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.

I was going to think of something good to say about Necrons, then I noticed that the Transcendent Ctan is more expensive than the Nightbringer, and is worse. And then I noticed the Tesseract Vault is only Toughness 7. SMH

 MalusCalibur wrote:
That isn't a fact, that's your opinion - you're just stating it as if it is a fact.

If you seriously believe you can write off an entire faction when the rules havn't even been commercially available for more than two days, then perhaps you are the one who needs to 'take a step back' and stop pretending you know better than anyone else.

Okay, are people actually reading my posts? How am I writing Necrons off? I've literally said in my posts 3 times in this thread alone that they're way too good against infantry heavy armies. If I were to say Harlequins are bad against hordes, would I be writing them off as well? Good grief.

And no, it's an objective fact - Necrons, currently, have the worst anti-tank capabilities in the game. It's a statistically measurable quantity - any other faction you can name has greater and more powerful anti-tank options, which they use preferentially unless you count sub-factions like assassins or Sisters of Silence. Unless you're going to argue the toss with me that anti-tank capabilities mean something other than the ability of a balanced list's ability to remove tanks from the table, then it's not at all an opinion.

Likewise, at least pretend to acknowledge rule 1 before flying off the rails at me for something I didn't even say.

I think the balancing factor is going to end up being that most armies will end up with more balanced builds to avoid losing to hard counters. But that remains to be seen.

Eyjio wrote:

 MalusCalibur wrote:
That isn't a fact, that's your opinion - you're just stating it as if it is a fact.

If you seriously believe you can write off an entire faction when the rules havn't even been commercially available for more than two days, then perhaps you are the one who needs to 'take a step back' and stop pretending you know better than anyone else.

Okay, are people actually reading my posts? How am I writing Necrons off? I've literally said in my posts 3 times in this thread alone that they're way too good against infantry heavy armies. If I were to say Harlequins are bad against hordes, would I be writing them off as well? Good grief.

And no, it's an objective fact - Necrons, currently, have the worst anti-tank capabilities in the game. It's a statistically measurable quantity - any other faction you can name has greater and more powerful anti-tank options, which they use preferentially unless you count sub-factions like assassins or Sisters of Silence. Unless you're going to argue the toss with me that anti-tank capabilities mean something other than the ability of a balanced list's ability to remove tanks from the table, then it's not at all an opinion.

Likewise, at least pretend to acknowledge rule 1 before flying off the rails at me for something I didn't even say.

It's because you're in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" It's not unreasonable to assume that if you make arguments for why Necron are not a good army in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" to assume that you are supporting that statement. From what little I've seen, it's not at all true that Necrons auto lose against a lot of vehicles, because vehicles are so ridiculously expensive that an army of them is fairly limited in scope and is countered quite easily with a little smart movement.

I still think the Necrons are a very solid army. I have and do struggle against vehicles, which is ironic. I don't particularly struggle against most anything else.

Destroying a whole unit of warriors is not as easy as people are making it out to be.

Flayed ones are amazingly good in the army as both a screen and as a close combat unit. Being able to deepstrike them where you want is pretty damn good and your opponent can not ignore them. So even if you fail the charge, they have to focus down that unit of flayed ones while ignoring a large part of the rest of your army.

Immortals with a +1 to hit buff are crazy good with their Tesla rules.

I think the problem is people aren't adapting to the new game yet. You lose a lot of stuff really quickly and you have to be able to adapt on the battlefield quickly or get overrun and lose. Necrons don't really want to field a ton of the big stuff but they do like to layer their buffs. Necrons struggle against vehicles. I just don't know how to counter razorback spam yet with them or anything like that.

So, Necrons are very strong in this edition.

But I've found that in 8th edition, you can't limit your scope to "a shooting army" or "an assault army" and expect to win.

The game doesn't start at turn 1, either. During deployment, when you're alternating setting up, you need to be cognizant of what your opponent is doing and plan appropriately. Especially as a shooting-heavy army. Assault is beast in this edition and you will need to play more defensively than you're probably used to. The only army that doesn't have to care about deployment or balance within the army is Imperial Guard. They're broken right now and can largely ignore tactics. Originally I thought Necrons would do well against Guard, and I think they can do better than most, but it's an uphill battle.

