Tactica: 5th edition Necrons codex.

[Infidel]

I still hold a special place for flayed ones. With access to 3 tournaments a month here, I might start entering more than 1 and begin collecting them with prize money. They're not that great in this edition, but I'm willing to bet they'll get some good uses in 6th. Better yet, maybe I'll get some miscasts from a few free boxes and get more free.

The supposed 6th ed rules have numerous buffs to Crons. Open-Topped no longer give +1 to damage chart, AP- no longer have -1 to damage chart, cumulative damage on vehicles, protection from cumulative damage results, better sniper weapon, flyer protection and assault after deepstrike.

Flayed ones become more usable and Deathmark has the potential to change the meta depending on what directed fire does....

[DJ3]

While I'm still not a huge fan of spending too much time discussing what might happen in 6th, I'm personally looking at Monoliths as a huge wild card.

Very minor changes in wording to the Assault or Transport rules could result in Portal-assaults becoming a reality, which would instantly solve most of the problems with Lychguard, while simultaneously avoiding any negative changes that are likely to occur in regards to the survivability of units inside Transports.

Similarly, changes to Ordnance could have a large impact as well. If they make it better at killing vehicles, the Monolith is our only source. Or even the simple removal of the one-weapon restriction on Ordnance opens up the Flux Arcs (and Exile Portal, if applicable) as every-turn weapons, which would be a noticeable boost in firepower and utility.

[Infidel]

While I'm still not a huge fan of spending too much time discussing what might happen in 6th, I'm personally looking at Monoliths as a huge wild card.

Very minor changes in wording to the Assault or Transport rules could result in Portal-assaults becoming a reality, which would instantly solve most of the problems with Lychguard, while simultaneously avoiding any negative changes that are likely to occur in regards to the survivability of units inside Transports.

Similarly, changes to Ordnance could have a large impact as well. If they make it better at killing vehicles, the Monolith is our only source. Or even the simple removal of the one-weapon restriction on Ordnance opens up the Flux Arcs (and Exile Portal, if applicable) as every-turn weapons, which would be a noticeable boost in firepower and utility.

I think portal-charging Spyder or Scarabs are scarier than Lychguards tbh.

[DJ3]

I think portal-charging Spyder or Scarabs are scarier than Lychguards tbh.

Scarabs would obviously benefit as well, but Scarabs get by just fine as is--the combination of Stealth, 3 wounds (potentially being replenished by spyders), and Beast movement is already a suitable replacement for a Transport vehicle in terms of gameplay. But there are things they just aren't good at killing, particularly anything that's WS5+ or has FNP, and no amount of added speed solves those problems.

It strikes me as a relevant problem because we've been seeing similar comments in the thread here--many Necron players are having problems killing anything above simple MEQ (and even just MEQ in some cases) in significant numbers, because our overall most efficient weapons available (Tesla, Scarabs, even Wraiths to a degree) just aren't great at doing so. We don't have an abundance of AP1-3 weaponry to deal with it from afar (Plasma-style), while we do have some Power Weapon options to deal with it in CC--the main problem being that those units have problems of their own which aren't easily overcome currently.

Lychguard, rather obviously created as a toned-down Terminator equivalent, are exactly what should be filling the "hey, I sure would like to have a unit to go kill some MEQ+ guys" role for a lot of these armies, but their relative shortcomings (read as: no Land Raider) put it somewhere between impractical and impossible currently.

Added speed could potentially make Lychguard viable, which is far more valuable than making Scarabs better, as I think their inability to properly fulfill their intended role is beginning to stand out more and more as we see the way people are trending with their Necron builds (i.e. Annihilation Barges, Tesla Immortals, mini-Farms, Imotekh). You can make a very shooty Space Marine army that's anchored by a single unit of TH/SS Terminators (see: virtually every Vulkan army ever), but Lychguard can't even come close to filling a similar role--generally, removing a specific enemy unit that your shooting isn't viable or efficient against. That's not to say that even Portal-assaults would bring them up to that level (because it wouldn't) but it might make it conceivable that they could become at least functional in that capacity, which might be all some of these army builds really need from them to solve (or at least mitigate) their MEQ+ problem.

[Infidel]

I was more thinking along the line of hiding the scarabs, buff it up and then charge out of a deepstriking Monolith to eat a whole flank worth of vehicles.

I personally think rather than expecting being able to charge out of portals, being able to charge out of deepstrike is probably a great deal more plausible, albeit with certain drawbacks (see: Defence Fire).

I'm rather looking forward to the day where instead of teleporting the shooty court, teleporting the blob with 5 shield Lychguards and being able to soak a turn of fire (bounce some back too) and then eat a squad in CC.

