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.

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I wonder if the necron lord gets squatted. There's a lot of new HQs, but no update on the lord. It's by far the oldest and crappiest sculpt in the range. I like the new HQs have more variety than just many random dudes holding staves or scythes.

I expect any generic Finecast models- I.E. the Overlord, Old Lord, Cryptek will all get squatted.

I don't know if the Lord as an entry in the dex is getting squatted, since most people can use their spare overlords as lords.

I am beginning to get concerned that regular Gauss Cannon destroyers may be getting squatted though. It looks like the new Heavy Destroyer has, speculated, an anti-tank weapon and an anti infantry weapon.

I could see the entry disappearing and people just using old lords as another overlord. I could see the Royal Warden as taking over as the cheaper buffing HQ option. That's a good point about the destroyers. They've been in a weird spot for a while once tomb blades came out, because you had two pretty similar units. It's also a unit that most people have a bunch of already. If they up the points and base size on em, they suddenly become quite different. Good thing I have 24 destroyers in my army from 7th .

I hope not myself. Destroyers serve a very distinct purpose compared to Heavy Destroyers, but it's pretty clear that this range refresh is getting rid of all of the green rods. My only guess is that the Enmitic exterminator is taking the place of the Gauss Cannon on these.

The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

Lords have worse stats than an overlord and allows units around it to reroll failed hits of a 1. It used to be reroll failed morale checks, but then GW realized that was useless on an army of LD10 units and give it an ability that's slightly more useful.
In terms of equipment they're the same, iirc.

Keep in mind that there are actually 3 lord types in the necron army -
You have Overlords, Lords and Destroyer Lords.

Overlords are comparable to Captains, I suppose. Good stats, except for attacks which is a bit on the low side, and they have an ability that gives a bonus to charge, hit and advance rolls. This is not an aura but a single unit buff. We know they are still going to be around because GW showed off the new Overlord model, which looks pretty good.

Lords are analogus to lieutenants. Already talked about them. We don't know if they are coming back, as it would seem that the Royal Warden is going to take over the lord's role as a minor support HQ choice.
You generally want Lords to escort warrior blobs to give them rerolls for Gauss spam, and it seems that Wardens are also designed for that.

Then we have destroyer lords, which are at an odd spot - They are designed for close combat and are alright duelists, or at least would be if they had an invul, but their buffs only work on destroyers, which is a unit who wants to shoot.
Skorpekh Lords are pretty much going to make Destroyer Lords obsolete, it would seem, as they are also designed for melee, but also can attack at range.

The ‘final boss’ of the awesome Warhammer 40,000 cinematic trailer, the Skorpekh Lord is death incarnate for anyone who dares face it in battle – looks like that Primaris Sergeant and Battle Sister are in for the fight of their lives! This enormous, hate-fuelled Destroyer can unleash the searing fury of its enmitic annihilator at range, reap anyone in its path with its devastating hyperphase harvester, or use its flensing claw to… er, flense its prey.

Source

Going off what you're saying Cthulu, maybe Lords will end up being the Captain equivalent while Overlords get buffed to Chapter Master equivalency?

Yeah, those are the only differences. They basically took the Tomb King vs Tomb Prince design choice from WHFB and ported it over. Another interesting thing is you actually can't kit out the units with all the codex options without kitbashing.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

It's basically the difference between a SM Captain and Lt, except less options and weaker stats. Their aura abilities are different, but their wargear are the same, except the OL can take a voidscythe.

I personally think the Lord will stay, new model? maybe not. Data sheet still around and usable? I think so.

And I think we're going to see a multipart kit of normal destroyers and destroyer lord. Why would they call it a Lokhust Heavy Destroyer rather than just a Lokhust Destroyer if it's the only model.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I just don't think it'll happen

 Kanluwen wrote:

The ‘final boss’ of the awesome Warhammer 40,000 cinematic trailer, the Skorpekh Lord is death incarnate for anyone who dares face it in battle – looks like that Primaris Sergeant and Battle Sister are in for the fight of their lives! This enormous, hate-fuelled Destroyer can unleash the searing fury of its enmitic annihilator at range, reap anyone in its path with its devastating hyperphase harvester, or use its flensing claw to… er, flense its prey.

Source

Going off what you're saying Cthulu, maybe Lords will end up being the Captain equivalent while Overlords get buffed to Chapter Master equivalency?

Maybe, but technically Pharaons are already meant to be the Necron equivalents for Chapter Masters, its just that they aren't in 8th ed. They were in 5th ed though.
Basically an upgrade you can buy for an Overlord that gave any unit it joined Relentless, iirc.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.

Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect.
It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Lord

Nemesor just means general.
Zahndrekh is both an Overlord and a Nemesor, for example.

Vargard would probably be a Royal Warden through.
Obyron is Zahndrekh's bodyguard, and a warden is pretty much a guard.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.

Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect, and Nemesors are supposed to fall under Overlords.
It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Nemesor > Lord

I'm fairly certain that Nemesor is a title given to the Overlord that is in charge of the Dynasty's military. So a Nemesor should be > than an Overlord.

 Sasori wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.

Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect, and Nemesors are supposed to fall under Overlords.
It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Nemesor > Lord

I'm fairly certain that Nemesor is a title given to the Overlord that is in charge of the Dynasty's military. So a Nemesor should be > than an Overlord.

I've read conflicting bits of background. Lexicanum says Nemesors are subservient to Overlords, the Wiki says Nemesor is just a higher military rank. The Wiki gave the better explanation, so I edited my comment to reflect that.
The 8th ed codex seems to corroborate on this, as there's a diagram that shows how an army is structured.

Nemesor has Overlord next to it in parenthesis.
Apparently Vargard is just a title given to a lord who's the bodyguard of a Nemesor.
Unless the Vargard is part of Tomb World Command, in that case its an Overlord.

I have to say, as military diagrams go the one in 8th ed isn't great. It doesn't tell me how many legions are supposed to be in a Decurion. Is it one legion per decurion? Then why is it a Decurion? Wouldn't that mean 10 legions?
Then it tells you that legions are divided into 10 phalanxes, each consisting of 10 necrons. So...why can you take Necron warrior squads in units of 20 then?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Skorpekh Destroyer is explicitly called out as a "Lord", so it's a good guess that at least the title of "Lord" will stick around.

Serious question: what delineates an Overlord from a Lord? I don't have the Necron codex to pull from, so I'm flying a bit blind on this one. They're a lesser rank but are the wargear options notably different or different auras or what?

I've always seen Overlord and Lord as the translation of Nemesor and Vargard or (more likely) Phaeron and Nemesor. Thinking on it I would consider Vargard Obyron to be the equivalent of the new Royal Warden and not a Lord.

Except Phaeron was an upgrade in 5th ed, which introduced the whole dynastic rank aspect, and Nemesors are supposed to fall under Overlords.
It goes Phaeron > Overlord > Nemesor > Lord

I'm fairly certain that Nemesor is a title given to the Overlord that is in charge of the Dynasty's military. So a Nemesor should be > than an Overlord.

I've read conflicting bits of background. Lexicanum says Nemesors are subservient to Overlords, the Wiki says Nemesor is just a higher military rank. The Wiki gave the better explanation, so I edited my comment to reflect that.
The 8th ed codex seems to corroborate on this, as there's a diagram that shows how an army is structured.

Nemesor has Overlord next to it in parenthesis.
Apparently Vargard is just a title given to a lord who's the bodyguard of a Nemesor.
Unless the Vargard is part of Tomb World Command, in that case its an Overlord.

I have to say, as military diagrams go the one in 8th ed isn't great. It doesn't tell me how many legions are supposed to be in a Decurion. Is it one legion per decurion? Then why is it a Decurion? Wouldn't that mean 10 legions?
Then it tells you that legions are divided into 10 phalanxes, each consisting of 10 necrons. So...why can you take Necron warrior squads in units of 20 then?

Yeah, it's hard to say. it doesn't help that most of the Nemesors that are talked about in the Fluff are super generals.

Hopefully they'll go into that a little more with the new dex/lore

 Sasori wrote:

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I wonder if the necron lord gets squatted. There's a lot of new HQs, but no update on the lord. It's by far the oldest and crappiest sculpt in the range. I like the new HQs have more variety than just many random dudes holding staves or scythes.

I expect any generic Finecast models- I.E. the Overlord, Old Lord, Cryptek will all get squatted.

I don't know if the Lord as an entry in the dex is getting squatted, since most people can use their spare overlords as lords.

I am beginning to get concerned that regular Gauss Cannon destroyers may be getting squatted though. It looks like the new Heavy Destroyer has, speculated, an anti-tank weapon and an anti infantry weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here are some of the models in the traditional scheme. I prefer this color scheme, though I do like the bronze one as well.

I personally think that there's plenty of detail on models now. No reason to go back to the old scheme. I'm planning on combining the two paint jobs.

