Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2018/05/01 04:47:30
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Nagerash wrote: I was still looking into what a good list vs eldar would be as I have still no idea about strategies against them. I came up with the following and I wonder what your thoughts are.
I don't have a game planned against them, but this is purely to look at what I would expect could work with the limited knowledge I have on them. Maybe it'll help someone.
Spoiler:
the obvious weakness is the lack of an tanky OL character, but as long as they don't have many snipers (I really don't know if this is an autoinclude in eldar lists) I should be fine just slogging/veiling it across the board.
I stayed away from any Tesla, and therefor wanted to try a list that is very low on HQ with just a cryptek and lord. I felt the lord would add more to the veil DM combo, and I really think I need a cryptek in this list. I had Illuminor Szeras in as my warlord at first, but I really felt the lack of 5++ against Eldar could be telling, with the ammount of AP-2/-3 weapons they have + the fact that any list that features 40 warriors will have an entire army focusfiring them, which means the 5++ could really be crucial to keep them alive. I also went with 2 deny chances with the WL trait and the Gloom. I'm curious how it would perform.
Maybe it will give someone ideas if they face our most hated enemy (not counting the Tyranids that our Silent King keeps blabing about)
Spiders are pretty bad. Even with the gloom prism they arent really a good use of points. People have mixed views on warriors, personally i dont think they are worth it. Id get rid of the warriors and ghost ark and spyder. Take more immortals and either another DDA or a transcendent Ctan.
I concur about what to remove, but would say consider Tomb Blades and Scarabs as far as what to add.
For example-
Spoiler:
++ Battalion Detachment +5CP [97 PL, 1749pts] ++
+ HQ +
Destroyer Lord [7 PL, 131pts]: Phylactery, Warscythe
Lord [5 PL, 83pts]: Staff of Light, Veil
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 193pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 193pts]
++ Total: [97 PL, 1749pts] ++
Could probably switch out the D.Lord but I figured having someone who could pull their weight in combat wouldn't be bad. Him and the Scarabs can go run off and have fun while the Doomsday Arks pepper things from the backline.
One thing I would say to consider is maybe taking the Destroyers as a Nephrekh aux for -1CP so they could pop in instead of running up to get into position or being Veil'd (and you may consider switching out the D.Lord for a CCB at that point).
2018/05/01 08:07:09
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Here is the issue with that article, he only counts charge phases and the necrons shooting phase, remember you get to take part in two assault phases per round, and in only get to shoot ranged weapons once a round (if your using the pistol, otherwise it's a one and done with the rod). So a more honest calculation would halve the effect of the ranged weapons. Which leaves Praetorians noticeably worse than lychguard, especially when you consider stratagems like blood rights, which lets novokh attack twice in a single phase. Other issues include using only one wound models, which greatly favors praetorians since they have no means to do multiple wounds. He also uses a very narrow target profile (albeit one that is common), against t3, as well as t5 and up lychguard perform much better due to higher strength of attacks.
Long and short GW screwed the pooch on praetorians, they cost too much, the two configurations are horribly lopsided in effectiveness yet cost the same, and by excluding them from the dynasty keyword they cut off any synergy with the rest of the necron army. FLG and ITC have more or less become a GW marketing asset, so seeing a lame article trying to spin the effectiveness of a bad unit is just par for the course at this point.
Yeah no getting around it - Triarch Praetorians didn't get a lot of love in our 8th Ed. Codex.
Pretty sure the author of that article responded to your comments and addressed the fact that the authord did the average math on the charge, which was labelled as such, and provided a table showing dmg against all T & Sv. enemies and even called out your comments as showing that you failed to read the actual article and just made hap-hazarded comments based on looking only at the math (which appears correct and accurately labelled).
I don't think there is any spin, it just looked like a fair opinion piece comparing lychguard and triarch praetorians. Neither are stand-out amazing so it just covered the differences and pros and cons of each. IMO Wraiths clearly outclass both, though Lychguard with sword-and-board have their place as being pretty resilient.
