Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]

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.

**iGuy91**

moonsmite wrote:
Try not using destroyers With the new lack of turn 1 deep strike with them and probably increase in points. get out of the habit of an auto include while it doesn't matter

That and will confused your opponent expecting to fight all the destroyers

Nah, i aint gonna hamstring myself because of potential new rules.

**Merkabah**

I don't know if they will nerf destroyers or that whatever hypothetical nerf they get will make them unusable. They may just conclude that the last thing we need right now is a nerf to one of the only standouts in the codex and leave them alone. It's hard to say.

Frankly, I don't think they are overpowered. They are strong, sure. But because of the way strategems work you can't spam them effectively and they aren't exactly the hardest thing around to get off the board. And everyone runs the right weapons to do the job.

**Slayer-Fan123**

If they hit Destroyers, that's GW hitting the wrong target. Their Stratagem should easily be 2CP.

**Arachnofiend**

If they were going to change the cost of Extermination Protocols it would have happened in the FAQ when they changed the cost of a whole bunch of other stratagems. I'm gonna be optimistic and say that nerfing the worst faction in the game isn't on GW's radar.

**vict0988**

torblind wrote:
I have played the Gauss pylon (also with T8/3+) only once in 8th (where's the fun, really), against AM.

Even with 5++, 5 LRBT variants brough tit down 17 wounds in his first turn of shooting, using only Dmg2 and D3 weapons and heavy bolters.

I don't know how average that is, but his rolls weren't overly particularly.

Not sure how readily available D2-D3 weapons are for others, but QS might not be that big of a deal perhaps. QS would likely shift them to use their lascannons on our destroyers and tomb blades instead.

QS might have a psychological impact though.

I don't think the Pylon is remotely good anymore with the DS nerf, the scenario you mentioned seems perfectly average to me without having done the math.

QS increases durability by 20% against D2 weapons, 28% against Dd3 weapons, 50% against D3 weapons, 117% against Dd6 weapons, 125% against Dd6 with a minimum of D3.

FNP increases durability by 20%/50%/100%/200% for FNP 6+/5+/4+/3+ respectively. QS being influenced more by a single roll means you have a great place to spend your re-rolls if you say roll a 6 against a D6 wound, with FNP you just have to take what you can get more or less.

QS is great fun to play with when you're a lucky SoaB but I don't think the rule fits Necrons very well, I'd like it better if Necrons had reliable technology and the only unreliable things available to Necrons were C'tan Shards.

dapperbandit wrote:
Boiling down the Monolith's needs to the basics:

A) It's too expensive
B) Its utility as a transport is questionable
C) It's not very survivable

D) It's slow.
E) It's useless in close-combat.
F) It doesn't have much dakka.
G) Its anti-charge ability is easily bypassed.
H) It has an uneven pts cost.

**iGuy91**

Had a great game against Illyandan Eldar last night. Casual game, but a very solid showing for my Immortal/Warrior Phalanx.

**torblind**

iGuy91 wrote:
Had a great game against Illyandan Eldar last night. Casual game, but a very solid showing for my Immortal/Warrior Phalanx.

Cool, what's in it?

**iGuy91**

torblind wrote:
iGuy91 wrote:
Had a great game against Illyandan Eldar last night. Casual game, but a very solid showing for my Immortal/Warrior Phalanx.

Cool, what's in it?

Ran a Mephrit Batallion/Outrider

Spoiler:

**rvd1ofakind**

My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

**iGuy91**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

You know...i'd NEVER considered running them as a mixed group...because i'm so used to our squads not being able to mix and match anything...huh...not a bad idea...

**Odrankt**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

I too like this idea but my only gripe with this idea is that while the 4 PBeamers are "tax" and are used to soak wounds and give you the ability to select what comes back to life via RP. You are still losing out on 4 Gauss tomb blades.

If you have 2 units of Blades, 1st with 9 Gauss and 2nd has 5 Gauss 4 PBs. And you lose 4 models in both units. While you are stripped of 4 Gauss TBs and 4 PBeamer TB. The 1st unit is actually going to be better because you will be RPing 4 Gauss TBs rather than 4 PBeamer TBs.if that makes sense?