I created a kitbash of the new necron warrior weapon while waiting (well mainly the gun):

weapon made with an Immortal's sawed-off gauss blaster. Quiz: Can you guess which part from another muldi-model necron kit the weapon's claw is made from?

 Sasori wrote:

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I wonder if the necron lord gets squatted. There's a lot of new HQs, but no update on the lord. It's by far the oldest and crappiest sculpt in the range. I like the new HQs have more variety than just many random dudes holding staves or scythes.

I expect any generic Finecast models- I.E. the Overlord, Old Lord, Cryptek will all get squatted.

I don't know if the Lord as an entry in the dex is getting squatted, since most people can use their spare overlords as lords.

I am beginning to get concerned that regular Gauss Cannon destroyers may be getting squatted though. It looks like the new Heavy Destroyer has, speculated, an anti-tank weapon and an anti infantry weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here are some of the models in the traditional scheme. I prefer this color scheme, though I do like the bronze one as well.

I hope the lord doesnt go, the reroll 1 to Wound really helps a lot of our units out as we already have MWBD so our warriors need some kind of W reroll to boost these damage potential.

It's also nice to have cheaper HQ choices so I think the old cryptek and lord will just be getting a new model later on down the road.

I doubt destroyers will get squatted, in pretty certain that they said there are 3 kinds of destroyer and we've seen scorpekh and heavy lokhust.

I dont think they would make the heavy distinction if this was the only kind of lokhust destroyer

I do wonder about the destroyer lord though, maybe it will be come a "Lokhust destroyer lord" and give buffs more centred around the Lokhust variant. Or it could get squatted as I have to admit it's in a sticky situation but considering how many HQ variants SM have I really hope they just upgrade the model and give us a brand new destroyer lord


Automatically Appended Next Post:

torblind wrote:
I created a kitbash of the new necron warrior weapon while waiting (well mainly the gun):

weapon made with an Immortal's sawed-off gauss blaster. Quiz: Can you guess which part from another muldi-model necron kit the weapon's claw is made from?

Nice model and I'm leaning towards Canoptek spider?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/15/indomitus-focus-the-canoptek-reanimatorgw-homepage-post-3/

Canoptek Reanimator Article up

Pick a friendly unit withing 9" and they get +1 to Reanimation

Relevant image. Pick a unit in your Command Phase, until your next Command Phase that unit gets +1 to Reanimation Protocol rolls.

Certainly better than 3", but if RP is unchanged then building around RP is still a mistake. It's also the first hint we've had that RP doesn't seem to be changing significantly, which could be good or could be bad, but it's certainly bad for this unit.

Edit, I'm almost certain that Nemesor is the title given to the the overlord in charge of a dynasties armies, since before he was the phaeron of the Sautekh dynasty, Imotekh's official title was Nemesor. Zandrekh became Nemesor after Imotekhs ascension, despite being more than slightly crazy, and a rival of Imotekh.

Dead on arrival. Shame, good looking unit.

For those who say it’s too early to call - building around reanimation has never worked well and never been good, the chance it’s different in this iteration is pretty much zero I’d say. The only hope it has would be if RP worked like 7th, and even then, are you gonna take a support unit which is very easy to see and where you have to announce what you’re picking so the enemy knows precisely what to focus on?

 Grimgold wrote:
Certainly better than 3", but if RP is unchanged then building around RP is still a mistake. It's also the first hint we've had that RP doesn't seem to be changing significantly, which could be good or could be bad, but it's certainly bad for this unit.

It really depends if they add some sort of defensive stratagems. RP is feast or famine today, you can reanimate a lot with, but in practice you don't reanimate at all. If PA or the future codex add stratagems to boost our resilience or make an RP instantly after taking damage, RP could become oppressive ... in theory.

I see your points, and agree if you're in a competitive meta, but for casual play it's not bad.

Imagine running 60 Warriors with a cryptek and 3 of these. Thats a 5++ and a 4+ RP roll for all of them.

Yeah, hopefully RP gets a tweak but it's looking bleak on that front. Hopefully it wont have terrible weapons or die to a stiff breeze

Yet we know it also has ranged capability, and the article says it’s not a slouch in HTH.

Me, I’ll welcome any and all perks for Reanimation where it’s not the units sole purpose. This tolboi may prove rather handy, as it appears to be a multi role support unit.

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I see your points, and agree if you're in a competitive meta, but for casual play it's not bad.

Imagine running 60 Warriors with a cryptek and 3 of these. Thats a 5++ and a 4+ RP roll for all of them.

