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.

 Traditio wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
if the Tac marine is to be the measure of all things, lots of units are going to need nerfing.

Tacs and warriors are directly comparable. They fit basically the same army role.

Why not compare them to immortals then? Those are also troop choices.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Did you use just bolters, or did you use the krak grenade that all tac squads are equipped with? Or the frag grenade?

5 rapidfiring boltguns and 1 rapid firing stormbolter.

You still killed more warriors then they killed marines

1. Only because the marines hid in the rhino long enough to jump out, rapidfire and then charge

2. The necrons still deal, on average, 3 wounds to the rhino, a 72 point model. That amounts to about a 22 point loss compared to the 24 on the part of the necrons.

And the marine damage to the necrons is unsustainable.

Because now the necrons have two choices:

1. They can tactically withdraw and allow another unit of warriors to move in and slaughter the 5 marines

or

2. They can remain in combat and face minimal casualties. Even assuming the rhino lives and zero marines die, the marines and rhino are only dealing around 2 wounds per turn once they get stuck in combat, and that's not even accounting for reanimation protocols.

Why on earth would the necron player want to leave combat? He's using a 120 point unit to tie up 137 points of models. By all accounts, that's a win.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Even here, the best case scenario is playing to the objectives. If the rhino charges the necrons and the marines jump out and sit on an objective, then point for point, the marines are better off.

But this only works with objectives, and this doesn't feel very satisfying, does it?

Astartes have a super efficient way of dealing with warriors. What with how close combat weapons are now insanely cheap. Take some vanguard, give them jump packs and power swords, lightning claws, relic blades (the ap-3 stuff) then delete the unit. If my at-a- glance math isnt terribly off, 20 warriors is 240 points. 10 vanguard vets with jump packs, give the dudes a bunch of power swords, give the sarge a relic blade&storm shield. 242 points. I'm willing to bet, with how devastating assault is now, that those vanguard are going to deal with those pesky warriors in short order.

Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

 DoomMouse wrote:
I'm a little worried about the new reanimation protocols on necron units. Their warriors are now 12pts, Move 5, BS 3+, S4, T4 LD10 and save 4+. Compared with a 13pt tactical marine they seem vastly superior. Their gauss weapons even have a bonus -1 armour pen, and they replenish downed squad members on a 5+ (or a 4+ with a cryptek, which seems like a no-brainer).

Don't get me wrong, I like the new RP rules, and it feels just like necrons should, but for 12pts per warrior it seems pretty crazily strong! I guess their damage output is pretty small, but still superior to tac marines.

If a 20 strong warrior squad is fighting against 20 tac marines at 24 inch range, the tacs will likely NEVER kill the necrons, even if the warriors don't even bother firing their guns... The math says their numbers stabilise around 10 models! I guess you'd have to use your entire army to focus down one squad at a time, but this isn't always possible while the enemy is cutting you down.

I suspect necrons are going to be very strong this edition! I dread to think how hard it'd be to finish off lychguard units. Imagine the pain when you finally reduce a squad to one model, then three more multi-wound models get back up again!

Bring scout snipers instead 140 points for 10 scouts with sniper rifles can sit 36" away kill the cryptek in 1 turn and put 3-4 wounds on the Warriors per turn.

The best setup for RP will cost Necrons around 300 points (Cryptek and Ghost Ark). Cryptek is T4 W4 4+ save hes super easy to kill. Ghost Ark is the same for a vehicle 14 wounds T6 and 4+ save. Overcharged plasma will do that thing in quick. Just dont shoot melta at it. Quantum Sheilding prevents damage based on a die roll if you roll lower then the damage done the damage is negated. But then S4 with a AP -2 would have a decent shot at bring it down.

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

I am pretty excited for crons in 8th. Everything seems to have a place, I am currently working on buying 1 box at a time so I currently only have 636 points. The plan is to buy and build a box one at a time, my 2k list goal looks like this.

Necrons - 2K - Batallion Detachment

Illuminor Szevas - 143
Cryptek - 104
Destroyer Lord, Warscythe,Phylactery - 150

20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240

C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230

5 Canoptek Wraiths, Particle Caster on 4 - 206

3 Heavy Destroyers, Heavy Guass Cannon - 225

Doom Scythe - 220

Pretty happy with it, has a nice mix of low arms firepower mixed with some heavy dakka and faster units.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

 AaronWilson wrote:
I am pretty excited for crons in 8th. Everything seems to have a place, I am currently working on buying 1 box at a time so I currently only have 636 points. The plan is to buy and build a box one at a time, my 2k list goal looks like this.

