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.

 vict0988 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:


Friend just sent me this, no idea on source. Could be fake obvs, but we had a similar leak confirming Engine War this way before it was revealed.

God I'd love Pariahs to come back.

News, possibly fake, not tactics.

I mean it's relevant to potential tactics if we get our anti psyker unit back. Also this place is hardly a hotbed of tactical chatter right now.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:


Friend just sent me this, no idea on source. Could be fake obvs, but we had a similar leak confirming Engine War this way before it was revealed.

God I'd love Pariahs to come back.

News, possibly fake, not tactics.

I mean it's relevant to potential tactics if we get our anti psyker unit back. Also this place is hardly a hotbed of tactical chatter right now.

According to Valrak on YouTube, it was uploaded to Bolter & Chainsword, so it's a mirror of Engine War & War of The Spider so far.

However, he also seems sold on the idea that it's Deathwatch Harlies and Necrons all in one book, and that PA-Pariah is the last one, which leaves SoB without PA support.

Odds on having Pariah be a Necrons vs DW or SoB, and then a book 8 with the Harlies vs the other?

Also yes, I know it isnt tactics, but lets be fair, we need this because our tactics havent changed in months

edited because an emoji popped up....

There was a rumour ages ago that Pariahs would be coming back, but that it would be a character, not the full unit. Considering how similar they look to Lychguard as a unit, I can see this being the case.

Still, a new HQ is something I'd welcome into the army, as most of our current lot are underpowered taxes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There was a rumour ages ago that Pariahs would be coming back, but that it would be a character, not the full unit. Considering how similar they look to Lychguard as a unit, I can see this being the case.

Still, a new HQ is something I'd welcome into the army, as most of our current lot are underpowered taxes.

Psychic awakening pariah is odd. Surely the PA book isnt named pariah. And surely a new unit isnt named psychic awakening pariah.

I don't see why it's such an odd name for a book?

I thought it was odd to name a PA book after a single faction. But now i realised there is greater good, saga of the beast, blood of baal, which are also named after a single faction, more or less.

It wont be "Pariah" as a single word I dont think.

It'll be something like "Pariah's Call" or "Shadow of The Pariah" or something else equally tongue-in-cheek and 'grimdark'

 IHateNids wrote:
It wont be "Pariah" as a single word I dont think.

It'll be something like "Pariah's Call" or "Shadow of The Pariah" or something else equally tongue-in-cheek and 'grimdark'

I think it's going to be called not relevant to tactics threads, but you're as well-informed on the subject as I am, who is to guess what a piece of future content 3-12 months down the line is going to be called?

What video-games are you guys playing? Riot's autobattler has adopted a futuristic style, so it's more relevant than ever to a Necron tactics thread, not that it's actually relevant, but who's keeping track?

I also heard a rumour about Dakka that there is a section of the board specifically for revealing and discussing rumours, I've even confirmed the rumour, so it's more of a fact, go check it out, pretty cool. When Necrons get their PA rules can we create a new thread with 99% less homebrew rules and rumour-talk?

 vict0988 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
It wont be "Pariah" as a single word I dont think.

It'll be something like "Pariah's Call" or "Shadow of The Pariah" or something else equally tongue-in-cheek and 'grimdark'

I think it's going to be called not relevant to tactics threads, but you're as well-informed on the subject as I am, who is to guess what a piece of future content 3-12 months down the line is going to be called?

What video-games are you guys playing? Riot's autobattler has adopted a futuristic style, so it's more relevant than ever to a Necron tactics thread, not that it's actually relevant, but who's keeping track?

I also heard a rumour about Dakka that there is a section of the board specifically for revealing and discussing rumours, I've even confirmed the rumour, so it's more of a fact, go check it out, pretty cool. When Necrons get their PA rules can we create a new thread with 99% less homebrew rules and rumour-talk?

Yeah lets get back to tactics talk.

What Necrons really need is a solid anti-psyker unit since our current psyker defence is limited. Something like the old Pariahs we used to have. Or maybe even a special character who is a pariah.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
It wont be "Pariah" as a single word I dont think.

It'll be something like "Pariah's Call" or "Shadow of The Pariah" or something else equally tongue-in-cheek and 'grimdark'

I think it's going to be called not relevant to tactics threads, but you're as well-informed on the subject as I am, who is to guess what a piece of future content 3-12 months down the line is going to be called?

What video-games are you guys playing? Riot's autobattler has adopted a futuristic style, so it's more relevant than ever to a Necron tactics thread, not that it's actually relevant, but who's keeping track?

