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.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

There is no where stating that if you take Imotekh that he has to be your warlord. You can choose any HQ to be your warlord so you can pick which trait you want in your list.

While that is true, you dont get the 1 CP he provides, if he isnt the warlord.

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

@Tauris_Blazestar

That´s true but giving up on the extra CP while taking, doesn´t sound that great tbh.

So for my first attempt at a competitive list post CA I came up with this:


It performed far better than I expected it to. Was up against admech cawl parking lot with a knight. The triarch stalker is really good for the points now, and I love the tomb blades even more than before. Giving the DDA reroll 1s and +1 to hit via MD is really solid. I'm strongly considering moving the tomb blades to sautekh and scraping the nephrekh detachment and just putting destroyers in an aux to save points on the lord and the scarabs so as to upgrade one DDA to Tess ark. What do you all think?

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

@Tauris_Blazestar

That´s true but giving up on the extra CP while taking, doesn´t sound that great tbh.

It would be, but as it's not a hit roll, wound roll or damage roll, you'd have to pay a CP to do it.

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:


How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

If you roll for the storm you inflict damage, so its a damage roll, sort of. If you dont agree that its a damage roll, then imotekh gives you +1 CP. If you use it to re-roll the storm its a free re-roll, sort of.

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

This may be worth Asking in YMDC.

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:

 Stained Class wrote:

 Werekill wrote:
Just did a massive math hammer post in another thread, comparing annihilation barges and stalkers. In addition, the benefit of the reroll buff from the stalker is measured.

I'd quote it, but it's a bit huge.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768975.page#10288022

Link leads to a 404. Can I get a quick summary?

Weird, the link works for me. It's the "post CA annihilation barge" thread on this same board.

I'd summarize, but I'm currently on mobile and just now waking up. Maybe later.

The link fails in mobile yet works on a desktop

Thankfully I was able to read it before I gamed with a friend and your data was REALLY helpful. Stalkers really aren't as useful as I thought, and rolling 2's was more problematic if anything when I tested them. Instead I fixed my list up with some minor tweaks:

*list was here*

Just make sure to keep in mind that the Stalker still does a respectable amount of damage by itself, and it's fairly sturdy. The only huge gap is between GEQ numbers.

But your list looks very solid!

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Gauss Pylon or Sentry pylons with the Gauss weapon. C'tan and Destroyer Lords aren't horrible, but not a real counter either. Destroyers aren't great unless your opponent regularly flies within 22" of them, while also not killing them. I think they're a bad counter because you don't get to re-roll 3s and 4s To Hit when shooting with Extermination Protocols, regardless of modifiers, -2 just cuts your shooting in half for Destroyers. Realistically the unit is too tough to deal with, ignore it and try to beat the rest of your opponent's army if you can't get within 12".

I won a 2k game against mono-Grey Knights going second with my Zahndrekh Lychguard Night Shroud list. Lychguard seem pretty bad, they do so little work considering their price compared to Teslamortals, I can't think of an opponent where I'd genuinely want to take them. The Night Shroud isn't worth its points, it might be as good as our other flyers, I just don't see how often my opponent is going to let me do a fly-over of an important unit, it's nearly useless against a large number of armies. I ran out of CP turn 1, definitely overspent, I was spending like I had 14, but my list just had 9 so that sucked, but not much because my opponent had terrible rolls and couldn't do any damage to me. I've also been forgetting to use Zahndrekh's random ability much of the time.

Creel wrote:

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

It's just an arbitrary roll, it's not any one of those very specific rolls for which the Sautekh warlord gets a free reroll.

