Necron 9th edition general discussion thread.

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.

**Surtr**

Seeing the change to the Datasheet from the OL.
Does it suggest that we might see more changes from the datasheets from Indominus.
And If yes, will the Changes only be on the Units themselves or also on some of the weapons?

**blaktoof**

Surtr wrote:
Seeing the change to the Datasheet from the OL.
Does it suggest that we might see more changes from the datasheets from Indominus.
And If yes, will the Changes only be on the Units themselves or also on some of the weapons?

Highly possible, forgebane had changes from index which were in turn changed short after by the codex.

**Wakshaani**

I dunno, getting Warriors into close combat is one of those radical 9th ed revissions that might actually work. People don't often fall back from a unit that's *crappy* in combat, so you might wind up being locked in combat for a turn or three which … isn't bad. You don't kill *quickly* but there aren't many normal troopers that will kill you any faster than you k them. (Melee-specific units, obviously, will, but.) … but Warriors get back up, while their guys don't.

And if on top of that, you have the body advantage, you hold the objective even if you aren't killing.

It's counter-intuitive, but … this might be a Thing.

(Bonus observation: As it currently stands, a Ghost Arc's ability works just fine while locked into melee as well. Ghost Arc and 10 Warriors against 5 Intercessors? 10 Dire Avengers? You'll always win that grind over time.)

**Bosskelot**

It's not really counter-intuitive at all. The game is entirely based around objective scoring and Primaries are the easiest ones to achieve. You can absolutely kill all of 5 models and still win the game in 9th. Anything that helps you contest and control objectives, directly or indirectly, is automatically really good.

This is why, despite its improvements, I'm not enamored by Mephrit still. It doesn't do any of the above or help contribute to them, is useless against a few armies in the game and is also useless on a lot of the actual shooting units too. It's still the exact same issue as the 8th edition trait: making something already good, slightly better, but not introducing extra options or tactical depth in your list building or play. However, I'm happy to eventually be proven wrong and to see all of the lists that tech hard into relying on the Mephrit trait. But as it stands I'd even place 9th ed Sautekh above it.

**Mixzremixzd**

Although it's not a new datasheet, someone on reddit got their hands on our new repackaged Croissants noted the change in flight stands.

I'm kinda ambivalent about it for now. I guess aircraft flight stands will be more uniform with what we've seen from the Inceptors, Seraphim etc. but I am curious about the strength of the cross connection to the stem.

**torblind**

Mixzremixzd wrote:
Although it's not a new datasheet, someone on reddit got their hands on our new repackaged Croissants noted the change in flight stands.

I'm kinda ambivalent about it for now. I guess aircraft flight stands will be more uniform with what we've seen from the Inceptors, Seraphim etc. but I am curious about the strength of the cross connection to the stem.

Well, it's going to be a lot easier to glue to the base, so that's nice.

Cross connection seems fine to me

**-Ňecrontyr-**

I like the design much more than the previous one

**vipoid**

Bosskelot wrote:

Spoiler:

CCB/Anni Barge and Overlord Stats.

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

So what I'm taking from this is that Warscythes are still garbage (since D2 is weaksauce when Thunderhammers are doing literally twice that, and AP-4 is irrelevant on anything that matters due to Invulnerable Saves breeding like rabbits). Nice to see that Overlords at least get an extra swing with their Rubberscythes, though.

Also, after an entire edition, GW still haven't figured out that S7 AP0 D1 is not a good profile for the main weapon of a vehicle, even with 10 shots.

**-Ňecrontyr-**

Yeah. The Tesla Destructor got nerfed going from 5th to 6th back when you could glancing hit things to death; upping the point cost for the Anni Barge, Doom and Night scythes, while ALSO removing the Arc special rule that allowed TLTD to do splash damage.

After vehicles got armor saves TLTD have really been pretty useless, and I was very diappointed when the Tesseract Vault/Obelisk ended up with similar weapons

**Xenomancers**

I'm holding off on building a CCB instead of an annihilation barge for the codex.

With 4 attacks and 9 wounds it is a lot better but your max damage is pretty weak. You can take void-reaper but CCB really needs the lightning field. I think rule of cool is gonna win out here BUT a better melee weapon would go a long way.

The barge on the other hand is pretty good - with the points we have right now i think in every situation you are better off taking a doom scythe for +50 points. (IDK) What do you all think about Barges?

**vipoid**

Xenomancers wrote:
I'm holding off on building a CCB instead of an annihilation barge for the codex.

With 4 attacks and 9 wounds it is a lot better but your max damage is pretty weak. You can take void-reaper but CCB really needs the lightning field. I think rule of cool is gonna win out here BUT a better melee weapon would go a long way.

The barge on the other hand is pretty good - with the points we have right now i think in every situation you are better off taking a doom scythe for +50 points. (IDK) What do you all think about Barges?

Regarding the barge, the problem I have (as above) is that I just don't see the point of the primary weapon.

Let's assume that you give it the Overlord buff and that Tesla still works on modified 6s. Even with that buff, it's still only killing 1.5 Marines. Maybe another one with the Gauss Cannon. That doesn't seem like much for over 200pts of investment.

**Tyel**

Said it last week, but I think the barge is out unless its Mephrit, which as the thread discussed is probably a trap for most units, so its really about whether you want to spend a special detachment for it.

