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.

So, aside from Turn 1 shenanigans, does this mean we still can’t move and charge following teleporting in from a monolith on Turn 2+?

sieGermans wrote:
So, aside from Turn 1 shenanigans, does this mean we still can’t move and charge following teleporting in from a monolith on Turn 2+?

You'd need the Deceiver for that most likely

So what's the feeling? I think we're slightly better off than we were. Some builds are anyway.

Our transports still kinda suck, but at least they function as transports now.

Would our "Emergency Invasion Beams" stratagem now force disembarking units to take causalities on a roll of 1?

As we are now "Disembarking as if it were a transport" while its being destroyed?


As a side note; Imotekh is now a dumpster fire, the deletion of his Warlord Trait is a sad thing to behold.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Would our "Emergency Invasion Beams" stratagem now force disembarking units to take causalities on a roll of 1?

As we are now "Disembarking as if it were a transport" while its being destroyed?


As a side note; Imotekh is now a dumpster fire, the deletion of his Warlord Trait is a sad thing to behold.

Destroying the night scythe does not say treat it as a transport, so no reason to trigger roll of 1 for passengers, although that would have been peferable to losing the entire unit

Also o is it that bad for necrons with the CP regenerate? You'd need to spend 6CP before you would expect to have 2 back. If you can limit yourself to 3 per turn, of our starting 9, you're still pretty good.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Would our "Emergency Invasion Beams" stratagem now force disembarking units to take causalities on a roll of 1?

As we are now "Disembarking as if it were a transport" while its being destroyed?


As a side note; Imotekh is now a dumpster fire, the deletion of his Warlord Trait is a sad thing to behold.

Where does it say Imotekh is losing his warlord trait?

So basically the format is this:
CA: rules changes, points changes
BIG FAQ 1: rules changes, points changes
BIG FAQ 2: rules changes while thinking about CA changes since it's already in the printers

Necrons are getting the points drops in CA. Don't worry. FAQs are to tone down the super strong/annoying stuff. CA is to buff the trash (while also toning down the good stuff)

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
So basically the format is this:
CA: rules changes, points changes
BIG FAQ 1: rules changes, points changes
BIG FAQ 2: rules changes while thinking about CA changes since it's already in the printers

Necrons are getting the points drops in CA. Don't worry. FAQs are to tone down the super strong/annoying stuff. CA is to buff the trash (while also toning down the good stuff)

The question is are point drops enough? We still lack enough AT and have some really big problems with how our rules are written.
Also necrons arent probably the only faction to get point drops and with this FAQ doing nothing to limit soup im still very skeptical

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

The question is are point drops enough? We still lack enough AT and have some really big problems with how our rules are written.
Also necrons arent probably the only faction to get point drops and with this FAQ doing nothing to limit soup im still very skeptical

We dont lack enough AT, the number of guns we have with S8+ is sufficient. One problem is random shots and random damage, like the DDA. The other is high point costs for those units.

 p5freak wrote:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

The question is are point drops enough? We still lack enough AT and have some really big problems with how our rules are written.
Also necrons arent probably the only faction to get point drops and with this FAQ doing nothing to limit soup im still very skeptical

We dont lack enough AT, the number of guns we have with S8+ is sufficient. One problem is random shots and random damage, like the DDA. The other is high point costs for those units.

No it isn't.
We have 5.
One is on an vehicle.
The other is on an expensive vehicle that no one takes
Another is on surprisingly fragile infantry.
One is on a flyer that can't even shoot at full accuracy.
One is on a walker.

Neither of these can been spammed and are expensive. Every other army can field heavy weapons much more frequently than necrons.
Nearly of our heavy weapons are vehicle based, and that's a problem, as that's one unit that can be gunned down and there goes our heavy weapons. Compare this to Space Marines, which can have lascannons in tac squads, lascannons in heavy squads, lascannons on vehicles, etc.
Necrons cannot simply saturate the field with S8 weapons fire like the other armies can.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

The question is are point drops enough? We still lack enough AT and have some really big problems with how our rules are written.
Also necrons arent probably the only faction to get point drops and with this FAQ doing nothing to limit soup im still very skeptical

We dont lack enough AT, the number of guns we have with S8+ is sufficient. One problem is random shots and random damage, like the DDA. The other is high point costs for those units.

No it isn't.
We have 5.
One is on an vehicle.
The other is on an expensive vehicle that no one takes
Another is on surprisingly fragile infantry.
One is on a flyer that can't even shoot at full accuracy.
One is on a walker.

