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.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I mean, a lot of people are stepping into the Mephrit trap. Ofc, I could be wrong, but it is very one-dimensional. "Situationally just a bit more damage that makes you get out of position" will not win you a tournament. Mobility will.

How are you winning tournaments without ever getting within 12" of an enemy to call mephrit a trap?

Sure, its not the best choice for all units but its far from 'a trap'.

I think that Mephrit will lend itself towards the old Silver Tide army lists.

The counter to a silver tide was get close + charge.

If the weapons you charge against get more effective as you get closer, a failed charge iuslikely to have disasterous consequences for practically anything

 Ordana wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I mean, a lot of people are stepping into the Mephrit trap. Ofc, I could be wrong, but it is very one-dimensional. "Situationally just a bit more damage that makes you get out of position" will not win you a tournament. Mobility will.

How are you winning tournaments without ever getting within 12" of an enemy to call mephrit a trap?

Sure, its not the best choice for all units but its far from 'a trap'.

By "trap" I mean that a lot of people think it's the best by default when it is probably one of the worse ones. And I rarely get within 12'' with stuff that can benefit from +1AP. I try to stay as far away as possible with my infantry, sending wraiths, vault, etc in front.

Nephrekh lets you win by skill (movement) and gives you the ability to deepstrike in case you're on a table/deployment map where you can't hide your destroyers

 rvd1ofakind wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I mean, a lot of people are stepping into the Mephrit trap. Ofc, I could be wrong, but it is very one-dimensional. "Situationally just a bit more damage that makes you get out of position" will not win you a tournament. Mobility will.

How are you winning tournaments without ever getting within 12" of an enemy to call mephrit a trap?

Sure, its not the best choice for all units but its far from 'a trap'.

By "trap" I mean that a lot of people think it's the best by default when it is probably one of the worse ones. And I rarely get within 12'' with stuff that can benefit from +1AP. I try to stay as far away as possible with my infantry, sending wraiths, vault, etc in front.

Nephrekh lets you win by skill (movement) and gives you the ability to deepstrike in case you're on a table/deployment map where you can't hide your destroyers

I dunno, mephrit could be quite lethal with gauss tomb blades, ghost arks and warriors. With warriors you want to be in 12" anyway, and tomb blades and ghost arks are fast enough to close the distance.

So I'm sat here bored and thought I would add my bit.. I played 1k sons yesterday and having mephrit won the day he charged his mauler fiend I done more damage on 20 warriors in overwatch (mephrit) then the 2 shots I got off from the dda. Now to call mephrit a trap I would love to see how you play because m5 is no way able to out manoeuvre a fast army like nids.. lol but he charged my warriors I over watched loads a few in my turn I used rp then veil and moved them across the board.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the wording for sauteks dynasty contradicts it self if you advance heavy is classed as assault, but if you didn't advance then there is no -1 to hit... why wouldn't you advance? You get the no -1 to hit as assault any way? Or am I seeing it wrong? Sorry if this is all jumbled I'm writing on my phone

Sn33R wrote:
So I'm sat here bored and thought I would add my bit.. I played 1k sons yesterday and having mephrit won the day he charged his mauler fiend I done more damage on 20 warriors in overwatch (mephrit) then the 2 shots I got off from the dda. Now to call mephrit a trap I would love to see how you play because m5 is no way able to out manoeuvre a fast army like nids.. lol but he charged my warriors I over watched loads a few in my turn I used rp then veil and moved them across the board.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the wording for sauteks dynasty contradicts it self if you advance heavy is classed as assault, but if you didn't advance then there is no -1 to hit... why wouldn't you advance? You get the no -1 to hit as assault any way? Or am I seeing it wrong? Sorry if this is all jumbled I'm writing on my phone

Shooting assault weapons after advancing incurs a -1 penalty to hit.

Going back to the unit sizes discussion...

I have found units of 3 Tomb Blades to be very good. I've run quite a few lists with 2 units of 3 with Tesla and Shield Vanes. 105 pts each.

They only usually die in games where I've used them as screens against assault. Otherwise they always seem to survive. I think this is down to them being more difficult to kill than they are worth. Opponents tend to try to focus down 1 or 2 units a turn to prevent things repairing, and the Blades aren't a big enough threat to be one of the units that gets picked on. They tend to get shot at most turns by leftover guns, storm bolters on Rhinos, and stuff out of range of better targets, but it usually turns out to be a waste of bullets.

