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.

That's what I like about DDA's in TAC lists they can move 12in to get in range with their Flayers and maybe score or if the Doomsday Cannon is needed at full strength then by all means hold still. Obviously, choice targets can hide from him but with Fly this is less of a problem. As stated before, the meta doesn't really call for the full strength cannon shots so I'm happy to move around. I always take varied AT platforms to compensate for the iniquities each unit has.

 Xyxel wrote:
Convergence of Dominion models are buildings/vehicles - can't they be placed within 3" of batleffield terrains?
Objective secured T8 W10 models nicely defend home objectives and block enemy deepstrike zones.

@Matt Swain
How many Wraiths lost their canoptek lives for this? Looks nice!

3.

Oh, one way i went against the instructions was hard but worth it. I cur the big wraith armor panels apart to make them fit better, just kept scoring them with an xacto knife along the lines , and carefully poked thru the thin plastic at the rim of the energy node recess.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're all arguing about DDA or DS, look at the tesseract ark's big gun.it has 3 modes.


Heavy anti tank mod has a 36" range, s8, ap3, d6 dhots and dam. Somewhat better than a DDA or DW on low power. Not as good as high power. Can move and fire but at -1 to hit. If he already has a-1 to be hit you lose nothing.

It has 2 other modes including a flamer type attack that has a 12" range, assault d6, hits automatically and wounds non vehicles on a 2+, only 1d but has a 3AP

Another mode has flat 3 damage, -3 ap and s5 and 24" range

There's a video above on how to turn 2 barges into one tesserct ark and its a good idea to do it. The ark is also survivable and had QS with a 4++ save.

The T7 from the TA Fells bad since the new QS makes it so ist has only an effect against S6 Weapons

Surtr wrote:
The T7 from the TA Fells bad since the new QS makes it so ist has only an effect against S6 Weapons

Yes, however I point out that the TA's QS has a 4++ save, apparently to reflect that the TA was one of the few units to have QS and a inv save earlier.

I am after getting a TA at some point as well, which is why I havent quite comited to picking up the Doomstalker yet.

I think I'm likely to regardless,. just to say I have one, but I am not certain. Courtesy of my country still not having the damn virus under control I dont think I'll be able to get any games in outside of TTS for a few months yet

Remember you can make a proxy with 2 barges, see the video in this thread.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Matt Swain wrote:
If you want to do FW necron units, especially the tomb stalker/sentinel, I recommend you pick up a box of wraiths and convert them.

I don't even know if failcast or farceworld has them available, and even if they do you can bet 3 wraiths are cheaper.

Also, if you want a tessaract ark (AND YOU SHOULD!) there's a DIY for that too, costs more but still less than a FCFW one.

I have not made a Tesseract ark like this guy did with the two barges (I got a budget resin one) but if I did I would make one change i recommend. The bit at the end where he cut the vertical curved piece and covered the end with greenstuff. Instead of green stuff use the necron symbol piece from the command barge's dias to cover that hole at the end.

 Matt Swain wrote:

 Xyxel wrote:
Convergence of Dominion models are buildings/vehicles - can't they be placed within 3" of batleffield terrains?
Objective secured T8 W10 models nicely defend home objectives and block enemy deepstrike zones.

@Matt Swain
How many Wraiths lost their canoptek lives for this? Looks nice!

3.

Oh, one way i went against the instructions was hard but worth it. I cur the big wraith armor panels apart to make them fit better, just kept scoring them with an xacto knife along the lines , and carefully poked thru the thin plastic at the rim of the energy node recess.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're all arguing about DDA or DS, look at the tesseract ark's big gun.it has 3 modes.


Heavy anti tank mod has a 36" range, s8, ap3, d6 dhots and dam. Somewhat better than a DDA or DW on low power. Not as good as high power. Can move and fire but at -1 to hit. If he already has a-1 to be hit you lose nothing.

It has 2 other modes including a flamer type attack that has a 12" range, assault d6, hits automatically and wounds non vehicles on a 2+, only 1d but has a 3AP

Another mode has flat 3 damage, -3 ap and s5 and 24" range

There's a video above on how to turn 2 barges into one tesserct ark and its a good idea to do it. The ark is also survivable and had QS with a 4++ save.

The DS, the DDA and the TA all suffer from the same issue though; the d6 shots + d6 or d3 damage is, in it's very nature, unreliable. It's always gonna feel good when you roll hot on them but personally I'd pick consistency every time. Knowing how much damage you're gonna do if your enemy fails a save is dead handy for planning out a turn.