Necrons - 2K - Batallion Detachment

Illuminor Szevas - 143
Cryptek - 104
Destroyer Lord, Warscythe,Phylactery - 150

20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240

C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230

5 Canoptek Wraiths, Particle Caster on 4 - 206

3 Heavy Destroyers, Heavy Guass Cannon - 225

Doom Scythe - 220

Pretty happy with it, has a nice mix of low arms firepower mixed with some heavy dakka and faster units.

Looks decent, but the Doom Scythe is a rather poor choice imo. The doomsday ark is roughly the same cost and more durable.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

D3 auto mortal wounds, if that offs the Psyker it spreads D3 auto mortal wounds to every unit within six inches, the spell itself auto fails and can't be attempted again by any of your Psykers for the rest of the turn and that's every spell bar Smite which can still be attempted again, not a sliding scale of risk and reward.
The Templars have the right of it "Suffer not the Witch to live".

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

My Templars have some issues with Null Zone...

Doesn't matter - the chance of a Libby getting perils and destroying themselves and everything around them is crazy.
I used to risk perils on any double to dip into Daemonology tables - current perils makes that look like a baby gamble.

Its still on a double one or a double six, and librarians have more than 3 wounds, right? The likelihood of that happening is slim.

D3 auto mortal wounds, if that offs the Psyker it spreads D3 auto mortal wounds to every unit within six inches, the spell itself auto fails and can't be attempted again by any of your Psykers for the rest of the turn and that's every spell bar Smite which can still be attempted again, not a sliding scale of risk and reward.
The Templars have the right of it "Suffer not the Witch to live".

If he has 4 wounds he can't be offed by it, and if he's on a single wound just make sure no one (except the enemy) is within 6". It really doesn't sound that bad, and there's only what, a 1/18 chance of it happening?

 krodarklorr wrote:
To everyone complaining Necrons will be OP, especially new players, need to relax a bit. Necrons in 7th edition were OP. This edition they are reverting back to 5th edition RP, but slightly better and worse. It just means you have to focus a unit down. Infantry in this edition is not hard to remove, so warriors won't be a problem for long.

Also characters don't come back, and once they get in melee or get shot at, they'll die easily, so living metal doesn't mitigate that much in the long run.

If anyone cries OP, then let's play a game using my 7th edition Decurion detachment. You'll love 8th edition Necrons then.

My best 7th Edition moment was fighting a Necron player, I drove a Chaos Sorcerer on a Bike right in the middle of his formation, cast enhanced Sunburst, BOOM, 11 hits per model, wiped out half the army in one spell

No more of that in this edition, but yeah that was pretty nonsensical, but the randomness in 7th had it's charm, but you had way less control than you do now, which is an improvement

 AaronWilson wrote:
I am pretty excited for crons in 8th. Everything seems to have a place, I am currently working on buying 1 box at a time so I currently only have 636 points. The plan is to buy and build a box one at a time, my 2k list goal looks like this.

Necrons - 2K - Batallion Detachment

Illuminor Szevas - 143
Cryptek - 104
Destroyer Lord, Warscythe,Phylactery - 150

20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240
20 Necron Warriors - 240

C'tan Shard of the Nightbringer - 230

5 Canoptek Wraiths, Particle Caster on 4 - 206

3 Heavy Destroyers, Heavy Guass Cannon - 225

Doom Scythe - 220

Pretty happy with it, has a nice mix of low arms firepower mixed with some heavy dakka and faster units.

I think this is fine for friendly games. In competitive matches, your AT is dead turn 1, and then the army just drives their units into combat with you and walks onto all the objectives because you can't kill them.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Grav cannon dev squad fires 12 boltgun shots and 16 grav cannon shots per round. The expected wounds this deals to the Necron warriors is 9.

Assuming the Necron player doesn't fire back because he just doesn't even care to.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 4 necrons (15 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 7 necrons (13 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 8 necrons (11 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)

stable state.

