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.

Ah FINALLY someone else sees the power of immortals!

Heck I would even drop those 4 extra warriors you have for more scarabs.
Then you could go with 3*4 scarabs with fields.

Not sure you need that phylactory lord though, you could drop it and and some immortals for a 2nd lith!

Since you have no real long range guns it does allow the enemy to outrange you for a while, eldar might be able to stay out of your immortal gun range and fire starcannons at you from afar, that said the starcannons aren't going to do that much damage that the immortals would really care.

Immortals rarely need the orb against shooting, CC is another issue though. Still I think a lith for redeployment might work better than the orb lord. You could then teleport 3 squads a turn.

Hmm, interesting idea. 2nd monolith would be hardcore I think, possibly a better list. Immortals not needing the orb I had considered, but I was thinking I'd try to play with one firebase with 30 immortals and one with 24 warriors, each with its own Lord - the veil Lord to move the immortals around and the cheap orb lord to keep the 24 warriors up (using them primarily to prevent phase out and sit down shooting 24".

The power of immortals isn't really in their shooting I don't think - it's great shooting. But the reason it appeals to me is that I can have 3 x 5 destroyers, or I can have 3 x 10 immortals - both the same exact resilience except that immortals can use more/better cover more easily. And the immortals are not really that much more expensive to have double. So playing VP denial, immortals are way, way better. and increase your phase count.

I think actually that I'll go 10/14 for warriors, and use the 14 man squad to soak assaults and then get monolithed out.

You tempt me though, with very good suggestions. I gain extra scarab engagement, an extra lith for redeployment, and two gauss flux arcs (sheesh) in exchange for a sacrificing some deployment flexibility by having to keep my warriors near an orb.

What would you think if I just hid 10 warriors and kept the other 10 with the immortals? (phase insurance)

I'm gonna second vsurma's comment regarding the second lord. Necron lords are stupidly expensive, and there are just better ways to spend the points.

Personally, I use 2 units of immortals and some Destroyers, as I just can't pass up their range and speed even with escalation concerns. Scarabs are always a terrific choice, and a second Monolith could really be nasty too.

I think you have to have a little more of a moving castle now than you did in 3rd ed, just because of the danger of h2h. Between Immortals veiling around, the Monolith(s) cycling units through the portal, and Destroyers and Scarabs zipping around, Necrons can field a surprisingly fast army that's quite good at staying out of trouble.

I wouldn't DS the 'lith(s) either against most armies and opponents. What they do best is anchor your lines and cycle units.

some good comments g, thanks.

I do like destroyers i just am going for an uber tournament-consistency army. I don't think i am willing to put any destroyers in my list. 30 immortals or at least 24 is where I'm going. the rest is all open.

heck, what do you think of this - would I make a lot of enemies?

Lord, orb, veil
2 x 8 immortals
1 x 10 immortals
2 x 10 warriors
3 x monolith

Be careful with multiple monoliths (especially 3 at 2k), I used 2 and got hit by some preditor lascannon fire (when your opponent uses 2 or 3 preds you know what they will gun at and they usually hang back vs. necrons so the lascannon is in range, but you aren't). Max immortals is great, they are the optimal pick for any necron list IMO, but be careful GW charges like $10.00 USD an Immortal, so if you use say 30, thats $300.00, just for 3 x 10 squads that aren't even troops. I also say stick with 2 lords, people may disagree, but I find that you will love having that second orb. IMO if you have 1 lord with orb and veil and the other orb and destroyer body, you can reliably cover the whole field esp. if you use even 1 or 2 tomb spyders and 1 max 2 moniloths (points pending), almost all of your troops/immortals will always be near (1) a similar unit (2) an orb (3) a spyder (artificer) (4) Moniloth (for that extra get back up)

Anyone who has played with necrons against good assault marine armies knows what i'm talking about.

Agreed, use scarabs as speedbumps vehicle busters if given a chance, but avoid cc at all costs, thats why you always take a veil as well.

with multiple monoliths to prevent people from getting to you and to focus pieplates on assault units, I don't think the scarabs would be as important. I do agree in general with their importance for a footslogging necron army.

going to have to think about it. I think the scarabs and 2 monolith list is probably the best option.