On that note I actually think our most reliable codex anti tank is a LHD with the gauss destructor. At -4 ap it basically puts anything that's got one onto its invun and then you're guaranteed at least 3 damage from that 3d3 roll if your opponent fails their save. There was a list recently that ran 6 LDHs to place second in a tournament. I'll see if I cant find it for you guys because it was pretty interesting.

Now if we had a strat to turn d6 shots into flat 4 or something I'd run 3 DS with a technomancer every time.

Heres a link to the goonhammer article where they talk about that list
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-9th-four-by-four-pt-1/

TheNEWnew wrote:

 Matt Swain wrote:

 Xyxel wrote:
Convergence of Dominion models are buildings/vehicles - can't they be placed within 3" of batleffield terrains?
Objective secured T8 W10 models nicely defend home objectives and block enemy deepstrike zones.

@Matt Swain
How many Wraiths lost their canoptek lives for this? Looks nice!

3.

Oh, one way i went against the instructions was hard but worth it. I cur the big wraith armor panels apart to make them fit better, just kept scoring them with an xacto knife along the lines , and carefully poked thru the thin plastic at the rim of the energy node recess.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're all arguing about DDA or DS, look at the tesseract ark's big gun.it has 3 modes.


Heavy anti tank mod has a 36" range, s8, ap3, d6 dhots and dam. Somewhat better than a DDA or DW on low power. Not as good as high power. Can move and fire but at -1 to hit. If he already has a-1 to be hit you lose nothing.

It has 2 other modes including a flamer type attack that has a 12" range, assault d6, hits automatically and wounds non vehicles on a 2+, only 1d but has a 3AP

Another mode has flat 3 damage, -3 ap and s5 and 24" range

There's a video above on how to turn 2 barges into one tesserct ark and its a good idea to do it. The ark is also survivable and had QS with a 4++ save.

The DS, the DDA and the TA all suffer from the same issue though; the d6 shots + d6 or d3 damage is, in it's very nature, unreliable. It's always gonna feel good when you roll hot on them but personally I'd pick consistency every time. Knowing how much damage you're gonna do if your enemy fails a save is dead handy for planning out a turn.

On that note I actually think our most reliable codex anti tank is a LHD with the gauss destructor. At -4 ap it basically puts anything that's got one onto its invun and then you're guaranteed at least 3 damage from that 3d3 roll if your opponent fails their save. There was a list recently that ran 6 LDHs to place second in a tournament. I'll see if I cant find it for you guys because it was pretty interesting.

Now if we had a strat to turn d6 shots into flat 4 or something I'd run 3 DS with a technomancer every time.

Heres a link to the goonhammer article where they talk about that list
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-9th-four-by-four-pt-1/

The skorpekh heavy destroyer has a weapon that does 3d3 dam, this nearly guarantees you 4 -5 dam and an average of 6.

Hi people ! Necrons are pretty much a shooty army, but now they have some nice CC oriented options.

What do you think is our best CC option that should be included in a list to deal with the CC units of our opponent on the table ?

A lot of people told me that Spyders supported by technomancers with the canoptek control node was our best option.

What is your take on the subject ?

Wraith are the best CC option. They can operate alone, no need for techno, or chronomancer.

 p5freak wrote:
Wraith are the best CC option. They can operate alone, no need for techno, or chronomancer.

Yeah I'd probably agree. The 4++ and 12" movement makes them a lot more independent. They can also be buffed by the technomancer too so they hit on 3s, plus wounding MEQ on 3s is never bad either. Sure spyders wound T4 opponents on 2s but a full squad of 3 being buffed by a technomancer with the fail safe overcharger and control node is gonna mince pretty much anything they charge anyway. Personally I think its a toss up between skorpekh destroyers and spyders for second place, if you want to start a cc threat on the board at least. The skorpekh destroyers being slightly faster and more independent, much like the wraiths.

 p5freak wrote:
Wraith are the best CC option. They can operate alone, no need for techno, or chronomancer.

Well, I'd also consider Skorpekh Destroyers.
They are a decent counter strike force which can operate well in a congested board center.

Question:

What do you think about using a single Understrength unit of Warriors (9 models) in a Ghost Ark, with either a Lord (for melee) or Royal Warden (shoot n scoot) for taking midfield, or even backline, objectives?