They've scored me a lot of objectives.


Actually, being the only thing with -1 to hit acts as a huge deterrent too. Quite often people go to shoot at them, then change their mind when I remind them of the -1.

Sn33R wrote:
So I'm sat here bored and thought I would add my bit.. I played 1k sons yesterday and having mephrit won the day he charged his mauler fiend I done more damage on 20 warriors in overwatch (mephrit) then the 2 shots I got off from the dda. Now to call mephrit a trap I would love to see how you play because m5 is no way able to out manoeuvre a fast army like nids.. lol but he charged my warriors I over watched loads a few in my turn I used rp then veil and moved them across the board.

Ah but with tyranids how much use that -1AP will then have against stuff that outmanouvers you? Stealers? They have 5++, they don't care. Hormagaunts? 6+ save. No care. Termagaunt ditto 6+ save so irrelevant. Warriors yeah I'll give it that there -2AP is good but again M6 so they aren't uber fast monsters...

Now there IS the carnifex with M7 and 3+. That's the prime one you would be looking at getting to rapid fire range.

Sunday facing necrons I was so glad he had the -1AP dynasty. Didn't came into play even once!

Isn't 3 units per 3 Tomb blades with particle beamer more survivable and overall better than 2 per 3 with Tesla? Cause they cost the same (216 points against 210). No Shield Vanes, but more bodies.

tneva82 wrote:

Sn33R wrote:
So I'm sat here bored and thought I would add my bit.. I played 1k sons yesterday and having mephrit won the day he charged his mauler fiend I done more damage on 20 warriors in overwatch (mephrit) then the 2 shots I got off from the dda. Now to call mephrit a trap I would love to see how you play because m5 is no way able to out manoeuvre a fast army like nids.. lol but he charged my warriors I over watched loads a few in my turn I used rp then veil and moved them across the board.

Ah but with tyranids how much use that -1AP will then have against stuff that outmanouvers you? Stealers? They have 5++, they don't care. Hormagaunts? 6+ save. No care. Termagaunt ditto 6+ save so irrelevant. Warriors yeah I'll give it that there -2AP is good but again M6 so they aren't uber fast monsters...

Now there IS the carnifex with M7 and 3+. That's the prime one you would be looking at getting to rapid fire range.

Sunday facing necrons I was so glad he had the -1AP dynasty. Didn't came into play even once!

This. Again, the problem is that mephrit is both situational AND bad for positioning. It it was +1 to hit/wound - heck yeah it'd be great. Right now, however, I don't think so.

-Sentinel- wrote:
Isn't 3 units per 3 Tomb blades with particle beamer more survivable and overall better than 2 per 3 with Tesla? Cause they cost the same (216 points against 210). No Shield Vanes, but more bodies.

This is true, and would work just as well. I like Tesla on them for when they can join in with some methodical destruction. Also, if I had any Tomb Blades in my list I would want to find points for shields. Then I would consider dropping the shields for more models. Then I'd want to put shields on those models. Then drop the shields for even more models...

Not sure if this has been covered already, but can I use the veil to pull units out of combat, and if so, does it count as falling back?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if this has been covered already, but can I use the veil to pull units out of combat, and if so, does it count as falling back?

You can and you don't count as falling back.

I used Zhandrekh and Obyron in the index a few times to be able to "fall back" and shoot every turn with a unit. Ate up a Tryanid horde with that once.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if this has been covered already, but can I use the veil to pull units out of combat, and if so, does it count as falling back?

From the rulebook faq https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/

Q: If a unit starts its Movement phase within 1" of an enemy
unit but elects to remain stationary, but subsequently uses a rule
that removes them from the battlefield and then sets them up
again, such as the Teleport Homer ability or the Gate of Infinity
psychic power, is it considered to have Fallen Back this turn?
A: No.

 Ordana wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if this has been covered already, but can I use the veil to pull units out of combat, and if so, does it count as falling back?

From the rulebook faq https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/

Q: If a unit starts its Movement phase within 1" of an enemy
unit but elects to remain stationary, but subsequently uses a rule
that removes them from the battlefield and then sets them up
again, such as the Teleport Homer ability or the Gate of Infinity
psychic power, is it considered to have Fallen Back this turn?
A: No.

