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.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Sooo... are we in agreement that the new Necron codex will have a grand total of two different Destroyer Lords?

Two that we know of anyway (Lokhust and Skorpekh) and those will be new models.

Seeing there has been no official word of lokhust destroyer lord or new model or even rumour/leaked pic not quaranteed. Gw isn't bottomless pool of releases particularly for npc factions. This is already abnormal.

Only destroyer thing we know is coming is lokhust heavy destroyer. Non-heavy isn't quaranteed either.

And if you pull green rod arqument phasing out something in stages isn't uncommon at all for gw. Great finecast purge where faction gets all removed has been told to be sure many times already for example.

If Necrons are npc no one has told necron players yet

Since it appears that GW still has Destroyers in stock, it's to their advantage to keep quiet on any new Lokhust Destroyers until they're ready to be released. Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

 Ghaz wrote:
Since it appears that GW still has Destroyers in stock, it's to their advantage to keep quiet on any new Lokhust Destroyers until they're ready to be released. Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

Does any company pull a product due to be updated months before its updated?

Per WarComs facebook comments, Lokhust Destroyers are not a replacement for the Destroyers we have now, but a separate unit entirely.

https://imgur.com/a/KUvUdjH

They've gotten wrong before, so hard to say.

So we'll have "Lokhust Destroyers", "Skorpekh Destroyers", and normal "Destroyers." But the "Lokhust" and normal destroyers will both be floaty-shooty-bois? Seems redundant.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Per WarComs facebook comments, Lokhust Destroyers are not a replacement for the Destroyers we have now, but a separate unit entirely.

https://imgur.com/a/KUvUdjH

That doesn't mean the existing destroyers will still exist though.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Per WarComs facebook comments, Lokhust Destroyers are not a replacement for the Destroyers we have now, but a separate unit entirely.

https://imgur.com/a/KUvUdjH

BilboSwaggins wrote:
So we'll have "Lokhust Destroyers", "Skorpekh Destroyers", and normal "Destroyers." But the "Lokhust" and normal destroyers will both be floaty-shooty-bois? Seems redundant.

That Warhammer Community facebook thread that references the precedent set by classic marines and primaris marines I think holds true for Necron destroyers or any legacy models/units for any faction for that matter. GW has no financial reason to just trash existing stock if they think they can sell it. As an example, GW is not trashing classic marine kits in favor of the updated and arguably superior rules wise Primaris versions. It is obvious on its face that GW is trying to sunset older kits in a way that doesn't anger longtime customers by instantly making their legacy models obsolete while at the same time giving those same customers a possibly compelling reason to buy the new kits.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
Since it appears that GW still has Destroyers in stock, it's to their advantage to keep quiet on any new Lokhust Destroyers until they're ready to be released. Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

Does any company pull a product due to be updated months before its updated?

Warriors (and the Start Collecting box?) disappeared from the web store a few weeks before the Indomitus pre-order date.

WarCom is still technically correct (Lokhust Destroyers are not in the current codex but will be in the next, ergo new unit) even if they're just renamed old Destroyers.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
WarCom is still technically correct (Lokhust Destroyers are not in the current codex but will be in the next, ergo new unit) even if they're just renamed old Destroyers.

Yep, this exactly. These being an entirely new unit doesn't preclude the old unit from being removed.

 Ghaz wrote:
Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

As long as they don’t dare do it in the middle, in September.

I'm just wondering honestly if this means classic flavour destroyer lords are being given a gun, given the floating ones are being relegated to shooty destroyers now (Even though being a jump unit makes more sense for getting in fast, and stable tripod legs make more sense for bracing a gun.)

 Ghaz wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You're making an assumption that Lokhust isn't just the new name for the normal Destroyer, despite Lokhust obviously referring to the hover Destroyers.

No. I've always assumed that the 'normal' Destroyers would have their fluff retconned to make them Lokhust Destroyers. I use the term 'normal' Destroyers to differentiate them from the new models and rules, much as GW seems to be doing. So while the 'normal' Destroyer Lord has the fluff of a Lokhust Destroyer Lord, it has neither the new rules or model of the Lokhust Destroyer Lord.

I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say here- you're splitting the hair so fine, I think you've completely obliterated it.
If you think there will be a 'lokhust' destroyer lord to replace the current destroyer lord, just say that. If you're saying something else... I honestly have no idea what that might be.

Currently there isn't any evidence to suggest that will actually happen, however.
We've only been shown the single heavy locust.

Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

Its weird, though. The monolith replacement isn't happening until October, and the current one is already gone.

Danny76 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

As long as they don’t dare do it in the middle, in September.