So the expected outcome is that the grav dev squad is unable to kill 20 warriors.

Again, I don't know how battleshock affect Necrons & their RP

And, again, if the Necrons fire first, they're going to win even against grav dev squad handily.

it's also worth pointing out that it would really be 40 necron warriors equivalent to cost of the grav squad, lol.

Your math is way off here.

Turn 1: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 3 necrons (14 total)
Turn 2: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 5 necrons (10 total)
Turn 3: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 6 necrons (7 total)
Turn 4: 9 wounds
Regenerate: 9 necrons (11 total)
Necrons are wiped out.

Remember that (without character support) Necrons only revive 1/3 of their lost models - not half as your math would seem to indicate.


That aside, what strikes me here is that these scenarios basically rely on the marine player playing completely into his opponent's strength. There was an old saying - you don't use 250pts of your army to kill 250pts of your opponent's army - you use 500pts of your army to kill 250pts of your opponent's army.

In essence, you don't just have each squad in your army shoot a different unit in your opponent's army. Instead, you focus on taking down just a few units with the whole of your army. This is true against most armies, but even more so against Necrons.

We are giving them the benefit of the cryptex in these analyses.

Even still - your post shows that a totally unsupported Necron warrior group would take the single hardest hitting infantry squad 4 turns to remove.

You're also factoring in that the marines shoot first, and the necrons never deal any damage.

And you mention "support," so let's just throw that in there. Why wouldn't the warriors have support?

Squad for squad Necron warriors with the new reanimation are too strong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

StarHunter25 wrote:
Astartes have a super efficient way of dealing with warriors. What with how close combat weapons are now insanely cheap. Take some vanguard, give them jump packs and power swords, lightning claws, relic blades (the ap-3 stuff) then delete the unit. If my at-a- glance math isnt terribly off, 20 warriors is 240 points. 10 vanguard vets with jump packs, give the dudes a bunch of power swords, give the sarge a relic blade&storm shield. 242 points. I'm willing to bet, with how devastating assault is now, that those vanguard are going to deal with those pesky warriors in short order.

Also, any core astartes player who complains about wraiths now needs to look at their librarians again. Null zone is amazing, totally worth the challenge to cast. Turn off their invulns then blast them to bits.

Doesn't it make sense that an elite melee unit kitted out in the best melee weapons in our codex should be able to beat your basic troop unit?

And if those Vets fail the charge, the Warriors *erase* them the following turn.

Which means, if you deep strike in, and attempt to do what you're describing, more than 50% of the time, the Necron Warriors win that fight, too.

But you are right - 10 vanguard vets kitted out with power swords will probably kill the Necron warriors.

I'm just going to point out:

At 107 for the Cryptek and 240 for 20 warriors, I can buy 2 50-man Conscript squads, a Company Commander, and a Commissar to keep them in place.

Whether I get first or second go, I will eliminate the necrons. If I go first, I wipe them all out in my first round of shooting. If I go second, I lose some guys, then wipe them out in my second round of shooting.

 Marmatag wrote:
We are giving them the benefit of the cryptex in these analyses.

Why?

If you are comparing squad vs squad, then you can't just give one of those squads a support character.

 Marmatag wrote:

Even still - your post shows that a totally unsupported Necron warrior group would take the single hardest hitting infantry squad 4 turns to remove.

That is rather misleading though. It only takes 4 turns because (as I already said) the scenario plays hugely into the Necron warrior's greatest strength.

 Marmatag wrote:

You're also factoring in that the marines shoot first, and the necrons never deal any damage.

You chose the scenario, not me. I was just correcting your math, since your post made no reference to the Necrons being supported by a Cryptek.

 Marmatag wrote:

And you mention "support," so let's just throw that in there. Why wouldn't the warriors have support?

Same reason the marines don't have support? Same reason the scenario assumes that marine player has fewer brain cells than models?

 Marmatag wrote:
Squad for squad Necron warriors with the new reanimation are too strong.

When tournaments are being won left, right and centre by Necron armies consisting solely of HQs and Warriors, I'll be prepared to admit that you're right.

Until then, I think you're giving far too much weight to an ability that can be completely countered by focusing fire.