Your 1st unit will last as long as the 2nd unit but the 1st one has a better chance of doing reliable dmg as it will always have more Gauss than the 2nd.

I would just run a unit of 9 PBeamers and have them advance around the board to grab objectives and be a mobile screen/distraction Carnifex.

Also, you should try running some as 3+ and 5++ for your exact reasons above. You get to choose what comes back via RP. So, with having both options you can designated which model takes what dmg e.g. shot with a weapon with AP -1? Take it on a Shield Vane TB. Being shot at with a weapon with AP -4? Take it on the Shadowloom TB. Better survivability and if in a Nihilakh detachment (just throwing this out their) you can make them 4++.

**torblind**

Odrankt wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

I too like this idea but my only gripe with this idea is that while the 4 PBeamers are "tax" and are used to soak wounds and give you the ability to select what comes back to life via RP. You are still losing out on 4 Gauss tomb blades.

If you have 2 units of Blades, 1st with 9 Gauss and 2nd has 5 Gauss 4 PBs. And you lose 4 models in both units. While you are stripped of 4 Gauss TBs and 4 PBeamer TB. The 1st unit is actually going to be better because you will be RPing 4 Gauss TBs rather than 4 PBeamer TBs.if that makes sense?

Your 1st unit will last as long as the 2nd unit but the 1st one has a better chance of doing reliable dmg as it will always have more Gauss than the 2nd.

I would just run a unit of 9 PBeamers and have them advance around the board to grab objectives and be a mobile screen/distraction Carnifex.

Also, you should try running some as 3+ and 5++ for your exact reasons above. You get to choose what comes back via RP. So, with having both options you can designated which model takes what dmg e.g. shot with a weapon with AP -1? Take it on a Shield Vane TB. Being shot at with a weapon with AP -4? Take it on the Shadowloom TB. Better survivability and if in a Nihilakh detachment (just throwing this out their) you can make them 4++.

Do you get to choose for RP?

**Odrankt**

torblind wrote:
Odrankt wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

I too like this idea but my only gripe with this idea is that while the 4 PBeamers are "tax" and are used to soak wounds and give you the ability to select what comes back to life via RP. You are still losing out on 4 Gauss tomb blades.

If you have 2 units of Blades, 1st with 9 Gauss and 2nd has 5 Gauss 4 PBs. And you lose 4 models in both units. While you are stripped of 4 Gauss TBs and 4 PBeamer TB. The 1st unit is actually going to be better because you will be RPing 4 Gauss TBs rather than 4 PBeamer TBs.if that makes sense?

Your 1st unit will last as long as the 2nd unit but the 1st one has a better chance of doing reliable dmg as it will always have more Gauss than the 2nd.

I would just run a unit of 9 PBeamers and have them advance around the board to grab objectives and be a mobile screen/distraction Carnifex.

Also, you should try running some as 3+ and 5++ for your exact reasons above. You get to choose what comes back via RP. So, with having both options you can designated which model takes what dmg e.g. shot with a weapon with AP -1? Take it on a Shield Vane TB. Being shot at with a weapon with AP -4? Take it on the Shadowloom TB. Better survivability and if in a Nihilakh detachment (just throwing this out their) you can make them 4++.

Do you get to choose for RP?

Yup. You just nominate what models you want to bring back e.g. 2 Shadowlooms and 2 Shield Vanes. And than you roll separately for each pair. Or nominate different colour dice to each model and roll all at once.

**torblind**

Odrankt wrote:
torblind wrote:
Odrankt wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

I too like this idea but my only gripe with this idea is that while the 4 PBeamers are "tax" and are used to soak wounds and give you the ability to select what comes back to life via RP. You are still losing out on 4 Gauss tomb blades.

If you have 2 units of Blades, 1st with 9 Gauss and 2nd has 5 Gauss 4 PBs. And you lose 4 models in both units. While you are stripped of 4 Gauss TBs and 4 PBeamer TB. The 1st unit is actually going to be better because you will be RPing 4 Gauss TBs rather than 4 PBeamer TBs.if that makes sense?

