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.
2018/05/04 09:20:01
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: At what point does a Lord become a better investment for Destroyers rather than Extermination Protocols? With everyone recommending 2 Destroyer units for a Nephreak Battalion/Outrider detachment it is probably best we figure out the best/cheapest way to make them as reliable as possible.
Extermination Protocols let's 1 Destroyer unit Re-roll all failed Hit and Wound rolls for that phase for 1CP. While that is awesome if we are investing 2 Destroyer units and we have access to 8-10 CPs (roughly 11-14 CPs if using Sautekh Warlord trait). So, if you use an average of; 2 CPs re-roll 1 die during 2 different phases a turn, Nephreak Stratagem, Destroyer Stratagem etc that would be 4 CPs gone in your 1st turn already which is a lot of our supply gone.
I'm starting to think that a Lord w/ Thrall of The Silent King, Cryptek w/ VoD in-between 2 Destroyer units might be a better investment in the long run.
We won't be able to re-roll all of our hit and wound rolls but it does stop us from using more CPs.
However, if we are to use Extermination Protocols than I think it is probably better to use Extermination Protocols during the 1st turn or 2 when we have the CPs and once everything tough is gone and our opponent has squishy stuff left we should be able to clear the field without extra help.
What do you guys think?
I haven't tried using 2 units of Destroyers yet, since I've always liked to spread my points around, but even though a lord is a decent pair with Destroyers (much better than a Destroyer lord funny enough)
It's hard to really replicate the awesomeness that is reroll everything for only 1 cp. You could MWBD + lord aura a destroyer unit to have the same effect as EP for a T3 unit, but that's not your ideal target.
The lord aura will help and you should definitly have a lord in range of both the Destroyers and infantry he'll most likely be following around, but it'll not help that much against the T6 or more likely T7/8 targets
you'll be shooting at with the Destroyers.
So yes, a lord will definitely help out and if you can (strategically speaking) keep everything in range without sacrificing points/options than by all means do that, but more often than not the Destroyers need
their higher movement to move around the map instead of being an unmovable firebase. The lord isn't ideal to pair this with (unless you're nephrekh)
Maybe I'm wrong and you could have 2 different targets to minimise this effect. 1 units with EP shoots at the T7/8 target and the one without EP shoots at the T5 elite infantry target you want gone as well.
I think if you have to deal with that T6/7/8 target you do need EP though. For T5 and lower I wouldn't use it especially with a lord nearby.
On an unrelated note.......
What do you guys think of the (Sautekh) Tomb Sentinel? Is it worth taking (or 2) in a Sautekh list?
I do think you need a Sautekh code for it to be viable, but some might argue that its "Heavy D6 S10 -4AP 3D" gun is better than the one on the DDA. It can move around and not care about Low power, and 3 Damage is for a lot of things preferable than D6 where the threat of 1 and 2 is always close...
The Obvious difference is T6 W14 4+ QS compared to T7 W9 3+. They are very Squishy and can easily die to a round of shooting (so having 2 might be better) but they could add quite a bit of value to a Sautekh Alphastrike list. Turn one you have your Deceiver/Monolith/VoD and turn 2 your Deathmarks (maybe not with Sautekh), Flayed Ones, Immortals stepping out of a Monolith/Night Scythe together with the Tomb Sentinel.
I feel for it's points it's not worth it if you can't support it with other targets the enemy has to choose between. He'll still most likely focus the Sentinel down first, if he has any Melta/Lascannons in range, but that'll leave the monolith or other targets in peace.
with only a 12" range you do NEED to DS the thing. You can't have it sneak up the side or harass from the backline. and with the Beta rules, it did lose some power. However, with most of its targets probably behind a screen of chaff you won't always be in range of the tank/T5 3W infantry you want to kill anyway in the first turn. So having it as as reinforcements for when your alphastrike/Teslamortals deals with those screens it is a perfect model to come in afterwards.
I'll stop myself from rambling now though.... What are your thoughts?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 09:22:04
- Power corrupts, Absolute power.... is a whole lot of fun...-
2018/05/04 09:45:04
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
(also, what Dynasty and WL trait. At the moment I'm thinking Nephrekh so the Destroyers can pop in, but if I free up some points to add another HQ I can give them their own Outrider) Right now I'd say the main problem might be how to get the Vault into play (assuming I'm going second). Everything else should be able to operate as normal.