Yeah, brain fart on my part (doesn't August come between September and October this year? )

Dudeface wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Per WarComs facebook comments, Lokhust Destroyers are not a replacement for the Destroyers we have now, but a separate unit entirely.

https://imgur.com/a/KUvUdjH

That doesn't mean the existing destroyers will still exist though.

A classic non-answer from GW's Social Media.

Voss wrote:

Personally I'm expecting the old Destroyers to go on Last Chance to Buy (if they don't just disappear) in late August or early October.

Its weird, though. The monolith replacement isn't happening until October, and the current one is already gone.

Maybe they'd run out of the green bits for the portal/crystal, and didn't want to get any more cast up?

The portal/crystals/green rods were all done by another company. They went for the option that no longer requires them to have to maintain stuff with the third party.

 Overread wrote:
I think that aongle character model is the ranged or alternate weapon version of the new three legged destroyer models

I think it's a destroyer Cryptek, it has what looks like a res orb on its back and some sort of flail like weapons.

 Togusa wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I think that aongle character model is the ranged or alternate weapon version of the new three legged destroyer models

I think it's a destroyer Cryptek, it has what looks like a res orb on its back and some sort of flail like weapons.

The Orb is terrain in the background, it's not a part of the model.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The portal/crystals/green rods were all done by another company. They went for the option that no longer requires them to have to maintain stuff with the third party.

it's for the best. The green rods never quite fit right, always looked a little tacky considering no other faction had them. The flash on them was a pain to clean off without gouging the rod and making it look bad. Replacements in different colors became harder to source for those of us with differing hobby skills. I like the newer design because now all I have to do is experiment with different paint colors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sasori wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I think that aongle character model is the ranged or alternate weapon version of the new three legged destroyer models

I think it's a destroyer Cryptek, it has what looks like a res orb on its back and some sort of flail like weapons.

The Orb is terrain in the background, it's not a part of the model.

the small one that looks like it's connected to his back? I don't think so, I think that part of the model.

Yeah, the orb is pretty clearly part of the model.

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Yeah, the orb is pretty clearly part of the model.

now it could be the same weapon on the canoptek creature, like a laser or something. But, It would be interesting to see a cryptek for destroyers.

You know, I almost feel like GW is restructuring armies so that you can play specific themes. It's most noteable for marines, but it's starting to take shape with the Necrons.

Ya'll need go look at the picture blown up.

It is clearly not a part of the model when you look at it close up. even in the larger picture you can see the back of the model and the curved backplate and the orb does not fit.

EDIT: If you click on the image, it doesn't seem to line up with it being on the backplate of the model. Unless it's got something very weird going on behind it, it looks like it's a part of the background.

 Sasori wrote:
Ya'll need go look at the picture blown up.

It is clearly not a part of the model when you look at it close up. even in the larger picture you can see the back of the model and the curved backplate and the orb does not fit.

EDIT: If you click on the image, it doesn't seem to line up with it being on the backplate of the model.

I'm being honest with you, but I cannot "clearly" see that. Even blown up it looks very clearly to me to be a part of the model.

I don't see anything terrain connected in the image to the orb.

 Sasori wrote:
Ya'll need go look at the picture blown up.

It is clearly not a part of the model when you look at it close up. even in the larger picture you can see the back of the model and the curved backplate and the orb does not fit.

Here's a better pic ...

 Togusa wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
Ya'll need go look at the picture blown up.

It is clearly not a part of the model when you look at it close up. even in the larger picture you can see the back of the model and the curved backplate and the orb does not fit.

EDIT: If you click on the image, it doesn't seem to line up with it being on the backplate of the model.

I'm being honest with you, but I cannot "clearly" see that. Even blown up it looks very clearly to me to be a part of the model.

I don't see anything terrain connected in the image to the orb.

It just doesn't seem to line up with the model, it looks like it's further in the background.

I could be wrong, maybe blowing up the image is distorting it some but it does not appear to be on backplate of the model.

EDIT: I dunno, I'm waffleing back and forth on this. It would make sense ot be a part of the model, but the orb and circular plate below the orb seem very off from the model.

Either way, hopefully they reveal it before too long.

Looks like it's part of the model IMO, and I suspect the things on the arms are some enmitic style guns. Hard to tell though, but to me it doesn't look like the orb matches the lighting in the background.

Did some maths on the Canoptek Doomstalker - it looks like a full sized doomsday cannon on the back to me, and if it's a BS4+ doomsday cannon it's very cost effective at 130 points. Depends on how tough it is. Feels like I end up saying that a lot about Necrons, they're just super squishy because GW never gives us invulns.

Pretty sure, from memory, they name dropped it as being a "Doomsday Blaster", so it's probably got a distinct profile.