Since a reroll a hit/wound/damage roll of your Sautekh is unlikely to give a substantial advantage, the value of this reroll certainly is questionable. Perhaps if he wielded a Dmg3 CC weapon or if Imotekh was shooting his Dmg2 weapon at a sentinel or something which threatens your tesla immortals and really needs to die.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Anything that does MW, is auto hitting, or has +1 to hit FLY. But, there is a stratagem which gives another -1 to hit, so even with +1 to hit, you are back at -2. As vict0988 already said, ignore it. Try to kill the rest of your opponents army. If flyers are the only unit(s) left, he is tabled and loses the game. Unless you play one of the new CA18 missions where you dont automatically lose when tabled.

dapperbandit wrote:
Hi guys,

In a recent tournament I was getting a lot of grief from lists with multiple Hemlock Wraithfighters. As you might expect, these were being run Alaitoc making them -2 to hit outside 12"

What is our best counter to these? Extermination Protocols?The 2D3 auto hitting, S12 AP-4 D2 guns are disgusting, with the only downside being the low amount of shots.

I was thinking the way to do it might be Praetorians in melee but unless you get something like scarabs into combat first, you basically automatically lose 2 Praetorians minimum in Overwatch.

Could you charge them with something CTan? Or destroyer Lord(s)if you fly those

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:

Creel wrote:

torblind wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

That RR is for Warlord's hit, damage or wound roll. You would never spend a RR in this anyway, so this likely isn't saving you anything.

You wouldnt RR a 1 when using Calling the Storm? That seems like a mistake.

How can you get free RR for Calling Storm? It's not hit / damage roll.

What Roll is it?

It's just an arbitrary roll, it's not any one of those very specific rolls for which the Sautekh warlord gets a free reroll.

Since a reroll a hit/wound/damage roll of your Sautekh is unlikely to give a substantial advantage, the value of this reroll certainly is questionable. Perhaps if he wielded a Dmg3 CC weapon or if Imotekh was shooting his Dmg2 weapon at a sentinel or something which threatens your tesla immortals and really needs to die.

I respect your opinion and it´s really GW´s fault for not defining things in there rules that causes a lot of confusion, but i dont see how those three type of roles are very specific, especially considering how often wound and damage roll gets mixed up in the various rules. Probably best to open a ymdc thread about this.

My default lists are 2 bats, with immortals, using Mephrit.

Assuming that's a solid core what do you recommend to support? Also, I have a triarch stalker and Monolith model. I am reading some love for the stalker... but dare I ask if monoliths are still terrible? If so, just how bad?

With the Abyssal Staff + Methodical Destruction you can get a fairly easy +1 to hit on a Hemlock. Of course this requires Sautekh which honestly is much better than Mephrit. I feel like Mephrit is a gigantic trap and it's a similar issue to what Tau players were having before they realized Velocity Trackers were good; an extra -1 AP doesn't matter if you can't hit anything or if you can't even get into half range to make use of it in the first place. The main thing with Hemlocks is that they themselves are actually pretty short range so the mass minus-to-hit stacking is mainly applicable in turn 1. I've managed to have some success recently with 3 DDA's and a unit of destroyers NOT in deepstrike. Now, 3 Eldar flyers will hurt, you can't avoid it, but by placing everything down and not in deepstrike I do force them to choose a bit harder on what they want to focus on. If I don't get first turn the main thing is just bracing and hoping the damage isn't too severe, but also positioning my stuff so that the flyers need to get right up close to hit the targets they want to hit which leaves them close enough to ignore the Altaioc -1 in my turn 1. With a Chronotek nearby your Destroyers could very possible absorb all 3 Hemlock fire before dying which then leaves 3 DDA's, with maybe 1 or 2 in rapid fire range, to retaliate and helped along with the aforementioned Abyssal Staff, Methodical Destruction and maybe a Triarch Stalker too.

 Grimgold wrote:
I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper. Tomb blades got 4 points cheaper a model, and they fill that anti-infantry niche while being faster, harder to hit and benefiting more from RP. Doomsday arks also got cheaper, at 320 points for two of them, and two DDAs are much better at fighting knights than 6 destroyers.

To quantify those statements,

9 tomb blades is 252 points vs 300 for 6 destroyers, assuming MEQ here is how the math works out

Tomb blades 36 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 10.7 wounds for 252 points = 23.5 points per wound
Destroyers 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 2/3 * 5/6 = 7.65 wounds for 300 points = 39.2 points per wound

The weaker the unit the better the tomb blades are, so against GEQ or Orks, tomb blades perform much better. Destroyer perform a little better against Primaris, terminators, and Nobz, but I don't see many of those in my meta.