That's looking pretty good!
I think Sautekh is a fairly good pick for the list. The extra CPs are always nice as is the stratagem. Methodical Destruction is very good for the Vaults Tesla Spheres, and the Cloak-Tek would be able to use his healing ability on it. It means you can't deep strike your Destroyers, but you may be able to get away with that as your opponent will want to target the Vault with their multi damage weapons. If you go second and the Vault gets focus fired on turn one it will have at least helped keep the Destroyers alive.
An alternative would be Nephrek for the Battalion and Nihilak for the Vault. Nephrek is good for the Scarabs and Tesla Immortals, and lets you deep strike the Destroyers. The Nihilak strat could be fiendish on a Vault, although it doesn't help if you're going second, or can't float onto an objective. You would need to plan accordingly if you're playing a mission that lets you place objectives.
Sautekh seems like the most reliable choice, if not the most exciting. What I like about the list is that even in the worst case scenario, where the Vault doesn't get to deal a ton of damage before being blown up, it can still draw fire from what is otherwise a very strong list.
Edit: Comparing that list to the non-Vault version discussed previously: The previous version would have the upper hand in a battle between the two due to not being too scared of the Vault, and being more than capable of killing it. That doesn't really tell you much about how each list would do vs all comers, but does highlight how the Vault gives a point of failure with no redundancy. The difference in damage output between a third DDA + third Destroyer unit vs the Vault is a close call. The Vault probably wins out defensively and gives you a great "distraction Carnifex".
What do you guys think of the (Sautekh) Tomb Sentinel? Is it worth taking (or 2) in a Sautekh list?
I've used a Sautekh Sentinel quite a lot, and been very impressed with it. I would only take one though as it's a great distraction unit, but you often don't want too many points languishing in reserve. I've used it in a list with deep striking Destroyers and veiled Gauss Immortals which gives a nice combination of units to drop into the opponents backfield.
One very nice trick you can do with it is to move and advance the sentinel and be able to shoots it's exile cannon as an assault weapon (thanks to the Sautekh code), then play the Adaptive Subroutines strat to let you charge afterwards.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/05/04 10:20:07
2018/05/04 09:48:59
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: At what point does a Lord become a better investment for Destroyers rather than Extermination Protocols? With everyone recommending 2 Destroyer units for a Nephreak Battalion/Outrider detachment it is probably best we figure out the best/cheapest way to make them as reliable as possible.
Extermination Protocols let's 1 Destroyer unit Re-roll all failed Hit and Wound rolls for that phase for 1CP. While that is awesome if we are investing 2 Destroyer units and we have access to 8-10 CPs (roughly 11-14 CPs if using Sautekh Warlord trait). So, if you use an average of; 2 CPs re-roll 1 die during 2 different phases a turn, Nephreak Stratagem, Destroyer Stratagem etc that would be 4 CPs gone in your 1st turn already which is a lot of our supply gone.
I'm starting to think that a Lord w/ Thrall of The Silent King, Cryptek w/ VoD in-between 2 Destroyer units might be a better investment in the long run.
We won't be able to re-roll all of our hit and wound rolls but it does stop us from using more CPs.
However, if we are to use Extermination Protocols than I think it is probably better to use Extermination Protocols during the 1st turn or 2 when we have the CPs and once everything tough is gone and our opponent has squishy stuff left we should be able to clear the field without extra help.
What do you guys think?
With MWBD, rerolling 1s to hit and wound is near identical to EP. You don't get to reroll 2s to wound on medium T targets.
Problem is T6 and up. With EP you can expect to kill a Leman Russ, with a lord nearby, and MWBD, that is no longer the case.
2018/05/04 09:56:34
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: At what point does a Lord become a better investment for Destroyers rather than Extermination Protocols?
This depends on the toughness of what you're shooting. A lord is always 16.66% more damage for the units it buffs, multiplicatively. Extermination Protocols (ignoring the hit rerolls) is varied. Although, remember that an overlord is 25% more damage.
Against T3, it's 16.66% more damage (since it's only rerolling 1s).
Against T4-5, it's 33.33% more damage.
