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.

 Bosskelot wrote:

Spoiler:

CCB/Anni Barge and Overlord Stats.

3+ Save for the Barge and the Overlord is +1 M and +1 A.

Really happy to see the Overlord gets A4 now. I've always been really annoyed at how pathetic they felt in close combat. This should help a lot.

 unitled wrote:
I can't be the only one who didn't previously know that an Overlord is known as Señor Supremo abroad?

Makes sense as a direct translation I suppose, but what really perplexes me is the Japanese translation for Overlord.

I could be mistaken, as my Japanese isn't great, but shouldn't it be オーバーロード?
They have a ウ (katakana character for U) with a dakuten (those two little dashes that slightly changes how you pronounce it) which I'm pretty sure doesn't exist.

Tétrarque doesn't really make sense either, as a tétraque (or tetrarch) is actually a really specific title that was used by a specific dynasty during a specific period of time where there were 4 rulers over a specific bit of territory.
A more accurate French translation would have been suzerain, or if you want a more direct approach, haut-seigneur. I know that's been around for a while, but that's something that always bugged me.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I could be mistaken, as my Japanese isn't great, but shouldn't it be オーバーロード?
They have a ウ (katakana character for U) with a dakuten (those two little dashes that slightly changes how you pronounce it) which I'm pretty sure doesn't exist.

.

You can write va in two ways. バ or ヴァ. Maybe second is more formal? My teacher taught me to write my family name ネヴァライネン for example.

 unitled wrote:
I can't be the only one who didn't previously know that an Overlord is known as Señor Supremo abroad?

Haha! That's awesome.

You know, with all the skeletons you could do a real Day of the Dead thing.

Edit: Senior Supremo and the Infinite Mariachi del Morte?

tneva82 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I could be mistaken, as my Japanese isn't great, but shouldn't it be オーバーロード?
They have a ウ (katakana character for U) with a dakuten (those two little dashes that slightly changes how you pronounce it) which I'm pretty sure doesn't exist.

.

You can write va in two ways. バ or ヴァ. Maybe second is more formal? My teacher taught me to write my family name ネヴァライネン for example.

Interesting, I did not know this.
Apparently ヴァ is a recent thing, so I guess its not on the katakana charts or in common usage yet, as the series Overlord is written as オーバーロード

-Ňecrontyr- wrote:
With the emphasis on a midrange army, the spotlight on controlling the midboard, and smaller table sizes Ive been planning on Mephrit for the added lethality

I'm leaning that way but I expect Nihilakh will be the competitive choice. Boring perhaps, but Obsec>just about everything.
It could actually get obnoxious if RP is changed such that it does anything.

I'm still going to play Novohk. They and mephrit are the closest thing to destroyer / old cron factions, imo, as they are built for aggression and destruction.

Tyel wrote:

-Ňecrontyr- wrote:
With the emphasis on a midrange army, the spotlight on controlling the midboard, and smaller table sizes Ive been planning on Mephrit for the added lethality

I'm leaning that way but I expect Nihilakh will be the competitive choice. Boring perhaps, but Obsec>just about everything.
It could actually get obnoxious if RP is changed such that it does anything.

Maybe. I'd rather have traits that allow the units to accomplish tasks, even though my runner up is actually Nephrek for the ability to get into position.

That said, I can't bring myself to decide without knowing what the protocols do and how they work. It could shift any dynasty from 'mediocre' to 'wow' or be fairly useless little things.

---
The overlord change is interesting, just for the fact that its a stat improvement over the Indomitus stats, which weren't that long ago.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'm still going to play Novohk.

As a long-term Necron player I'm interested to play them in the 9th, while I skipped them in the 8th.
What is the common point of view about units playable in the 9th?
What I've seen is that Wraiths are largely nerfed which is a big downside to the melee department of Necrons.

We dont know until the codex drops. We know some stats, but we dont know points, we dont know how RP will change, we dont know if living metal will stay the same. We dont know what protocols will be, and how they work.

 wuestenfux wrote:
As a long-term Necron player I'm interested to play them in the 9th, while I skipped them in the 8th.
What is the common point of view about units playable in the 9th?
What I've seen is that Wraiths are largely nerfed which is a big downside to the melee department of Necrons.

Very difficult to answer at this point as the meta is still up in the air, and as it's a matter of weeks until we get our codex any advice you get is going to be out of date before your paint is dry. I suspect there's a bunch of stuff coming in the codex that we didn't see in Pariah, personally!

I'd be interested to see if Mephrit is still a trap in 9th. The little extra range is nice, but you still have the issue of a bunch of already decently high AP weapons and few ways to reliably deliver them to get the bonus consistently. I suppose longer ranges, smaller boards and objectives focused on the middle of the board mitigate this somewhat, but I'm also not a fan of how one dimensional the bonuses are. I guess Command Protocols will be the dealbreaker and associated stratagems/traits/relics etc.