Against Knights

2 x DDAs: 7 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 7.3 damage = 43.8 points per damage
Destroyers: 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 1/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 6.1 damage = 49.2 points per damage

All bets are off on an extermination protocol rounds, but we tend to run very lean on CP, and destroyers are pretty squishy compared to to either DDAs or Tomb blades. So you either deep strike them when you need them (which cost another CP, dictates the dynasty, and limits their presence to after the first turn), or risk them getting shot off of the board before they can do anything. Also a round after round investment of CP to make a unit work is less than ideal for an army that has 9 to 10 CP in most configurations.

So in the spirit of re-examining units that we neglected before the CA 2018, I took a look at flayed ones. Against MEQ they are pretty competitive with tomb blades in terms of throughput for a given points value, assuming Novokh:

hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 1/2 + (1/2 * 1/2) = 3/4
Chance to fail save: 1/3

so 8/9 * 3/4 *1/3 * 3 = .67 wounds per fight phase per model
thus 17/.67 = 25.3 points per wound against MEQ

Against marines at 13PPM that gives them about a 2 to 1 ratio, which is a good points invested vs points destroyed. They will do better against GEQ in terms of wounds inflicted, but GEQ are much cheaper and thus the ratio of points invested to points destroyed is worse:

hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Chance to fail save: 2/3

So 8/9 * 8/9 * 2/3 * 3 = 1.6 wounds per fight phase
thus 17/1.6 = 10.6 points per wound

Against GEQ at 4PPM = 2.65 to 1 ratio, which is still not a bad ratio, though for larger flayed one blobs you'll run out of victims before you can reach that, since a 20 man flayed one blob would require 32 victims to get that ratio.

So the next question is how broad is their target profile, to channel my inner mad scientist, let check their worst target profile, knights. I'll cheat slightly and assume you spend 1 CP for disruption fields to give them +1 str:

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail save: 1/3

So .48 wounds per model per combat round, so for a 20 man blob that's almost 10 wounds, against what is their worst target profile.

The math says they are more flexible than destroyers while being significantly tougher, and as a cherry on top they gain the maximum benefit from RP. However good math and good tabletop experience are often strangers, they are slow, and thus hard to get into melee. Deep striking them is a trap, because they can't show up until the second round, and you'll likely have to wait until the third round to get them into CC. So that leaves Hoofing it, Veil of darkness, or a nightscythe. Veil is probably the best offensive option since you can add a warlord trait (like crimson haze or implacable conqueror), Night scythe is the best chance to get them into CC (if it survives) and the idea of 20 flayed ones squeezing out of a clown car is just amusing. Hoofing it is probably the worst option, since even advancing with MWBD on the first round you'll only be able to charge (6" + 5" + 3.5" + 7") = 21.5" on average, which is short of the 24" you'll have to cover for a second round charge. It might not be a bad option if you have an opponent that you know is coming for you (like orks or tyranids). I'll play around with lists to see if I can make a viable melee army for necrons.

*edit* Here is the list, still needs some polish but is an interesting deviation from the normal necrons lists:

Ed Orange wrote:
Hi all, been itching to get my Necrons out for game after taking a bit of a break. I've been doing some reading on this thread to try and get back up to speed. Previously I have been running a lot of Tesla immortals, a CCB, Deciever, Scarabs and 6-12 Destroyers. I always lacked a bit on anti tank firepower so I am thinking of picking up a DDA or 2. Is it worth running a repair spider with them? Also I have picked up some Tomb Blades NOS, I'm wondering whether to equip them with Tesla or Gauss? Tesla seems the way to go but I am intending to run around 30 Tesla Immortals, would it be worth taking the gauss to deal with heavy infantry? We see a good mix of units in the local meta.

Gauss is generally thought to be the best option AFAIK. The problem with Gauss Immortals is their inability to move into range quickly enough and then the fact that they can get locked in combat and possibly even taken hostage.