Against T6 it's 50% more damage.
Against T7+ it's 66.66% more damage.
Against theoretical T12+, it would be 83.33% more damage.
So, your lord is better than fine if you're killing hordes of cultists or something. In that case, the 2xMWBD stratagem is more bang for your buck than extermination protocols. But if you're using destroyers as a T6 or T7+ killer, then there's no substitute for extermination protocols.
Also, one cool thing about Extermination Protocols is that it lets the Destroyers go off unsupported. The unit is still running at 190% efficiency (against T7) without needing to slow down for characters. This means it can fly around to contest objectives, position itself to charge enemy LRBTs to reduce next turn firepower, or charge infantry and tri-point them so you can't get shot next turn. The unit that's getting support is much more limited in where it can go, lest it get out of range of the Lord/MWBD/Cryptek range.
2018/05/04 10:25:48
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: At what point does a Lord become a better investment for Destroyers rather than Extermination Protocols?
I've been thinking about that myself.
Got the idea to have a Lord w/ Veil take a unit of Gauss Immortals up the same turn my two Destroyer units drop (one Destroyer group comes in close enough behind the Lord to get his wound reroll buff, the other one further away gets Extermination Protocols on it, Scarabs running up the first turn to screen for them).
So like
.
. D D . . . . I I
. D D . . . L . I . . . . . . . . . X
. D D . . . . I I
.
.
.
.
. D D . . . S
. D D . . . S . . . . . . . . . . . X
. D D . . . S
.
Someone would have to run the numbers to see what the actual difference in damage output would be, though.
2018/05/04 10:37:18
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Regarding everyone's replies. It would seem that for turn 1 it is better to pop Extermination Protocols to destroy the thing you fear most and once everything T6+ is destroyed it is perfectly okay to rely on a Lord as long as your not restricted by the foot slogging Lord. Which can be dealt with if in a Nephrekh detachment, if it is the Warlord with Thrall of the Silent King and/or VoD by itself or Cryptek/Overlord.
I suppose we could Drop 1 Destroyer unit in cover to use EP Turn 1. Then on T2 drop the 2nd Destroyer unit and VoD the Lord and anything else you want? Could also use the Deceiver if you didn't want the 2nd Destroyer unit in DS.
So, your lord is better than fine if you're killing hordes of cultists or something. In that case, the 2xMWBD stratagem is more bang for your buck than extermination protocols. But if you're using destroyers as a T6 or T7+ killer, then there's no substitute for extermination protocols.
The only issue with this statement is that most people are now bring 2-3 DDAs in their list. So, technically we already have a way of dealing with anything T6+ and up as well as anything else. Plus, the Gauss Arrays on the DDa as well.
Realistically. If we can use DDAs to destroy T6 and have Destroyers destroy T5 and lower with help from an Overlord and Lord. Do we really need to use EP that much?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 10:38:53
Realistically. If we can use DDAs to destroy T6 and have Destroyers destroy T5 and lower with help from an Overlord and Lord. Do we really need to use EP that much?
Yes. Every turn. In my experience 2-3 DDAs does not remove all of an opponents tough units quickly enough, and I still find myself shooting Destroyers at T7.
2018/05/04 11:37:39
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: Realistically. If we can use DDAs to destroy T6 and have Destroyers destroy T5 and lower with help from an Overlord and Lord. Do we really need to use EP that much?
I second a yes. Destroyers are absurdly efficient with EP.
Take a T8, 3+ target for example.
A 193 point DDA throws out 5.44 wounds on average from it's main gun.
200 points of 4 destroyers throws out 5.18 wounds on average unsupported... 6.05 with a lord, 6.48 with MWBD, 7.56 with both.
200 points of 4 destroyers with Extermination Protocols is 9.88 wounds.
Your 6 destroyers in the enemy's face with Extermination Protocols is 14.8 wounds. The entire wing of 3xDDAs sitting in the back is only doing 16.3.
2018/05/04 12:11:40
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Odrankt wrote: Realistically. If we can use DDAs to destroy T6 and have Destroyers destroy T5 and lower with help from an Overlord and Lord. Do we really need to use EP that much?
I second a yes. Destroyers are absurdly efficient with EP.
Take a T8, 3+ target for example.