I know that size + RP is the big protection for warriors, but given Reapers, for the firepower, a character for protection, and the Ghost Ark's healing, it should be able to punch down a flank, as long as you can hide from the enemy's firepower concentration.

Anyone given it a spin?

Wakshaani wrote:
Question:

What do you think about using a single Understrength unit of Warriors (9 models) in a Ghost Ark, with either a Lord (for melee) or Royal Warden (shoot n scoot) for taking midfield, or even backline, objectives?

I know that size + RP is the big protection for warriors, but given Reapers, for the firepower, a character for protection, and the Ghost Ark's healing, it should be able to punch down a flank, as long as you can hide from the enemy's firepower concentration.

Anyone given it a spin?

Are you still allowed to do this in matched play? I seem to recall something about that only being allowed in 8th if the understrength unit was in an auxiliarry detachment but I might be totally misremembering that. If you are allowed to that would be pretty nice actually, it always irked me there was no way to transport characters and units with the ark.Might be nice with a hand of the phaeron overlord, two ghost arks, and 10x + 9x reaper warriors.

Wakshaani wrote:
Question:

What do you think about using a single Understrength unit of Warriors (9 models) in a Ghost Ark, with either a Lord (for melee) or Royal Warden (shoot n scoot) for taking midfield, or even backline, objectives?

I know that size + RP is the big protection for warriors, but given Reapers, for the firepower, a character for protection, and the Ghost Ark's healing, it should be able to punch down a flank, as long as you can hide from the enemy's firepower concentration.

Anyone given it a spin?

You can't take 9 Warriors in a Matched Play game (what most people play). I really like Ghost Arks; but they're not really useful as a Transport...which is odd being a DEDICATED transport

However, it has the firepower of a min-squad of necron warriors for only 15 points more. That 15 points nets you: a rather tanky vehicle for your opponent to split fire on; +1d3 warriors per turn (which pays for itself the first time you use it on average); and an extra 3 (2 since you lose the +1 aura from Characters) inches of movement on turn one if you slap a squad of Reaper warriors inside to advance out and up the board turn one (combine with 6" pregame move? haha nice); and sometimes a refuge for later-game hiding of damaged warrior squads to snag last-minute objectives potentially.

It's a great buy....but DO NOT use it as a transport. Basically all non-Open topped transports are largely garbage outside of very specific uses. Which means that it is pretty good that the Ghost Ark is very powerful for its points even if you ignore the fact that it is a transport at all.

 TheArchmagos wrote:

Wakshaani wrote:
Question:

What do you think about using a single Understrength unit of Warriors (9 models) in a Ghost Ark, with either a Lord (for melee) or Royal Warden (shoot n scoot) for taking midfield, or even backline, objectives?

I know that size + RP is the big protection for warriors, but given Reapers, for the firepower, a character for protection, and the Ghost Ark's healing, it should be able to punch down a flank, as long as you can hide from the enemy's firepower concentration.

Anyone given it a spin?

Are you still allowed to do this in matched play? I seem to recall something about that only being allowed in 8th if the understrength unit was in an auxiliarry detachment but I might be totally misremembering that. If you are allowed to that would be pretty nice actually, it always irked me there was no way to transport characters and units with the ark.Might be nice with a hand of the phaeron overlord, two ghost arks, and 10x + 9x reaper warriors.

I'm not 100% sure. There's a notation that "If you don't have enough models, you can field what you have: this is called an undersized squad" in the main rules, but there's not another mention of them I don't *think*, so … not sure.

I'd love to know tho.

Pg. 280 muster armies says you cant use understrength units in matched play.

Bitharne wrote:

It's a great buy....but DO NOT use it as a transport. Basically all non-Open topped transports are largely garbage outside of very specific uses. Which means that it is pretty good that the Ghost Ark is very powerful for its points even if you ignore the fact that it is a transport at all.

Nah its a great transport for a destroyer bomb of 3 skorpid lords andttwo lochust lords. /sarcasm.... unless?

 p5freak wrote:
Pg. 280 muster armies says you cant use understrength units in matched play.

But it notes that you CAN use them in an Auxillary Detachment.

Which is 2 CPs.

2 CPs to take one less guy? Not really a plan.
…

DRAT!

Thought I might have been on to something here.