What's more, why not try the respective squads against non-infantry targets? See how many wounds they deal to a Hive Tyrant or a Land Raider or some Thunderwolves.

 vipoid wrote:


When tournaments are being won left, right and centre by Necron armies consisting solely of HQs and Warriors, I'll be prepared to admit that you're right..

/sigh. You understand there's a difference between "hey this model is a little good for its points" vs "holy crap this model is MVP of every list ever!" No one here is claiming that they're riptide-wing-levels-of-awesome, we're just saying they could stand to eat a couple points of price increase given their abilities.

Ehh, rest of the codex is pretty balanced tbh, not as scary as other indexes out there chaps.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
You understand there's a difference between "hey this model is a little good for its points" vs "holy crap this model is MVP of every list ever!" No one here is claiming that they're riptide-wing-levels-of-awesome,

Actually, with what has been said about warriors in this thread, that's exactly the impression I get.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
we're just saying they could stand to eat a couple points of price increase given their abilities.

Then I would maintain that my point is entirely valid. If Necron warriors are as amazing as people say they are, then Necron lists clearly need nothing else beyond them a few HQs to support them.

- They have no need of more resilient units because, as had been shown, Necron Warriors can survive the best firepower a squad of marines can offer for 4 turns without even firing back. And with HQ support, they can survive indefinitely.

- They have no need of more offence, because Warriors are able to out-shoot a squad of marines in a vacuum.

If these are the only criteria that matter when determining that a unit is undercosted, Necron Warriors must indeed be the MVP of Necrons because they pass both tests with flying colours.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
We are giving them the benefit of the cryptex in these analyses.

Why?

If you are comparing squad vs squad, then you can't just give one of those squads a support character.

To demonstrate how sticky that can be, I would assume. I jumped into this thread with this being discussed. And with the new rules where buffs are based on inches, you could have multiple squads buffed by one special unit.

And, it's also about the availability of something like this. It's hard to imagine not having this for Necrons, unless you can make a compelling case not to bring one.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Even still - your post shows that a totally unsupported Necron warrior group would take the single hardest hitting infantry squad 4 turns to remove.

That is rather misleading though. It only takes 4 turns because (as I already said) the scenario plays hugely into the Necron warrior's greatest strength.

Shooting the Necron warriors with AP-3, strength 5 multi-shot weapons plays to their strength? We've already demonstrated normal fire *cannot* remove them unless the Necron player produces significant outliers in their rolls. You must bring heavy arms fire or heavy arms melee to eliminate your basic troops.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

You're also factoring in that the marines shoot first, and the necrons never deal any damage.

You chose the scenario, not me. I was just correcting your math, since your post made no reference to the Necrons being supported by a Cryptek.

This was made evident in the thread. I would recommend reviewing the full context. You weren't correcting my math. You were changing a controlled variable which was not set by me.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

And you mention "support," so let's just throw that in there. Why wouldn't the warriors have support?

Same reason the marines don't have support? Same reason the scenario assumes that marine player has fewer brain cells than models?

Ok. Give the Necrons their support unit, and give the optimal TAC marine squad a captain. See what happens.

 vipoid wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Squad for squad Necron warriors with the new reanimation are too strong.

When tournaments are being won left, right and centre by Necron armies consisting solely of HQs and Warriors, I'll be prepared to admit that you're right.

Until then, I think you're giving far too much weight to an ability that can be completely countered by focusing fire.

Killing the entire squad outright isn't a viable counter though.

 vipoid wrote:
What's more, why not try the respective squads against non-infantry targets? See how many wounds they deal to a Hive Tyrant or a Land Raider or some Thunderwolves.

Be my guest? I believe the original goal was to compare troops vs troops. We only got on the topic of devastators after people in this thread were unable to create a tac squad that could properly handle necron warriors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
You understand there's a difference between "hey this model is a little good for its points" vs "holy crap this model is MVP of every list ever!" No one here is claiming that they're riptide-wing-levels-of-awesome,

Actually, with what has been said about warriors in this thread, that's exactly the impression I get.

And you choose to see that because it's an easier stance to attack...

 krodarklorr wrote:
To everyone complaining Necrons will be OP, especially new players, need to relax a bit. Necrons in 7th edition were OP. This edition they are reverting back to 5th edition RP, but slightly better and worse. It just means you have to focus a unit down. Infantry in this edition is not hard to remove, so warriors won't be a problem for long.