A 193 point DDA throws out 5.44 wounds on average from it's main gun.
200 points of 4 destroyers throws out 5.18 wounds on average unsupported... 6.05 with a lord, 6.48 with MWBD, 7.56 with both.
200 points of 4 destroyers with Extermination Protocols is 9.88 wounds.
Your 6 destroyers in the enemy's face with Extermination Protocols is 14.8 wounds. The entire wing of 3xDDAs sitting in the back is only doing 16.3.
If you are up against AM with 4-5 T8 vehicles, then you probably have to throw everything against them.
Otherwise you could have the DDAs shoot first, and if you're happy with the result and want to focus at T6 or lower, then you could save the EP CP for later and have the destroyers shoot at that other things where it makes less a difference
Just bring the flexibility to the table and you should be in a good position.
2018/05/04 12:46:40
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Yep, definitely a case of "Why not both?"
(or "all", really)
2-3 DDAs 2-3 Destroyer Cults
Problem then is, if you've gone all in that's almost 1500 points right there for those six units. Factor in the requisite 2x HQ & 3x Troops and you're already basically out of points.
(this list was in fact already posted a page or two back but I don't know how it would be able to handle itself against a lot of the current meta. Anyone tried it yet who can report back?)
Personally I prefer a bit more flexibility... though I don't know how efficient using points on Scarabs/Tomb Blades/Wraiths instead of max Destroyers/DDAs would be.
The other issue I still find myself running into is sorting my units into the best matching Dynasties and then deciding which one I want in the Battalion and which one I want in the Outrider/Spearhead.
I want my Destroyers to be Nephrekh
And I want my DDAs to be Sautekh
But then which one do I want my Immortals run as?
And which HQ is best to go with them under each Dynasty?
Ugh, decisions.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/05/04 12:56:43
2018/05/04 13:22:05
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
skoffs wrote: Yep, definitely a case of "Why not both?"
(or "all", really)
2-3 DDAs 2-3 Destroyer Cults
Problem then is, if you've gone all in that's almost 1500 points right there for those six units. Factor in the requisite 2x HQ & 3x Troops and you're already basically out of points.
(this list was in fact already posted a page or two back but I don't know how it would be able to handle itself against a lot of the current meta. Anyone tried it yet who can report back?)
Personally I prefer a bit more flexibility... though I don't know how efficient using points on Scarabs/Tomb Blades/Wraiths instead of max Destroyers/DDAs would be.
The other issue I still find myself running into is sorting my units into the best matching Dynasties and then deciding which one I want in the Battalion and which one I want in the Outrider/Spearhead.
I want my Destroyers to be Nephrekh
And I want my DDAs to be Sautekh
But then which one do I want my Immortals run as?
And which HQ is best to go with them under each Dynasty?
Ugh, decisions.
Looking at it on paper, if you run Gauss Immortal, I'd think Sautekh hands down. Being able to advance and shoot your -2AP weapons is pretty huge (even at the -1 to hit), allowing them to get into place for Rapid Fire but still being able to shoot.
I've run a DLord with 2 units of Nephrekh Destroyers a few times with pretty good results. I hide one unit with the strat, and the DLord baby sits the other, and then use Extermination Protocols on the hidden unit when I bamf them onto the table.
2018/05/04 13:32:19
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
skoffs wrote: Yep, definitely a case of "Why not both?" (or "all", really)
2-3 DDAs 2-3 Destroyer Cults
Problem then is, if you've gone all in that's almost 1500 points right there for those six units. Factor in the requisite 2x HQ & 3x Troops and you're already basically out of points. (this list was in fact already posted a page or two back but I don't know how it would be able to handle itself against a lot of the current meta. Anyone tried it yet who can report back?)
Personally I prefer a bit more flexibility... though I don't know how efficient using points on Scarabs/Tomb Blades/Wraiths instead of max Destroyers/DDAs would be.
The other issue I still find myself running into is sorting my units into the best matching Dynasties and then deciding which one I want in the Battalion and which one I want in the Outrider/Spearhead. I want my Destroyers to be Nephrekh And I want my DDAs to be Sautekh But then which one do I want my Immortals run as? And which HQ is best to go with them under each Dynasty? Ugh, decisions.