Also, if you have the opportunity to choose what format of deployment zones you'll be using, this is a colossal advantage. You get to do this after all objective markers are placed, which really helps you control the map.

My 2c.

Eyjio wrote:

 MalusCalibur wrote:
That isn't a fact, that's your opinion - you're just stating it as if it is a fact.

If you seriously believe you can write off an entire faction when the rules havn't even been commercially available for more than two days, then perhaps you are the one who needs to 'take a step back' and stop pretending you know better than anyone else.

Okay, are people actually reading my posts? How am I writing Necrons off? I've literally said in my posts 3 times in this thread alone that they're way too good against infantry heavy armies. If I were to say Harlequins are bad against hordes, would I be writing them off as well? Good grief.

And no, it's an objective fact - Necrons, currently, have the worst anti-tank capabilities in the game. It's a statistically measurable quantity - any other faction you can name has greater and more powerful anti-tank options, which they use preferentially unless you count sub-factions like assassins or Sisters of Silence. Unless you're going to argue the toss with me that anti-tank capabilities mean something other than the ability of a balanced list's ability to remove tanks from the table, then it's not at all an opinion.

Likewise, at least pretend to acknowledge rule 1 before flying off the rails at me for something I didn't even say.

Dude have you played many games? Youve been farcrying how bad our Anti Vehicle weaponry is in 8th, yet I went up against a 6 tank horde IG army, and crippled 4 tanks in 4 rounds, from just one stalker and one DDA........

 Purifier wrote:

Eyjio wrote:

 MalusCalibur wrote:
That isn't a fact, that's your opinion - you're just stating it as if it is a fact.

If you seriously believe you can write off an entire faction when the rules havn't even been commercially available for more than two days, then perhaps you are the one who needs to 'take a step back' and stop pretending you know better than anyone else.

Okay, are people actually reading my posts? How am I writing Necrons off? I've literally said in my posts 3 times in this thread alone that they're way too good against infantry heavy armies. If I were to say Harlequins are bad against hordes, would I be writing them off as well? Good grief.

And no, it's an objective fact - Necrons, currently, have the worst anti-tank capabilities in the game. It's a statistically measurable quantity - any other faction you can name has greater and more powerful anti-tank options, which they use preferentially unless you count sub-factions like assassins or Sisters of Silence. Unless you're going to argue the toss with me that anti-tank capabilities mean something other than the ability of a balanced list's ability to remove tanks from the table, then it's not at all an opinion.

Likewise, at least pretend to acknowledge rule 1 before flying off the rails at me for something I didn't even say.

It's because you're in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" It's not unreasonable to assume that if you make arguments for why Necron are not a good army in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" to assume that you are supporting that statement. From what little I've seen, it's not at all true that Necrons auto lose against a lot of vehicles, because vehicles are so ridiculously expensive that an army of them is fairly limited in scope and is countered quite easily with a little smart movement.

Exactly this, the way you titled your thread has opened you up to the responses you are getting.

He didn't title the thread

Breng77 wrote:
I'm interested to see what most armies can take for 2-3 lascannons. If we look at space marines. Devestators get 4 lascannons for 165 points, vs 2 heavy destoryers for 150. The heavy gauss cannon has better AP but worse range. But with the movement advantage of destroyers the range is fairly a non factor.

Well as you said you can get a unit of devestators with 4 lascannons for 165 points.
You can get 5 scourge with 4 dark lances for 150 points.
You can have 3 guard heavy weapon teams with lascannons for 72 points.

In terms of the soft stats I am happy to accept the destroyer has upside. It can fly its 10" without effecting its accuracy. It has an extra -1 rend. 36" is plenty of range (imo anyway).

At the end of the day though those stats don't kill things. For your points the devestators are doing about 30% more damage. The scourge are even better. The guard are 67% more damaging vs a rhino (used as a test case). To be fair the scourges would do a bit worse vs T8 stuff - but would still come out ahead.

