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.

It's been edited. There was a minute where it suggested you take a CCB to support Tomb Blades with a Resurrection Orb, which got some poeple excited about them changing the Res Orb rules, but I guess they just made a mistake as they've now removed that text from the post on community

It seems really odd that they would suggest keeping a Command Barge to go with the Tomb Blades. Originally they said that you did so because you can use a res orb on them, but that was edited out. You also can't use MWBD on them either. So why bother with a Command Barge instead of a Cloaktek?

I mean CCB is one of the few overlord esque units that can keep up with a group of Tomb blades to increase their combat efficiency. Plus compared to the cryptek it's more likely to stay alive with a rez orb then a cyptek, so if you have the pair traveling with the TB's then your TB's are pretty tenacious.

 Lothmar wrote:
I mean CCB is one of the few overlord esque units that can keep up with a group of Tomb blades to increase their combat efficiency.

How do you figure that?

 skoffs wrote:

 Lothmar wrote:
I mean CCB is one of the few overlord esque units that can keep up with a group of Tomb blades to increase their combat efficiency.

How do you figure that?

Speed difference mainly 9" difference for named/regular overlords vs 2" for CCB. I suppose you could gimp your TB's speed by slowing them to the equivalent of an overlord to keep them in range of their mwbd~ but if you're looking for relative consistent mwbd's on the move then the CCB's your best bet.

Sure you could make the overlord Nephrek for 6" advances, but then that means the tomb blades you want him to buff also have to be Nephrek because mwbd is dynasty restricted.

Well thats the problem, mwbd is for infantry only and not for bikes, same for the rez orb.... Unless they changed that a ccb supports tomb blades like.... Not at all

 Lothmar wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 Lothmar wrote:
I mean CCB is one of the few overlord esque units that can keep up with a group of Tomb blades to increase their combat efficiency.

How do you figure that?

Speed difference mainly 9" difference for named/regular overlords vs 2" for CCB. I suppose you could gimp your TB's speed by slowing them to the equivalent of an overlord to keep them in range of their mwbd~ but if you're looking for relative consistent mwbd's on the move then the CCB's your best bet.

Sure you could make the overlord Nephrek for 6" advances, but then that means the tomb blades you want him to buff also have to be Nephrek because mwbd is dynasty restricted.

You can’t give them MWBD.

Whoops sorry, derped there.

Must have been thinking of Destroyers who do count as infantry. Sorry bout that.

Granted TB's might make some decent mobile screen for a CCB looking to move at high speed most of the game.

Hopefully TB's will get a leader variant like destroyers have.

Well, he can keep up with them in order to offer melee/heavier weapon support. You could also have a CCB with the "immune to Morale" Trait to keep them around, but you'd need to be running a lot for that to make sense.

Since the video leak has gone down, I cant remember if heavy gauss changed to S6, 36" compared to S5 24"?

 Klowny wrote:
Since the video leak has gone down, I cant remember if heavy gauss changed to S6, 36" compared to S5 24"?

They were buffed very nicely from S5 Heavy 2 24" to S6 Heavy 3 24" and even got a point reduction as well, whether that's how they stay of course remains to be seen

So, how do DDA's compare with the big Gauss Pylons for killing tanks and such?

StevetheDestroyeOfWorlds wrote:
So, how do DDA's compare with the big Gauss Pylons for killing tanks and such?

You're comparing a Heavy support choice to a Lord of War. They aren't even on the same scale.
Unless the Pylon got nerfed super hard. Last time I saw its statline was when it had titan killer stats and could one shot any vehicle.

StevetheDestroyeOfWorlds wrote:
So, how do DDA's compare with the big Gauss Pylons for killing tanks and such?

They are about equal efficiency point for point (not 1:1 model) for killing big tanks if the ark doesn't move, pylon is better for air and titanic targets and has more potential for a whiff/overkill equal points wise (2.5 ish arks v 1 pylon for target options). Both have secondary infantry weapons that again are about the same efficiency points wise.

Again no guarantee this is still the case in the codex.

Points per Wound on non-titanic, non-flying T8, 3+: GPs struggle due to only having D6 shots.