I don't think those 6 units coming to 1500 is problem. 500pts is just enough for the HQ and Troops. I'd call it serendipitous! I'm with you on preferring more flexibility though, as that list would get a bit dull. Diversifying will probably reduce it's effectiveness however.
I have the same conundrum regarding Dynasties and detachments in every list. Sautekh Battalion and Nephrek Outrider, or Nephrekh Battalion and Sautekh Spearhead?
It usually comes down to what the troops are. If I'm going for the minimum 3x5 Tesla Immortals then it's Nephrekh for the Battalion. If I'm taking larger units then I want Sautekh.
There's no hard and fast rule though, it depends on the list.
HQ's tend to be determined by the detachment choice. If I'm taking more troops and having a Sautekh battalion then it's an Overlord(maybe Immotekh) and a Cryptek to buff them, with a Dlord for the Nephrekh Outrider. In a Nephrekh battalion the HQ's tend to be something to buff the Destroyers, while the Cloaktekh is an obvious choice for the Sautekh Spearhead.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 13:41:55
2018/05/04 14:00:56
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I finally found a use to lychguards.
Fought against a list, basicaly all scouts + Guilliman.
Ok the guy came to the game room before me, the table was set up favorably so he could put all his list inside one building, and he won the initiative. Yet did not won my much. My list wasn't optimised, i tried 2 bataillons of 5 man immortal squads. Also used gauss, which i will not do again.
Turn 1 he shot down my nightbringer, had to use a reroll so he doesn't blow up in my ranks, then proceeded to shoot down my CCD, who was equiped with voidreaper and honorable combatant (see the link with nightbringer?) and left it at 1HP. I had a cloacktek nearby though.
skoffs wrote: Yep, definitely a case of "Why not both?"
(or "all", really)
2-3 DDAs 2-3 Destroyer Cults
Problem then is, if you've gone all in that's almost 1500 points right there for those six units. Factor in the requisite 2x HQ & 3x Troops and you're already basically out of points.
(this list was in fact already posted a page or two back but I don't know how it would be able to handle itself against a lot of the current meta. Anyone tried it yet who can report back?)
Personally I prefer a bit more flexibility... though I don't know how efficient using points on Scarabs/Tomb Blades/Wraiths instead of max Destroyers/DDAs would be.
The other issue I still find myself running into is sorting my units into the best matching Dynasties and then deciding which one I want in the Battalion and which one I want in the Outrider/Spearhead.
I want my Destroyers to be Nephrekh
And I want my DDAs to be Sautekh
But then which one do I want my Immortals run as?
And which HQ is best to go with them under each Dynasty?
Ugh, decisions.
I don't think those 6 units coming to 1500 is problem. 500pts is just enough for the HQ and Troops. I'd call it serendipitous! I'm with you on preferring more flexibility though, as that list would get a bit dull. Diversifying will probably reduce it's effectiveness however.
I have the same conundrum regarding Dynasties and detachments in every list. Sautekh Battalion and Nephrek Outrider, or Nephrekh Battalion and Sautekh Spearhead?
It usually comes down to what the troops are. If I'm going for the minimum 3x5 Tesla Immortals then it's Nephrekh for the Battalion. If I'm taking larger units then I want Sautekh.
There's no hard and fast rule though, it depends on the list.
HQ's tend to be determined by the detachment choice. If I'm taking more troops and having a Sautekh battalion then it's an Overlord(maybe Immotekh) and a Cryptek to buff them, with a Dlord for the Nephrekh Outrider. In a Nephrekh battalion the HQ's tend to be something to buff the Destroyers, while the Cloaktekh is an obvious choice for the Sautekh Spearhead.
2DDA 2 Destroyers is good enough, you can have enough 10 tesla immortals to deal with pink horrors and the like. More than that, i call wasted points and you get vulnerable vs swarm armies. Even with that list i had trouble vs the classic Magnus list.
3 DDA 0 destroyers is good enough also. Use Nihkalah for DDA with a small spearhead detachment and a cloaktek. Not even 700pts. 3D6 shots hit on 3 reroll 1s, usually wound on 3 if not 2s. It's really about the 72'' range, you deploy as far back as you can and blast your enemy from afar. You force him to advance and get out of his preferred hideouts. Start advancing your warriors / immortals on turn 3.
