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.

dapperbandit wrote:

Unfortunately, they do rely on getting into combat to do the business and the AP is often wasted when attacking something with a 4++

Which takes at least two turns, maybe even three. No thanks. Its wraith for me. They can advance and charge, have a 3+ inv, and they have synergies.

 p5freak wrote:

dapperbandit wrote:

Unfortunately, they do rely on getting into combat to do the business and the AP is often wasted when attacking something with a 4++

Which takes at least two turns, maybe even three. No thanks. Its wraith for me. They can advance and charge, have a 3+ inv, and they have synergies.

They're also fairly independent, as in they don't need synergies to perform.

sieGermans wrote:
Doesn’t MWBD also give +1 to charge rolls? Or am I misremembering?

That's where the 8" charge i was talking about comes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

dapperbandit wrote:

Unfortunately, they do rely on getting into combat to do the business and the AP is often wasted when attacking something with a 4++

Which takes at least two turns, maybe even three. No thanks. Its wraith for me. They can advance and charge, have a 3+ inv, and they have synergies.

They're also fairly independent, as in they don't need synergies to perform.

They don't perform if they don't get into melee, unless you call dying on the way there performing.

 p5freak wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

dapperbandit wrote:

Unfortunately, they do rely on getting into combat to do the business and the AP is often wasted when attacking something with a 4++

Which takes at least two turns, maybe even three. No thanks. Its wraith for me. They can advance and charge, have a 3+ inv, and they have synergies.

They're also fairly independent, as in they don't need synergies to perform.

They don't perform if they don't get into melee, unless you call dying on the way there performing.

The durability helps there. I was more referring to the fact they're less reliant on Strats or Character buffing.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The durability helps there. I was more referring to the fact they're less reliant on Strats or Character buffing.

They totally are, but we tend to play less characters and are not a CP heavy army anyway. On one hand it's good because our ressources can be spent elsewhere, on the other hand i still think Wraith car offers you more flexibility and when needed you can spend 1CP to make them incredibly fast, 2CP to make them RP. It's quite handy having these tricks in your sleeve.

If their own stratagem was, as said above, a +1 to wound, you could have a unit who usually operate alone without ressources, but can sometimes push a little more making them a good distraction carnifex.

I will totally test them though, because if D2 weapons are directed toward them, Tomb Blades and Quantum Shield Vehicules will be happier.

What do you guys think of Necron units having an ability opposite to Space Marine combat squads?

In that before deployment, units of the same datasheet can be combined into a single unit.

It helps us solve our CP/Detachment issues along with boosting our Reanimation Protocols ability.

I think the idea belongs in the 40K Proposed Rules section. Unless you are asking what sorts of tactics we'd use if the rule was implemented, even that is very tangential to this thread.

I'd be interested to know if people would be willing to submit their gaming data to me for processing after the changes in CA19? If I can get a handful of people from this thread to input data I might also go on some other sites and see if I can find a large-ish group of people to all put in their gameplay data. I plan on playtesting every unit, but it'd probably take me 1-5 months to do it alone and more data is better data.

http://is2.4chan.org/tg/1575035533636.png so what do you guys think about this?

Heavy destroyers are cheap as chips now!

The troops, Destroyers, and Doom units didn't change in points so this won't help the most common lists.

Our external balance hasn't changed at all - we still suck.

Internal balance is much better now though, so we can bring a greater variety of lists and still only suck the same amount we did before.

I think Novokh has to be the way to go after these changes. Wraiths, Ctan and Lyhcguard dropped. Flayed Ones too, though not quite as low as I'd like.

it still blows my mind that GW thinks a Cryptek is worth 80 pts

A lot of weird changes. Heavy Destroyers are no cheaper than regular Destroyers. Warriors being unchanged is pretty terrible though. Same with Crypteks. I'm not sure this changes too much about our ability to compete with other books.

T. Vault is still 566 :/

Based on these numbers you could get 30 sword and board lychguard, 18 wraiths, a Nightbringer and some HQs. You won't kill anything, but you can march into the centre of the board and dare anything to come near you while you score pts. Best I can come up with.

Ghost Ark at 120 points are kind of silly compared to Warriors. They were already close to Warriors price, but now, for 10 points more that 10 warriors, you gain so much more (12" move, T6, Fly).

Shaelinith wrote:
Ghost Ark at 120 points are kind of silly compared to Warriors. They were already close to Warriors price, but now, for 10 points more that 10 warriors, you gain so much more (12" move, T6, Fly).

I guess at minimum they'll get use as Gun Boats. It isn't a terrible package for the price but you can't fill detachment requirements to get that CP so who cares?