DDA: 3.5 shots = 2.3 hits = 1.5 wounds = 5.3 damage = 39pts per damage
GP: 3.5 shots = 2.3 hits = 1.9 wounds = 15.3 damage = 36pts per damage

Versus T9 and T5 through T3, the points per damage slips back in favor of DDA.

I want to do necrons again with the new dex. They were the first army I did (so unpainted and modelled awfully) but my love for them has definitely been revived. I have an acceptable doom scythe, some warriors (owned 30 some are ok) and a very nicely painted cryptek. I think the new SC box and more warriors. What else? Any tips? (I really like the mephrit dynasty trait, suits my style and good against what I play)

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:
I want to do necrons again with the new dex. They were the first army I did (so unpainted and modelled awfully) but my love for them has definitely been revived. I have an acceptable doom scythe, some warriors (owned 30 some are ok) and a very nicely painted cryptek. I think the new SC box and more warriors. What else? Any tips?

Split the Forgebane box with an AdMech player. Great deal for more Immortals, a Cryptek, and some Wraiths.

So assuming the leak was correct. This list actually looks somewhat scary. Im wondering what people think the best dynasty would be for them.

zacharia wrote:

 Klowny wrote:
Since the video leak has gone down, I cant remember if heavy gauss changed to S6, 36" compared to S5 24"?

They were buffed very nicely from S5 Heavy 2 24" to S6 Heavy 3 24" and even got a point reduction as well, whether that's how they stay of course remains to be seen

With the changes to Wraiths in Forgebane compared to the beta codex, it would be safe to say to not assume anything at this point until the codex.

Inevitableq wrote:

Spoiler:

Super heavy detachment
Tesseract vault x3

Supreme command
Cloaktek x3
Deceiver

1983 points 7cp

So assuming the leak was correct. This list actually looks somewhat scary. Im wondering what people think the best dynasty would be for them.

If you've got a core of 3 Vaults + deceiver + a cloaktek, I'm not sure what the other 2 cloakteks are doing. Conceivably they could be healing, but only if your opponent isn't focus firing (which they really ought to).

You could swap to an outrider detachment instead and go 3x3 Scarabs + 1 Canoptek Spyder. 2 scarab swarms grab a random objective in your backline, 1 scarab takes the orb with your cloaktek to try to screen a charge or tie up something useful in melee, and the Spider will be able to deep strike in with strategem and provide more repairs to the TV that's being focused down (and get to deny at least 1 psychic power). Mephrit is the obvious answer for your only weapon (tesla spheres), but I think Nephrekh would be better just in case you get a bad deceiver roll.

Xachariah wrote:

Inevitableq wrote:

Spoiler:

Super heavy detachment
Tesseract vault x3

Supreme command
Cloaktek x3
Deceiver

1983 points 7cp

So assuming the leak was correct. This list actually looks somewhat scary. Im wondering what people think the best dynasty would be for them.

If you've got a core of 3 Vaults + deceiver + a cloaktek, I'm not sure what the other 2 cloakteks are doing. Conceivably they could be healing, but only if your opponent isn't focus firing (which they really ought to).

You could swap to an outrider detachment instead and go 3x3 Scarabs + 1 Canoptek Spyder. 2 scarab swarms grab a random objective in your backline, 1 scarab takes the orb with your cloaktek to try to screen a charge or tie up something useful in melee, and the Spider will be able to deep strike in with strategem and provide more repairs to the TV that's being focused down (and get to deny at least 1 psychic power). Mephrit is the obvious answer for your only weapon (tesla spheres), but I think Nephrekh would be better just in case you get a bad deceiver roll.

With the new stratagem for using the highest profile, focusing tesseract vaults may not be the best method for taking them out if you aren't confident you can take one out a turn, which is likely. So what they probably want to do is to get one down a profile at a time to limit you're ability to keep the vaults vomiting out 3 powers a turn. So using 3 crypteks may be the better option. To add to this, if you are playing something that involves kill point, mainly ITC Champtions missions, having everything character but the vaults can deny your opponent kills and boost you ahead

Ridge wrote:

Xachariah wrote:

Inevitableq wrote:

Spoiler:

Super heavy detachment
Tesseract vault x3

Supreme command
Cloaktek x3
Deceiver

1983 points 7cp

So assuming the leak was correct. This list actually looks somewhat scary. Im wondering what people think the best dynasty would be for them.