Your 1st unit will last as long as the 2nd unit but the 1st one has a better chance of doing reliable dmg as it will always have more Gauss than the 2nd.

I would just run a unit of 9 PBeamers and have them advance around the board to grab objectives and be a mobile screen/distraction Carnifex.

Also, you should try running some as 3+ and 5++ for your exact reasons above. You get to choose what comes back via RP. So, with having both options you can designated which model takes what dmg e.g. shot with a weapon with AP -1? Take it on a Shield Vane TB. Being shot at with a weapon with AP -4? Take it on the Shadowloom TB. Better survivability and if in a Nihilakh detachment (just throwing this out their) you can make them 4++.

Do you get to choose for RP?

Yup. You just nominate what models you want to bring back e.g. 2 Shadowlooms and 2 Shield Vanes. And than you roll separately for each pair. Or nominate different colour dice to each model and roll all at once.

What's the choice in that? Each dead model has a dice that gets a 5+ or not. Or what did you talk about selecting in the first place?

**iGuy91**

I'd suggest rolling them separately.

E.g - Ok, this one is for the Gauss Tomb Blade, These 4 are for the Particle Tomb Blades.

Only seems fair.

**Odrankt**

torblind wrote:
Odrankt wrote:
torblind wrote:
Odrankt wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
My fav. configuration for Tomb Blades is 4 particle 5 gauss all 3+ ofc. I kill particles first so gauss actually does it's thing.

I too like this idea but my only gripe with this idea is that while the 4 PBeamers are "tax" and are used to soak wounds and give you the ability to select what comes back to life via RP. You are still losing out on 4 Gauss tomb blades.

If you have 2 units of Blades, 1st with 9 Gauss and 2nd has 5 Gauss 4 PBs. And you lose 4 models in both units. While you are stripped of 4 Gauss TBs and 4 PBeamer TB. The 1st unit is actually going to be better because you will be RPing 4 Gauss TBs rather than 4 PBeamer TBs.if that makes sense?

Your 1st unit will last as long as the 2nd unit but the 1st one has a better chance of doing reliable dmg as it will always have more Gauss than the 2nd.

I would just run a unit of 9 PBeamers and have them advance around the board to grab objectives and be a mobile screen/distraction Carnifex.

Also, you should try running some as 3+ and 5++ for your exact reasons above. You get to choose what comes back via RP. So, with having both options you can designated which model takes what dmg e.g. shot with a weapon with AP -1? Take it on a Shield Vane TB. Being shot at with a weapon with AP -4? Take it on the Shadowloom TB. Better survivability and if in a Nihilakh detachment (just throwing this out their) you can make them 4++.

Do you get to choose for RP?

Yup. You just nominate what models you want to bring back e.g. 2 Shadowlooms and 2 Shield Vanes. And than you roll separately for each pair. Or nominate different colour dice to each model and roll all at once.

What's the choice in that? Each dead model has a dice that gets a 5+ or not. Or what did you talk about selecting in the first place?

The choice depends on what models you sacrificed. If each model in a unit has a different upgrade and/or gun you should nominate what your RPing e.g. you lose 5 TBs and 3 where Shield Vanes and 2 where Shadowlooms. Well say you rolled RP and only get 3 5+ out of 5 die but you didn't nominate what you wanted to RP. You dont get to choose what 3 models come back - 2 Shieldvanes, 1 Shadowlooms. 2 Shadowlooms, 1 Shield Vane etc because you never informed what models you wanted to bring back before the RP roll. You at least need to tell your opponent what models your RPing if your unit has models with different guns and loadouts. You RP per model, meaning you roll 1 die at a time. You should only group roll RP if all models in a unit are the same. E.g. if running 5 Destroyers you would roll 5 normal RPs. But if one of those model is a Heavy destroyer you have to nominate what Sequence your RPing.

**moonsmite**

With the current Beta FAQ for strat regen. It brings the question

How many CP would we need to get back to make it worth taking the Sautekh Warlord trait over any other trait

Personally expecting to get back 2 in a game. But would it be worth having a more survivable warlord over these CP?