Your 2nd paragraph is very confusing - you seem to agree that voidblade & particle caster praetorians are clearly better than Rod of Covenant (which seemed to be the main premise of the article, other than comparing lychguard as well), and then call the article a lame attempt at spin. Not sure why you would hate on any discussion of necrons, especially when the analysis is sound and overall informative of differences so that each player can make their own determination to bring what they like. Perhaps you're just disappointed GW cut off the Praetorians from synergy and didn't make them strong enough to compensate? I think we're all in agreement there, but there is a difference between someone saying "Triarch Praetorians are great," which would be flat out wrong, versus someone saying "Triarch Praetorians are sometimes better than Lychguard, depending on the situation, and here are the pros & cons of bringing praetorians vs. bringing lychguard."
2018/05/01 10:09:32
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Nagerash wrote: I was still looking into what a good list vs eldar would be as I have still no idea about strategies against them. I came up with the following and I wonder what your thoughts are.
I don't have a game planned against them, but this is purely to look at what I would expect could work with the limited knowledge I have on them. Maybe it'll help someone.
Spoiler:
the obvious weakness is the lack of an tanky OL character, but as long as they don't have many snipers (I really don't know if this is an autoinclude in eldar lists) I should be fine just slogging/veiling it across the board.
I stayed away from any Tesla, and therefor wanted to try a list that is very low on HQ with just a cryptek and lord. I felt the lord would add more to the veil DM combo, and I really think I need a cryptek in this list. I had Illuminor Szeras in as my warlord at first, but I really felt the lack of 5++ against Eldar could be telling, with the ammount of AP-2/-3 weapons they have + the fact that any list that features 40 warriors will have an entire army focusfiring them, which means the 5++ could really be crucial to keep them alive. I also went with 2 deny chances with the WL trait and the Gloom. I'm curious how it would perform.
Maybe it will give someone ideas if they face our most hated enemy (not counting the Tyranids that our Silent King keeps blabing about)
Spiders are pretty bad. Even with the gloom prism they arent really a good use of points. People have mixed views on warriors, personally i dont think they are worth it. Id get rid of the warriors and ghost ark and spyder. Take more immortals and either another DDA or a transcendent Ctan.
I concur about what to remove, but would say consider Tomb Blades and Scarabs as far as what to add.
For example-
Spoiler:
++ Battalion Detachment +5CP [97 PL, 1749pts] ++
+ HQ +
Destroyer Lord [7 PL, 131pts]: Phylactery, Warscythe
Lord [5 PL, 83pts]: Staff of Light, Veil
+ Heavy Support +
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 193pts]
Doomsday Ark [10 PL, 193pts]
++ Total: [97 PL, 1749pts] ++
Could probably switch out the D.Lord but I figured having someone who could pull their weight in combat wouldn't be bad. Him and the Scarabs can go run off and have fun while the Doomsday Arks pepper things from the backline.
One thing I would say to consider is maybe taking the Destroyers as a Nephrekh aux for -1CP so they could pop in instead of running up to get into position or being Veil'd (and you may consider switching out the D.Lord for a CCB at that point).
The Reason I didn't list any Tomb Blades, is because I expect any Eldar player to use at least 1 unit of Dark Reavers and they always hit on 3's whatever the modifiers. Which means the best defense Blades have is gone, and with their weapons being 2shot S5 -2 D2 weapons. That is very easily a dead squad of Blades imo. The Reason I go for big warrior blobs, is I have this idea that Eldar are mostly a very elite army, who might struggle with lots of bodies on the field. So making the warriors as resilient as possible can work wonders. + S4 ap-1/2 is very strong against his T3 infantry. and weight of fire is a good counter vs any -1 to hit or whatever defenses he might place on his infantry. So I figured staying away from Tesla is a good idea and you need the cryptek for the warriors. But I as I've said. I haven't tested this.
I'm not a fan of the Destroyer lord. His reroll to wound can't be used in the fight fase on a model clearly meant to go in CC + and he's pretty expensive.