Overall Nihilakh still seems like the one most friendly to 9th's systems, but a part of me really thinks people will be sleeping on Novokh and Szarekhan. Specifically the ability to manipulate wound rolls is something Necrons sorely lack and while both are being nerfed,keeping the re-roll wounds of Master Artisans and Expert Crafters is still incredibly strong for the Necron army specifically.

^If the Monolith gets an ability similar to it's 3rd Ed incarnation where it can pop models out of it's gate the turn that it Deep Strikes, then getting into close range would be pretty doable.

As for what to buy or paint before the codex drops, gauss Immortals got a decent buff in Toughness and Range

 Bosskelot wrote:
I'd be interested to see if Mephrit is still a trap in 9th. The little extra range is nice, but you still have the issue of a bunch of already decently high AP weapons and few ways to reliably deliver them to get the bonus consistently. I suppose longer ranges, smaller boards and objectives focused on the middle of the board mitigate this somewhat, but I'm also not a fan of how one dimensional the bonuses are. I guess Command Protocols will be the dealbreaker and associated stratagems/traits/relics etc.

Overall Nihilakh still seems like the one most friendly to 9th's systems, but a part of me really thinks people will be sleeping on Novokh and Szarekhan. Specifically the ability to manipulate wound rolls is something Necrons sorely lack and while both are being nerfed,keeping the re-roll wounds of Master Artisans and Expert Crafters is still incredibly strong for the Necron army specifically.

Hmmm. I'd like to like Novokh, but I can't see it. There are things we don't know, synergies that may exist - but I just keep mentally comparing it to say Bloody Rose and at least to my mind its so much worse. If it was +1A, so basic warriors became... okayish assault units, I could see how the whole list changes.
But unknown things aside - it seems like anything that's bad at close combat (so the bulk of the army) will continue to be bad at close combat.

There might be scope for a mini-detachment for say Wraiths, Scarabs, Lichguard - and who knows, flayed ones - but... I don't see it happening.

I think Szarekhan is more plausible - especially in a sort of vehicle focused list. It will just depend on how good that is.

Necrons are bad at CC? Overall I'd say they are about average, due to their decent WS, strength and durability.

If you want bad at CC try Tau and most Eldar units, due to subpar WS and low strength and durability.

In the past, yes, Necrons were bad at CC due to their low initiative and crippling weakness to sweeping advance.
In 8th ed / 9th ed those rules don't exist, so they aren't really bad at CC.

Novokh is useful in that it synergizes with mid to short ranged builds. You take some reaper warriors, for example, double tap into an enemy with them, charge using the +1 bonus to distance (which works well with the 7" rapid fire range) and you get an armor piercing bonus. A unit of 20 warriors doing that should deal a surprising amount of damage.

Bloody Rose isn't a good comparison because Sisters are still S3 and bolt pistols are still AP-, AP-1 with the trait.
Necrons are S4 with ranged weapons that tend to have more than AP-1. Its not really accurate.

Plus for what it's worth Immortals are now 2A base, could do some damage clearing out leftovers after their shooting phase.

Plus you have to consider that 9th is actually a close combat edition. You wanna get people off the midfield objectives and score the points? Best way to do that is by both shooting and punching them. Then you deny them points and score your own. Aggressive Novokh Immortal play could be surprisingly decent and if Wraiths are suddenly -3 AP they suddenly become a slight concern for Marines in CC. Even just being able to guarantee a unit of Warriors succeeds a charge and manages to start contesting a point is legitimately useful.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Plus you have to consider that 9th is actually a close combat edition. You wanna get people off the midfield objectives and score the points? Best way to do that is by both shooting and punching them. Then you deny them points and score your own. Aggressive Novokh Immortal play could be surprisingly decent and if Wraiths are suddenly -3 AP they suddenly become a slight concern for Marines in CC. Even just being able to guarantee a unit of Warriors succeeds a charge and manages to start contesting a point is legitimately useful.

This is how i've always played...paying for S4 and not using attacks against T3/4 with low-ish saves is a bit of a waste to me

I totally agree in theory - 9th does favour assault - I just don't see it working in practice.

Warriors first.

As any Ork player will tell you, getting lots of models on big bases into combat is difficult. Lets be incredibly generous though and say you get 15 into combat versus a Marine unit.

15 attacks. 10 hits. 5 wounds. 5/3 go through=not even a dead marine with 2 wounds. Its not fire warriors sure - but I'm still pretty confident in saying this is terrible. Odds are you won't get 15 in and it will be even worse.
Lets make them Novokh. Well... I feel turning it into 5/2 wounds is still pretty terrible - even if you do at least kill a Marine this time. It seems to me that if you are going down this road its surely Nihilakh every time, because you charge something (or get charged), tag and objective and win obsec wars rather than the pillow fight.

