# Unlocking the CC Potential of a Necron Army.



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

I've recently thrown myself back into the hobby to discover that the Necrons now have a full(ish) army and codex. (I last gave up at a time when you had to carry around an issue or two of White Dwarf in order to use the necrons.)
The first thing that struck me was the green plastic gauss bitz, which is freakin' sweet. The second thing was the new (new to me) units available, especially those geared towards Close Combat...

...I've spent a month or two looking at the codex before finally deciding to go for it but I've come to realise that my vision of a bad ass CC army is seems damn near impossible, without going to Apocalypse proportions at any rate.

So here's the thing, if I run through some junk can you guys tell me if I've missed anything.

**Surgical rapid re-deploy assualts using the VoD* are pretty much out of the question because-
Wraiths:- are effectively jet bikes. The VoD seems kind of wasted here. 
Flayed Ones:- Would get torn to pieces during the shoot phase, plus I don't think they'd actually do that much damage in an assault. They seem moot.
Tomb Spyders:- Not necron + why would you when they seem to be best used to bolster the main phallanx.
Pariahs: Freakin... YES! Blasters AND armour negating CC attacks. Holy crap it's like these things were made for the oh dear, they're not necron. Can't benefit from teleporting (doesn't stop 'em phazing though _grumblegrumblegrumble_)

**Deep strike craziness.*
Flayed Ones:- I, well, you could but, y'know, and it's like, I don't know, um, and... kinda like, maybe if you have abundant space and points.
Monolith:- using the monolith poses the pretty much the same cons as the VoD, _HOWEVER_ it would certainly draw the fire whilst providing some of it's own. Breaking up CC and the second WBB roll could probably be used to good effect with the Flayed ones. For a turn, maybe two.

**CHARGE!*
It's a possible. If you could use the warriors to sheild the Assault units and then spirit them away to a couple of monoliths that would then leave the way way clear for the assault units to run up and get to work without taking too much damage. However I can't see this working well sub-3/4000pts. Besides, I imagine such a tactic would be better used for setting up a killzone rather than a charge.
However, If all the units charging were wraiths then they could just go straight over the phallanx.

All in all it seems like unlocking the CC potential of the necrons is going to be hella (that's right. I said Hella) difficult. I do have another I dea but it's the sort of thing that would need illustrations.

Any other ideas. Have I missed anything?


----------



## te3b0r (Mar 30, 2009)

Yeah from what I have heard and read cc and the Necrons just dont seem to go hand in hand. I will say I have no first hand experience with them as I am just starting to get my army together though so I may just be crazy!


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Crazy? Nah, dude, I'm fairly sure the "Necrons are not CC" sentiment is going to be the general consensus, which is fair enough. It's just that I spend ages staring longingly at the Pariahs and the Wraiths and the potential they have, then I lament how largely wasted that potential is. It's enough to bring a man to tears.

...Well, maybe not, but still.


----------



## te3b0r (Mar 30, 2009)

Spadge said:


> Crazy? Nah, dude, I'm fairly sure the "Necrons are not CC" sentiment is going to be the general consensus, which is fair enough. It's just that I spend ages staring longingly at the Pariahs and the Wraiths and the potential they have, then I lament how largely wasted that potential is. It's enough to bring a man to tears.
> 
> ...Well, maybe not, but still.


Yeah from what I have been reading in the Codex and online it seems to me that there is a TON of wasted potential with the Necrons. I played 40k in the 3rd ed and it seems like more and more that GW is letting the SM/CM and Orks have there way and everything else is getting nerfed. I understand that the SM/CM and Orks are in all likely hood, very big army groups played and why put your time/energy/money into other ones but there are other armies that people want to play GW!!!


----------



## catalyst (Feb 10, 2009)

The saddest thing is that even if you get pariahs in close combat as they _all_ have warscythes none of their wounds count toward winning combat, so they autmatically lose any combat, and being fearless take all those extra wounds


----------



## TheJackalMan (Feb 29, 2008)

catalyst said:


> The saddest thing is that even if you get pariahs in close combat as they _all_ have warscythes none of their wounds count toward winning combat, so they autmatically lose any combat, and being fearless take all those extra wounds


The fearless part I'm with you on. I've only had bad experiences with Fearless units in CC. 

The Warscythe wounds not counting toward winning combat though? This seems like a misinterpretation. Any wound that is unsaved, thus all wounds caused by the warscythes count toward winning the battle. So get a good to hit roll, then an awesome to wound roll and as long as your opponent didn't get the charge and they're not orks, you're set to win that round of CC.