On an objective scenario, i used the deceiver. A lucky shot i grand illusioned 3 DDA right in his face. You also get 60 rapid fire shots that rerolls 1s
The problem i have with destroyers is that really good players often bring small 5-man disposable squads and advance them 18'' from their main forces. You can't VOD/ deepstrike anywhere to hit your preferred target. Plus if people keep swarming destroyers like this, you can bet they will be hit my the nerf bat next october! I'll bet 2CP extermination protocols.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 14:10:06
2018/05/04 14:11:29
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Da W wrote: I finally found a use to lychguards.
Fought against a list, basicaly all scouts + Guilliman.
Ok the guy came to the game room before me, the table was set up favorably so he could put all his list inside one building, and he won the initiative. Yet did not won my much. My list wasn't optimised, i tried 2 bataillons of 5 man immortal squads. Also used gauss, which i will not do again.
Turn 1 he shot down my nightbringer, had to use a reroll so he doesn't blow up in my ranks, then proceeded to shoot down my CCD, who was equiped with voidreaper and honorable combatant (see the link with nightbringer?) and left it at 1HP. I had a cloacktek nearby though.
Just 5 lychguards would have foiled his plans.
[
You didnt have them bubblewrapped? I cant remember how many wounds the CCB has, but the Nightbringer should not have been targettable unless he killed all the closest units around it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 14:12:11
2DDA 2 Destroyers is good enough, you can have enough 10 tesla immortals to deal with pink horrors and the like. More than that, i call wasted points and you get vulnerable vs swarm armies. Even with that list i had trouble vs the classic Magnus list.
The 3x DDA, 3x Destroyers list would be a little weaker vs swarms, but I think it can still handle them. The Flayers on the DDAs + 15 Tesla Immortals are decent against hordes, and the Destroyers will still put down 15 GEQ each volley. Mass invul saves are a bigger concern I think, nurgle demons would be tough to chew through.
As for screening units pushing back the Destroyers: it is an issue, but it would require more than a few 5 man scout units to really cause a problem. You may need to jump the DDAs forward for rapids or deploy some destroyers on the board. It needs testing, but I'm not going to invest in 18 Destroyers. Like you say, they might get nerfed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 14:33:22
2018/05/04 14:42:21
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Da W wrote: I finally found a use to lychguards.
Fought against a list, basicaly all scouts + Guilliman.[
You didnt have them bubblewrapped? I cant remember how many wounds the CCB has, but the Nightbringer should not have been targettable unless he killed all the closest units around it.
If he was facing mostly scouts, bubblewrapping does nothing. Having Lychguard would have let him soak up the wounds coming in from the sniper rifles.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 14:43:11
2018/05/04 14:46:07
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
What would scouts do? Are they able to target characters that aren't the closest model? And exactly how do scouts kill both those models in 1 turn? (practically)
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: HQ's tend to be determined by the detachment choice. If I'm taking more troops and having a Sautekh battalion then it's an Overlord(maybe Immotekh) and a Cryptek to buff them, with a Dlord for the Nephrekh Outrider. In a Nephrekh battalion the HQ's tend to be something to buff the Destroyers, while the Cloaktekh is an obvious choice for the Sautekh Spearhead.
Did we ever come to a conclusion on whether Imotekh was actually worth it?
Yes, he does some cool things, but he costs as much as 4 Destroyers (who, I guess if we go by the comparison to DDAs above, are now our unit of measurement to quantify whether something is points efficient or not).
2018/05/04 14:47:24
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
They can all equip Sniper Rifles. Against the NB, they would need 6s to wound, but those would also cause a MW in addition to a regular one. Roundabout Girdlewearer lets them reroll all their failed hit and wound rolls.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 14:49:44
2018/05/04 15:09:33
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Then I would really have hoped to get some terrain in my deployment area to hide them behind for at least the first turn... I don't think I would even want to play against that list. Where's the fun and strategy?
- Power corrupts, Absolute power.... is a whole lot of fun...-
2018/05/04 15:10:52
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
I think for future games I am going to set aside 1000pts of my lists just for DDA and Destroyer combos e.g. 3 DDAs + 1 destroyer unit, 2 DDAs + 2 Destroyer units etc and use the remainder to build a Battalion or something I specifically want like 5 man tesla mortal in a Nephreak Battalion.