[Necr0n]

I was more thinking along the line of hiding the scarabs, buff it up and then charge out of a deepstriking Monolith to eat a whole flank worth of vehicles.

I personally think rather than expecting being able to charge out of portals, being able to charge out of deepstrike is probably a great deal more plausible, albeit with certain drawbacks (see: Defence Fire).

I'm rather looking forward to the day where instead of teleporting the shooty court, teleporting the blob with 5 shield Lychguards and being able to soak a turn of fire (bounce some back too) and then eat a squad in CC.

A big problem with Teleporting Scarabs would be the size of the unit. Usually scarabs, pre-assault are to be found in large quantities such as 10-15 bases (taking advantage of spyders), and such a unit should be impossible to be placed 2" of the Monolith's portal. Given the size of their bases (terminator base) and the need for large numbers in orded to be effective, I'd say even though it sounds good, it wouldn't be as helpful.

Also, as DJ3 said, they already have a pretty nice speed. 6" + D6" + 12" is actually good. Plus the 2" you get when you make new scarabs!

PS: To answer any possible questions: If you teleport less, that would mean you're not taking advantage of their most imortant strength, the spyders.

[DJ3]

A big problem with Teleporting Scarabs would be the size of the unit. Usually scarabs, pre-assault are to be found in large quantities such as 10-15 bases (taking advantage of spyders), and such a unit should be impossible to be placed 2" of the Monolith's portal.

Didn't even take that into account, and it's a rather huge deal. It's commonly accepted that 15 25mm models can come through the Portal--it would be a lot fewer for Scarabs.

[SideshowLucifer]

I'm really waiting to see how Deathmarks will turn out. Currently, I love using them and if they get better, then I'm all for it. I think I'm one of the few people who does not use the Eldritch Lance Court at all. I tend to go with Staves of Light and Mind Shackle Scarabs with some porting via veil and monoliths.

[Alsiaie]

I'm really waiting to see how Deathmarks will turn out. Currently, I love using them and if they get better, then I'm all for it. I think I'm one of the few people who does not use the Eldritch Lance Court at all. I tend to go with Staves of Light and Mind Shackle Scarabs with some porting via veil and monoliths.

I think deathmarks would be much better if they didn't have to mark a unit that is already on the battlefield. If you want the 2+, either you're deploying second or deep striking them.

[Infidel]

Didn't even take that into account, and it's a rather huge deal. It's commonly accepted that 15 25mm models can come through the Portal--it would be a lot fewer for Scarabs.

By looking at it, i guess about 8 bases. But if you're getting the charge off without the fear of them being blasted to bits, i'd say a smaller swarm is worth it, and there's nothing stopping you from pulling the Spyders thru the next turn.

[SideshowLucifer]

I think deathmarks would be much better if they didn't have to mark a unit that is already on the battlefield. If you want the 2+, either you're deploying second or deep striking them.

Well the reactive deep striking is what I usually do with them, and not usually in front of said unit to be shot to pieces either.

[IcedAnimals]

I am looking for some opinions on Tomb blades vs Destroyers. Weapon wise the Destroyer comes out slightly on top against marines where the tomb blade is slightly on top vs guard. They are both killing small amounts of models per turn (2-3). Tomb blades are half cost and have better mobility.

I have been recently been test running 3 units. 5 tomb blades with stealth and str 6 blast weapons. 5 destroyers, and 3 heavy destroyers. AV4 weaponry being as rare as it is. if something is going to penetrate my 4+ save it is almost always also going to pen my 3+ save. So I have yet to try that upgrade on the blades. However stealth gets me that benefit without worrying about it being ignored (by most stuff). I find the blast weapon tends to get as many or more hits as the TL tesla and doubling t3 helps with certain armies I have faced. Ignoring the heavy destroyers for now since they have a completely different roll from the other 2, I am curious on peoples opinions. So far the blades seem to be the better buy and in every game they perform better than their destroyer counterparts.

[Buddha777]

I am looking for some opinions on Tomb blades vs Destroyers. Weapon wise the Destroyer comes out slightly on top against marines where the tomb blade is slightly on top vs guard. They are both killing small amounts of models per turn (2-3). Tomb blades are half cost and have better mobility.

I have been recently been test running 3 units. 5 tomb blades with stealth and str 6 blast weapons. 5 destroyers, and 3 heavy destroyers. AV4 weaponry being as rare as it is. if something is going to penetrate my 4+ save it is almost always also going to pen my 3+ save. So I have yet to try that upgrade on the blades. However stealth gets me that benefit without worrying about it being ignored (by most stuff). I find the blast weapon tends to get as many or more hits as the TL tesla and doubling t3 helps with certain armies I have faced. Ignoring the heavy destroyers for now since they have a completely different roll from the other 2, I am curious on peoples opinions. So far the blades seem to be the better buy and in every game they perform better than their destroyer counterparts.