As for Spadge's ideas, you're correct on pretty much all of them. 

Though, Necrons do have some close combat options. Flayed ones are more or less useless at this point. They can't hold objectives, don't have fleet, and since 5th ed nerfed Deep Strike, can't move after deep striking. 

Wraiths on the other hand are great in packs. Most people don't play them sub-apocalypse because in order to be effective you have to have 2 or 3 full units of 3. This way, they can benefit from WBB if one unit completely drops and this way you just have more of them. 

The next CC choice that you seemed to overlook was the lowly but goodly Scarab Swarms. This is something you'll see some Necron players field, The Scarab Lord. They take a Necron Lord w/ Destroyer body and Warscythe and then take as many scarabs as thier points limit will allow (while still taking troops and other necron units as not to Phase Out) and then they just turbo boost their way in to combat. With a 2+/3+ cover save and the ability to be in CC by 2nd turn, its nice. Also, the scarabs have a ridiculous number of attacks and wounds. You'll see this army devour infantry heavy IG lists and Scout heavy SM lists. Possibly Ork lists if you never let them charge and avoid the Waagh. Oooo, and Tau, yummy.

Also, The C'Tan. They love CC. or love to ruin it for others. The Nightbringer is of course a beast, but since 5th Ed. The Deceiver has been getting more spotlight. With his ability to leave CC by choice and thus ruining and enemy's assault phase, being able to make units take frequent leadership tests, regardless of whether they're fearless or not, he's quite fetching nowadays. He's also a good combination with Pariahs. Since Pariahs make units near by have leadership 7 if not already lower, This makes the Deceiver more effective, And the Deceiver has the ability to make it so the enemy has to roll 6s in CC to hit. So even when not directly in CC, The Deceiver buffs it. 

Otherwise, yes, the Necrons are generally seen as a shooty army. Once you get in to Apocalypse games though, CC is a thing of beauty.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I found a nasty trick vs shooty armies is to take a unit of Wraiths but keep them fairly to the rear at the start. Then I deep strike a Monolith from reserve near pthe enemy, portal through the Wraiths for an assault and BANG. Very nice vs Tau hehe. It gives the Wraiths the chance to assault units that are 36" away.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Firstly, I think I must overlooked something: why can't flayed one's hold objectives (book + edition (my codex is quite old and tatty) and page number?). Not that it really matters as I can't think of any use for them other than to buy manoeuvring time against hordy armies.

Secondly, I like the scarab lord tactic. I'd decided to equip my scarabs with disruption fields and go armoury hunting (I figured with that many attacks I'd at least destroy a weapon). Pairing them with a lord certainly puts a different slant on it. For on the lord wouldn't need the ResOrb and spend the points elsewhere.

As for the monolith idea, I can see how it could gut an army, especially if you had another two squads of wraiths to send in in later rounds, but is it legal to use the the portal immediately after a deep strike. Does the Ponderous special rule kind of negate this? (Sorry guys, it's been 5 years or so, I've got a lot of catching up to do when it comes to the intricacies).

I'm leaving the C'tan alone for a little while, I want to get to grips with the fundamentals of my army first rather than relying on "godly" lambastings. (Though I'm kinda liking the deciever).

Finally, as it seems unlikely that I can simply plough into the enemy (except perhaps for the wraiths) is it worth keeping a CC unit (other than the scarabs) handy for purposes of interception, body guarding and capitalising on any accidentally exposed weaknesses etc.?


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

I do amazingly well with my Necrons in CC.

First off this weekend I played a game vs IG with just infantry. It was an objective mission, and shooting at all those meat shields in cover wasn't going to get me anywhere. So what did I do? I got into close combat with all my units, even my destroyers and they all whooped ass. Before the game I did some mathhammering and figured out an immortal or a destroyer has a 30/1 advantage against an IG infantry model, which gave me better odds than me shooting at them and having them shoot back at me. All it took was two volleys by my destroyers into the HQ to kill their vox, after the head of the snake was cut off I had 20 guardsmen running from a combat with 4 destroyers.

So you cannon just say Necrons are bad in CC, because they are not always.

Secondly I have another favorite list of mine where I take a monolith, flayed ones, destroyer lord, and three units of wraiths. This also kicks ass, the 3+ inv save of the wraith backed up with some friends and the res orb of the destroyer lord really does well even against terminators. This is by far my favorite use of the Necrons.