I feel tying up warrior blobs so you take a few punches is far superior to taking a wall of Gauss - whether you are Novokh or not. Its what happened in 8th and I don't see it changing now. The difference declines as the unit shrinks - but at the extreme I think you would be trading in as low as 10~ melee attacks for 40~ shots. I feel the Royal Warden has come into existence to get out out of this situation (and just be more flexible generally - but still.)

Also if you were going melee sisters, you'd bring an icon to push them up to strength 4, and now you are hitting almost as hard as two Necron warriors (and indeed there are further synergies for 3 attacks). If Necron's get some non-chapter tactic synergies (beyond say a reroll charges warlord trait) to give their troops equivalent assault potential then I completely change my view, but as it stands I feel safe in saying Necron warriors are a bad assault unit for their points. I mean yes, your 20 warriors are likely to eat 5 Fire Warriors on the charge - but its 240 points into 45. You'd sort of hope so.

Immortals are mathematically more punchy - because its 2 attacks for 18 points versus 1 for 12 - but I still think its pretty lacklustre. Intercessors for instance are standing right there with 3 attacks for 20 points (and I feel the immortal will always be compared with them). They don't get the point of AP until turn 3 or 4, but they get it baseline with a chapter tactic on top. Every little helps - but being generous, 20 attacks, 13ish hits, 7 ish wounds, 2 and a bit go through to kill one intercessor. Killing 20 points is quite a bad return on an 180 point unit. If you get tied up and can't shoot next turn that's potentially really bad. (Shoot->charge->fight->veil/warden into shoot again is probably theoretically optimal, but very difficult to pull off.)

I just don't think Novokh is opening other doors for these units. Making Wraiths AP-3 is undoubtedly nice. I think Scarabs especially will benefit from a -1. The two-weapon Skorpekhs benefit from going to AP-4 too (AP-5 feels like overkill). I guess if you put a lot of points into these units maybe its the road to go down. I'm just not sure its enough.

Happy to be wrong though.

I think Necrons have a few specialist units (Lychguard, Praetorians look SURPRISINGLY Solid, the New Skorpekh destroyers if they can come in squads of 6)

However, I feel 1 dedicated melee unit as a bully for an objective is enough. I dont think they're strong enough to base a whole list around. We're still a mid-range, relatively durable, middle of the range quality shooting army, and yes, ranges are reduced this edition, which plays to our benefit.

But I think planning to melee with your warriors to actually cause damage is a trap. They still have 1 attack. The best case is using the charge move to move onto and contest an objective/take an objective from something they outnumber. (Unless my homeboy Anrakyr gets a points cut, then running him with 2x20 warriors makes them funny in melee if you can also make them fearless).

However, currently with the meta as it is I think Necrons are going to move back to Gauss for their weaponry, Dense cover hurts tesla a lot, and marines in cover get a 2+ vs Tesla.

My point about Novokh Warriors had nothing to do with their damage potential. It's just solely about being to able fire a volley at a unit holding an objective and then get a very reliable charge off so you can either contest or start holding that objective. When their turn rolls around you have denied them 5 or potentially more VP's. And you don't even need to be Nihilakh to win the Obsec war since even in a scenario where you fail to kill a Marine, it's still 5 vs 15+.

This is a CC edition not because things are more killy, but because being able to get into combat reliably is now far more useful and far more likely to happen.

Tyel wrote:
I totally agree in theory - 9th does favour assault - I just don't see it working in practice.

Warriors first.

As any Ork player will tell you, getting lots of models on big bases into combat is difficult. Lets be incredibly generous though and say you get 15 into combat versus a Marine unit.

15 attacks. 10 hits. 5 wounds. 5/3 go through=not even a dead marine with 2 wounds. Its not fire warriors sure - but I'm still pretty confident in saying this is terrible. Odds are you won't get 15 in and it will be even worse.
Lets make them Novokh. Well... I feel turning it into 5/2 wounds is still pretty terrible - even if you do at least kill a Marine this time. It seems to me that if you are going down this road its surely Nihilakh every time, because you charge something (or get charged), tag and objective and win obsec wars rather than the pillow fight.

I feel tying up warrior blobs so you take a few punches is far superior to taking a wall of Gauss - whether you are Novokh or not. Its what happened in 8th and I don't see it changing now. The difference declines as the unit shrinks - but at the extreme I think you would be trading in as low as 10~ melee attacks for 40~ shots. I feel the Royal Warden has come into existence to get out out of this situation (and just be more flexible generally - but still.)

