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.
2018/10/09 13:44:02
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
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.
Yeah, I have 12, and they have been ongoing uncompleted projects for 1.5 years now. Magnetized even. Little buggers.
Also since they have -1 to hit, guys tend to shoot at other things first, warriors, immortals, certainly destroyers. If you bring more bodies, making them 6+ man (or bike) strong, they are even more reluctant to start shooing at them since they have RP, and they'd rather clear other, easier to kill, units with RP first (in my experience)
Alsp PBeamers are nice with mehprit, Assault 3 S6 -1 is not too shabby for its price. The perfect companion for 20 warriors sent up with the deceiver.
2018/10/09 14:49:07
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
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.
You do pick a unit, and you roll RP for every model in that that unit, then you can freely select which models get resurrected. You certainly dont have to say that this one dice is for that one model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: May i suggest that everyone emails FW and tells them to change the D6 damage on the singularity generators from the seraptek heavy construct to something like 2D3 or anything else less random. I did, maybe they change it, if enough people email them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/10/09 15:32:06
2018/10/09 16:14:05
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
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.
You do pick a unit, and you roll RP for every model in that that unit, then you can freely select which models get resurrected. You certainly dont have to say that this one dice is for that one model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: May i suggest that everyone emails FW and tells them to change the D6 damage on the singularity generators from the seraptek heavy construct to something like 2D3 or anything else less random. I did, maybe they change it, if enough people email them.
I have to disagree there, it quite clearly says you roll a dice for each model and the roll decides the outcome for the model
2018/10/09 22:33:45
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Im unsure what torblind is getting all necrons are the same unless your talking about different kitted out tombblades. Then yes you would have to roll seperately for the different ones! Otherwise it makes no difference.
2018/10/10 00:55:01
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
It does say "roll a D6 for each slain model" "on a 5+, the model's reanimation protocols activate". So yes, technically you have to do it model by model, but then you use fast dice and roll all at the same time if it is the samy type of model.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/10 04:02:55
p5freak wrote: Please cite the rule from the codex where it says you must select a certain single model first, and roll one dice for that model. I just don't see it.
Well, I see it where it says roll a dice for each model and on a 5+ the reanimation protocols activate and you set it back up with it's unit
2018/10/10 06:11:51
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
One trick you can do by rolling the RP one by one is when you are just out of range of a Cryptek. If you roll them 1 by 1, the first new model you can place might just get you within the Cryptek’s range, letting you roll the rest on a 4+
2018/10/10 07:29:28
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Doctoralex wrote: One trick you can do by rolling the RP one by one is when you are just out of range of a Cryptek. If you roll them 1 by 1, the first new model you can place might just get you within the Cryptek’s range, letting you roll the rest on a 4+
That goes against every other similar mechanic in the game. Resolving wounds when shooting for example.
I would never do it or allow it.
2018/10/10 08:02:52
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
No it doesn't. This is in the faq. If you're shooting into an infantry unit that has 10 models, 3 of which aren't on a ruin, I can roll until I kill those 3 and then roll the other 7 with +1 for cover in the same shooting section.
I don't see why this is any different.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/10/10 08:04:01
Doctoralex wrote: One trick you can do by rolling the RP one by one is when you are just out of range of a Cryptek. If you roll them 1 by 1, the first new model you can place might just get you within the Cryptek’s range, letting you roll the rest on a 4+
That goes against every other similar mechanic in the game. Resolving wounds when shooting for example.
I would never do it or allow it.
When making saves you can do it one at a time to remove a model outside of cover to get cover for the rest of the unit, so not really?
If for some reason you wanted to you can do a Reanimation Protocol roll for a model in one unit, then take a Reanimation Protocol roll for another unit, then do a couple of My Will Be Done targets, generate objectives and then finally go back to the first unit and do the remaining Reanimation Protocol rolls for that unit. You're not making the rolls for units, you're making for models and it all happens at the start of the turn.
Also thanks to Doctoralex I'd never even considered that. Of course, you'd usually just want to be in range and you're going to hate yourself if you roll two fours before you roll a 5+.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/10 08:34:09
2018/10/10 09:52:21
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Doctoralex wrote: One trick you can do by rolling the RP one by one is when you are just out of range of a Cryptek. If you roll them 1 by 1, the first new model you can place might just get you within the Cryptek’s range, letting you roll the rest on a 4+
That goes against every other similar mechanic in the game. Resolving wounds when shooting for example.