**p5freak**

Odrankt wrote:

The choice depends on what models you sacrificed. If each model in a unit has a different upgrade and/or gun you should nominate what your RPing e.g. you lose 5 TBs and 3 where Shield Vanes and 2 where Shadowlooms. Well say you rolled RP and only get 3 5+ out of 5 die but you didn't nominate what you wanted to RP. You dont get to choose what 3 models come back - 2 Shieldvanes, 1 Shadowlooms. 2 Shadowlooms, 1 Shield Vane etc because you never informed what models you wanted to bring back before the RP roll. You at least need to tell your opponent what models your RPing if your unit has models with different guns and loadouts. You RP per model, meaning you roll 1 die at a time. You should only group roll RP if all models in a unit are the same. E.g. if running 5 Destroyers you would roll 5 normal RPs. But if one of those model is a Heavy destroyer you have to nominate what Sequence your RPing.

You roll a dice for every model you lost. For every successful roll you can bring back one model. You can choose freely. Nothing in the RP rule says you have to choose a model first, before you roll.

**torblind**

p5freak wrote:
Odrankt wrote:

The choice depends on what models you sacrificed. If each model in a unit has a different upgrade and/or gun you should nominate what your RPing e.g. you lose 5 TBs and 3 where Shield Vanes and 2 where Shadowlooms. Well say you rolled RP and only get 3 5+ out of 5 die but you didn't nominate what you wanted to RP. You dont get to choose what 3 models come back - 2 Shieldvanes, 1 Shadowlooms. 2 Shadowlooms, 1 Shield Vane etc because you never informed what models you wanted to bring back before the RP roll. You at least need to tell your opponent what models your RPing if your unit has models with different guns and loadouts. You RP per model, meaning you roll 1 die at a time. You should only group roll RP if all models in a unit are the same. E.g. if running 5 Destroyers you would roll 5 normal RPs. But if one of those model is a Heavy destroyer you have to nominate what Sequence your RPing.

You roll a dice for every model you lost. For every successful roll you can bring back one model. You can choose freely. Nothing in the RP rule says you have to choose a model first, before you roll.

Bit surely you would decide which unit you roll for? And does it say to do that in the rules?

**iGuy91**

moonsmite wrote:
With the current Beta FAQ for strat regen. It brings the question

How many CP would we need to get back to make it worth taking the Sautekh Warlord trait over any other trait

Personally expecting to get back 2 in a game. But would it be worth having a more survivable warlord over these CP?

I never thought it was worth it in the first place. Its even worse than it was before now.

**torblind**

iGuy91 wrote:
moonsmite wrote:
With the current Beta FAQ for strat regen. It brings the question

How many CP would we need to get back to make it worth taking the Sautekh Warlord trait over any other trait

Personally expecting to get back 2 in a game. But would it be worth having a more survivable warlord over these CP?

I never thought it was worth it in the first place. Its even worse than it was before now.

Well if you run something akin to a silver tide you likely will spend 2 CP on morale, so going with that trait matches the benefit of sautekh trait.

I find that when I regenerate CPs I am less careful with my points, spending more than I otherwise would, and more than the 1 in 3 advantage would suggest.

**iGuy91**

torblind wrote:
iGuy91 wrote:
moonsmite wrote:
With the current Beta FAQ for strat regen. It brings the question

How many CP would we need to get back to make it worth taking the Sautekh Warlord trait over any other trait

Personally expecting to get back 2 in a game. But would it be worth having a more survivable warlord over these CP?

I never thought it was worth it in the first place. Its even worse than it was before now.

Well if you run something akin to a silver tide you likely will spend 2 CP on morale, so going with that trait matches the benefit of sautekh trait.

I find that when I regenerate CPs I am less careful with my points, spending more than I otherwise would, and more than the 1 in 3 advantage would suggest.

If you are running silver tide, and aren't running immortal pride for your WL trait, you're doing it wrong IMO, you should be getting the fearless bubble for free, and spending the CP on extra MWBD charges from Phaeron's will

**torblind**

Yeah I wrote horrible English, meant to say going with the trait that lets you pass morale already buys you 2cp you otherwise would spend with hyoerlogical strategist, in a silver tide. So already on par or better there.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Yeah, you pretty much need Immortal Pride if you are running big blobs of warriors. Not having to take morale tests saved my warrior blob quite a few times.