Anybody think we'll see a resurgence of the Gauss Pylon? Or is it only really amazing against things without an invul? I'm a little concerned it'll be useless against 3++ Knights, they can just save a re-roll for it and be fine. Maybe with a DDA you can trigger Rotate on a Castellan and then shoot the Pylon at something else, or if he doesn't you maybe get a few wounds on it, Methodical Destruction for the win. Something like Pylon, 3 DDAs, two Triarch Stalkers, Cloaktek, Annihilation Barge. Aaand that's not 2000 pts any longer. It would have been 1700 now it's 1400. Add 600 pts worth of Ork hate.

 Grimgold wrote:
I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper. Tomb blades got 4 points cheaper a model, and they fill that anti-infantry niche while being faster, harder to hit and benefiting more from RP. Doomsday arks also got cheaper, at 320 points for two of them, and two DDAs are much better at fighting knights than 6 destroyers.

To quantify those statements,

9 tomb blades is 252 points vs 300 for 6 destroyers, assuming MEQ here is how the math works out

Tomb blades 36 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 10.7 wounds for 252 points = 23.5 points per wound
Destroyers 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 2/3 * 5/6 = 7.65 wounds for 300 points = 39.2 points per wound

The weaker the unit the better the tomb blades are, so against GEQ or Orks, tomb blades perform much better. Destroyer perform a little better against Primaris, terminators, and Nobz, but I don't see many of those in my meta.

Against Knights

2 x DDAs: 7 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 7.3 damage = 43.8 points per damage
Destroyers: 18 * (2/3 + (1/6 * 2/3)) * 1/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 6.1 damage = 49.2 points per damage

All bets are off on an extermination protocol rounds, but we tend to run very lean on CP, and destroyers are pretty squishy compared to to either DDAs or Tomb blades. So you either deep strike them when you need them (which cost another CP, dictates the dynasty, and limits their presence to after the first turn), or risk them getting shot off of the board before they can do anything. Also a round after round investment of CP to make a unit work is less than ideal for an army that has 9 to 10 CP in most configurations.

So to summarize, Tomb Blades are better against MEQ at 12" than Destroyers at 12", DDAs are better against Knights when you ignore our best Stratagem that costs a whopping 1 CP. Destroyers are more versatile and don't rely on getting into RF range or standing still, they're our best anti TEQ choice but when you ignore those things there is no reason to take them over two of our other top choices. You really just made Destroyers sound amazing by pointing out how little better DDAs and TBs are in your cheripicked scenarios.

 Tauris_Blazestar wrote:

Creel wrote:
Calling the Storm with a free RR and double MWBD is pretty nice, it´s his Dynasty and Warlord Trait Limitation, plus sometimes his regular Dmg Output that´s a bit annoying.

There is no where stating that if you take Imotekh that he has to be your warlord. You can choose any HQ to be your warlord so you can pick which trait you want in your list.

You'd be a fool not to, he gets you a free CP for being your WL and he has the best WL trait available to Necrons. The only WL trait that has any chance of being better is the Fearless/Deny trait and that's only better in certain niche armies. In those armies you should not pick Imotekh. I haven't been triggering Methodical Destruction with his Lord of the Storm ability, I've read that you can trigger it like this, what would lead anyone to think you can? Also, a free re-roll is free. Just because it is a worse version of the Astra Militarum one does not mean it is no longer good.

Inevitableq wrote:
I'm strongly considering scraping the nephrekh detachment and just putting destroyers in an aux to save points on the lord and the scarabs.

Letting go of Methodical Destruction and Relentless Advance and paying 2 CP to Deep Strike a squad of Destroyers is not worth it. They're perfectly fine as Sautekh if you play on tables with enough terrain. If you don't then you definitely do not want to get rid of any Doomsday Arks.

 Grimgold wrote:
... The math says Flayed Ones are more flexible than destroyers...