I'm also not a big fan of using 2 cp to DS Destroyers, when you can just deploy them out of line of sight for the first turn.
- Power corrupts, Absolute power.... is a whole lot of fun...-
2018/05/01 12:47:56
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I would never play it because I'm dragging my feet assembling my second ghost ark, finishing painting my first ghost ark, and even starting to paint my DDA. A big ol' bucket of nope for this list.
40k:
8th Edtion: 9405 pts - Varantekh Dynasty
2018/05/01 13:58:02
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I wouldn't play it simply cos I can't stand Warrior models. The legs are stupidly posed and the rest of the kit feels outdated. I'll field 1 unit if I absolutely have to, but would go to great lengths to avoid having any.
GK - 2k Points
IK - 3k Points
Tau - 2k Points
DR:80S++G++M+B+IPw40k00#+D++A++/sWD-R++T(T)DM+
2018/05/01 13:59:44
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Here is the issue with that article, he only counts charge phases and the necrons shooting phase, remember you get to take part in two assault phases per round, and in only get to shoot ranged weapons once a round (if your using the pistol, otherwise it's a one and done with the rod). So a more honest calculation would halve the effect of the ranged weapons. Which leaves Praetorians noticeably worse than lychguard, especially when you consider stratagems like blood rights, which lets novokh attack twice in a single phase. Other issues include using only one wound models, which greatly favors praetorians since they have no means to do multiple wounds. He also uses a very narrow target profile (albeit one that is common), against t3, as well as t5 and up lychguard perform much better due to higher strength of attacks.
Long and short GW screwed the pooch on praetorians, they cost too much, the two configurations are horribly lopsided in effectiveness yet cost the same, and by excluding them from the dynasty keyword they cut off any synergy with the rest of the necron army. FLG and ITC have more or less become a GW marketing asset, so seeing a lame article trying to spin the effectiveness of a bad unit is just par for the course at this point.
Yeah no getting around it - Triarch Praetorians didn't get a lot of love in our 8th Ed. Codex.
Pretty sure the author of that article responded to your comments and addressed the fact that the authord did the average math on the charge, which was labelled as such, and provided a table showing dmg against all T & Sv. enemies and even called out your comments as showing that you failed to read the actual article and just made hap-hazarded comments based on looking only at the math (which appears correct and accurately labelled).
I don't think there is any spin, it just looked like a fair opinion piece comparing lychguard and triarch praetorians. Neither are stand-out amazing so it just covered the differences and pros and cons of each. IMO Wraiths clearly outclass both, though Lychguard with sword-and-board have their place as being pretty resilient.
Your 2nd paragraph is very confusing - you seem to agree that voidblade & particle caster praetorians are clearly better than Rod of Covenant (which seemed to be the main premise of the article, other than comparing lychguard as well), and then call the article a lame attempt at spin. Not sure why you would hate on any discussion of necrons, especially when the analysis is sound and overall informative of differences so that each player can make their own determination to bring what they like. Perhaps you're just disappointed GW cut off the Praetorians from synergy and didn't make them strong enough to compensate? I think we're all in agreement there, but there is a difference between someone saying "Triarch Praetorians are great," which would be flat out wrong, versus someone saying "Triarch Praetorians are sometimes better than Lychguard, depending on the situation, and here are the pros & cons of bringing praetorians vs. bringing lychguard."
To be fair. Lychguard are our most efficient close combat damage dealers. They are pretty darn tough too. However, they struggle with a lack of delivery options, where wraiths simply move to their targets, and can charge with the strategem
Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts
MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum.
2018/05/01 14:00:20
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Legitimately don't know this, but could you even play it? I thought dedicated transports need the corresponding unit to be fielded per the detachment callout box (so you would need another infantry character or unit of Warriors). I may be misreading this however, and the blurb could mean you would need at least 5 other units to field the 5 transports (which this list fulfills).
2018/05/01 14:01:47
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I would never play it because I'm dragging my feet assembling my second ghost ark, finishing painting my first ghost ark, and even starting to paint my DDA. A big ol' bucket of nope for this list.