Usually I will start two units or warriors and a unit of immortals on the board. Use the warriors to engadge and lock down the enemy, then deep strike the monolith on their flank, march out the third squad of warriors. Then I bring my wraiths and destroyer lord in to the same flank, and next turn teleport the immortals to the same flank. It's truley devistating, and the wraiths seem to be able to take on whoever I send them after esp with the lord.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

I also never put dis fields on my scarabs, makes them way too expensive. Instead I prefer to use my wraiths to attack armor. Three wraiths attacking a leman russ that moved 6", have a 50% chance of destroying it completely, not to mention also destroying the battlecannon.


----------



## Gul Torgo (Mar 31, 2008)

I would be very hesitant to field Warriors as CC. Their low initiative makes them _very _vulnerable to sweeping advance, and that's a pretty expensive unit to just disappear off the board like that.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

To be fair NecronCowboy, if I was up against IG I'd assault them too, regardless of objectives. If I remember correctly(and it's been a while) but I'm fairly sure the avergae IG squad would lose CC to an irate rabbit. And with a ResOrb in tow I suppose warriors and immortals alike would possess a certain tenacity. Thank you. I was getting carried away with the idea that Necrons simply die -full stop- in h2h. 
As for the scarabs, we're going to have to agree to disagree. 160pts for 30 (40 if charging) quickly placed attacks that glance on a 6 sounds sweet to me. If you mathhammer it works out at about 6/7 hits (if vehicle didn't move) 3/4 hits (if it hit combat speed). Either way you're looking at a fair chance of immobilising. Plus a swarm with that capabillity is gonna draw a lot of fire off your main force. Tasty tasty.

Gul Torgo: I agree, it's definitely not a primary tactic... unless you're fighting the Guard it seems. Plus, you've always got the VoD and the monoliths if things start going sour.


----------



## slaaneshy (Feb 20, 2008)

I know he costs a fortune, but the Night Bringer is a close combat beast. 

Neccies fare ok in CC against certain armies but poorly against better armoured foes likes SM. On the whole, I find while they can be a capable CC force, they are far better employed shooting.

Large Necron units can often hold up 'better' close combat units in combat for a long time, with their good toughness, save and WBB rule.


----------



## Winst0n (Mar 12, 2009)

i used a squad of 8 warriors and took down a lictor in CC . other than that every time my necrons [scarabs aren't necrons] get in CC they get demolished.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Gul Torgo said:


> I would be very hesitant to field Warriors as CC. Their low initiative makes them _very _vulnerable to sweeping advance, and that's a pretty expensive unit to just disappear off the board like that.


I would be hesitant to field warriors in CC against space marines, but not against IG or Eldar guardians etc. They will at most cause 1 wound a turn, so it will almost always end up with you winning the round or a draw, or rarely you taking a LD test for a 9 or less. So low initiative doesn't really matter if the odds of you having to take a fall back roll are so very low.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Spadge said:


> To be fair NecronCowboy, if I was up against IG I'd assault them too, regardless of objectives. If I remember correctly(and it's been a while) but I'm fairly sure the avergae IG squad would lose CC to an irate rabbit. And with a ResOrb in tow I suppose warriors and immortals alike would possess a certain tenacity. Thank you. I was getting carried away with the idea that Necrons simply die -full stop- in h2h.
> As for the scarabs, we're going to have to agree to disagree. 160pts for 30 (40 if charging) quickly placed attacks that glance on a 6 sounds sweet to me. If you mathhammer it works out at about 6/7 hits (if vehicle didn't move) 3/4 hits (if it hit combat speed). Either way you're looking at a fair chance of immobilising. Plus a swarm with that capabillity is gonna draw a lot of fire off your main force. Tasty tasty.


There are many S6 AP5 weapons out there that will destroy scarabs quite fast, terminators eat them for lunch. Scarabs always look good on paper to me, but just aren't that useful during the game.

One thing I wanted to try with them was to throw them down into cover on top of an objective in a seize ground mission.


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

Spadge said:


> Firstly, I think I must overlooked something: why can't flayed one's hold objectives (book + edition (my codex is quite old and tatty) and page number?).


Because only troops can hold objectives (BRB pp. 90 *Scoring Units*) and Flayed ones are elites.