Yeah, hopefully RP gets a tweak but it's looking bleak on that front. Hopefully it wont have terrible weapons or die to a stiff breeze

You wouldn't need these, though. If the cryptek is in the middle, its 3" aura for +1 reanimation can affect all 3 units. And yeah, we've had this since the beginning of 8th edition, and we know it doesn't do well.

Eyjio wrote:
Dead on arrival. Shame, good looking unit.

For those who say it’s too early to call - building around reanimation has never worked well and never been good, the chance it’s different in this iteration is pretty much zero I’d say. The only hope it has would be if RP worked like 7th, and even then, are you gonna take a support unit which is very easy to see and where you have to announce what you’re picking so the enemy knows precisely what to focus on?

Perhaps. If there are other ways to boost RP still (I.E. The Cryptek) and RP has gotten fixed a bit, I could see this.

If an Army wants to dump a lot of firepower into something like this that at least leaves several of my other units to survive the Alphastrike, I'd probably be ok. There is also the new terrain to consider, as this thing is not that tall. If you get to roll for RP at the end of every phase as well, I could see this being a bit better.

I will say that in 5th and 6th, plenty of people brought Res Orbs for their units. It wasn't exactly build around, but it was very common for buffing RP.

We really do need to see the full picture. If they tweaked RP to be a bit better and depending on points and durability, this could be pretty good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darsath wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I see your points, and agree if you're in a competitive meta, but for casual play it's not bad.

Imagine running 60 Warriors with a cryptek and 3 of these. Thats a 5++ and a 4+ RP roll for all of them.

Yeah, hopefully RP gets a tweak but it's looking bleak on that front. Hopefully it wont have terrible weapons or die to a stiff breeze

You wouldn't need these, though. If the cryptek is in the middle, its 3" aura for +1 reanimation can affect all 3 units. And yeah, we've had this since the beginning of 8th edition, and we know it doesn't do well.

There is no guarantee the Crypteks are keeping that ability now, though I still hope so.

So this new Reanimator is basically what Tomb Spyders used to be.

 Sasori wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I see your points, and agree if you're in a competitive meta, but for casual play it's not bad.

Imagine running 60 Warriors with a cryptek and 3 of these. Thats a 5++ and a 4+ RP roll for all of them.

Yeah, hopefully RP gets a tweak but it's looking bleak on that front. Hopefully it wont have terrible weapons or die to a stiff breeze

You wouldn't need these, though. If the cryptek is in the middle, its 3" aura for +1 reanimation can affect all 3 units. And yeah, we've had this since the beginning of 8th edition, and we know it doesn't do well.

There is no guarantee the Crypteks are keeping that ability now, though I still hope so.

I mean, to be fair, if they decide to nerf Necrons with the new edition, then obviously I'm not gonna drop a penny. Even if I like the models.

I agree that I think we still need the full picture. We haven't seen the full terrain rules or the rules for the INFANTRY keyword. It may be that a unit of immortals or warriors in certain terrain features with one of these guys could be difficult to remove.

 MannyMcCoconut wrote:
I agree that I think we still need the full picture. We haven't seen the full terrain rules or the rules for the INFANTRY keyword. It may be that a unit of immortals or warriors in certain terrain features with one of these guys could be difficult to remove.

I think this is the most likely scenario at the moment. Games workshop haven't shown any of the big rules, stats or much else because they want to extend the teasing period for about a month for maximum calculated hype. In actuality, what happens is people have to make educated guesses as to what stuff does, and the context of changes, because key information is being deliberately withheld.

Shaelinith wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
Certainly better than 3", but if RP is unchanged then building around RP is still a mistake. It's also the first hint we've had that RP doesn't seem to be changing significantly, which could be good or could be bad, but it's certainly bad for this unit.

It really depends if they add some sort of defensive stratagems. RP is feast or famine today, you can reanimate a lot with, but in practice you don't reanimate at all. If PA or the future codex add stratagems to boost our resilience or make an RP instantly after taking damage, RP could become oppressive ... in theory.

The Necron players have spent quite a bit of time thinking about how we would tweak RP, and stratagems have come up often as a possible solution. Speaking from my own perspective as a Necron player we've never managed to get it right. For instance the most popular one is a once per unit per game stratagem that allows a destroyed unit one chance at reanimation, which means you have to kill every good Necron unit twice, which is not really a fun mechanic for anyone. I think the best answer is just to accept the rule as it is now, which is to say fluffy and situationally useful, but not the central feature of the faction. If they are going to refactor a rule, I'd much rather they look into gauss, -1 ap is really generic, and it leaves our warriors struggling to hurt units they used to melt in prior editions.