You need over 400 points in heavy destroyers to expect to kill a rhino a turn. This is not efficient.

asauve19 wrote:

1 - Reanimation protocols are trash now... yeah yeah they were just broken in 7th, but they are garbage now. You used to be able to reliably get up and close because you could sustain an attack or two with a squad or warriors. That's no longer the case... I tried running 5 squads of 10 then I put 3 squads of 20 to test.. Both got annihilated before I could even get close to using my rapid fire (since everyone basically has gauss, rapid fire is the only thing that seperates them from everything else)... Bringing the point equivalent in Immortals is only slightly better. Still terrible.

RP is a mixed bag, I've had it bypassed a few times, but when it works, it's very effective. In addition to being a good recovery option it's also a very functional deterrent, if they don't bring enough dakka to seal the deal, most opponents won't bother shooting at blobs. This means you can get away with some amusing antics with a 20 man warrior blob that would have not been possible in 7th ed.

asauve19 wrote:
2- Living Metal isn't very good either. I was able to pull that trick for one turn, the first game. After that my opponents targeted my Doom Scythe until it died from turn 2 g1 threw the rest of the games. (different opponents).

I agree it's a little underwhelming, and the fact chaos have it as well makes me roll my eyes (seriously chaos get off of my schtick). The real defensive perk on our vehicles is quantum shielding, which makes using anti-vehicle weapons to take them out problematic, combined with high wounds on our arks we have fairly tough vehicles. Take a spyder for repairs and you'll find vehicles like the DDA are very survivable.

asauve19 wrote:
3- They are slow with really bad range. Any Halfway competent opponent can and does just sit back and shoot you, wipe hole units rather than piece some out slowly and you lose.

Only our infantry is slow, and even that can be mitigated with the correct army comp, Outside of that we are a fairly mobile army. Deceiver, night scythes, and monoliths can help you avoid marching across the board.

asauve19 wrote:
4- Only way I was able to be semi competitive in 4 games was with giving my guys invulns, and even that didn't do it, also I shouldn't have to force 1 model from the entire army to make any of my guys relevant.

In my list I only have only two or three invuls unless I'm taking wraiths. I just position warriors and scarabs to take the hits, they are so cheap at 240 points for a 20 man blob or 117 for a 9 base scarab unit that the amount of effort required to kill them is disproportionate to the value of doing so. As for the last comment I assume that's a comment regarding the deceiver, and he is a clutch unit, no ways around that, but we do have builds outside of him. You could opt for a tomb world deploy lists, or go for a destroyer outrider list, or bring a mounted infantry lists. We don't have as many options as we did in 7th ed, but we do have some.

asauve19 wrote:
1-4 are points/opinions, not games. Anyway.. In all 4 games, I was not even remotely competitive (in non competitive games) and was nearly tabled in all games by turn 4... I literally can't think of anything to do, to not only keep them competitive.. But just keep them worthy of fun pickup games..

Any suggestions?

It's time for the hard truth, the skill cap for Necrons went way up this edition, and that's left a lot of necron players looking for new armies. In 7th ed you brought your decurion, marched up and punched your opponent in the face until they fell down, relying on how tough you were to weather return fire. It was very rare that someone won a toe to toe fight with crons, not even eldar could pull it off regularly. The reason we didn't rule the roost in 7th ed was deathstars, psychic shenanigans, and summoning which was basically the entirety of the late 7th ed meta.

It's not like that anymore, now you have to plan out your army comp meticulously, and you have to use your units for specific roles, and you have to protect yourself with things like screens and deterrents. So you can either take your lumps until you catch up to the new meta, or you can switch armies. Necrons still have a lot to offer, and in the right hands they can be very competitive. My advice. hang in there, you'll find your legs sooner or later, and when you do you'll be glad you didn't have to paint an entirely new army which you'll also have to learn from scratch.

Purifier wrote:It's because you're in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" It's not unreasonable to assume that if you make arguments for why Necron are not a good army in a thread called "NECRON IN 8TH UNPLAYABLE?" to assume that you are supporting that statement. From what little I've seen, it's not at all true that Necrons auto lose against a lot of vehicles, because vehicles are so ridiculously expensive that an army of them is fairly limited in scope and is countered quite easily with a little smart movement.