Spadge said:


> As for the monolith idea, I can see how it could gut an army, especially if you had another two squads of wraiths to send in in later rounds, but is it legal to use the portal immediately after a deep strike. Does the Ponderous special rule kind of negate this? (Sorry guys, it's been 5 years or so, I've got a lot of catching up to do when it comes to the intricacies).


No problems – everyone has a learning curve :grin:. The Monolith may use the portal the turn it Deep Strikes to do anything *except* shoot the particle whip. The new rules count deep strike as moving at cruising speed and disallows any weapons fire when vehicles move that fast (even the flux arc). 



Spadge said:


> Finally, as it seems unlikely that I can simply plough into the enemy (except perhaps for the wraiths) is it worth keeping a CC unit (other than the scarabs) handy for purposes of interception, body guarding and capitalising on any accidentally exposed weaknesses etc.?


No, Necrons are pretty weak in CC. Wraiths, Flayed ones, and Scarabs are your best bet (since you are leaving the C’Tan out of it), but even those units have serious drawbacks. The Wraiths, while the best stat wise, are very expensive and have a prohibitively low wound count. Flayed Ones are the closest thing we have to a standard SM, in fact he’s pretty identical, with a couple of exceptions. But like the Wraith, he doesn’t have a shooting attack and he has no transport available, so he is very limited in mobility. Now he can be teleported by the Monolith, but the Monolith is slow too, and you have to have one where you want to teleport :grin:. Scarabs are the choice I make most of the time. They have a very high number of wounds, and I mostly use them to tar-pit while I bring my ranged fire power to bear on other targets. They will kill things in CC, especially IG, Eldar or Tau, but they have very limited utility vs. MEQ or Orks and Nids.



NecronCowboy said:


> So you cannon just say Necrons are bad in CC, because they are not always.


You can’t take one of the worst CC armies in the game and then say that since Necrons beat them in CC they are good at CC. Necron’s CC ability still sucks, we just happen to be better than IG (usually) or Tau (nearly always). 



NecronCowboy said:


> Secondly I have another favorite list of mine where I take a monolith, flayed ones, destroyer lord, and three units of wraiths. This also kicks ass, the 3+ inv save of the wraith backed up with some friends and the res orb of the destroyer lord really does well even against terminators. This is by far my favorite use of the Necrons.


I agree, it’s fun, but not very cost effective :biggrin: And worst of all, you are going to lose all your Fast FOC slots which means no Destroyers. I’m sorry . . . :cray: . . . I gotta go . . . That’s just too horrible a thing to contemplate.



NecronCowboy said:


> I also never put dis fields on my scarabs, makes them way too expensive. Instead I prefer to use my wraiths to attack armor. Three wraiths attacking a leman russ that moved 6", have a 50% chance of destroying it completely, not to mention also destroying the battlecannon.


Wraiths work fine against anything with an AV of 11 or less, but with AV 12 or better, you’re way better off with Scarabs upgraded to D-Fields (and I’m talking about rear armor AV 12 – remember you hit on the rear armor for non-walker vehicles in CC).


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

> No problems – everyone has a learning curve :grin:. The Monolith may use the portal the turn it Deep Strikes to do anything *except* shoot the particle whip. The new rules count deep strike as moving at cruising speed and disallows any weapons fire when vehicles move that fast (even the flux arc).


The monolith can use the particle whip when it deep strikes, as the weapon can be shot even if the vehicle moves.




> Flayed Ones are the closest thing we have to a standard SM


I'll assume you mean in CC? If so then I don't you could any more wrong, the flayed one has twice as many attacks, higher leadership and get's WBB rolls against most attacks. They also force you to take a LD test before combat to see if you can hit them on better than a 6. I would take the flayed one in CC over the SM any day of the week.



> You can’t take one of the worst CC armies in the game and then say that since Necrons beat them in CC they are good at CC. Necron’s CC ability still sucks, we just happen to be better than IG (usually) or Tau (nearly always).


Where did I say that exactly???



> I agree, it’s fun, but not very cost effective :biggrin: And worst of all, you are going to lose all your Fast FOC slots which means no Destroyers. I’m sorry . . . :cray: . . . I gotta go . . . That’s just too horrible a thing to contemplate.


If you use the wraiths in a smart way, then it shouldn't be a problem. You can't rely on a 200 pt unit with only 4 wounds that basically matches the firepower of a rapid firing unit of warriors. It's actually extremely cost effective as wraiths are a lot cheaper than destroyers and have that awesome 3+ invunerable save.