I also heard a rumour about Dakka that there is a section of the board specifically for revealing and discussing rumours, I've even confirmed the rumour, so it's more of a fact, go check it out, pretty cool. When Necrons get their PA rules can we create a new thread with 99% less homebrew rules and rumour-talk?

Yeah lets get back to tactics talk.

What Necrons really need is a solid anti-psyker unit since our current psyker defence is limited. Something like the old Pariahs we used to have. Or maybe even a special character who is a pariah.

Nope, wish-listing for better anti-psyker tools is not relevant. Saying that Necrons are vulnerable to psychic powers is, saying how you know how to combat such armies despite or that it's no big problem is relevant. Discussion of how good units with gloom prisms are or aren't also is. This isn't super hard. I'll try to crusade against this type of discussion until we start a new thread and then we can hopefully all be free of it and I won't have to police it and you won't have to deal with me trying to police a thread with a horrible history of sticking to the topic. This is not Necrons general.

True.
On topic then. Has anyone tried to move to heavy Destroyers for their main anti tank? You would think that kind of price drop would make it a real option but I have never tried it as I have seen the ease other armies pop regular D's even at range out of line of sight.

Pyrothem wrote:
True.
On topic then. Has anyone tried to move to heavy Destroyers for their main anti tank? You would think that kind of price drop would make it a real option but I have never tried it as I have seen the ease other armies pop regular D's even at range out of line of sight.

You hit the nail on the head. They're easily erased from the board. Especially since they only have 36 inches of range. It's not that hard for other units to reach out and smoke'em. Jump shoot jump was a great tactic for them, alas it faded away into days of old.

I personally feel that DDArk is still the best AT and anti-monster we currently have. Maybe there's something better FW, but I doubt it.

They really need to retune the annihilation barge to help out in this area. It's stuck in this weird halfway limbo point of "not very useful, but almost"

Any big Tesla guns are worthless. It has no real targets. A lot of this is just a very poorly written Dex.
I have a sneaking suspicion that what we will get will be C'Tan focused with the big point drop they got in CA making them fun but not really useable in a non narrative game.

Pyrothem wrote:
Any big Tesla guns are worthless. It has no real targets. A lot of this is just a very poorly written Dex.
I have a sneaking suspicion that what we will get will be C'Tan focused with the big point drop they got in CA making them fun but not really useable in a non narrative game.

C'tan are already competitive, they were used by several people at the Las Vegas Open.

Yeah, C'tan are actually pretty good. As long as you have a screen for them and don't let them get into combat against large units or anything that can survive the charge (4+ invul sucks, but they've always had that) a player should get some mileage out of it.

C'tan also allows you to deal damage in the movement phase, which helps against Ghaz.

 IHateNids wrote:


However, he also seems sold on the idea that it's Deathwatch Harlies and Necrons all in one book, and that PA-Pariah is the last one, which leaves SoB without PA support.

Which we can already bunk 100% certainly. SOB get PA rules. That's confirmed by GW. Who knows that better. GW or Valrak?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

punisher357 wrote:

Pyrothem wrote:
True.
On topic then. Has anyone tried to move to heavy Destroyers for their main anti tank? You would think that kind of price drop would make it a real option but I have never tried it as I have seen the ease other armies pop regular D's even at range out of line of sight.

You hit the nail on the head. They're easily erased from the board. Especially since they only have 36 inches of range. It's not that hard for other units to reach out and smoke'em. Jump shoot jump was a great tactic for them, alas it faded away into days of old.

I personally feel that DDArk is still the best AT and anti-monster we currently have. Maybe there's something better FW, but I doubt it.

They really need to retune the annihilation barge to help out in this area. It's stuck in this weird halfway limbo point of "not very useful, but almost"

36" is plenty. For non LOS ignoring weapons any further than that is not something you can rely as LOS will be bigger issue.

They beat the flyers easily in utility. Only issue is they are expensive as hell in euro's.

And you can only have 3 dda. 2 don't average leman russ dead so even 3 are short. You need more AT. Destroyer squad good but what then? It's flyers or heavy destroyers. Flyers bad at that and are hardly tougher and far harder to hide

2 DDA
7 shots
14/3 hits (49/9 with RR1s)
28/9 wounds (98/27)
No saves allowed
Times 3.5 for damage, for...

98/9 or about 11 points of damage without RR1s, close to 13 with.

Add a single CP to reroll a poor damage roll or number of shots, and two DDAs should be able to obliterate a Russ.

I don’t disagree with the above.

But I would ask, why are we setting the bar so low? Leman Russes aren’t what’s wrecking the meta. You need a/some combined solution that solves 28 wound, T8 models.

This ain’t yo grandpa’s meta (6th)!

sieGermans wrote:
I don’t disagree with the above.