Where in the math does it say they have range 24"? You can multiply Flayed Ones damage by 0,28 because they need to actually successfully charge to do anything, then you also have to subtract some or a lot of attacks because of Overwatch, depending on how effective the Overwatch is you could be looking at 2-6 dead FOs and still a possibly failed charge. Flayed Ones are good if you are a god at rolling charge distances (and if you never forget them ), but mathematically they are trash. The best you can get is re-roll failed charge rolls and having a CP ready, so if you roll no 5+s you re-roll and if you roll at least 1 5+ but don't roll 9+ you can get up to 40-60% chance of succesfully charging turn 2. Nephrekh Destroyers have a 100% chance of shooting turn 2 unless you're playing against a select few opponents that can fire when you DS.

 vict0988 wrote:

So to summarize, Tomb Blades are better against MEQ at 12" than Destroyers at 12", DDAs are better against Knights when you ignore our best Stratagem that costs a whopping 1 CP. Destroyers are more versatile and don't rely on getting into RF range or standing still, they're our best anti TEQ choice but when you ignore those things there is no reason to take them over two of our other top choices. You really just made Destroyers sound amazing by pointing out how little better DDAs and TBs are in your cheripicked scenarios.

I'm not sure you did the math, so let me do it to show you how much smoke your blowing.

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail a save: 2/3

so the damage they would do on a EP round is:
8/9 * 5/9 * 2/3 * 2 * 18 = 11 wounds

That's four wounds more, and if you were to instead blow that CP on a reroll for the DDA (say number of shots or a failed wound), it would only be less than 1 wound of difference. Do you think that extra fraction of a wound justifies the fragility of destroyers when compared to DDAs? I sure don't, the fragility of destroyers has vexed me this entire edition, and in a meta this heavy on knights, it's not like people don't bring the right weapons to wipe out a destroyer squad in a single round.

A few other points,
- I never said destroyers were bad, in fact my very first sentence in the quote says this "I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper."
- Cherry picking involves looking for edge cases to support your point, I used two of the most common opponents you'll likely face at a tournament. For instance if I were cherry picking I wouldn't have used knights I would have used LRBT, because it doesn't have an invul, which would have made the DDA better. If I were cherry picking I would have used genestealers instead of MEQ since they have an invul which cuts down on the effectiveness of destroyers. Please don't accuse me of being intellectually dishonest, especially when you do the very thing you accuse me of in the same breath.
- Do you run into many TEQ, because I sure don't. This is a good example of cherry picking, taking a unit that doesn't see the light of day in the competitive scene and using it as an excuse as to why your argument is somehow better.
- With a 14" move and fly tomb blades should never have a problem getting into raid fire range, Tomb blades are also considerably tougher than destroyers, and benefit more from RP.
- If I make destroyers sound amazing it's because I was looking only at their offensive output, instead of their well known issues. I do that because I want to compare their strengths to units who are arguably better in every other way. On Offense destroyers only edge out their rivals with a stratagem, and have a lifespan of a turn or two once they get into the action.
- Destroyers are a high risk high reward unit, in an army designed around snowballing. They do have a broad range of targets, but end up playing second fiddle to units that are designed to do specific roles. Take lychguard for instance, with that same 1 CP investment, they can drop 20 wounds on a knight in a single round, destroyers are lucky to get half of that. for that same CP, 300 points of tesla immortal is almost double the output of destroyers against infantry, thanks to double my will be done.

I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but you talk like you have all this knowledge about necrons, but even a cursory examination of what you are talking about shows that you are mistaken. If you are just looking to snark, might I suggest reddit, at least you can earn fake internet points by playing the buffoon over there.

The fact you said Destroyers were less geared for killing a Knight than Lychguard says more about you not playing the army than the guy you're replying to

Come on guys, this is perhaps the friendliest tactica thread on dakkadakka, don't start the new year like this!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The fact you said Destroyers were less geared for killing a Knight than Lychguard says more about you not playing the army than the guy you're replying to

Well they do more wounds, don't they. Doesn't mean you get to see that on table, which also he is not saying.

 Grimgold wrote:


So that leaves Hoofing it, Veil of darkness, or a nightscythe. Veil is probably the best offensive option since you can add a warlord trait (like crimson haze or implacable conqueror), Night scythe is the best chance to get them into CC (if it survives) and the idea of 20 flayed ones squeezing out of a clown car is just amusing.