> Wraiths work fine against anything with an AV of 11 or less, but with AV 12 or better, you’re way better off with Scarabs upgraded to D-Fields (and I’m talking about rear armor AV 12 – remember you hit on the rear armor for non-walker vehicles in CC).


Lol ok one tiny example where scarabs are better. That covers what 2 maybe 3 units in the entire game? So you thinks its better to sit there and try to get 4+ immobilised or weapon destroyeds with glancing?????? Instead you are probally going to lose 4-6 bases of those 16 point scarabs a turn due to S6+ attacks auto killing + failing the saves to cover those due to fearless.


----------



## Gul Torgo (Mar 31, 2008)

NecronCowboy said:


> I would be hesitant to field warriors in CC against space marines, but not against IG or Eldar guardians etc. They will at most cause 1 wound a turn, so it will almost always end up with you winning the round or a draw, or rarely you taking a LD test for a 9 or less. So low initiative doesn't really matter if the odds of you having to take a fall back roll are so very low.


Fair enough. I play a high initiative marine army, so my perspective was colored by that. Plus this weekend my I6 Daemon Prince wiped out a squad of 15 necron warriors in one round via sweeping advance, so it was on my mind :mrgreen:


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Gul Torgo said:


> Fair enough. I play a high initiative marine army, so my perspective was colored by that. Plus this weekend my I6 Daemon Prince wiped out a squad of 15 necron warriors in one round via sweeping advance, so it was on my mind :mrgreen:


Haha yeah I wouldn't go charging 15 Necron warriors into combat with a Daemon Prince any day soon!

The major reason Warriors are bad in CC is the low initiative and not being able to WBB after being swept, but as long as they hold the line they are pretty decent.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Before I go on I gotta thank you gentlemen as this is all indispensible. I was expecting a couple of "keep 'em shooty" comments and nothing more. This is certainly reinforcing my choice to go Necron.

Firstly:- 8 warriors taking down a Lictor? You lucky SOB. You must have been laughing hard when that happened.

Right then,



> Daneel 2.0:
> Because only troops can hold objectives (BRB pp. 90 Scoring Units) and Flayed ones are elites.
> No problems – everyone has a learning curve . The Monolith may use the portal the turn it Deep Strikes to do anything except shoot the particle whip. The new rules count deep strike as moving at cruising speed and disallows any weapons fire when vehicles move that fast (even the flux arc).
> 
> ...


Thank you muchly, I shall bear this all in mind.

It's starting to become clear that I may have got carried away upon seeing that 2 for intiative and thus completely ignored the s4 t4 and, of course, the ol' WBB rule. It seems that the only races a squad of warriors should never assault are the Orks and the Nids. And probably Daemons as well. Granted the low I is a disadvantage but warriors should be able to hold their own against marines if, and only if, it's strictly necessary. Obviously I'm referring to basic troops. I'd never willingly send a squad of warriors against a squad of terminators if I had the choice to do otherwise.

Flayed ones - ah, I hope not to come across fickle - maybe I wrote them off too quickly. However you look at it it's still 180pts for upto 30 solid attacks + special rules. Unless the dice are really against you it seems a full squad of Flayed will win a combat againts any basic troop choice (apart from maybe genestalers). In fact so long as you don't expect them to take down super crazy characters or CC orientated squads - such as teminators, well drugged wyches and possibly ogryns - then they seem like a potentially useful choice. Providing you can get them into battle of course. It's certainly a worthwhile consideration if you have the points. 

The wraith vs. destroyers debate seems to be a matter of taste. Either way you look at it both units are fast, both will draw fire and both will provide at least 3 S6 attacks per model. The only issue I have with Wraiths is that for the type of unit they are I think they could stand to have +1 to either WS,T or W (preferably WS), balanced by a minor point increase in order to make them truly worthwhile (not saying they're not already fairly worthwhile).

As for the scarab debate. It's a tough call but think as a matter of personal taste I'd Wraiths purely for anti-infantry/ character purposes, though I'd still take a crack at any tanks I happened across. The scarabs aren't quite so versatile and, with DFs, they'd probably stand a much better chance of neutralising a tank than they would otherwise neutralising a squad. 

Finally, I submit for your approval, the following potential tactic.

Step 1










Fairly self explanatory. Both armies are within range to capitalise on rapid fire and make charges. So fronts within 12". 