Neither of these can been spammed and are expensive. Every other army can field heavy weapons much more frequently than necrons.
All of our heavy weapons are vehicle based, and that's a problem, as that's one unit that can be gunned down and there goes our heavy weapons. Compare this to Space Marines, which can have lascannons in tac squads, lascannons in heavy squads, lascannons on vehicles, etc.
Necrons cannot simply saturate the field with S8 weapons fire like the other armies can.

Thank you.

This PLUS the random damage makes for very poor AT in my eyes

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Huh, they couldn't before? Weird. Still would have been better if you could use them after the vehicle moves though.

No not better, that implies they were good and got better, less gak is the right sentence, because they were gak, continue to be gak but are now less gak. Just take a Nephrekh Battalion and include whatever units you'd put on the Tomb World in deep strike with the CP from the Nephrekh Battalion.

I know better fits, but it really is still gak. I wish I was willing to believe to believe that it isn't considered coming in from reinforcements. Or that they actually just fething fixed it by changing it to end of Movement phase, like I don't know, EVERY OTHER REINFORCEMENT RULE IN THE GAME.

And then, for the love of Szarek allow my Monoliths to shoot out of melee, 4 Orks should not be able to negate almost 400 pts worth of moving fortress until someone comes and saves the damsel in distress that is my Monolith. It's Titanic and practically immovable, let us have this.

Bizazedo wrote:
Turn one charges inc.

Did you win any tournaments with your Lychguard as Troops?

Bizazedo wrote:
That would be true if the FAQ change didn't say we treated them as disembarking from a transport. They're not considered reinforcements.

I know what you're getting at, that originally they're considered on the Tomb World, but the FAQ explicitly says to treat them when disembarking for all rules purposes
All rules purposes. And that was added at the same time as the tactical reserves.

Like, let me ask you, why else would you change the wording to that as it only affects disembarking? Why not just leave it as is?

(Not saying I'm right, btw, just find it fascinating. I wouldn't do it yet without opponent buy-in).

They are considered to be reinforcements until they arrive.

After they arrive yes, they still can't arrive turn 1 though.

Because now you can move after disembarking.

I'd suggest everyone who reads rules they find ambiguous and rules in their own favour do this. As is though, there is nothing that says that they are not reinforcements while they are reinforcements.

Tied a game against Tau and won a game against Thousand Sons with my Orikan balance list.

List:

Tie vs Tau.


Win vs Thousand Sons

The list is okay, very fun and feels very varied, but I think I'd do better with Mephrit Warrior spam with just a regular Cryptek and no Lychguard. The Lychguard being a priority take down isn't so bad since it allows me to keep my Destroyers alive for longer, but I could have just brought another unit of Destroyers. As is I don't see Lycguard being worth it if your opponent is going full tilt as my opponents were obviously bringing soft lists between Orks, Thousand Sons with Rubrics and Tau sniper spam. I'm not sure what to move onto next, perhabs some Doomscythe spam to try out the Stratagem. I still haven't done almost anything with the Tesseract Vault. I'm pretty sure that the DDAs and Destroyers were doing the majority of the heavy lifting for the list

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

The question is are point drops enough? We still lack enough AT and have some really big problems with how our rules are written.
Also necrons arent probably the only faction to get point drops and with this FAQ doing nothing to limit soup im still very skeptical

We dont lack enough AT, the number of guns we have with S8+ is sufficient. One problem is random shots and random damage, like the DDA. The other is high point costs for those units.

No it isn't.
We have 5.
One is on an vehicle.
The other is on an expensive vehicle that no one takes
Another is on surprisingly fragile infantry.
One is on a flyer that can't even shoot at full accuracy.
One is on a walker.

Neither of these can been spammed and are expensive. Every other army can field heavy weapons much more frequently than necrons.
Nearly all of our heavy weapons are vehicle based, and that's a problem, as that's one unit that can be gunned down and there goes our heavy weapons. Compare this to Space Marines, which can have lascannons in tac squads, lascannons in heavy squads, lascannons on vehicles, etc.
Necrons cannot simply saturate the field with S8 weapons fire like the other armies can.

Thank you.

This PLUS the random damage makes for very poor AT in my eyes

Yeah, its limited AT and random to boot.
This whole thing where a unit can only take a specific heavy weapon that can't be found anywhere else needs to go away. The only reason why it worked in 3rd was because Gauss was a swiss army knife; it worked on everything effectively well. After they changed the vehicle rules in 5th it stopped being as useful, and its certainly not as versatile in 8th.

Necrons simply need to have other weapon options like the other armies do so they can adapt to threats like everyone else.