Also characters don't come back, and once they get in melee or get shot at, they'll die easily, so living metal doesn't mitigate that much in the long run.

If anyone cries OP, then let's play a game using my 7th edition Decurion detachment. You'll love 8th edition Necrons then.

Lol to this comment.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

/sigh. You understand there's a difference between "hey this model is a little good for its points" vs "holy crap this model is MVP of every list ever!" No one here is claiming that they're riptide-wing-levels-of-awesome, we're just saying they could stand to eat a couple points of price increase given their abilities.

To be clear, I don't think anyone's made a really convincing argument for this yet. I mean, maybe it's true, but for a while now this thread has mostly been about 240 points of Warriors getting shot by <500 points of stuff over multiple turns, which is just not what tends to happen in real games.

There's a point that I've seen a few people raise that just doesn't make much sense. Someone mentions that in a real game the Marines would have support, and then someone else says that well the Necrons would have support too so that's irrelevant. But that's not actually true. Yes, 20 Warriors vs 18 or 19 Marines is a slaughter. But 200 Warriors against 185 Marines is a much closer fight (obviously in a real game this is going to be a more varied mix of units). If you're wiping out whole squads at once then they get much less benefit from Reanimation Protocols. It really is a big advantage for the Marines that larger forces can concentrate fire on individual units. Yeah, the Necrons can also do this, but they don't gain any particular advantage from doing so other than getting at the special and heavy weapons faster and, done right, maximizing expected losses due to morale.

So yeah, Warriors are really scary if you don't have the firepower to put down 20 of them in a turn. If you do have that kind of firepower, they're significantly more fragile than Marines for their cost. And, sure, you might be using three or four times the Warriors' points' worth of units or more to do it, but this is pretty normal. I mean, a tactical marine rapid-firing at another tactical marine only expects to do about 22% of his points in damage. For many models, they've had an okay turn if that's what they accomplish.

Now, I think that Warrior units backed up by a Ghost Ark and a Cryptek are really solid. I expect that that'll be at the core of some great Necron lists. But I don't think it's clear that this is going to be something that's just incredibly hard for several other factions to beat. My intuition is that if there's a problem it's going to be with the character Cryptek (edit: apparently all Crypteks have a weaker version of this) that hands out a 5++, depending on how the meta shapes up in terms of high AP weaponry. Regardless, I doubt that increasing the points of Warriors is a great solution. If the problem is RP then you ought to just reduce their max squad size, otherwise you're just forcing people to always take the max size if they want to take them at all.

So yeah, Warriors are really scary if you don't have the firepower to put down 20 of them in a turn. If you do have that kind of firepower, they're significantly more fragile than Marines for their cost. And, sure, you might be using three or four times the Warriors' points' worth of units or more to do it, but this is pretty normal. I mean, a tactical marine rapid-firing at another tactical marine only expects to do about 22% of his points in damage. For many models, they've had an okay turn if that's what they accomplish.

The amount of expected strength 4, hitting on 4+, AP -0 attacks to generate 20 wounds against the Necron profile is 120.

As has been said in the thread, the best way to remove these is melee combat with AP3, after sniping the Cryptek.

Just throw some Murder Clowns their throat! So 20 man warriors with a cryptek is about 340 points.

5 x Troupe with embrace
1 x Starweaver

Double that and that would be around 410 points.

Starweaver can move 22" a turn and still shoot. Even at rapidfire range the warriors won't kill a starweaver. Next turn murder clowns gets out of the transport. Kill the cryptek and most of the warriors. Then next turn the warriors will be all dead.

 Marmatag wrote:

The amount of expected strength 4, hitting on 4+, AP -0 attacks to generate 20 wounds against the Necron profile is 120.

As has been said in the thread, the best way to remove these is melee combat, after sniping the Cryptek.