Strictly speaking, NIght scythe means also they don't get their till turn two (because deployed off the board), the exact reason you moved away from deep striking. The Monolith on the other hand..


As for being tough..

Having played against Necrons with Necrons, I experienced first hand how lack luster our mid range damage output is, I was unsuccessful at taking down 6 destroyers in my 2nd turn. 18 wounds 3+ T5 isn't particularly more fragile than 20 wounds T4 4+ (flayed ones). If Flayed ones should become the next great thing, they certainly would get blown of the board a lot easier than destroyers.

Cmon guys!

just as @torblind said lets not start the new year like that!

I have to agree with @Grimgold that Destroyers are very fragile. I DO think they are one of our best units. Plus now that we can better use 2 battalions its a well spent CP for EP.
But I DO think they arent our only best unit they were before CA2018.
Spending a CP on a 300point unit and hoping for many 5s isnt a solution that many people consider „best“.

Destroyers aren't that fragile, imo.
I've had games where they absolutely refuse to get wiped, even after taking a bit of punishment.

It depends on positioning, I think. Abuse LoS and range limits, use chaff to tie up targets and force your opponent to deal with threats. I actually really like warrior blobs for this purpose, because some opponents get really scared of them and try to whittle them down before they get into range. If monoliths didn't have that stupid 3 turn delay before they can be properly used, dropping in a monolith with 20 warriors would be a hilarious surprise.
In theory its still strong, but it depends on surviving until the monolith arrive and having enough CP left over to use the emergency invasion beam if the monolith gets focused down.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

torblind wrote:


Having played against Necrons with Necrons, I experienced first hand how lack luster our mid range damage output is, I was unsuccessful at taking down 6 destroyers in my 2nd turn. 18 wounds 3+ T5 isn't particularly more fragile than 20 wounds T4 4+ (flayed ones). If Flayed ones should become the next great thing, they certainly would get blown of the board a lot easier than destroyers.

Necron mirror matches are pretty boring. Most mirror matches are, but necrons are especially boring, because you're just slugging at each other, and neither army has the damage output to do anything.
Its actually pretty ironic that the army that necrons can most reliably get RP against is necrons.

Pretty sure 18 T5 3+ save wounds is more durable than 20 T4 4+ save wounds though. One has a higher toughness stat and better saves characteristic.

One likes small arms more than the other. However, destroyers really hate weapons with good damage characteristics and high strength.
In fact, they and monoliths are the only units that particularly hate them; with any other necron unit small arms or Damage 2-3 appears to be sufficient. Which means that your opponent can just dump lascannons into destroyers. Its why I think it would do wonders for the necron army if there was something like a mini-monolith unit that could serve as a front-line battle tank. Something like a predator, except with more wounds, living metal, T8 and armed with a deathray and 2 gauss cannons. Because Necron Science is the Best in the World.

With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

MrPieChee wrote:
With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

Yes, from what you say, but I usually bring Tesla immortals for that insane, sweet MWBD force multiplier, won't get that with a barge.

 Grimgold wrote:
I'm not sure you did the math, so let me do it to show you how much smoke your blowing.

Hit: 2/3 + (1/3 * 2/3) = 8/9
Wound: 1/3 + (2/3 * 1/3) = 5/9
chance to fail a save: 2/3

so the damage they would do on a EP round is:
8/9 * 5/9 * 2/3 * 2 * 18 = 11 wounds

That's four wounds more, and if you were to instead blow that CP on a reroll for the DDA (say number of shots or a failed wound), it would only be less than 1 wound of difference. Do you think that extra fraction of a wound justifies the fragility of destroyers when compared to DDAs? I sure don't, the fragility of destroyers has vexed me this entire edition, and in a meta this heavy on knights, it's not like people don't bring the right weapons to wipe out a destroyer squad in a single round.