I hear that.
Advice for anyone building this kit:
Always assemble it with the ribs pointing up but without the broken warrior "filling". You can then slot in the big gun to make it a DDA (no glue required) or leave it out to have a ghost ark. You can even stand a whole unit of 10 warriors inside the empty ark if you like.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/01 14:03:32
2018/05/01 14:58:11
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I would never play it because I'm dragging my feet assembling my second ghost ark, finishing painting my first ghost ark, and even starting to paint my DDA. A big ol' bucket of nope for this list.
I hear that.
Advice for anyone building this kit:
Always assemble it with the ribs pointing up but without the broken warrior "filling". You can then slot in the big gun to make it a DDA (no glue required) or leave it out to have a ghost ark. You can even stand a whole unit of 10 warriors inside the empty ark if you like.
This is what I did. I even modeled some of the passengers as regular warriors since I had extra gauss flayers (made a bunch of crypteks in the old days.) Gives you a chance to have some warriors that don't look like they are squating.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/05/01 16:00:18
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
This has decent synergy with the mephrit code. That's a lot of AP. I don't know how competitive it would be, but I plan on running something similar, assuming it doesn't violate any rules, etc.
2018/05/01 16:02:04
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
The issue with that Mephrit list is that it has no hard shooting outside the DDAs. Even with AP-2, the rest is just S4, so you're really hoping to grind down before you die, which isn't a great strategy.
2018/05/01 16:50:19
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I really miss the Ghost Ark being Open Topped. A single change like that would really bump Warriors up a tier.
honestly, I think that may end up being too strong with the durability of the ghost ark. That's a pretty significant amount of firepower in a very resilient package. Maybe if they did open-topped with a -1 to hit modifier or something?
2018/05/01 17:02:18
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I really miss the Ghost Ark being Open Topped. A single change like that would really bump Warriors up a tier.
honestly, I think that may end up being too strong with the durability of the ghost ark. That's a pretty significant amount of firepower in a very resilient package. Maybe if they did open-topped with a -1 to hit modifier or something?
Seeing how durable Rhinos are, I don't think that's a valid complaint.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/05/01 17:13:59
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I really miss the Ghost Ark being Open Topped. A single change like that would really bump Warriors up a tier.
honestly, I think that may end up being too strong with the durability of the ghost ark. That's a pretty significant amount of firepower in a very resilient package. Maybe if they did open-topped with a -1 to hit modifier or something?
Seeing how durable Rhinos are, I don't think that's a valid complaint.
I'm not super familiar with rhino stats.....but if I recall they're not open topped are they? Are you simply saying they're very durable? Don't they have much less firepower than a ghost ark? They definitely don't have quantum shielding.
2018/05/01 17:22:44
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I really miss the Ghost Ark being Open Topped. A single change like that would really bump Warriors up a tier.
honestly, I think that may end up being too strong with the durability of the ghost ark. That's a pretty significant amount of firepower in a very resilient package. Maybe if they did open-topped with a -1 to hit modifier or something?
Seeing how durable Rhinos are, I don't think that's a valid complaint.
I'm not super familiar with rhino stats.....but if I recall they're not open topped are they? Are you simply saying they're very durable? Don't they have much less firepower than a ghost ark? They definitely don't have quantum shielding.
It doesn't make sense for the Ghost Ark to be open-topped, since the warriors ride all plugged into the regeneration apparatus.
I have 3 DDA/GA... may have to run a game or two with them as GA.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/05/01 17:51:46
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I would never play it because I'm dragging my feet assembling my second ghost ark, finishing painting my first ghost ark, and even starting to paint my DDA. A big ol' bucket of nope for this list.
I can relate. The arks are nice models (ignoring the fact that they don't really fit logically in the lore as military vehicles), but they are an absolute bitch to assemble.
I swear GW hates necron players. That's why they give us such annoying kits to assemble.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2018/05/01 18:08:22
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I would never play it because I'm dragging my feet assembling my second ghost ark, finishing painting my first ghost ark, and even starting to paint my DDA. A big ol' bucket of nope for this list.