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: HQ's tend to be determined by the detachment choice. If I'm taking more troops and having a Sautekh battalion then it's an Overlord(maybe Immotekh) and a Cryptek to buff them, with a Dlord for the Nephrekh Outrider. In a Nephrekh battalion the HQ's tend to be something to buff the Destroyers, while the Cloaktekh is an obvious choice for the Sautekh Spearhead.
Did we ever come to a conclusion on whether Imotekh was actually worth it?
Yes, he does some cool things, but he costs as much as 4 Destroyers (who, I guess if we go by the comparison to DDAs above, are now our unit of measurement to quantify whether something is points efficient or not).
I think Emotekh is cool and is bad-ass but not sure if he is suited for the competitive scene. He gives an Extra CP, can MWBD twice, calls a storm and what not but If I am sinking 200pts into a HQ I want something that is an combination of a Lord and an Overlord. Not an Overlord with better Overlord buffs. For 150ish point we can get an Overlord and Lord that lets 1 unit have +1 advance, charge and hit, all <dynasty> infantry units re-roll 1s, can both hold their own in CC and lets us get 3 Scarabs with points left over and access to relics and Warlord traits.
Emotekh is probably better off for Narrative, Friendly, Apocalypse type games imo.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 15:12:35
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: HQ's tend to be determined by the detachment choice. If I'm taking more troops and having a Sautekh battalion then it's an Overlord(maybe Immotekh) and a Cryptek to buff them, with a Dlord for the Nephrekh Outrider. In a Nephrekh battalion the HQ's tend to be something to buff the Destroyers, while the Cloaktekh is an obvious choice for the Sautekh Spearhead.
Did we ever come to a conclusion on whether Imotekh was actually worth it? Yes, he does some cool things, but he costs as much as 4 Destroyers (who, I guess if we go by the comparison to DDAs above, are now our unit of measurement to quantify whether something is points efficient or not).
My conclusion on Immotekh before using him was that he isn't worth it. Having played with him now I'm not so sure. Firstly your comparison to 4x Destroyers isn't exactly fair. I'd say that it costs you 2 destroyers to upgrade the Overlord you probably had to take anyway. I would never drop destroyers to make this upgrade but that isn't always the choice you're faced with. Also, everything in the codex looks bad compared to equal points of destroyers.
He needs to be fielded with full strength Immortal units. When he is there are three things I found that make him special:
1) He is very good for triggering Methodical Destruction. To the point that I found the Stratagem a lot more usable when he's in the list. 1st turn he hits a big target with the storm and your DDAs follow up hitting on 2's. Later his staff puts wounds on an infantry unit and you follow up with Tesla immortals getting extra shots on a 4+ (MD and MWBD). MD is a lot less efficient without him.
2) as well as the +1CP he grant's he also saves you another one per turn that you would use for a second MWBD. 2 overlords would do the same slightly cheaper but they lose out when the other two advantages are taken into account.
3) in the late game, when things get messy, he can be a real boss, dealing decent damage and refusing to die. He got stuck in against khorne berzerkers in one game and did well. He'll hold up against anything that lacks AP. He actually beat Kharn the Betrayer 1 on 1 in that game but obviously that was a fluke.
Definitely not an auto include though. It comes down to how a given list is fitting together and whether it suits him.
Edit: I'm not talking top tier lists here. I don't see him rocking the tourney scene.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/04 15:35:57
2018/05/04 15:32:35
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
How are people constantly finding these match-ups were they can spend 2 CP willy nilly and are fighting some insane big dude/blob that takes 3-4 units shooting at him to kill him? Because otherwise that strat is not worth it at all.
I much more often find myself needing a deepstrike to not get a squishy unit like destros wiped off the board and the 6'' advance to get to objectives, behind LoS with weak units, etc
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/05/04 15:37:48
rvd1ofakind wrote: How are people constantly finding these match-ups were they can spend 2 CP willy nilly and are fighting some insane big dude/blob that takes 3-4 units shooting at him to kill him? Because otherwise that strat is not worth it at all.
Making Tesla explode on a 4+ is 100% worth it vs a Nid or Ork Swarm that is immune to Morale checks. It could be the difference between being able to shoot next turn or being stuck in/falling back from melee.