A few other points,
- I never said destroyers were bad, in fact my very first sentence in the quote says this "I don't think any of us are saying Destroyers are bad, it's just that their two main sources of competition in the codex got cheaper."
- Cherry picking involves looking for edge cases to support your point, I used two of the most common opponents you'll likely face at a tournament. For instance if I were cherry picking I wouldn't have used knights I would have used LRBT, because it doesn't have an invul, which would have made the DDA better. If I were cherry picking I would have used genestealers instead of MEQ since they have an invul which cuts down on the effectiveness of destroyers. Please don't accuse me of being intellectually dishonest, especially when you do the very thing you accuse me of in the same breath.
- Do you run into many TEQ, because I sure don't. This is a good example of cherry picking, taking a unit that doesn't see the light of day in the competitive scene and using it as an excuse as to why your argument is somehow better.
- With a 14" move and fly tomb blades should never have a problem getting into raid fire range, Tomb blades are also considerably tougher than destroyers, and benefit more from RP.
- If I make destroyers sound amazing it's because I was looking only at their offensive output, instead of their well known issues. I do that because I want to compare their strengths to units who are arguably better in every other way. On Offense destroyers only edge out their rivals with a stratagem, and have a lifespan of a turn or two once they get into the action.
- Destroyers are a high risk high reward unit, in an army designed around snowballing. They do have a broad range of targets, but end up playing second fiddle to units that are designed to do specific roles. Take lychguard for instance, with that same 1 CP investment, they can drop 20 wounds on a knight in a single round, destroyers are lucky to get half of that. for that same CP, 300 points of tesla immortal is almost double the output of destroyers against infantry, thanks to double my will be done.

I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but you talk like you have all this knowledge about necrons, but even a cursory examination of what you are talking about shows that you are mistaken. If you are just looking to snark, might I suggest reddit, at least you can earn fake internet points by playing the buffoon over there.

Re-rolling a wound roll on a DDA grants you 1,6 more unsaved wounds, which is not comparable to the effect of EP. Re-rolling number of shots if you roll a 1 grants you 2,6 more unsaved wounds, which is not comparable to the effect of EP, further you can only re-roll a 1 for the number of shots when you roll a 1 for number of shots, you're mitigating a bad roll. Re-rolling a 1 for the number of shots turn 4 has much less effect on the overall course of the game than doing so turn 1, you want to spend the majority of your CP before turn 3 to start snowballing the game in your direction.

I'm pretty sure your math is off, hit on 3s re-rolling 1s, wound on 5+, save on 5+, d3 damage.
>18/36*28/36*12/36*24*2=6,2222222222222222222222222222222
Vs hit on 3s re-rolling everything, wound on 5s re-rolling everything, save on 5+, d3 damage.
>18/36*32/36*20/36*24*2=11,851851851851851851851851851852
Subtract the initial damage from the EP damage to get the difference.
>11,851851851851851851851851851852-6,2222222222222222222222222222222=5,6296296296296296296296296296297
So the difference (on average) is actually 5,6 wounds rather than 4. 4 damage on a Knight would still be extremely good for 1 CP.

- I never said that you claimed Destroyers were bad, I said the way you frame the situation was unbalanced and doesn't accurately show how good/bad they are.
- You picked a scenario in which I'm shooting at a Knight but not using EP, that's going to happen 1/30 games if I'm using 6, quite often if I'm bringing 18, that's an edge case. You're assuming you'll always be in RF range with your Tomb Blades, that's not always going to happen. Also, what exactly are you accusing me of cheripicking? Sorry if cheripicking wasn't the right word choice, but you still failed to accurately weigh the pros and cons of bringing Destroyers by focussing only on the negatives while ignoring the positives, I was merely highlighting those positives you failed to mention. Also rounding 11,85 down to 11? Are you seriously accusing me of being intellectually dishonest while doing this? Are you trying to drive down the prize of Destroyers on Ebay or something lol?
-I don't know about TEQs, how much of the field they take up. But given that Terminators across the board have been buffed I think we're going to see quite a lot of Terminators. Pretty much every Custodes model is a TEQ, the Shroud Terminators from Deathguard are also pretty strong, Grey Knights Dreadknights have also gotten buffs and they were already the most popular unit in what is admittedly a super weak faction. I think you're quite likely to see Terminators when you go to an event, I don't think we'll be seeing as many TEQs at the top tables as on the bottom tables so perhabs I should steer clear of Destroyer ^^.
- You're forced to Veil in those Lychguard and then you still only have a 40% chance of making it, maybe 60% with another CP for a re-roll 100% if you also want to sacrifice Obyron and Zahndrekh to kill a Knight. Whatever you do you are taking Overwatch and loosing 1 or 2 before you even get in is pretty likely, then you factor in screening and I'm not buying those Scytheguard being as good as Destroyers. If you are placing those Scytheguard out in the open it also will not take long before they get toasted, their low M means they are less likely to be able to hop from cover to out-of LOS to cover like Destroyers sometimes can.