I can relate. The arks are nice models (ignoring the fact that they don't really fit logically in the lore as military vehicles), but they are an absolute bitch to assemble.
I swear GW hates necron players. That's why they give us such annoying kits to assemble.
They look so cool though! I'm okay with the difficulty assembling and painting because the end product looks great!
2018/05/01 18:17:31
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Yeah the dda / ghost ark is a pain to put together. But they do look sweet. I normally run 2 dda with a Spyder, 40 warriors, 10 immortals, and a ghost ark. I like the idea of adding 2 more, they really do have some serious firepower themselves. They have the shooting ability of 10 warriors, t6, 4+ save, quantum shielding, and 14 wounds. Vs a rhino for 74 pts (half the cost) being arguably about as durable (3+ save, 10 wounds) but without the output of firepower (2 storm bolters).
When in a vacuum yes the rhino looks better since it's so much cheaper but add in the reanimation boost for warriors it's nice. If your playing mass warriors you need them. If not then they are still useful, but perhaps overcost a bit.
2018/05/01 18:26:51
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Azuza001 wrote: Yeah the dda / ghost ark is a pain to put together. But they do look sweet. I normally run 2 dda with a Spyder, 40 warriors, 10 immortals, and a ghost ark. I like the idea of adding 2 more, they really do have some serious firepower themselves. They have the shooting ability of 10 warriors, t6, 4+ save, quantum shielding, and 14 wounds. Vs a rhino for 74 pts (half the cost) being arguably about as durable (3+ save, 10 wounds) but without the output of firepower (2 storm bolters).
When in a vacuum yes the rhino looks better since it's so much cheaper but add in the reanimation boost for warriors it's nice. If your playing mass warriors you need them. If not then they are still useful, but perhaps overcost a bit.
The ghost ark also has more wounds, more guns, quantum shielding and living metal. If the ghost ark was rhino price it would be overpowered. Maybe it does need 20 points or so shaved off, but it should be more than a rhino.
You don't use the ark as a transport. That's not actually its primary role. Its primary role is to be an ambulance for warriors.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2018/05/01 18:38:22
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Sn33R wrote: I love this idea but has anyone came up with a competetive list with 2xdda and 2xga that's a big point sink.
How do you play it though? Rush forward to get into RF range? Shoot till one pops, then unload warriors and try to keep them alive?
Not a clue?.. maybe deceiver it up with a squad of warriors? Really you would want 2x 20 warriors and 2x ghost arks. That is a lot of firepower not mega power but mass dakka. In my meta ass razorback spam is prevelant
2018/05/01 19:20:18
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Had a 1500pt game vs Ultramarines. We were using Targets of Opportunity from Chapter Approved and Search and Destroy deployment. I won the game 12-6. Battle Report To come within the next few days. My list was;
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I really miss the Ghost Ark being Open Topped. A single change like that would really bump Warriors up a tier.
honestly, I think that may end up being too strong with the durability of the ghost ark. That's a pretty significant amount of firepower in a very resilient package. Maybe if they did open-topped with a -1 to hit modifier or something?
Seeing how durable Rhinos are, I don't think that's a valid complaint.
I'm not super familiar with rhino stats.....but if I recall they're not open topped are they? Are you simply saying they're very durable? Don't they have much less firepower than a ghost ark? They definitely don't have quantum shielding.
2 Storm Bolters and the Rhino is 74 points. They're actually very durable for the cost. It isn't unreasonable for us to just get Open Topped back for the Ghost Ark.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/05/02 08:27:36
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
2 Storm Bolters and the Rhino is 74 points. They're actually very durable for the cost. It isn't unreasonable for us to just get Open Topped back for the Ghost Ark.
The ghost ark has 2.5 times the firepower (not including the extra -1ap), and is significantly more durable. Making it open top would give it 5 times the number of shots while a unit is on board - there's no way that wouldn't incur a point increase!
4000 pts
~1660