Bitharne wrote:

Wakshaani wrote:
Question:

What do you think about using a single Understrength unit of Warriors (9 models) in a Ghost Ark, with either a Lord (for melee) or Royal Warden (shoot n scoot) for taking midfield, or even backline, objectives?

I know that size + RP is the big protection for warriors, but given Reapers, for the firepower, a character for protection, and the Ghost Ark's healing, it should be able to punch down a flank, as long as you can hide from the enemy's firepower concentration.

Anyone given it a spin?

You can't take 9 Warriors in a Matched Play game (what most people play). I really like Ghost Arks; but they're not really useful as a Transport...which is odd being a DEDICATED transport

However, it has the firepower of a min-squad of necron warriors for only 15 points more. That 15 points nets you: a rather tanky vehicle for your opponent to split fire on; +1d3 warriors per turn (which pays for itself the first time you use it on average); and an extra 3 (2 since you lose the +1 aura from Characters) inches of movement on turn one if you slap a squad of Reaper warriors inside to advance out and up the board turn one (combine with 6" pregame move? haha nice); and sometimes a refuge for later-game hiding of damaged warrior squads to snag last-minute objectives potentially.

It's a great buy....but DO NOT use it as a transport. Basically all non-Open topped transports are largely garbage outside of very specific uses. Which means that it is pretty good that the Ghost Ark is very powerful for its points even if you ignore the fact that it is a transport at all.

Transports are extra bad now with the command phase happening before movement - you can't even buff the unit coming out of the transport. I totally suspect this will change in the first chapter approved. I think you are correct that the ghost arch is pretty great on it's own merit. Throw 10 warriors with reapers in there or just leave it empty to reduce the value of shooting it.

Yeah command phase sounds alright on paper but in reality anything outside scoring-related happening in the command phase really messes with things.

I hate it. Its one of the few things about 9th i really, really hope they just eratta out at some point.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Yeah command phase sounds alright on paper but in reality anything outside scoring-related happening in the command phase really messes with things.

I hate it. Its one of the few things about 9th i really, really hope they just eratta out at some point.

Me too. It just needs to happen AFTER the movement phase IMO. They just trying to port over things from sigmar without really thinking it through. Sigmar doesn't really have a ton of units that transport or come in from reserves so that phase happening first in sigmar doesn't have these negative effects like it does in 40k.

Curious if theres something i missed about Tomb Blades.

Theyre warriors on jetbikes but essentially theyre immortals with a jetpack is a better comparison.

2x Immortals w/ Gauss = 34pts
1 Tombblade w/ Ignore Cover and 3+ Sv = 36pts

Same Toughness, overall Wounds, saves, and damage output (2x rapid1 vs 1x rapid2), but the Tombblade also has Fly, 14" movement, -1 to hit protection, ignores cover built in, and access to that Assault stratagem in a pinch.
The only real drawback is Tombblades arent Troops (obviously) and its 3 less attacks than the 2 immortals, so they dont wanna be anywhere near melee. But with that amount of speed and dakka they shouldnt need melee.

i havnt heard anything on tombblades other than a casual mention that they are Core for some reason. The more i look at this things the more i wish i built/painted them first instead of lychguard lol (different role entirely but order of things priority basically is what im getting at)

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Curious if theres something i missed about Tomb Blades.

Theyre warriors on jetbikes but essentially theyre immortals with a jetpack is a better comparison.

2x Immortals w/ Gauss = 34pts
1 Tombblade w/ Ignore Cover and 3+ Sv = 36pts

Same Toughness, overall Wounds, saves, and damage output (2x rapid1 vs 1x rapid2), but the Tombblade also has Fly, 14" movement, -1 to hit protection, ignores cover built in, and access to that Assault stratagem in a pinch.
The only real drawback is Tombblades arent Troops (obviously) and its 3 less attacks than the 2 immortals, so they dont wanna be anywhere near melee. But with that amount of speed and dakka they shouldnt need melee.

i havnt heard anything on tombblades other than a casual mention that they are Core for some reason. The more i look at this things the more i wish i built/painted them first instead of lychguard lol (different role entirely but order of things priority basically is what im getting at)

They are phenomenal. Not much use for the ignore cover though. Solar pulse is on demand when you need it. shadowloom is decent though to put on a few of them for a 5++. For me they have been crucial so far.