If you wield a dull blade you will at least not cut yourself when you drop it on your neck. I'm sorry if you took me critiquing your review of the effectiveness of Destroyers personally, please just block me, I was just trying to help the discussion by pointing out that Destroyers are still a really solid unit despite not being able to Rapid Fire and despite not being a DDA (which I've already said I think are a mandatory 3-of in every list). It's okay to be wrong and to not mention every scenario and to just pick the ones you think are most relevant, but don't be surprised if someone finds that in their experience what you described does not describe their experience playing the game. You mentioning TEQ being rare is very fair, perhabs I am too coloured by playing Deathwing three times and Custodes twice in twenty games. Sometimes I try and have a bit of fun while posting, I don't mean to ruin your day. I hope everyone can enjoy posting and discussing tactics for our faction and ask for advice or post army lists and battle reports without ridicule but with support and good advice, calling someone out on being wrong about the game or the math they are doign should never be viewed as a personal attack but a chance for growth. If it sounds like I think I know everything then I'm sorry, I'm just moderately good at math and like playing Necrons.

MrPieChee wrote:
With barges cheaper now, are blaster immortals better? You can take a few telsa destructors in place of Tesla immortals for low armour targets, and take blasters for higher armour. Also allows you to increase QS saturation. Perhaps leaves you a little short on troops choices since you might not want as many blaster immortals, but smaller units of warriors can grab objectives and hide from fire...?

A Gauss Immortal core backed by Annihilation barges is worse than Tesla Immortals back by Tomb blades with Gauss Blasters.

The two most immediate threats to Gauss Immortals being taken are the Tomb Blades and the Destroyers, the immobility coupled with their relative ineffectiveness at range 13+ makes them really terrible in some match-ups. I think you should try taking Ghost Arks before Annihilation barges, the ability to stick an HQ in there can be worth VP in certain match-ups. I feel like an army based on Warrior blobs and the Fearless Warlord trait were better than one focussed on Immortals but perhabs the larger decrease on Immortals has changed that. In any case Tomb Blades benefitted as much as Immortals did from that change so I don't really think there is any contest.

I cheated in a game I won against Tyranids, I brought 20 Praetorians I only had room for 16, when I tried to type in 120 in excel for Szeras I typed in 12 instead, I've been too lazy to type all my lists into battle scribe I really need to get it done. I updated my list and replaced those 6 Praetorians with a Ghost Ark and tied in a Maelstrom game against a newb playing a casual Thousand Sons list and won against a casual Tau Empire list. In the first game luck was very back and forth and I unfortunately failed a bunch of rolls on the last turn and the game ended T5 before I could wipe out my opponent completely. Against Tau I had some really crappy targeting because I assumed my opponent had bubble-wrapped two of his Commanders, but only one of them was wrapped so my Deep Striking Destroyers killed one Commander instead of killing both the ones that weren't wrapped.

revisiting old conclusions and rethinking established truths is never wrong, especially not after a change such as CA. I encourage it frenetically. There is absolutely no need for bickering. If lychguard still aren't all that it should be a simple case to argue or demonstrate in game.

Just see how nobody believed in wraiths anymore in the beginning of 8th yet they were a key element om all the consistently best performing mevron tourney lists.

While they may not be super viable, I'm finding my Sentry Pylons (with Heat Cannons) to be super fun to play.

With CA18 cutting their cost so much, I can almost always bring three, sometimes 6.

Yeah the d6 hits and damage make them super swingy, but I've found that the more I play them, the more I see it even out. Every unit can have good and bad rolling games.