Destroyers should have the option to take other weapons. Likewise for Heavy Destroyers.

Annihilation Barges should be able to take heavy gauss cannons.

Immortals should probably be given some sort of heavy weapon. Like a gauss cannon or a tesla cannon, or some sort of particle weapon. Not a destructor though or a heavy gauss cannon. It doesn't...feel right, I guess. Maybe because seeing an immortal with a gun like that would look silly.

You'd think that as much as they'd keep pushing this whole necrons with identity thing, they'd give them more varied loadouts.

You need 2 max anti-tank units. If the unit was doing insane damage and had insane survivability- you just need one. It all comes back to points cost as long as you have inefficient anti-tank units. If DDAs cost 120 points each and destroyers cost 30 pts each, necrons would have great antitank.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
You need 2 max anti-tank units. If the unit was doing insane damage and had insane survivability- you just need one. It all comes back to points cost as long as you have inefficient anti-tank units. If DDAs cost 120 points each and destroyers cost 30 pts each, necrons would have great antitank.

I would still argue for more reliable dmg output on the DDAs (2D3 shots D3+3Dmg or D6min3)

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Annihilation Barges should be able to take heavy gauss cannons.

Immortals should probably be given some sort of heavy weapon. Like a gauss cannon or a tesla cannon, or some sort of particle weapon.

Love this idea! Would also help if stalkers got a good price drop, and I feel like heavy Gauss cannons should get heavy 2 (the barges and stalkers could get heavy 4 twin cannons). Tesla destructors with either dmg 2, or str 8 would make a huge difference. Not sure which would be better though...

DDA needs to either auto hit or get a fixed 3/4 shots. This random shots with random dmg thing is stupid and needs changing for every army.

Once necrons have the tools to compete it's much easier to balance points. At the moment it just feels like whatever happens in CA it's not going to be enough...

I just want our old rules back in some format. Make Gauss weapons cause an additional MW to vehicles on a wound role of 6.

It'd make heavy destroyer's even more irrelevant I guess, but if we don't get anti-tank weapons on our infantry, we should be able to 'glance' stuff to death like we used to.

I do miss the kill-everything-ness of the Gauss. Now that everything is wounds-on-6, them simply giving it a -1AP over a normal Bolter just doesn't cut it. Mortal wounds are very powerful though, I'd be wary of handing out a mortal-wound generator to our basic guns! Plus would take away some of the Synaptic Disintegrator's schtick.

Yeah, mortal wounds are pretty disgusting. They should stay as a rarity.
Maybe a simple +1 strength (not wound. That would mean a flayer could damage T10 units on a 5+) against vehicles would be enough, or +1 damage.

IanVanCheese wrote:
I just want our old rules back in some format. Make Gauss weapons cause an additional MW to vehicles on a wound role of 6.

It'd make heavy destroyer's even more irrelevant I guess, but if we don't get anti-tank weapons on our infantry, we should be able to 'glance' stuff to death like we used to.

OMG this would fix so much of my problems! Was just getting stomped by BA and SW playing buddies today, and one of my biggest issues is handling big stuff. My SW buddy was rushing rhinos, stormfang, and ven dreads up at me and I was having issues even scratching the paint with two DDAs, Heavy Destroyers and a stalker (reg destroyers were in reserve). Granted popping smoke and using the -1 hit stratagem didn't help, but I was hoping I'd do SOMETHING.

At least this buff to gauss would make using infantry well worth it again. Currently have 10 gauss immortals and 40 warriors just kinda gathering dust.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
I do miss the kill-everything-ness of the Gauss. Now that everything is wounds-on-6, them simply giving it a -1AP over a normal Bolter just doesn't cut it. Mortal wounds are very powerful though, I'd be wary of handing out a mortal-wound generator to our basic guns! Plus would take away some of the Synaptic Disintegrator's schtick.

Maybe, but if it was limited to vehicles, it would keep them in check a bit. I don't think +1 Str is enough of a buff, and we already have ways to make Gauss get an extra -1 and it's not helping us take down armour.

With that said, a +1 to wound vs vehicles would work. We need something. Necrons units were designed around this idea that Gauss wrecked armour, hence no special/heavy weapons. Now that it doesn't, we don't have to usual options to deal with the big stuff. Also making Gauss scary to tanks again gives Warriors another reason to exist. ATM no one is running warriors.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
I do miss the kill-everything-ness of the Gauss. Now that everything is wounds-on-6, them simply giving it a -1AP over a normal Bolter just doesn't cut it. Mortal wounds are very powerful though, I'd be wary of handing out a mortal-wound generator to our basic guns! Plus would take away some of the Synaptic Disintegrator's schtick.