I think the Barge is probably the big hope for GW looking down and going "oh wait, this doesn't work" in the Codex - somehow printing this a week after the Barge's stats for the box were printed. But it seems incredibly unlikely.

**p5freak**

Anni barges are fast units, and good for engage on all fronts. When my opponent targets them with anti armour weapons he is not using them against my stalkers and DDAs.

**Mixzremixzd**

So pretty much Distraction Carnifexes and point scorers is the name of the game for Anni Barges?

**tneva82**

Mixzremixzd wrote:
So pretty much Distraction Carnifexes and point scorers is the name of the game for Anni Barges?

Pretty much yes. Any dam1 weapon is pretty irrelevant in 9e.

At least command barge can be made to tank any high damage weapon. Not good role but something

**MrPieChee**

Strength 8 and/or damage 2 would have been great :(

**Slipspace**

p5freak wrote:
Anni barges are fast units, and good for engage on all fronts. When my opponent targets them with anti armour weapons he is not using them against my stalkers and DDAs.

My problem with that is they are currently far too fragile against small arms. The new ones are quite a bit better but still pretty fragile and we don't have the new points for them yet so it's hard to make any definite conclusions. Between Tomb Blades, Scarabs and Skorpekhs roaming up the board I don't usually have too many problems with Engage on All Fronts so adding a not-very-tough vehicle with poor armament to the list seems sub-optimal. If the main Tesla weapon was D2 I think it'd be much more attractive as an option.

**Bosskelot**

I wouldn't really say T6 8W and a 3+ save are fragile against small arms.

**Slipspace**

Bosskelot wrote:
I wouldn't really say T6 8W and a 3+ save are fragile against small arms.

I would. Sure, not against Lasguns or Splinter fire but against even partially buffed bolters or pulse rifles, with a smattering of plasma or similar they fold pretty fast. The volume of fire available to most competitive armies now means units like the Barge or Land Speeders often end up dying to a flurry of shots that wound on 5+, simply through weight of shots. It's exacerbated by the fact you're often better shooting a vehicle against Necrons than their infantry if you can't be sure of killing the infantry.

If you keep the Barge further back it can work OK, but pushing it forward, into rapid fire and potentially charge range to get the Engage on All Fronts points is what I think is a bad idea. It puts you right into the sweet spot for the enemy and I just don't think it's survivable enough in that scenario.

**Moosatronic Warrior**

The 3+ Sv will help a lot against the small arms fire, but they need to be cheap to be attractive. I find the Gauss cannon a better gun than the Tesla Destructor.

**tneva82**

Well it's basically 40 primaris bolters in non-tactical doctrine

**vipoid**

p5freak wrote:
Anni barges are fast units, and good for engage on all fronts. When my opponent targets them with anti armour weapons he is not using them against my stalkers and DDAs.

I suppose that's fair, though I generally prefer units that can do that while still being effective themselves.

Still, do you think Annihilation Barges are better in that role than Triarch Stalkers? The Stalkers are slightly more expensive, but are also tougher, have some melee ability, and can provide buffs to other units without needing to be anywhere near them.

Or is this for when you're already maxed out on Stalkers?

**tneva82**

Plus stalkers are actually threat in shooting department as well.

And yes first max out on stalkers, then AB's. Though then you start bleeding bring it down. With 3 DDA you really shouldn't be adding all that much more vehicles unless you then go for full on vehicle mode.

**Sasori**

Right now I don't think there is really a good case for Abarges over what else our codex can bring, though I'd be happy to put them on the table again if the end up good again.

Triach Stalkers and Doom scythes are looking great though.

**Slayer-Fan123**

The main thing Anni Barges had for them a while ago was their cheapness. They currently don't have that.

**p5freak**

vipoid wrote:

I suppose that's fair, though I generally prefer units that can do that while still being effective themselves.

Still, do you think Annihilation Barges are better in that role than Triarch Stalkers? The Stalkers are slightly more expensive, but are also tougher, have some melee ability, and can provide buffs to other units without needing to be anywhere near them.

Or is this for when you're already maxed out on Stalkers?

Anni barges serve a different purpose in my army than stalkers. They are anti infantry and score some VP for engage on all fronts. Heat ray stalkers buff other units, they are anti armour and partially anti infantry. They can shoot in melee, hit automatically, and fight a little bit as well. And yes, i am maxed out on stalkers.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Aren't stalkers slower too?

Also, Tesla destructors now have 30" range, so you can kite with them a bit more effectively.

With a bit of micromanaging you can make annibarges as annoying as some Eldar units.

Why would you be in rapid fire range of small arms fire when you have a fast moving vehicle with 30" range guns? Even with the smaller table sizes it should be hard to catch it.

**-Ňecrontyr-**

You can see the anni barge as a distration carnifex that can shrug heavy weapon fire... but even with all that maneuverability and durability you are still just plinking away with AP - that might sneak maybe 1 or 2 wounds per turn through

**CthuluIsSpy**

Against what target? If you attack light infantry with it you're going to deal more than 2 wounds.

Non-Marines exist, despite GW's attempt to make you think otherwise.

It has a longer engagement range than most necron anti-infantry weapons, so you can deal damage without waiting for the army to come in position.

Is it auto-include? No. Is it functional, especially compared to the previous version? Yes, I think so.

**Bosskelot**

I think a big thing that would push the desirability of the unit way up would be the ability to take multiple in the same slot.