Step 2










The lord VoDs himself plus (preferably 10 strong) squad of immortals to the enemy's rear/ flank. Hopefully draw some of the attention otherwise directed to the front. The pariahs, previously shielded by the immortals and Lord, move in. Armies open fire. Pariahs make a Run! roll if they need to get closer.

Step 3










Pariahs charge in and get slicing.

Now, this is just the bare bones. You could throw in flank support in the form of wraiths and/or destroyers and it'd probably be best to have a second lord with a ResOrb to stay with and maintain the phallanx.
I know it's risky but I think it might potentially be a solid tactic against a Daemon/ terminator/ armoury heavy army.

Thoughts?


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

NecronCowboy said:


> The monolith can use the particle whip when it deep strikes, as the weapon can be shot even if the vehicle moves.


Well, that’s debatable, but I understand your point. I happen to disagree, but acknowledge that, due to the old language, a raw reading may seem to support that position.



NecronCowboy said:


> I'll assume you mean in CC? If so then I don't you could any more wrong, the flayed one has twice as many attacks, higher leadership and get's WBB rolls against most attacks. They also force you to take a LD test before combat to see if you can hit them on better than a 6. I would take the flayed one in CC over the SM any day of the week.


No, I didn’t mean just in CC. I meant all around, and I didn’t say that they were identical. If you were to look at just CC, and ignored how the units got to CC then the Flayed Ones have a slight advantage and will probably win through attrition eventually (though it will probably take about 4 or 5 turns). If you include ranged attacks though, the Flayed Ones lose out pretty quickly.



NecronCowboy said:


> If you use the wraiths in a smart way, then it shouldn't be a problem. You can't rely on a 200 pt unit with only 4 wounds that basically matches the firepower of a rapid firing unit of warriors. It's actually extremely cost effective as wraiths are a lot cheaper than destroyers and have that awesome 3+ invunerable save.


I’ve never had a problem with Destroyers and their survivability. I *do* rely on them for the backbone of my army and have never been let down. And at only 9 points difference between them, I don’t think you are really justified in saying they are “extremely” cost effective or “a lot” cheaper :wink:. They’re a little more expensive, but the ability to project their hits at 36” (out of range of many threats) is invaluable.

And just to be clear, I like the Wraiths. I have 9 of them, and use them with a fair degree of frequency. They do have their uses. My big problem with them is they are extremely wound limited. And with only 3 wounds in a full squad, they die FAST against dedicated CC units who put out so many attacks that, even with a 3+ invulnerable save, they get overwhelmed.



NecronCowboy said:


> Lol ok one tiny example where scarabs are better. That covers what 2 maybe 3 units in the entire game? So you thinks its better to sit there and try to get 4+ immobilised or weapon destroyeds with glancing?????? Instead you are probally going to lose 4-6 bases of those 16 point scarabs a turn due to S6+ attacks auto killing + failing the saves to cover those due to fearless.


Lose 4-6 bases a turn vs. a vehicle? Not likely – I didn’t take that many wounds with an entire Tau army firing at a single squad for a turn. And loses due to the fearless armor save only applies in CC (which you don’t have to worry about with vehicles either). And with 10 bases, you’ll get 3 to 4 rolls of 6 on an average charge. That many glances usually results in a stunned or shaken roll which means if you can get there w/o wounds, the vehicle isn’t doing anything to you the next turn (and with cover saves as easy to get as they now are, and the +1 to cover that scarabs get, I’ve never had a problem with it).

Just because I only gave 1 example doesn’t mean there aren’t others :biggin: They are also better against swarm armies (orks and nids) because of the number of wounds and the number of attacks that flow out of those units.



Spadge said:


> It's starting to become clear that I may have got carried away upon seeing that 2 for intiative and thus completely ignored the s4 t4 and, of course, the ol' WBB rule.


The strength, toughness and WBB of Necron Warriors is excellent, just remember that in addition to their low initiative they have a low attack number as well. Coupled together, these to stats pose a major problem for Warriors in CC. So, like all things, you’ll want to pick and choose your battles. 



Spadge said:


> It seems that the only races a squad of warriors should never assault are the Orks and the Nids. And probably Daemons as well. Granted the low I is a disadvantage but warriors should be able to hold their own against marines if, and only if, it's strictly necessary. Obviously I'm referring to basic troops. I'd never willingly send a squad of warriors against a squad of terminators if I had the choice to do otherwise.


Well, if you’re talking about strictly troop choices, then I think you’re safe enough there. But I say that with the added caution. Necron Warriors are primarily shooty. You rarely gain much by throwing them into CC.