But I would ask, why are we setting the bar so low? Leman Russes aren’t what’s wrecking the meta. You need a/some combined solution that solves 28 wound, T8 models.

This ain’t yo grandpa’s meta (6th)!

Silly amounts of Immortals is the right answer. With Methodical Destruction it's super easy to pop a Knight a turn.

 vict0988 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
I don’t disagree with the above.

But I would ask, why are we setting the bar so low? Leman Russes aren’t what’s wrecking the meta. You need a/some combined solution that solves 28 wound, T8 models.

This ain’t yo grandpa’s meta (6th)!

Silly amounts of Immortals is the right answer. With Methodical Destruction it's super easy to pop a Knight a turn.

60 Tesla Immortals with +2 to hit and rerolling 1s to hit, do by my clculations 28.5 wounds on T8/3+

That's Imotekh and 3 overlords and 2 stratagems (3CP) and stalker to pull off. And those 60 32mm bases have to fit into range.

And then the stalker chips in 3 wounds too.

tneva82 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:


However, he also seems sold on the idea that it's Deathwatch Harlies and Necrons all in one book, and that PA-Pariah is the last one, which leaves SoB without PA support.

Which we can already bunk 100% certainly. SOB get PA rules. That's confirmed by GW. Who knows that better. GW or Valrak?

Thats kinda my point....

it lends weight to either 2 more books, or 4 in a single book.

As to H.Des as prime AT selection, I've seen them used not too badly in that role, but they do suffer a little bit from people wanting them dead. Given they're no more survivable than regular destroyers and capped at a unit of 3, I have been finding them not worth it. Granmted, i have yet to try them since they came down in points, but that doesnt change how easy they die....

Folks keep acting like other things in this edition are durable lol. Almost every other option in the book that isn't a character will die turn 1 verse a solid army/player.

HD don't really have a durability problem at IMO. You can easily get them a 2+ save and hide them turn 1. They can even grab a 5++ if you like crypteks (I don't). They also don't get boned for moving like DDA's whos main weapon becomes a garbage battle canon.

But the bigger question is why on earth do folks keep comparing the two like it's either or? Run both if you own the models. I personally own 9 heavy D's and 2 DDA's, I have 3 doom scythes but they easily lost out to HD's now. It was a debate back when they were dead even on points, now I only run planes for fun. But there is no real reason other then flavor why I would feel pressured to not run one over the other in regard to DDA's and Heavy D's, they both work incredibly well and especially in concert with each other since it's a real PITA for your opponent to mitigate the crippling fire you are going to deliver.

I suppose if I REALLY had to choose one over the other it would depend on the rest of my army. DDA's actually do more for me when they get into gaus range, but if my list is rocking tesla immortals and/or tomb blades I really don't need the anti infantry and will prefer the HD's because they are much more reliable AT that can hide and thanks to a 10" move with fly and infantry keyword are almost always getting the drop and with MWBD they pretty much auto hit something 3 times, I cannot tell you how nice it is to know I can pretty much auto hit something with 3 heavy gaus canons and since I usually rock a lord I am wounding more often then not as well.

But I'll reiterate, there is no reason why DDA's and HD's should be competing. Personally I find the more compelling question is should we bother with troops currently. My last tournament list had zero troops and I did incredibly well maximizing on mobile and long range units with fly. Our army only really needs a couple CP anyway.

torblind wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

sieGermans wrote:
I don’t disagree with the above.

But I would ask, why are we setting the bar so low? Leman Russes aren’t what’s wrecking the meta. You need a/some combined solution that solves 28 wound, T8 models.

This ain’t yo grandpa’s meta (6th)!

Silly amounts of Immortals is the right answer. With Methodical Destruction it's super easy to pop a Knight a turn.

60 Tesla Immortals with +2 to hit and rerolling 1s to hit, do by my clculations 28.5 wounds on T8/3+

That's Imotekh and 3 overlords and 2 stratagems (3CP) and stalker to pull off. And those 60 32mm bases have to fit into range.

And then the stalker chips in 3 wounds too.

A DDA and a moving Triarch Stalker do 4,34 damage, now you need another 24 wounds. That's 40 MWBD Immortals and 5 non-MWBD Immortals.

A Heavy Destroyer shooting at a target of Methodical Destruction with 3+/4++ does 1,134 unsaved damage.

2,57 MWBD Immortals shooting at a target of Methodical Destruction with 3+/4++ does 1,005 unsaved damage.

A Heavy Destroy shooting at 30 Ork Boyz does 0,648 unsaved damage.