**rvd1ofakind**

BTW, particle tomb blades are basically as good as gauss tomb blades against the right targets. So taking 4 of those in my unit of 9 is not a detriment to me. It's 3 shots.

**Maelstrom808**

With my list, I am usually burning 4cp before the first round ever starts, so regen is hugely important to me still. I have yet to run out of CP before turn 5 since the FAQ dropped.

**tneva82**

torblind wrote:
p5freak wrote:
Odrankt wrote:

The choice depends on what models you sacrificed. If each model in a unit has a different upgrade and/or gun you should nominate what your RPing e.g. you lose 5 TBs and 3 where Shield Vanes and 2 where Shadowlooms. Well say you rolled RP and only get 3 5+ out of 5 die but you didn't nominate what you wanted to RP. You dont get to choose what 3 models come back - 2 Shieldvanes, 1 Shadowlooms. 2 Shadowlooms, 1 Shield Vane etc because you never informed what models you wanted to bring back before the RP roll. You at least need to tell your opponent what models your RPing if your unit has models with different guns and loadouts. You RP per model, meaning you roll 1 die at a time. You should only group roll RP if all models in a unit are the same. E.g. if running 5 Destroyers you would roll 5 normal RPs. But if one of those model is a Heavy destroyer you have to nominate what Sequence your RPing.

You roll a dice for every model you lost. For every successful roll you can bring back one model. You can choose freely. Nothing in the RP rule says you have to choose a model first, before you roll.

Bit surely you would decide which unit you roll for? And does it say to do that in the rules?

Don't have necron codex with me and not that experienced with necrons(been too busy painting adeptus titanicus and orks for 6k apoc to start working on my necrons) but check the wording between RP and transports blowing up where you roll number of models in transport and pick casualties rather than roll for each unit(thus not having 1/6 chance of having your expensive character die out of that if he has cheap chaff to sacrifice instead). Maybe gives hint how it should be rolled with RP.

**CthuluIsSpy**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
BTW, particle tomb blades are basically as good as gauss tomb blades against the right targets. So taking 4 of those in my unit of 9 is not a detriment to me. It's 3 shots.

I actually really like the idea of particle tomb blades. It synergizes quite well with nephrekh, as you can take advantage of the extra advance distance as much as you want.
The problem with taking tesla is that if you advance, you lose the extra hits which is what you want tesla for. Tesla is also about double the cost of a particle caster, with just one more shot at a lower strength. If you advance its objectively inferior to particles.

**torblind**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
BTW, particle tomb blades are basically as good as gauss tomb blades against the right targets. So taking 4 of those in my unit of 9 is not a detriment to me. It's 3 shots.

I actually really like the idea of particle tomb blades. It synergizes quite well with nephrekh, as you can take advantage of the extra advance distance as much as you want.
The problem with taking tesla is that if you advance, you lose the extra hits which is what you want tesla for. Tesla is also about double the cost of a particle caster, with just one more shot at a lower strength. If you advance its objectively inferior to particles.

Also they're cheap. Sometimes you just need many fast bodies.

**Merkabah**

torblind wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
BTW, particle tomb blades are basically as good as gauss tomb blades against the right targets. So taking 4 of those in my unit of 9 is not a detriment to me. It's 3 shots.

I actually really like the idea of particle tomb blades. It synergizes quite well with nephrekh, as you can take advantage of the extra advance distance as much as you want.
The problem with taking tesla is that if you advance, you lose the extra hits which is what you want tesla for. Tesla is also about double the cost of a particle caster, with just one more shot at a lower strength. If you advance its objectively inferior to particles.

Also they're cheap. Sometimes you just need many fast bodies.

That's the big thing I was thinking about. I'm basically taking these things instead of troops and that leaves me a little lacking in bodies. I'm thinking that if I can squeeze in a third squad by taking two squads of these guys it could counter a big weakness I see with the list I'm building. On the other hand, I would have to build another squad of these little sobs to try it. And that makes me sad. Very very sad.