or ranged units quickly and criple necrons ability to fight back.

Everyones talking like you have to kill the whole a unit of 20 warriors or don't bother. Knocking them down a few models is still going to help your CC mowers get close and wipe them. If they are close enough to get bonuses from characters it'll leave those characters extremely vulnerable to consolidation moves.

An exclusive picture on how a 8E Necron army will look:

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
An exclusive picture on how a 8E Necron army will look:

Cant exalt this enough. How did you do it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nebulas1 wrote:
Aside from some first turn shenanigans Necrons are a very slow army with mostly very short range in an edition where everything is moving very fast and assault can be devastating . The game is 5 turns long so many necrons will being playing for objectives from turn one. A good player will take out fast or ranged units quickly and criple necrons ability to fight back.

Everyones talking like you have to kill the whole a unit of 20 warriors or don't bother. Knocking them down a few models is still going to help your CC mowers get close and wipe them. If they are close enough to get bonuses from characters it'll leave those characters extremely vulnerable to consolidation moves.

All our fast units have gone up in durability. 2W praets, 3 wound wraiths, 3 wound destroyers. The maths done already has a unit of 3 wraiths being the most resilient thing in our army.... more than the 20w monolith.

Also if everything is so fast, wont have to worry about our short range then.

7th ed speed cron's was a very viable choice.

Nothing is different in 8th.

I dont think we are OP, nor nerfed into the ground. We look pretty balanced at the outset.

 Klowny wrote:

Cant exalt this enough. How did you do it?

So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yup. Seems a bit... odd. But hey, I'm not complaining!

 Freddy Kruger wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yup. Seems a bit... odd. But hey, I'm not complaining!

It actually makes a lot of sense if you think of it as the shield from Dune; it blocks powerful attacks but isn't effective against slower, weaker attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yeah. So use missile launchers and plasma instead.

 WarbossDakka wrote:
As bad as it may seem, and as much I dislike Necrons, I have to say this isn't nearly as bad as 7th. In 7th, RP could have been made multiple times (as it was a save). Now, RP can only be made once before the model is finally removed. The -1AP weapons with SM levels of shooting is where it gets good, especially for such a cheap model. That's where I would be most worried, but it isn't so bad, I'm sure they suffer in other places. Necrons seem to have translated nicely into 8th, at least much better than some other armies (Deathwatch, Orks).

Ummm. Isn't it now reverse? In 7th ed if you failed the RP after last wound that's it, gone. Okay you got it for every wound which helped for multi wound but for 1 wound guys it was one roll and if failed you are done. Now until squad is wiped out every turn you get to make the 5+ roll to come back to life.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:
So, if I shoot your tank with my nice awesome Melta Gun and deal 6 damage...

It will almost always be reduced to 0?

Yeah. So use missile launchers and plasma instead.

Nah to Missiles, too risky to roll high damage (can't believe I just said that)

Most Necron Vehicles are T6, so we are looking for S7... So Autocannons?

or even Battle Cannon type weapons that are d6 shots with d3 damage each.

tneva82 wrote:
Ummm. Isn't it now reverse? In 7th ed if you failed the RP after last wound that's it, gone. Okay you got it for every wound which helped for multi wound but for 1 wound guys it was one roll and if failed you are done. Now until squad is wiped out every turn you get to make the 5+ roll to come back to life.

4+ with Technomancy

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

Not sure I follow, do we have tiers yet? The number of games of 8th ed that this board has played is probably in the low double digits, definitely not enough to form a solid idea of the meta.

People have already seen the rules and some have the imagination to convert data to field representation pretty accurately, I know one, he's claiming tiers are a thing - I'm inclined to believe him, firstly it would be a miracle if any company achieved true balance, secondly between what I've seen of Marines, Necrons and Daemons Daemons are a solid step behind.

Replace word miracle with supernatural laws of physic breaking archievement. It's flat out impossible. So there are tiers out there. Question is just what are what and how big differences.

Tiers are always out there in point level systems.

Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

Autocannon is always 2 damage

Krak Missile is d6 damage btw

 Talamare wrote:
Most Necron Vehicles are T6, so we are looking for S7... So Autocannons?

or even Battle Cannon type weapons that are d6 shots with d3 damage each.

Yeah autocannons and battle cannons are probably best weapons to deal with necron vehicles funnily enough.

Volcano is funnily enough one of the worst Average roll 0 damage!

Tiers will always be a thing. But there is a hell of a difference between tiers in Malifaux where they might give you a slight edge, and tiers in 7th 40k, where tiers mean you're not playing the same game.

Of course tiers will be a thing. I don't think anyone has ever argued that 8th will bring perfect balance to 40k. I think we should be happy that they're just trying to get some balance at all, and expect that this first try will fail pretty badly. But not as bad as 7th did.

It will be unbalanced, but the promises now is that it will be addressed as we trot along, unlike how GW has worked up until now.

 Talamare wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

Autocannon is always 2 damage

Krak Missile is d6 damage btw

Huh, really? I could have sworn its d3 damage.
Yeah, autocannons could work then. You'll want a weapon that inflicts 2-3 damage to try to get around shielding, while keeping the amount of firepower required low.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Missiles are D3 damage. 3 is a good spot. Not too high, not too low. Its a 50% chance they will be negated.
Battlecannons might be good. What's the damage stat on an autocannon?

33%. You need to roll below damage to block it. He rolls 3 for damage, you need 1 or 2 to block it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
It will be unbalanced, but the promises now is that it will be addressed as we trot along, unlike how GW has worked up until now.

Of course with GW's style being wild swings, side steps and all sort of weird stunts I'm expecting just shifting broken thing from another equally broken things. Much like 8th ed so far.

That is true. I keep forgetting that it's under the damage value, not under or equal to -_-.
So yeah, 33% to negate damage 3, 50% to negate damage 4, 66% to negate damage 5, and 83% to negate damage 6, 100% to negate damage 7+
Funnily enough, that would mean damage 1 would always get through, as you can't roll below one.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thought the general idea of 8th was to not have tiered armies.
Guess that fell through.

I hope you mean GW.
There is nothing like balancing in a game with a complex rule set. I think here the problem is NP hard but I havent proved it.

I can't believe people even think Necrons are going to be in the top 10 armies, let alone OP. Every single Imperium faction army, even if they stick to a single faction, outguns Necrons. S4 AP-1 bolters don't make up for the loss of special weapons in an edition where most tanks are T7 W10 3+. Necrons cannot deal with vehicles at all; where guard can take 6 lascannons for just over 150 points, Necrons can take 2 - and that's their best possible anti-tank option. Against combat MCs, there is literally no good way to deal with them in the entire Necron index.

Necrons have an army gutted of units good against any large models, with poor combat, middling shooting at best, low range and no options. There are scarier feather dusters.