3 MWBD Immortals shooting at 30 Ork Boyz does 5,237 unsaved damage.

In this scenario, I think it's fair to ignore the cost of MWBD and treat any HQs as CP tax because they also perform the role of melee combatants.

Yes, your anti-tank gun is slightly more pts-effective against Knights, my anti-horde gun is many times more effective at killing hordes than Heavy Destroyers relative to how good Heavy Destroyers are at shooting Knights. As you showed Immortals can get the job done, if my opponent is using their Castellan/Lord of Skulls defensively enough that I cannot reach them then I will target whatever is out on the field taking objectives or I'll win the game on objectives.

If you take a Lord the whole thing becomes a lot more effective, but that applies to both Heavy Destroyers and Immortals. The argument for Heavy Destroyers has nothing to do with being able to do 28 wounds/turn to a T8 unit, unless you are taking a lot of S4/S7 weapons then it's very doable, the argument would be Repulsors, Centurions and Aggressors. I still haven't created or tested a competitive list with Heavy Destroyers, I do think they are quite good. The benefit of having 0 multi-wound units except for characters and Quantum Shielded units is not to be understated, I think I might try a list without DDAs as my first bet on a good Heavy Destroyer spam list, it also depends on whether you have to worry about Gang Busters in which case you wouldn't want Destoyers or Wraiths if you take 3x3 Heavy Destroyers.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Folks keep acting like other things in this edition are durable lol. Almost every other option in the book that isn't a character will die turn 1 verse a solid army/player.

HD don't really have a durability problem at IMO. You can easily get them a 2+ save and hide them turn 1. They can even grab a 5++ if you like crypteks (I don't). They also don't get boned for moving like DDA's whos main weapon becomes a garbage battle canon.

But the bigger question is why on earth do folks keep comparing the two like it's either or? Run both if you own the models. I personally own 9 heavy D's and 2 DDA's, I have 3 doom scythes but they easily lost out to HD's now. It was a debate back when they were dead even on points, now I only run planes for fun. But there is no real reason other then flavor why I would feel pressured to not run one over the other in regard to DDA's and Heavy D's, they both work incredibly well and especially in concert with each other since it's a real PITA for your opponent to mitigate the crippling fire you are going to deliver.

I suppose if I REALLY had to choose one over the other it would depend on the rest of my army. DDA's actually do more for me when they get into gaus range, but if my list is rocking tesla immortals and/or tomb blades I really don't need the anti infantry and will prefer the HD's because they are much more reliable AT that can hide and thanks to a 10" move with fly and infantry keyword are almost always getting the drop and with MWBD they pretty much auto hit something 3 times, I cannot tell you how nice it is to know I can pretty much auto hit something with 3 heavy gaus canons and since I usually rock a lord I am wounding more often then not as well.

But I'll reiterate, there is no reason why DDA's and HD's should be competing. Personally I find the more compelling question is should we bother with troops currently. My last tournament list had zero troops and I did incredibly well maximizing on mobile and long range units with fly. Our army only really needs a couple CP anyway.

I’m not saying it’s either/or. In fact, my point was to illustrate that people should be focusing on solving a specific (and relevant) problem: not just playing “how many wounds do these cause” on an individual basis.

As an example, if we know that 3 DDAs alone can’t kill an IK (assuming that’s a relevant problem for your strategy to win games), you may need to supplement with some additional AT.

Where the comparisons between AT platforms become relevant is deciding on whether it should be 3 DDAs + X HDs, or Y HDs as primary + Z DDAs to fill the gap.

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 DDA
7 shots
14/3 hits (49/9 with RR1s)
28/9 wounds (98/27)
No saves allowed
Times 3.5 for damage, for...

98/9 or about 11 points of damage without RR1s, close to 13 with.

Add a single CP to reroll a poor damage roll or number of shots, and two DDAs should be able to obliterate a Russ.

That algorithm misses variance. Good rolls don't balance bad rolls because there's wound cap. vs russ average damage for 1 dda is 5.14, chance of 0 damage 20.06%m chance of 1 shotting 11.52%. This fairly close to accurate with hundred's of thousands of simulations.

2x5.14=10.28

That way to calculate damage would give 31 damage vs baneblade for pylon yet its only 57% chance of 1 shotting. More realistic average damage is 19


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IHateNids wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:


However, he also seems sold on the idea that it's Deathwatch Harlies and Necrons all in one book, and that PA-Pariah is the last one, which leaves SoB without PA support.

Which we can already bunk 100% certainly. SOB get PA rules. That's confirmed by GW. Who knows that better. GW or Valrak?

Thats kinda my point....

it lends weight to either 2 more books, or 4 in a single book.