Will this CA include points for FW stuff like Kutlakh, Acanthrites and the Seraptek? I have a soft spot for those three but I honestly think they need adjusting by a sizeable margin to see anything akin to a decent semi-competitive list.

Shaelinith wrote:
Ghost Ark at 120 points are kind of silly compared to Warriors. They were already close to Warriors price, but now, for 10 points more that 10 warriors, you gain so much more (12" move, T6, Fly).

Hmm good point. Maybe they shouldn't be used with warriors at all and just have as gunboats.

Darsath wrote:A lot of weird changes. Heavy Destroyers are no cheaper than regular Destroyers. Warriors being unchanged is pretty terrible though. Same with Crypteks. I'm not sure this changes too much about our ability to compete with other books.

Heavy destroyers are 37 now, destroyers are still 50.

Mixzremixzd wrote:Will this CA include points for FW stuff like Kutlakh, Acanthrites and the Seraptek? I have a soft spot for those three but I honestly think they need adjusting by a sizeable margin to see anything akin to a decent semi-competitive list.

FW has a separate entry.

 Mixzremixzd wrote:
Will this CA include points for FW stuff like Kutlakh, Acanthrites and the Seraptek? I have a soft spot for those three but I honestly think they need adjusting by a sizeable margin to see anything akin to a decent semi-competitive list.

Yes. But GW has long tradition of UPPING cost of FW units. Like flyer that didn't even dominate tournaments or even appear much just getting 300% price hike.

That's resin tax. Don't expect good thing for FW models. GW doesn't want you to use them.

tneva82 wrote:

Shaelinith wrote:
Ghost Ark at 120 points are kind of silly compared to Warriors. They were already close to Warriors price, but now, for 10 points more that 10 warriors, you gain so much more (12" move, T6, Fly).

Hmm good point. Maybe they shouldn't be used with warriors at all and just have as gunboats.

Yeah that was what i had in mind. I still remember the LVO necron list who made 20th place last year. It has two ghost ark (with warrior inside but still), and since then i had a similar list i wanted to try. Never did it because i don't want to build my last 3 arks before i paint them and ... i was too lazy to build them =)

The meta has drastically change since though. But i could see Ghost Ark as gun boats work just to tag things and serve as cheap distraction carnifex.

Shaelinith wrote:
Yeah that was what i had in mind. I still remember the LVO necron list who made 20th place last year. It has two ghost ark (with warrior inside but still), and since then i had a similar list i wanted to try. Never did it because i don't want to build my last 3 arks before i paint them and ... i was too lazy to build them =)

The meta has drastically change since though. But i could see Ghost Ark as gun boats work just to tag things and serve as cheap distraction carnifex.

Here's what I'm thinking. 57 pts still to spend. Probably not even optimal but didn't want to start getting fancy accounting point differences manually



Ghost arks form front line providing buffer to h2h units and throwing in 40 shots outside 12". Teslas, dda's and destroyers blow stuff as usual. Basically compared to my usual lists rather than fliers for the nice but unreliable(if you go 2nd usually one dies anyway) MW bomb I have ghost ark skirmish line between me and enemy.

Too bad I don't have 4 ghost arks...

List of percentage pts changes from the leaks we've gotten so far:


I'm happy our HQs got buffs, they really needed it. It didn't feel right to me that our HQ tax was so high. Cheap GAs makes me wonder if that alone makes Warriors more viable, probably not. Even if you have 3 GAs you'd probably still run Immortals over Warriors IMO. I'm very unsure if I should continue my double Battalion playstyle, I might just add in a Necron Lord and get another free CP and let my old army carry me forwards. 18 Wraiths and 5 C'tan was very fun sometimes, that's 300 pts cheaper. Particle casters being an option on Wraiths is neat, I think I'll run them wysiwyg from now on if I have them, I think the optimal amount is probably around 50% of the unit. T-beamers and P-beamers are still trash sadly. Spyder getting a MASSIVE drop is very nice, I kind of hope GW isn't going with my idea of nerfing the fabricator claw array to actually balance the options but just lets us have cheap repair-Spyders.

tneva82 wrote:

 Mixzremixzd wrote:
Will this CA include points for FW stuff like Kutlakh, Acanthrites and the Seraptek? I have a soft spot for those three but I honestly think they need adjusting by a sizeable margin to see anything akin to a decent semi-competitive list.

Yes. But GW has long tradition of UPPING cost of FW units. Like flyer that didn't even dominate tournaments or even appear much just getting 300% price hike.