If you've got a core of 3 Vaults + deceiver + a cloaktek, I'm not sure what the other 2 cloakteks are doing. Conceivably they could be healing, but only if your opponent isn't focus firing (which they really ought to).

You could swap to an outrider detachment instead and go 3x3 Scarabs + 1 Canoptek Spyder. 2 scarab swarms grab a random objective in your backline, 1 scarab takes the orb with your cloaktek to try to screen a charge or tie up something useful in melee, and the Spider will be able to deep strike in with strategem and provide more repairs to the TV that's being focused down (and get to deny at least 1 psychic power). Mephrit is the obvious answer for your only weapon (tesla spheres), but I think Nephrekh would be better just in case you get a bad deceiver roll.

With the new stratagem for using the highest profile, focusing tesseract vaults may not be the best method for taking them out if you aren't confident you can take one out a turn, which is likely. So what they probably want to do is to get one down a profile at a time to limit you're ability to keep the vaults vomiting out 3 powers a turn. So using 3 crypteks may be the better option. To add to this, if you are playing something that involves kill point, mainly ITC Champtions missions, having everything character but the vaults can deny your opponent kills and boost you ahead

This is pretty much how i was thinking about it. Its not all that easy to down one of these things. Plus if they do kill one. They blow up rather nicely.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/20/preview-the-mephrit-dynasty-and-destroyersgw-homepage-post-2/

Destroyers are still insane. Even if the point drop isn't as big as it is in the Beta book, it's still really, really strong.

Everything there jives with the beta leak.

The best part about the change to Destroyers (from a nostalgia pov) is that the Strength and # of shots is now the same as they were when Destroyers were first made in plastic.

 Galef wrote:
The best part about the change to Destroyers (from a nostalgia pov) is that the Strength and # of shots is now the same as they were when Destroyers were first made in plastic.

The worst part is the ancient sculpt. Anyone make their own or improve the base model any? I am thinking at the bare minimum using the head from the CCB (the dude on the right) and adding something to the insides of the ...exhaust ports? Whatever the sides are. They look weird empty.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

 Galef wrote:
The best part about the change to Destroyers (from a nostalgia pov) is that the Strength and # of shots is now the same as they were when Destroyers were first made in plastic.

The worst part is the ancient sculpt. Anyone make their own or improve the base model any? I am thinking at the bare minimum using the head from the CCB (the dude on the right) and adding something to the insides of the ...exhaust ports? Whatever the sides are. They look weird empty.

That's funny, because for years the Destroyers and Warriors were considered some of the best GW models. They certainly are showing their age now, but my main gripe is the cost for such a simple kit.
Also, Warriors should be in boxes of 10 without Scarabs and Scarabs need their own box. This obviously requires a recast.
If we also recast Destroyers and the Monolith, we can abolish green rods entirely. Whether that is good or bad is up to the players ( I personally like the green rods)

-

 Galef wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

 Galef wrote:
The best part about the change to Destroyers (from a nostalgia pov) is that the Strength and # of shots is now the same as they were when Destroyers were first made in plastic.

The worst part is the ancient sculpt. Anyone make their own or improve the base model any? I am thinking at the bare minimum using the head from the CCB (the dude on the right) and adding something to the insides of the ...exhaust ports? Whatever the sides are. They look weird empty.

That's funny, because for years the Destroyers and Warriors were considered some of the best GW models. They certainly are showing their age now, but my main gripe is the cost for such a simple kit.

What years? The '90s?! They have almost always been rubbish to me. Far outshined now by the entire range of 'Crons that came from their revamp.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

What years? The '90s?! They have almost always been rubbish to me. Far outshined now by the entire range of 'Crons that came from their revamp.

Indeed, the 90s and early 2000s. I started playing Necrons in 2006. Necrons had a "coolness" factor that no other army had. This was in part due to the Destroyers and Warriors.
I remember days when both Necrons and Dark Eldar hadn't had updates in a decade. Necrons still had a good (if limited) model range, but garbage rules, yet DE had excellent rules but garbage models.
How times have changed.

But I do agree that the more current Necrons are far better. I would be nice to see updated kits, even it the aesthetics stay the same overall.

-

I like the Destroyer sculpt.