As to H.Des as prime AT selection, I've seen them used not too badly in that role, but they do suffer a little bit from people wanting them dead. Given they're no more survivable than regular destroyers and capped at a unit of 3, I have been finding them not worth it. Granmted, i have yet to try them since they came down in points, but that doesnt change how easy they die....

4 in single book being way more likely than 2 books with 2 factions. Engine got 4, war of spider 4+small tiny one.

How many 2 faction books there been? Even PA1 had 2+ynnari

And that's assuming harlies still get rules.

 vict0988 wrote:

A DDA and a moving Triarch Stalker do 4,34 damage, now you need another 24 wounds. That's 40 MWBD Immortals and 5 non-MWBD Immortals.

A Heavy Destroyer shooting at a target of Methodical Destruction with 3+/4++ does 1,134 unsaved damage.

2,57 MWBD Immortals shooting at a target of Methodical Destruction with 3+/4++ does 1,005 unsaved damage.

A Heavy Destroy shooting at 30 Ork Boyz does 0,648 unsaved damage.

3 MWBD Immortals shooting at 30 Ork Boyz does 5,237 unsaved damage.

In this scenario, I think it's fair to ignore the cost of MWBD and treat any HQs as CP tax because they also perform the role of melee combatants.

So according to all this, it's super easy to kill a knight with immortals in one turn?

That's quite the kabal, and as others have pointed out, barely meating the expectation means you will kill it 1 out of 2 times.

sieGermans wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Folks keep acting like other things in this edition are durable lol. Almost every other option in the book that isn't a character will die turn 1 verse a solid army/player.

HD don't really have a durability problem at IMO. You can easily get them a 2+ save and hide them turn 1. They can even grab a 5++ if you like crypteks (I don't). They also don't get boned for moving like DDA's whos main weapon becomes a garbage battle canon.

But the bigger question is why on earth do folks keep comparing the two like it's either or? Run both if you own the models. I personally own 9 heavy D's and 2 DDA's, I have 3 doom scythes but they easily lost out to HD's now. It was a debate back when they were dead even on points, now I only run planes for fun. But there is no real reason other then flavor why I would feel pressured to not run one over the other in regard to DDA's and Heavy D's, they both work incredibly well and especially in concert with each other since it's a real PITA for your opponent to mitigate the crippling fire you are going to deliver.

I suppose if I REALLY had to choose one over the other it would depend on the rest of my army. DDA's actually do more for me when they get into gaus range, but if my list is rocking tesla immortals and/or tomb blades I really don't need the anti infantry and will prefer the HD's because they are much more reliable AT that can hide and thanks to a 10" move with fly and infantry keyword are almost always getting the drop and with MWBD they pretty much auto hit something 3 times, I cannot tell you how nice it is to know I can pretty much auto hit something with 3 heavy gaus canons and since I usually rock a lord I am wounding more often then not as well.

But I'll reiterate, there is no reason why DDA's and HD's should be competing. Personally I find the more compelling question is should we bother with troops currently. My last tournament list had zero troops and I did incredibly well maximizing on mobile and long range units with fly. Our army only really needs a couple CP anyway.

I’m not saying it’s either/or. In fact, my point was to illustrate that people should be focusing on solving a specific (and relevant) problem: not just playing “how many wounds do these cause” on an individual basis.

As an example, if we know that 3 DDAs alone can’t kill an IK (assuming that’s a relevant problem for your strategy to win games), you may need to supplement with some additional AT.

Where the comparisons between AT platforms become relevant is deciding on whether it should be 3 DDAs + X HDs, or Y HDs as primary + Z DDAs to fill the gap.

Sorry, I didn't mean to lump you in. It was just easier being general as what I was addressing was more important. Honestly, I think those two are clearly the front runners for long ranged AT. Not that we have a ton of alternatives, but the ratio between how many of either you field is totally dependent on the rest of your list. I really was enjoying fielding destroyers for a while which is why I have so many ( I have 12 normal plus the 9 heavy) and it was because I was loading up on flying units. It's a funny one too, folks continue to act as though they are fragile, but they are honestly way more durable then immortals. And again, Necrons really don't require many CP if any. The more interesting debate is whether to bother with troops at all, at least IMO.

I find relying on Destroyers to kill hard targets without use of ExProts to be one of the most mandatory things in our codex

That, and MWBD if you arent running Sautekh

What is the math regarding a unit of destroyers hammering a suped-up squad of GK paladins? Is that a worthwhile use of them?
Also, curious. Is MWBD worth throwing onto a destroyer unit that will be getting EP?

I would say no to putting MWBD on Destroyers using EP with the exception that you don't have anything better to put it on.