Then again, if Gauss weapons did mortal wounds on 6s, that would equate to ~4.44 mortal wounds being dished out on average by 20 warriors in rapid fire range. I feel like that's not gamebreaking, but still enough to have an impact. And it could be further balanced by making it only proc against vehicles, or the mortal wound replacing the regular damage on flayers and blasters.

Even if warriors could dish out mortal wounds I doubt it would be gamebreaking tbh. Just give them that very needed edge.

Except there's the inconsistency of such a weapon only doing that to vehicles. Gauss used to be special when it could sound anything on a 6.

I agree as well, that its obvious they mean the last sentence for mono and nightscythe to overwrite any previous rules and as written i dont see many judges stopping it if at all.

Its still a hefty as heck tax to take a mono or nightscythe, until maybe C.A. but it is nice to have that option back.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except there's the inconsistency of such a weapon only doing that to vehicles. Gauss used to be special when it could sound anything on a 6.

Gauss has always been more effective against vehicles than other targets though. While it always wounded on 6s against other models, the main strength of Gauss was that vehicles suffered a glancing hit. In earlier editions that could permanently cripple a vehicle, and in 7th a blob of warriors in rf would reliably kill any 3 hp or less vehicle in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides, almost nothing had t8+ anyway, so always wounding on 6s barely ever even came into play outside of apocalypse games

If gauss were to get weird mortal wounds, I'd rather the exception be that they don't spread to multiple models in a unit, so the mortal wound generation would be a factor against hive tyrants and dreadnoughts but not guardsmen.

Maybe a rule were Gauss gives -1 to all saving throws (so invulns as well) on a wound roll of 6+?

IanVanCheese wrote:

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll wrote:
I do miss the kill-everything-ness of the Gauss. Now that everything is wounds-on-6, them simply giving it a -1AP over a normal Bolter just doesn't cut it. Mortal wounds are very powerful though, I'd be wary of handing out a mortal-wound generator to our basic guns! Plus would take away some of the Synaptic Disintegrator's schtick.

Maybe, but if it was limited to vehicles, it would keep them in check a bit. I don't think +1 Str is enough of a buff, and we already have ways to make Gauss get an extra -1 and it's not helping us take down armour.

With that said, a +1 to wound vs vehicles would work. We need something. Necrons units were designed around this idea that Gauss wrecked armour, hence no special/heavy weapons. Now that it doesn't, we don't have to usual options to deal with the big stuff. Also making Gauss scary to tanks again gives Warriors another reason to exist. ATM no one is running warriors.

I run warriors, but only in games larger than 1000 points. They are overpriced (they probably need to be 10 points, for their armor, min squad size and range), but they are fairly effective against light infantry, and if used in conjunction with a Ghost Ark they can be a strong front line. The Ghost Ark is also a neat infantry killer; my opponents are always taken by surprise just how many shots it can churn out at short range.

You could use tesla, but I find that they tend to drop off against things with 5+ saves and relying on 6s to proc tend to lead to disappointment. They are more expensive too, and the fact that -1 modifiers remove the tesla ability is a huge problem. They should have kept it on natural 6s; necron lightning weapons from battlefleet gothic, which were most likely the source of inspiration for tesla, didn't care about things like holofields or other abilities that reduce weapon accuracy, and Tesla weapons in 5th procced on a natural 6 too.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

No it isn't.
We have 5.
One is on an vehicle.
The other is on an expensive vehicle that no one takes
Another is on surprisingly fragile infantry.
One is on a flyer that can't even shoot at full accuracy.
One is on a walker.

Wrong. We have these units with S8+ guns :

Anrakyr
Tomb sentinel
Triarch stalker
Heavy destroyer
DDA
Monolith
Sentry Pylon
Gauss Pylon
Tesseract ark
Doom scythe

Yes, they are expensive, which can be fixed with point drops. We dont lack AT.

 p5freak wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

No it isn't.
We have 5.
One is on an vehicle.
The other is on an expensive vehicle that no one takes
Another is on surprisingly fragile infantry.
One is on a flyer that can't even shoot at full accuracy.
One is on a walker.

Wrong. We have these units with S8+ guns :

Anrakyr
Tomb sentinel
Triarch stalker
Heavy destroyer
DDA
Monolith
Sentry Pylon
Gauss Pylon
Tesseract ark
Doom scythe
Illuminor Szeras

Yes, they are expensive, which can be fixed with point drops. We dont lack AT.

You forgot one