Isn't the first part of this basically what I said? Many lists can use about 3 or 4 times the Warriors' cost in other units to kill them in a turn. For some factions this is going to make the most sense at range while others can do melee. Obviously it's not going to be 60 tactical marines rapid-firing. I'm not sure how many lists even run 60 tactical marines. I don't know Marines that well but Guard are going to have artillery, mortars, tons of lasguns, and scion drops that they can direct at an approaching Warrior blob. I think Eldar expect to kill exactly 20 in a turn if they drop two 10-man Guardian squads out of shuriken cannon Wave Serpents and shoot a Doomed unit of Warriors (ignoring the Cryptek invulnerable save, which I already said seemed like might become an issue depending on the meta). Tyranids can charge them. A unit of 20 Genestealers is 240 points, can get there very fast especially with psyker or Swarmlord help, and expects to wipe the whole unit (I'm ignoring Overwatch but with a little extra support the Warriors are gone). They don't even need to worry too much about getting shot on the way in because Necrons don't actually have that much long-ranged shooting.

The challenge is in that you need very specific counters to them.

Imperial Guard will struggle with Necrons, they seem like a soft counter in the same way GSC is to Eldar in 7th.

 Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:


Bring scout snipers instead 140 points for 10 scouts with sniper rifles can sit 36" away kill the cryptek in 1 turn and put 3-4 wounds on the Warriors per turn.

How do you figure? If you force them to move then it's 10 * .5 * .5 * .5 = 1.25. The extra MWs come to 10 * .5 * .167 = 0.835

So 2 wounds a turn. Living metal puts that to 1. It would take them 3 turns. I'm sure the Necrons can shoot back in the meantime.

The best setup for RP will cost Necrons around 300 points (Cryptek and Ghost Ark). Cryptek is T4 W4 4+ save hes super easy to kill. Ghost Ark is the same for a vehicle 14 wounds T6 and 4+ save. Overcharged plasma will do that thing in quick. Just dont shoot melta at it. Quantum Sheilding prevents damage based on a die roll if you roll lower then the damage done the damage is negated. But then S4 with a AP -2 would have a decent shot at bring it down.

5 overcharged plasma guns will do 3.7 wounds a turn - 7.4 if you're foolish enough to let a move 12 unit get in range. Minus one for living metal.

 Marmatag wrote:
The challenge is in that you need very specific counters to them.

Imperial Guard will struggle with Necrons, they seem like a soft counter in the same way GSC is to Eldar in 7th.

I guess the counters don't strike me as being that specific. T4 4+ is a pretty generic statline. You can kill it with small arms, but it's not that wasteful to use guns with decent AP. It's just that you need an army that can focus fire, which is a good thing to have anyway. Eldar should have lots of short-range but highly mobile firepower. Tyranids should have some really scary and fast CC units. I guess I don't really see where Guard would have a huge amount of trouble. Gauss' -1 AP isn't great against them. A reliance on plasma for anti-tank is good against quantum shielding. And they're excellent at putting out just a ton of firepower on things that have to come in close to fight, with FRFSRF. Mortars look like a fantastic choice for any Guard list too, and they can reach out and hit Warrior blobs from 48" without LoS. I mean, for 27 points a Guard heavy weapon unit expects to get 5.25 S4 hits. A single Taurox Prime for 96 points expects to drop over 4 Warriors even after moving, or 5.5 if it can let the Necrons come to it. A 100-something point scion squad expects to kill almost 6 Warriors, though you'd probably prefer to use them on the vehicles. I'm just naming stuff that people understand to be generically good about the new Guard -- it's stuff you'll see in lots of lists. I don't think they'll have a problem removing Warrior blobs, unless it's some other part of the Necron index you're thinking about.

 Marmatag wrote:
The challenge is in that you need very specific counters to them.

Imperial Guard will struggle with Necrons, they seem like a soft counter in the same way GSC is to Eldar in 7th.

I'm not so sure about Imperial Guard. They have one factor that will be in play no matter the Edition: Volume of Fire. They are the definition of the quality of quantity. The question is if you will take advantage of it. The Necron player may be bringing a Patrol Detachment, but the IG could easily fit a Brigade since Platoons are not a current factor (rather disappointed on that).

 Marmatag wrote:
The challenge is in that you need very specific counters to them.

Imperial Guard will struggle with Necrons, they seem like a soft counter in the same way GSC is to Eldar in 7th.

How do you figure that?

20 Warriors + Cryptek = 347 points
100 Conscripts + CC + Commissar = 360 points.

The 100 Conscripts vaporize the necrons right then and there. Even if the Necrons shoot first, the remaining conscripts sweep the floor.

400 shots * .33 * .33 * .5 = 22 wounds.