I would never do it or allow it.
When making saves you can do it one at a time to remove a model outside of cover to get cover for the rest of the unit, so not really?
If for some reason you wanted to you can do a Reanimation Protocol roll for a model in one unit, then take a Reanimation Protocol roll for another unit, then do a couple of My Will Be Done targets, generate objectives and then finally go back to the first unit and do the remaining Reanimation Protocol rolls for that unit. You're not making the rolls for units, you're making for models and it all happens at the start of the turn.
Also thanks to Doctoralex I'd never even considered that. Of course, you'd usually just want to be in range and you're going to hate yourself if you roll two fours before you roll a 5+.
Resolving wounds to gain cover from one salvo was admitadly news to me, I'd happily stand corrected on that.
Doesn't that on its own invalidate the rule that models must be entirely in cover to get benefit of cover? If you just remove those 4 guys out of cover first, then the remaining 6 are in cover, by the 4th failed saving throw and now lo and behold, remaining unit is in cover, and get +1. Effectively you get cover save for any mode in cover, regardless of models outside because you just remove those first? Does not sound right although I havent yet gone down the YMDC route on this one.
2018/10/10 11:17:14
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Neat idea with the cryptek and RP, thanks for that.
RAW, you cant fast roll saves against wounds. But if everything is the same, why not. On to cover. Infantry receives the benefit of cover when the entire unit is within terrain. Other units only when they are within terrain, and at least 50% obscured from the firers view. Note that it doesnt have to be the piece of terrain where the unit is, which is obscuring it. It could be another unit, friendly, or enemy. Models can only see through other models in their own unit. Lots of threads in YMDC about this.
From the designers commentary :
Q: When determining whether a model
benefits from cover, does the model’s
entire unit need to be fully on or within
terrain, or just the model making a
particular saving throw?
3
A: All of the models in a unit need to be at
least partially on or within terrain if any of
the models are to receive the +1 bonus to
their saving throw.
Note, however, that it is possible for a unit to
gain the benefit of cover as it suffers casualties
during the Shooting phase by removing those
models that are not on, or within terrain. As
soon as the last model that was not on or within
terrain is slain, the rest of the unit immediately
starts to receive the benefit of cover.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/10 11:21:14
2018/10/10 11:21:05
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
p5freak wrote: Neat idea with the cryptek and RP, thanks for that.
RAW, you cant fast roll saves against wounds. But if everything is the same, why not. On to cover. Infantry receives the benefit of cover when the entire unit is within terrain. Other units only when they are within terrain, and at least 50% obscured from the firers view. Note that it doesnt have to be the piece of terrain where the unit is, which is obscuring it. It could be another unit, friendly, or enemy. Models can only see through other models in their own unit. Lots of threads in YMDC about this.
The specific issue is, if you have 4 infantry models outside of cover and 6 modesl on cover, all from 1 unit. You then receive 10 wounds. And you decide to roll them one by one. The first 4 saving rolls fail, and you remove the 4 models out of cover. You then claim the remaining 6 are now in cover, making the hole unit being in cover, and you move on to rolling the remaining 6 wounds with a +1 modifier.
I am highly surprised this is allowed as it would nullify the entire meaning of having the entire unit within cover in the first place. Has this been down the YMDC route?
2018/10/10 11:22:02
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Q: When determining whether a model
benefits from cover, does the model’s
entire unit need to be fully on or within
terrain, or just the model making a
particular saving throw?
A: All of the models in a unit need to be at
least partially on or within terrain if any of
the models are to receive the +1 bonus to
their saving throw.
Note, however, that it is possible for a unit to
gain the benefit of cover as it suffers casualties
during the Shooting phase by removing those
models that are not on, or within terrain. As
soon as the last model that was not on or within
terrain is slain, the rest of the unit immediately
starts to receive the benefit of cover.
This is nothing new, its been there since the designers commentary has been released. No need to go down the YMDC route.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/10/10 11:24:06
2018/10/10 11:52:16
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
p5freak wrote: Neat idea with the cryptek and RP, thanks for that.