That's resin tax. Don't expect good thing for FW models. GW doesn't want you to use them.

Where are you getting this from? GW drastically reduced the cost of the SM/CSM Fire Raptor which was already good, then it became a competitive staple and then they nerfed it back to or further than its starting point after having learnt how good it could be. The Necron FW Flyer got buffed last CA, the first CA didn't touch Necrons except for the Gauss Pylon which kind of makes sense if they want to see how good (or in this case bad) the codex was on its own.

tneva82 wrote:


Here's what I'm thinking. 57 pts still to spend. Probably not even optimal but didn't want to start getting fancy accounting point differences manually

Spoiler:

Overlord & cryptek as usual

3x10 tesla immortal

3xdda

2x3 scarab

6xdestroyer

4 ghost ark

Ghost arks form front line providing buffer to h2h units and throwing in 40 shots outside 12". Teslas, dda's and destroyers blow stuff as usual. Basically compared to my usual lists rather than fliers for the nice but unreliable(if you go 2nd usually one dies anyway) MW bomb I have ghost ark skirmish line between me and enemy.

Too bad I don't have 4 ghost arks...

What dynasty would you play ?

Well me being me nephrek. I'm pretty much dynasty locked for that apart from airwings ;-) I like the mobilty which helps scoring objectives from distant places and giving me sure ablity to actually shoot T1 with immortals if I go first. And if there's someting I don't like at all it's dynasty/chapter/regiment/whatever hopping. I have played nephrek from the get-go and with these necron models unless GW screws nephrek completely that's what I'm sticking with.

But guess sautekh or mephrit could work. Not with my playstyle though. Would need to learn a new playstyle with them.

tneva82 wrote:

Shaelinith wrote:
Yeah that was what i had in mind. I still remember the LVO necron list who made 20th place last year. It has two ghost ark (with warrior inside but still), and since then i had a similar list i wanted to try. Never did it because i don't want to build my last 3 arks before i paint them and ... i was too lazy to build them =)

The meta has drastically change since though. But i could see Ghost Ark as gun boats work just to tag things and serve as cheap distraction carnifex.

Here's what I'm thinking. 57 pts still to spend. Probably not even optimal but didn't want to start getting fancy accounting point differences manually

Spoiler:

Overlord & cryptek as usual

3x10 tesla immortal

3xdda

2x3 scarab

6xdestroyer

4 ghost ark

Ghost arks form front line providing buffer to h2h units and throwing in 40 shots outside 12". Teslas, dda's and destroyers blow stuff as usual. Basically compared to my usual lists rather than fliers for the nice but unreliable(if you go 2nd usually one dies anyway) MW bomb I have ghost ark skirmish line between me and enemy.

Too bad I don't have 4 ghost arks...

Looks solid, the only change I'd make is drop the Immortal down to min squads - you've got anti infantry firepower for days, you don't need them. That saves you 225 pts, which I'd spend on another two Ghost Arks or a Ghost Ark and 3 Heavy Destroyers.

Not bad idea. Well except 3 heavy destroyers. No way I'm dropping dda for them. Nor paying 1 CP for them either.

Also 6 ghost arks is getting bit expensive So at least for start I think I would stick with 4 ark version ;-) I ain't made of gold!

tneva82 wrote:
Not bad idea. Well except 3 heavy destroyers. No way I'm dropping dda for them. Nor paying 1 CP for them either.

Also 6 ghost arks is getting bit expensive So at least for start I think I would stick with 4 ark version ;-) I ain't made of gold!

Honestly 4 Arks might be enough for most circumstances assuming these leaks are correct.

Don't underestimate 10 Tesla immortals. With reroll 1s from a stalker and MWBD and MD you can score 50+ hits.

Am I the only one who thinks those new points are somewhat disappointing ? Some are good, but most aren't good.

tneva82 wrote:
Not bad idea. Well except 3 heavy destroyers. No way I'm dropping dda for them. Nor paying 1 CP for them either.

Also 6 ghost arks is getting bit expensive So at least for start I think I would stick with 4 ark version ;-) I ain't made of gold!

Crap, forgot you only had one detachment. I'm just looking at the meta right now, it's either minus to hit flyers or 2+ save stealthy Iron Hands - both of which are terrible matchups for Tesla.

I think I'm going to actually use warriors as troops, stick them in the Ghost Arks and do the Necron version of Venom Spam. With only 1 detachment, it's a toss up between Mephrit and Nihilakh for your list. I'd be tempted to go full Quantum Shield Online, sneak a CCB in there with those spare points then you can have a Nihilakh Spearhead and a Mephrit Battalion.