Ah, its under general FAQ. I was looking under the Necron FAQ. That's handy.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:

-Sentinel- wrote:
Isn't 3 units per 3 Tomb blades with particle beamer more survivable and overall better than 2 per 3 with Tesla? Cause they cost the same (216 points against 210). No Shield Vanes, but more bodies.

This is true, and would work just as well. I like Tesla on them for when they can join in with some methodical destruction. Also, if I had any Tomb Blades in my list I would want to find points for shields. Then I would consider dropping the shields for more models. Then I'd want to put shields on those models. Then drop the shields for even more models...

I want to try full squad of Tomb blades, but in a world of reapers and Riptides with valleys of d2 weapons I'm not sure they worth it. Can use them in a scarab slot for fast point grapping though. Worth trying at least.

For those that run a Nephrekh Outrider, what is your go to HQ? Looking for preferences and experiences because to me it comes down to what can keep up with our fast movers: CCB, DLord or Cloaktek. I'm looking at Destroyers with a mix of Wraiths/Scarabs/Tomb Blades. Yes it all depends on what the HQ could move with. Staff HQ with Destoryers/Tomb Blades, beatstick CCB/DLord with Wraiths/Scarabs, even beatsticks with Destroyers for anti-charge melee threat.

What have you found to work best?

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Going back to the unit sizes discussion...

I have found units of 3 Tomb Blades to be very good. I've run quite a few lists with 2 units of 3 with Tesla and Shield Vanes. 105 pts each.

They only usually die in games where I've used them as screens against assault. Otherwise they always seem to survive. I think this is down to them being more difficult to kill than they are worth. Opponents tend to try to focus down 1 or 2 units a turn to prevent things repairing, and the Blades aren't a big enough threat to be one of the units that gets picked on. They tend to get shot at most turns by leftover guns, storm bolters on Rhinos, and stuff out of range of better targets, but it usually turns out to be a waste of bullets.

They've scored me a lot of objectives.


Actually, being the only thing with -1 to hit acts as a huge deterrent too. Quite often people go to shoot at them, then change their mind when I remind them of the -1.

I've done well in my escalation league using three Gauss Blades. People seem to underestimate their damage output and ignore until it's too late.

 EnTyme wrote:

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
Going back to the unit sizes discussion...

I have found units of 3 Tomb Blades to be very good. I've run quite a few lists with 2 units of 3 with Tesla and Shield Vanes. 105 pts each.

They only usually die in games where I've used them as screens against assault. Otherwise they always seem to survive. I think this is down to them being more difficult to kill than they are worth. Opponents tend to try to focus down 1 or 2 units a turn to prevent things repairing, and the Blades aren't a big enough threat to be one of the units that gets picked on. They tend to get shot at most turns by leftover guns, storm bolters on Rhinos, and stuff out of range of better targets, but it usually turns out to be a waste of bullets.

They've scored me a lot of objectives.


Actually, being the only thing with -1 to hit acts as a huge deterrent too. Quite often people go to shoot at them, then change their mind when I remind them of the -1.

I've done well in my escalation league using three Gauss Blades. People seem to underestimate their damage output and ignore until it's too late.

I can definitely see how that could happen. The small squads are deceptive. I think I'd really like to try them as mephrit with tesla and then pop the stratagem to erase a horde or overwhelm a HVT with volume. You can always finish the HVT with DDA or destroyers.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
By "trap" I mean that a lot of people think it's the best by default when it is probably one of the worse ones.

I don't think there is a "best by default" code. If I know I'm playing a specific faction, it affects how I tinker with my list.

TEQ/MEQ army? Mephrit firebase with either some Nephrehk or Sautehk support

Horde army that's going to be coming at me? Nihilahk for army wide rerolls of 1 with some Novohk melee screens/speedbumps

Gunline that's just gonna park and shoot? Sautehk firebase with Nephrehk/Novohk support/harrassing units

Playing in any kind of league/tourney where I need to go for a "take all comers" list, I generally gravitate towards some combo of Sautehk/Mephrit/Nephrehk, but that's my playstyle. If someone likes blobs with supporting units, I could totally see them playing Nihilahk and parking from T2 onward.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

torblind wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
They don't benefit from the dynasty.

Pretty sure they do

They do not. C'tan Shards explicitly do not receive any benefits from dynasty traits.

There was a debacle over the misspelled keyword (plurual s) but yeah I agree it only makes sense with this interpretation

Ive been enjoying this series of articles a lot.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/04/12/guest-tactica-the-celestial-orrery/

torblind wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

torblind wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
They don't benefit from the dynasty.