RAW, you cant fast roll saves against wounds. But if everything is the same, why not. On to cover. Infantry receives the benefit of cover when the entire unit is within terrain. Other units only when they are within terrain, and at least 50% obscured from the firers view. Note that it doesnt have to be the piece of terrain where the unit is, which is obscuring it. It could be another unit, friendly, or enemy. Models can only see through other models in their own unit. Lots of threads in YMDC about this.
The specific issue is, if you have 4 infantry models outside of cover and 6 modesl on cover, all from 1 unit. You then receive 10 wounds. And you decide to roll them one by one. The first 4 saving rolls fail, and you remove the 4 models out of cover. You then claim the remaining 6 are now in cover, making the hole unit being in cover, and you move on to rolling the remaining 6 wounds with a +1 modifier.
I am highly surprised this is allowed as it would nullify the entire meaning of having the entire unit within cover in the first place. Has this been down the YMDC route?
Well it would remove some flexibility in casualty removal. If you want to remove guys in the cover first(due to them being more sacrificiable) tough luck.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2018/10/10 12:39:04
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
But all shots from a salvo are simultaneous, right? Ie unit A fires at my unit, I remove 6 casualties. unit B also shoots at them and now they have cover since the remaining 4 are in terrain.
Is it commonly accepted that the last 2 guys I removed in salvo A also have cover? I may roll saves one by one, but that doesn't change the fact that all shooting in a salvo is simultaneous and 'immediately' cannot happen till after it is resolved?
2018/10/10 12:55:46
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
torblind wrote: But all shots from a salvo are simultaneous, right? Ie unit A fires at my unit, I remove 6 casualties. unit B also shoots at them and now they have cover since the remaining 4 are in terrain.
Is it commonly accepted that the last 2 guys I removed in salvo A also have cover? I may roll saves one by one, but that doesn't change the fact that all shooting in a salvo is simultaneous and 'immediately' cannot happen till after it is resolved?
The answer is literally written down in the thread above, in the FAQ snippet.
Other precedent for this - Tau marker lights. You can roll these one at a time (e.g. a unit of 6 marker drones), once you get a hit the ML takes effect for the remaining shots.
2018/10/10 13:16:20
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Probably some armies like scion plasma spam would hard-counter the list, but I can see a lot of lists, particularly ones tooled up for Knights, struggling to shift those bodies.
If we get the promised price drops in CA, this might turn into something maybe?
2018/10/10 14:29:40
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Probably some armies like scion plasma spam would hard-counter the list, but I can see a lot of lists, particularly ones tooled up for Knights, struggling to shift those bodies.
If we get the promised price drops in CA, this might turn into something maybe?
Double battalion certainly is interesting, but will it be diverse enough?
Perhaps spend another 2 CP on a relic since you still get to regenerate freely before turn 1
2018/10/10 15:18:56
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Isn't the Rule of Three going to prohibit that list? I know one batallion has tesla and the other gauss but can't you only take 3 of any datasheet, irrespective of gear choices?
2018/10/10 15:52:18
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
dapperbandit wrote: Isn't the Rule of Three going to prohibit that list? I know one batallion has tesla and the other gauss but can't you only take 3 of any datasheet, irrespective of gear choices?
Troops are still good
Also the WL isn't on the field to regenerate those CPs anyway that I suggested.
2018/10/10 16:33:43
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - [please post lists under spoilers]
Probably some armies like scion plasma spam would hard-counter the list, but I can see a lot of lists, particularly ones tooled up for Knights, struggling to shift those bodies.
If we get the promised price drops in CA, this might turn into something maybe?
Double battalion certainly is interesting, but will it be diverse enough?
Perhaps spend another 2 CP on a relic since you still get to regenerate freely before turn 1
You don't get to regenerate CP spent before your WL is placed on the battlefield. If you want to do the trick with a Sautekh WL and a bunch of Nephrekh units using the DS Strat you need to place the WL on the field first before using those Stratagems. The relic is bought before deployment so no regeneration for that or if you wanted to re-roll the result on your Transcendent C'tan's personality.