Between 20 warriors with veil and 9 tomb blades you can easily bully pretty much anything infantry off the objective of your choice. Between the 2 units that 76 str 5 ap-2...Can easily have them shooting at 2+ to hit reroll 1's. Pretty versatile and awesome in lots of dynasties too for tomb blades.
Sautehk/Mephrite benefit the most.
Honestly their biggest issue is they are a pain in the ass to build and paint. So I'm sure a lot of people just having got around to getting them at full strength just as we haven't. Realistically all of their weapon options are good too. If not for the fact 2+ saves are so prevalent in the game today - I would probably go with particle casters. Youd save 5 points and maximize out on # of shots and effective range.

Yeah i just finished assembling 9 of them i can fully understand the pain of assembly. Mostly in the shieldvanes department (the hell GW there needs to be 2 points of contact on something that "floats" over the model!!)

Magnetized their weapons, except the particle castor for now as i am trying to find a way to do that w/o using 1mm magnets (really dont wanna buy magnets for literally 1 unit, and 1mm magnets seem to be difficult to find in the states).

i'd rather have the ability to ignore cover built in because Solar Pulse costs CP and generally whatever i hit with it dies from Reapers alone anyway. Plus i usually have the points floating around anyway.

I swear by Ignores Cover, and I have had a unit of 9 with 6 Blasters 3 Beamers for a while.

I used to get called out for not taking tesla, but look where we are now :p

In the past, i'd agree not taking tesla would be a mistake.
In the currect codex tesla is just worthless. Way too many multiwound models with a decent save floating around and cant increase the exploding 6's to 5's.

Tesla is pretty bad atm. It needs either a built-in splash effect or an actual AP or be stupid, stupid cheap.

edit: Also whats your guys' opinion on crons vs quins? Personally i think we just dumpster on them.
Only person ive come across was using 15 haywire bikes as an excuse for his warriors disappearing. Im like...thats...thats 825pts worth of bikers that on-average wont fully remove a 20man warrior blob unless the dice luck is horrendous for the necron player... being 3x5 squads so i get RP's between.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
In the past, i'd agree not taking tesla would be a mistake.
In the currect codex tesla is just worthless. Way too many multiwound models with a decent save floating around and cant increase the exploding 6's to 5's.

Tesla is pretty bad atm. It needs either a built-in splash effect or an actual AP or be stupid, stupid cheap.

edit: Also whats your guys' opinion on crons vs quins? Personally i think we just dumpster on them.
Only person ive come across was using 15 haywire bikes as an excuse for his warriors disappearing. Im like...thats...thats 825pts worth of bikers that on-average wont fully remove a 20man warrior blob unless the dice luck is horrendous for the necron player... being 3x5 squads so i get RP's between.

If you take the +1 to save archana on a creptek that would really help in that situation too.

I don't think we matchup very well against them actually. If you could talior against them you'd dumpster them for sure with hexmarks and spam tesla but tesla is generally bad and unplayable at this time. Except maybe doom scythes. So you wont have what you need. I would dumpster 15 haywire bikes for sure but if they are spamming troops - they would overrun me I think with my standard build.

key issues. Shadowseer -1w turns our str 5 guns into str 3 weapons.
Crons biggest strength is high AP shooting - completely nullified by every unit in their army.

I don't think I'd have a chance against a competent harlequin player. Unless ofc I was playing full melee crons. Which lots are doing these days. Even then - I'd say they have the edge because quins have better mobility and rerolls.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Curious if theres something i missed about Tomb Blades.

Theyre warriors on jetbikes but essentially theyre immortals with a jetpack is a better comparison.

2x Immortals w/ Gauss = 34pts
1 Tombblade w/ Ignore Cover and 3+ Sv = 36pts

Same Toughness, overall Wounds, saves, and damage output (2x rapid1 vs 1x rapid2), but the Tombblade also has Fly, 14" movement, -1 to hit protection, ignores cover built in, and access to that Assault stratagem in a pinch.
The only real drawback is Tombblades arent Troops (obviously) and its 3 less attacks than the 2 immortals, so they dont wanna be anywhere near melee. But with that amount of speed and dakka they shouldnt need melee.

i havnt heard anything on tombblades other than a casual mention that they are Core for some reason. The more i look at this things the more i wish i built/painted them first instead of lychguard lol (different role entirely but order of things priority basically is what im getting at)

1 model, 2 wounds is lot worse than 2 models　1 wound each.

Also, Immortals have the almighty Obsec unless you're running that one DIY Dynasty code that gives it to everything