Not alot of experience with tomb blades in this edition but I do have a ton with destroyers. Destroyers can be great in units of 4-5 if you have either a solid phalanx or you have an all mobile force and need what is essentially a harassing and skirmish unit. They can pop transports and can give MEQs fits. However (emphasis needs adding), they are pricey and the necron force already has alot of anti-infantry shooting. Yes, destroyer do add that punch against 3+ save, and indeed is likley the reason you're taking them, but with abundant transports and cover you must temper your expectations to not taking chunks of enemy units away. Use them as harassers and they should meet those expectations. However (yup there it is again) since they are best as skirmishers so are tomb blades. If you are not needed that AP3 firepower then the undead bikies seem to be the better option.

Heavy destroyers, on the other hand, I view as essential if you arn't running a lance court or 2. You need LR high strength firepower and these can be a great buy as they are tough as nails, especially in cover. However (seem to need this word alot when talking about destroyers), for basically half the cost you can have a lance cryptek that does essentially the same job with a bit less survivability.

So, in tl:dr summation, destroyers are great as mobile skirmishers and heavy ds are great for that needed long range firepower .... both assuming you don't already have a better unit. Good luck.

[SideshowLucifer]

I still don't get all the lance love. If it was a real lance, then I could see it, but honestly, just has no appeal to me.

[Infidel]

I still don't get all the lance love. If it was a real lance, then I could see it, but honestly, just has no appeal to me.

35pt S8 AP2 Assult 36" gun that can be fired out of AV13 bunker or hidden inside a blob of metalic alative wounds that can shoot on the move?? Yes please.

Just a reminder, a 180pt lance chrono court bests Longfangs in point-efficiency when it comes to killing AV12 and besides a range disadvantage, they are infinitely better at killing big stuff like Meph and Paladins.

[Nostro]

35pt S8 AP2 Assult 36" gun that can be fired out of AV13 bunker or hidden inside a blob of metalic alative wounds that can shoot on the move?? Yes please.

This. Don't picture them as dark/bright lances that lack the Lance rule, or meltas that don't get AP1 and the Melta rule, but think of them as missile launchers that got extra AP (yay TEQs!) and Assault (yay fire on the move!) for a minor range reduction.

[SideshowLucifer]

I guess I'm just usually happy with staves of light for that purpose. Vehicles are rarely a problem for me, I need massed fire to thin enemy units. To each their own though, at least we have a codex where we have choices. I saw a list win an event here I would have never taken myself..almost all close combat units.

[Infidel]

I guess I'm just usually happy with staves of light for that purpose. Vehicles are rarely a problem for me, I need massed fire to thin enemy units. To each their own though, at least we have a codex where we have choices. I saw a list win an event here I would have never taken myself..almost all close combat units.

Crons can put out a mean CC list in the form of 12 Wraiths, 6~9 Spyders and a million Scarab swarms with NF cover. Back that up with some shooting to supress enemy mech/peel away bubble-wraps and you have a very strong list.

[Str10_hurts]

On a new subject, I was impressed by the storm cryptec. The voltalic stave is amazing. (note: I use the haywire effect as an abillity so does not suffer from the weapons ap-) It does have a short range but man does it disable vehicles to useless fast with 4 shots, each hit glancing or even penetrate if lucky! And the lightning field is actually a nice upgrade too.

The transmorgification cryptec is not near as good as I hoped. The tremor stave needs to hit to get his quake into effect and is nothing more than a S4 blast. The cubicle is a little better upgrade than the lighting field but not by much (I need to play against more combat orientated armies to figure that out).
So I am thinking of trying out the harbringer of despair with nightmare shroud instead of the transmorgification cryptec. (in 1000 points on a 4x4 table with lots of scarabs,wraiths and immortals I see no need to invest in the teleport ability)\

Anyone else have cool findings exept that destruction cryptecs are (obviously) good and eternety give good synergy to some units.

[DJ3]

On a new subject, I was impressed by the storm cryptec. The voltalic stave is amazing. (note: I use the haywire effect as an abillity so does not suffer from the weapons ap-)

No offense, but there's really no basis at all to claim Voltaic Staff Haywire hits don't apply the AP- modifier. It's not as if it's a separate ability being performed--it's directly tied to the hits of the weapon. You can't just insert a separate step where the weapon rolls to hit, and then you go "okay, well, it's not the weapon anymore! no AP- for me!" and roll Haywire on those hits the weapon caused.

I can understand why you'd be having quite a bit more success with Storm Crypteks if you're choosing to play it that way, but it's really not a proper interpretation.