2018/05/04 15:45:46
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
rvd1ofakind wrote: For 2 CP? And a requirement? I can blow up a swarm with 2 units most of the time anyway with just MWBD
This is kind of why I like Immotekh. I think +1 to hit is worth 1CP per unit. If Immo triggers the strat then you only need 2 other units combining fire to make it worth it. Otherwise you are combining 3 "proper" units fire.
E.g. The storm + 2 DDAs seems worth it. His staff + 2 units of tesla somethings seems worth it.
This is stuff I only came to think after using him in games.
The Abyssal staff on a normal HQ is another option but Immos extra 6" range, and a stat line that allows for more ballsey positioning makes a big difference.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/04 16:06:00
2018/05/04 16:03:05
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Never said the strat was a requirement, just that it's worth the 2CP, as a 10 man unit of Immortals with MWBD getting to use that strat can, on a slightly above average roll or having a Lord backing them up, wipe out a unit of 25-30 by themselves.
2018/05/04 16:48:31
Subject: Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
2DDA 2 Destroyers is good enough, you can have enough 10 tesla immortals to deal with pink horrors and the like. More than that, i call wasted points and you get vulnerable vs swarm armies. Even with that list i had trouble vs the classic Magnus list.
The 3x DDA, 3x Destroyers list would be a little weaker vs swarms, but I think it can still handle them. The Flayers on the DDAs + 15 Tesla Immortals are decent against hordes, and the Destroyers will still put down 15 GEQ each volley. Mass invul saves are a bigger concern I think, nurgle demons would be tough to chew through.
As for screening units pushing back the Destroyers: it is an issue, but it would require more than a few 5 man scout units to really cause a problem. You may need to jump the DDAs forward for rapids or deploy some destroyers on the board. It needs testing, but I'm not going to invest in 18 Destroyers. Like you say, they might get nerfed.
His list was 30 snipers!
2018/05/04 16:57:34
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
My dream list would include a Vault, two DDAs, two full strength Destroyer units, Imotekh, a Cloak-tek, a Lord, and a bunch of Tesla Immortals with a sprinkling of Scarabs... but unfortunately I just can't seem to get it to fit inside of 2000 points (not without seriously gimping the Destroyers down to 4 models per unit).
I think at this point it's going to have to be a case of,
Either a Vault OR Imotekh + lots of Immortals. Not both.
But in lieu of taking Destroyers under Nephrekh for CT deep strike,
how viable is Veiling them up turn one with a Chrono-Tek?
Pro: turn one alpha!
Con: and now they're sitting in front of your opponent's entire army by themselves after having just smoked something off the table.
Seems like an expensive kamikaze stunt, but could it be worth it?
2018/05/04 17:08:07
Subject: Re:Necrons NEW 8th ed. Codex tactica - New FAQ discussion p.72
Thinking of having the Deceiver and Nightbringer together (or transcendant to throw one more power a turn, but i like the NB's shooting attack). Still cheaper than TVault.
Deciver would definitly have Cosmic fire, potentially hitting every unit within 9''.
Both would grand illusion together, and if i can i would bring like 20 warriors for screening. Or scarabs to blow up for extra MW if you have CP to spare. With scarabs that's 500pts on the enemy's flank, he still have 1500pts to worry about in front of him. (Or perhaps you can have another 300-600 points of destroyers deepstiking on the other side, but that's another thing.)
Cast C'Tan powers as long as you can. Spend CP to throw a 3rd (or 4rth) a round.
Since Deciver is the worst of all three once your grand illusion trick is done, he's the chosen one to go on suicide mission. 8'' forward + D6'' advance if needed, or charge if doable, he should get in range to throw cosmic fire, doing D3 wound to anything in 9'' on 4+.
Then should he get killed (which he will), he will blow up on 4+, use CP to reroll if needed, doing still D3 wound to anything in 3''.
Nightbringer, i want him to target. Potentially antimatter meteor and/or times arrow. The power and his shoot is very good to kill 2-3W armor 2+ infantry. Or go charge the big piece of meat in the room.
So for 425-500 pts that a whole bunch of MW. It is expensive in CP. ANd you can have on eBay for 50$ compared to the T.Vault