Also if you were going melee sisters, you'd bring an icon to push them up to strength 4, and now you are hitting almost as hard as two Necron warriors (and indeed there are further synergies for 3 attacks). If Necron's get some non-chapter tactic synergies (beyond say a reroll charges warlord trait) to give their troops equivalent assault potential then I completely change my view, but as it stands I feel safe in saying Necron warriors are a bad assault unit for their points. I mean yes, your 20 warriors are likely to eat 5 Fire Warriors on the charge - but its 240 points into 45. You'd sort of hope so.

Immortals are mathematically more punchy - because its 2 attacks for 18 points versus 1 for 12 - but I still think its pretty lacklustre. Intercessors for instance are standing right there with 3 attacks for 20 points (and I feel the immortal will always be compared with them). They don't get the point of AP until turn 3 or 4, but they get it baseline with a chapter tactic on top. Every little helps - but being generous, 20 attacks, 13ish hits, 7 ish wounds, 2 and a bit go through to kill one intercessor. Killing 20 points is quite a bad return on an 180 point unit. If you get tied up and can't shoot next turn that's potentially really bad. (Shoot->charge->fight->veil/warden into shoot again is probably theoretically optimal, but very difficult to pull off.)

I just don't think Novokh is opening other doors for these units. Making Wraiths AP-3 is undoubtedly nice. I think Scarabs especially will benefit from a -1. The two-weapon Skorpekhs benefit from going to AP-4 too (AP-5 feels like overkill). I guess if you put a lot of points into these units maybe its the road to go down. I'm just not sure its enough.

Happy to be wrong though.

You're forgetting shooting. You can shoot and charge now.
Yes, Necron warrior just in combat by themselves are weak, but if you add in shooting that's a few more models dead in the same turn.
40 reaper shots followed by 10 warrior attacks (assuming that you can't get all 20 in cc range and only 10 can get in contact) against Primaris should kill about 7 models.

Then your opponent has to deal with a blob of 20 warriors in their lines, possibly holding an objective.

Comparing a unit just on their melee combat potential vs their points value is a faulty comparison. Warriors still have guns, there are 2 phases they can deal damage in.

Shooting at something you want to charge is always a great idea, your opponent will remove models to make your charge longer. Warriors or immortals melee can be improved by anrakyr, MWBD, disruption fields.

That's only really a problem if you are trying to do a long range charge. A 7" with reapers (technically 5" with the Novohk protocol and the engagement rules) is not a long range charge.
Besides, so what if you fail your charge? Failing your charge has the exact same consequence of not attempting a charge. A few overwatch shots doesn't really matter in the end; your opponent is still going to focus down a necron unit in his shooting phase, so you might as well deal as much damage as you can in your turn.

I definitely want to keep an eye on Praetorians. Especially in the rare case of having a Warden lurking about. If only they could receive MWBD from standard Overlords....

I might be underestimating Anrakyr to be fair. Sort of depends what his points end up being in the codex I think.

Tyel wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
I'd be interested to see if Mephrit is still a trap in 9th. The little extra range is nice, but you still have the issue of a bunch of already decently high AP weapons and few ways to reliably deliver them to get the bonus consistently. I suppose longer ranges, smaller boards and objectives focused on the middle of the board mitigate this somewhat, but I'm also not a fan of how one dimensional the bonuses are. I guess Command Protocols will be the dealbreaker and associated stratagems/traits/relics etc.

Overall Nihilakh still seems like the one most friendly to 9th's systems, but a part of me really thinks people will be sleeping on Novokh and Szarekhan. Specifically the ability to manipulate wound rolls is something Necrons sorely lack and while both are being nerfed,keeping the re-roll wounds of Master Artisans and Expert Crafters is still incredibly strong for the Necron army specifically.

Hmmm. I'd like to like Novokh, but I can't see it. There are things we don't know, synergies that may exist - but I just keep mentally comparing it to say Bloody Rose and at least to my mind its so much worse. If it was +1A, so basic warriors became... okayish assault units, I could see how the whole list changes.
But unknown things aside - it seems like anything that's bad at close combat (so the bulk of the army) will continue to be bad at close combat.

There might be scope for a mini-detachment for say Wraiths, Scarabs, Lichguard - and who knows, flayed ones - but... I don't see it happening.

I think Szarekhan is more plausible - especially in a sort of vehicle focused list. It will just depend on how good that is.

You take units to fit dynasty, not random mix of units and then dynasty.

And i wouldn't worry about warriors being bad at novokh. They are bad period.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Bloody Rose isn't a good comparison because Sisters are still S3 and bolt pistols are still AP-, AP-1 with the trait.
Necrons are S4 with ranged weapons that tend to have more than AP-1. Its not really accurate.

If sisters plan to get into melee they will have s4

Edit