For the list I'd get at least 2x10 Tesla to get max value from your OLs' MWBD, cut a few of the Gauss Immortals to make room for that, ideally you'd want even more than that because your opponent will target the big units first, so I'd go 3x10 Tesla 1x8 Tesla and 3x5 Gauss. Knights don't have a problem with clearing out MEQ so your list design is way off if you're looking for a Knight counter, it's going to be absolutely brutal against Orks though so it's not necessarily a bad list if Orks are going to be the new meta.
I think the way cover works is the way it should work, it only makes sense the people in cover are the last to die and that they are harder to kill.
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?
If you're running void/warscythe then the personal re-roll isn't bad, that's something to keep in mind as well. When I'm running a Lord or Cryptek I don't really see any benefit in making him tougher because he's going to die to a stiff breeze anyways. Like the BA Smashcaptain WL needs two wounds instead of 1, easily done, doing 4 wounds with a DP is also fairly easy in a turn, if I'm running an Overlord I'm probably running a Battalion in which case HypeStrat is amazing.
The only times when Hyperlogical Strategist isn't necessarily the best is for a D Lord or a Catacomb Command Barge which might want a defensive strat or if you're running silver tide in which case I agree with the other posters about Immortal Pride being better. The rest of the WL traits don't really compare and should never be taken on a Sautekh WL, Thrall of the Silent King is the best of the bad but it doesn't compare to HypeStrat. Half my reason for ever taking Sautekh is just the WL trait, it is that amazing and unless you're playing incredibly CP hungry armies (Tesseract Vaults come to mind) then it is just as good as it was before and I would always take it.
It's also a question of what armies you're making when playing Sautekh, Implacable Conqueror is pretty good in the right list, but that list isn't Sautekh.
Won a game against a Dark Angels and Astra Militarum alliance with the same list. My opponent didn't get to shoot with his 10 Hellblasters for the first two turns due to a huge LOS blocking piece of terrain blocking view of my entire army. He dropped down a unit of 10 Terminators and did a little bit of shooting damage but they got cut down after failing their charge.
I lost a 2k CA Maelstrom game with the same list against an Ulthwe list. I did pretty well in killing all his infantry, but he won through Maelstrom objectives and running circles around my Lychguard with his grav tanks. I forgot about the FLY change and accidentally got my Destroyers killed because they're too fat to fit between the 2" gap between models in a Lychguard unit and can no longer fly.
I won a 2k CA Maelstrom game with Novokh Lychguard spam against DG. My opponent didn't really pick his targets very well and didn't manage to kill anything but a unit of 10 Warriors in his first two shooting phases and got pushed back and didn't really get many objectives. It was his first time against Necrons, I don't think he appreciated how important target priority was. I accidentally left too little room to manouvre a unit of Lychguard through another Lychguard unit twice meaning I got fewer models in because I had to conga line my Lychguard to maintain coherency with one that was locked between another two units. I think I'll be more careful when mixing units up next time.
I still think the list is bad due to its weakness against fast units with FLY, it seems better than the Kutlakh list I tried earlier though, perhaps it's that third unit of Lychguard that is needed to make Kutlakh better. Maybe it's about not including Tesla Immortals, chaff and horde units I can use to my advantage as a jumping off board or as hostages to prevent my opponent from shooting at my Lychgaurd, clearing them away may actually be a mistake.
Lost a CA Maelstrom game with Novokh Lychguard spam against AM. He brought 9 of the FW flametanks with D6 S6 AP-1 D2 autohits each and a 6" explosion for D6 MWs that triggers on a 4+, I surrendered turn 3 when I got "outflanked" and lost Anrakyr and my only Cryptek and subsequently failed my Crypteks 4+ Reanimation roll, without any CP left I surrendered with a Lord, 2 Lychguard, 23 Warriors, 2 Destroyers at the end of his third turn (he was comically unlucky), having killed four 80 pt tanks and a 47 pt unit of Guard.
My opponent didn't tailor and I asked him if he wanted me to bring a list giving him more challenge but he allowed me to see if I could somehow pull out a win. Despite my best efforts of taking hostages and piling into things I didn't charge it just wasn't nearly enough. I think I might try putting my characters in the second rank instead of the third or fourth rank behind all my Lychguard, that might make it possible for them to charge with the Lychguard, which could have prevented my opponent from circling around me and getting to my characters in the back, it also means fewer guys standing around to provide range to my aura buffs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/11 09:39:48