I mean, in my opinion it is in fact unreasonable to put words into my mouth and then criticise me for saying something I didn't. Maybe that's just me, but for some reason it sounds pretty ridiculous. It sounds especially absurd when my first sentence of my first comment in the thread was, to quote, "[t]hey're nowhere near unplayable", followed by me then saying "we don't even have all the index rules for Forge World, let alone know how the codex will play out when it arrives, so it's a bit early to be selling anything".

As for vehicles being ridiculously expensive, that's just objectively wrong. They're more expensive, but I can still quite happily fit 7 into an IG list without breaking a sweat.

Again, if you're going to attack what I'm saying, make sure I actually said it. Ideally, dial it down a notch at the same time.

Klowny wrote:Dude have you played many games? Youve been farcrying how bad our Anti Vehicle weaponry is in 8th, yet I went up against a 6 tank horde IG army, and crippled 4 tanks in 4 rounds, from just one stalker and one DDA........

One Stalker and a Doomsday Ark is the equivalent of having 4 lascannons and it costs ~400 points. I'm glad your game went well, but it's rich to say there's no issues because you rolled well in 1 game. I've played 6 games so far for reference, and will be relying on the mathhammer more than gameplay experience until I've gotten at least 30 games in - the averages behind Doomsday Ark + Stalker shooting are decidedly mediocre.

Huron black heart wrote:Exactly this, the way you titled your thread has opened you up to the responses you are getting.

This is exactly the total lack of reading comprehension I'm on about. Not only did I not make this thread, I've posted in this thread refuting the original poster's points. Jesus.

Tyel wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I'm interested to see what most armies can take for 2-3 lascannons. If we look at space marines. Devestators get 4 lascannons for 165 points, vs 2 heavy destoryers for 150. The heavy gauss cannon has better AP but worse range. But with the movement advantage of destroyers the range is fairly a non factor.

Well as you said you can get a unit of devestators with 4 lascannons for 165 points.
You can get 5 scourge with 4 dark lances for 150 points.
You can have 3 guard heavy weapon teams with lascannons for 72 points.

In terms of the soft stats I am happy to accept the destroyer has upside. It can fly its 10" without effecting its accuracy. It has an extra -1 rend. 36" is plenty of range (imo anyway).

At the end of the day though those stats don't kill things. For your points the devestators are doing about 30% more damage. The scourge are even better. The guard are 67% more damaging vs a rhino (used as a test case). To be fair the scourges would do a bit worse vs T8 stuff - but would still come out ahead.

You need over 400 points in heavy destroyers to expect to kill a rhino a turn. This is not efficient.

No they don't but dead things don't kill things either, neither do things without LOS. Destroyers may well get more shooting in a game than some of these other units. On a table with no LOS blocking terrain, Heavy Destroyers are bad by comparison. It is also important to note that the with a Destroyer lord, Heavy Destroyers are even better (though that is more points). On a table where I can move my units out of LOS from your heavy weapons destroyers are better. I also hate the new metric of "kill something in a turn" IT is not all about killing things in one turn, especially with equal points of models, very few things do that.

look through the necron index... there is no limit on how many stacks you can use for RP meaning, you can buff it to a 2+ with 3 characters... I'd say their more broken than not. blob squads surrounding those characters and your units will NEVER die.

 supreme overlord wrote:
look through the necron index... there is no limit on how many stacks you can use for RP meaning, you can buff it to a 2+ with 3 characters... I'd say their more broken than not. blob squads surrounding those characters and your units will NEVER die.

The characters themselves have this stipulation though. They can't combine, so it caps at 4+. It's still good, but it's not 2+ RP good - which is pretty fortunate, because I don't think anyone would have fun facing a 2+ RP roll.

 supreme overlord wrote:
look through the necron index... there is no limit on how many stacks you can use for RP meaning, you can buff it to a 2+ with 3 characters... I'd say their more broken than not. blob squads surrounding those characters and your units will NEVER die.

There is, actually. I'm pretty sure the technomancer ability specifies that it can't be better than a 4+

I actually rolled sub par, with the stalker only helping out 1 dice roll over the whole game to the DDA, and only hitting with one shot total a turn for the most part, but when you get two wounds through and roll average damage, your getting 8w. I rolled a little hot for the damage, but it made up for the shots.