Pretty sure they do

They do not. C'tan Shards explicitly do not receive any benefits from dynasty traits.

There was a debacle over the misspelled keyword (plurual s) but yeah I agree it only makes sense with this interpretation

How do we get them to include that in the next FAQ?

 rvd1ofakind wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I mean, a lot of people are stepping into the Mephrit trap. Ofc, I could be wrong, but it is very one-dimensional. "Situationally just a bit more damage that makes you get out of position" will not win you a tournament. Mobility will.

How are you winning tournaments without ever getting within 12" of an enemy to call mephrit a trap?

Sure, its not the best choice for all units but its far from 'a trap'.

By "trap" I mean that a lot of people think it's the best by default when it is probably one of the worse ones. And I rarely get within 12'' with stuff that can benefit from +1AP. I try to stay as far away as possible with my infantry, sending wraiths, vault, etc in front.

Nephrekh lets you win by skill (movement) and gives you the ability to deepstrike in case you're on a table/deployment map where you can't hide your destroyers

See with Mephirt, I want to take the center field. Dictate where my opponent can go, while my outflankers harass or kill their flank. I like silvertide lists backed up by a few support units. If you get close, I'll plug you. If you get within 12", I'll plug you harder. It's the threat that counts. Being able to fall back and still having a ton of firepower to plug them harder is quite a real threat.

 skoffs wrote:

Spoiler:

torblind wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

torblind wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
They don't benefit from the dynasty.

Pretty sure they do

They do not. C'tan Shards explicitly do not receive any benefits from dynasty traits.

There was a debacle over the misspelled keyword (plurual s) but yeah I agree it only makes sense with this interpretation

How do we get them to include that in the next FAQ?

From Warhammer Community:

To make this is super-easy, we’ve created an email inbox just for Warhammer 40,000 rules related feedback.

40KFAQ@gwplc.com

Catchy.

 skoffs wrote:

torblind wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

torblind wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
They don't benefit from the dynasty.

Pretty sure they do

They do not. C'tan Shards explicitly do not receive any benefits from dynasty traits.

There was a debacle over the misspelled keyword (plurual s) but yeah I agree it only makes sense with this interpretation

How do we get them to include that in the next FAQ?

I don't understand why? Its pretty clear that C'tan do not receive dynasty traits, though they will not cause an army to lose them.

 nintura wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I mean, a lot of people are stepping into the Mephrit trap. Ofc, I could be wrong, but it is very one-dimensional. "Situationally just a bit more damage that makes you get out of position" will not win you a tournament. Mobility will.

How are you winning tournaments without ever getting within 12" of an enemy to call mephrit a trap?

Sure, its not the best choice for all units but its far from 'a trap'.

By "trap" I mean that a lot of people think it's the best by default when it is probably one of the worse ones. And I rarely get within 12'' with stuff that can benefit from +1AP. I try to stay as far away as possible with my infantry, sending wraiths, vault, etc in front.

Nephrekh lets you win by skill (movement) and gives you the ability to deepstrike in case you're on a table/deployment map where you can't hide your destroyers

See with Mephirt, I want to take the center field. Dictate where my opponent can go, while my outflankers harass or kill their flank. I like silvertide lists backed up by a few support units. If you get close, I'll plug you. If you get within 12", I'll plug you harder. It's the threat that counts. Being able to fall back and still having a ton of firepower to plug them harder is quite a real threat.

Agreed. This is how I have played so far this edition, and I ususally task my specialist units like destroyers with taking out anything that threatens to somehow wipe out the fearless midfield blob with invuln saves vs shooting.

How highly are cp being valued now? Am I handicapping myself by taking 2 of the 1 cp detachments instead of the troop tax battalion?

Always use a battalion. Necron troops are good, and they can buffed a lot.

blufury wrote:
How highly are cp being valued now? Am I handicapping myself by taking 2 of the 1 cp detachments instead of the troop tax battalion?

I didn't value it as high before the FAQ, but now that a Battalion is 5CP, it's a must in any balanced list I create. I say balanced because it depends on the list you make. If you're running 3 T. Vaults or some other extreme, you'll probably be fine with limited CP.

But having the extra CP to command reroll a die for a target you really need to drop this turn, or auto pass morale when you can't afford to lose an objective, is really powerful.