Spadge said:


> Flayed ones - ah, I hope not to come across fickle - maybe I wrote them off too quickly. However you look at it it's still 180pts for upto 30 solid attacks + special rules. Unless the dice are really against you it seems a full squad of Flayed will win a combat againts any basic troop choice (apart from maybe genestalers). In fact so long as you don't expect them to take down super crazy characters or CC orientated squads - such as teminators, well drugged wyches and possibly ogryns - then they seem like a potentially useful choice. Providing you can get them into battle of course. It's certainly a worthwhile consideration if you have the points.


You’re better off with Immortals actually. If you have that many points left over, you will almost always get more use out of a partial squad of immortals then you would from a full squad of Flayed Ones. 



Spadge said:


> The wraith vs. destroyers debate seems to be a matter of taste. Either way you look at it both units are fast, both will draw fire and both will provide at least 3 S6 attacks per model. The only issue I have with Wraiths is that for the type of unit they are I think they could stand to have +1 to either WS,T or W (preferably WS), balanced by a minor point increase in order to make them truly worthwhile (not saying they're not already fairly worthwhile).


Actually, stat wise, I don’t have a problem with Wraiths where they are. I just wish they would increase the squad size to 5 and maybe give the ability to upgrade to rending for a small point increase. With these choices, you will probably want to go all or nothing though (3 x 3 Wraiths or 3 x 5 Destroyers) as points allow. Necrons WBB depends on having like models around, and sophisticated opponents will take advantage of mistakes in deployment or movement to eliminate full squads the fall out of support range. So be careful :grin:



Spadge said:


> Finally, I submit for your approval, the following potential tactic.


It’s a solid, workable plan. But what you risk is defeat in detail. If I were facing you, when you VOD your Immortals into my backfield, I’d turn the whole army move 6” backwards and attempt to eliminate the full unit and the Lord that turn. If my shooting didn’t get them all, I’d use a dedicated CC unit to assault them and keep them pinned down and eliminate them (they have the same problems in CC that warriors do, but have the additional +1T). 

As to Pariah, most people don’t use them often. They are as expensive as 20 warriors (or the C’Tan), and they just die too fast (no WBB and a MAJOR fire magnate). 

Like I said, I think it’s workable, but you’ll have to give it a try to see how it works for you. I’ve used similar tactics, and found that with luck in your deep strike roll, you can do serious damage to your opponent, eliminating major units for a relatively small investment. Just be careful. That unit will be isolated and will probably be the focus of much enemy fire.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

> daneel2.0:
> *Necrons WBB depends on having like models around* _(emphasis added)_, and sophisticated opponents will take advantage of mistakes in deployment or movement to eliminate full squads the fall out of support range. So be careful


Bam! Forgot that entirely. That is certainly a major weakness. Following this topic I decided to play test 3 wraiths versus 5 terminators... man, those wraiths are really missing something. The wraiths lost 10/10 combats, several of which saw them destroyed outright, and they never took out more than one terminator.
*Analysis:* They should never be sent against a squad of +2 armour saves. They need a damn good tweaking.

As for the tactic, The reason I chose immortals is because of the assault2 36". If you can get enough distance behind the enemey an assault is unlikely and even if they are assaulted their T5 should keep them alive long enough to VoD them away at the start of the next turn.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

So I don't use VoD. Why? Because when you are done you have a big deep strike circle of immortals who can run to break out of the circle, but then can't shoot.

I use immortals not in my center but on my flanks, because they can move and fire a full 24", and they don't need the Lord wit res orb, as you are unlikely to come across many S10 weapons. All you have to worry about is high strength power weapons.

I use my lord and res ord in my center with my warrior who need it with all those strength 8 and 9 weapons out there. Another way to look at it is the res orb gives your warriors a 4+ invunerable cover save if you are moving through ground without cover.

Lord also gives your center some good shock in case something nasty decides to try to get into CC with you.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

What you have to also ask yourself is what are you gaining from having your lord with res orb with your immortals who don't really need the res orb behind the enemy? Don't you do basically the same damage as shooting from the front? Doesn't this leave you behind the lines and vunerable to your enemies reserves? Do you think it's good to have an entire squad clumped up in a deep strike ball waiting for a battle cannon to blast you all back to the tomb?

I prefer to do my moves with the monolith, I never use the VoD and instead use a deep striking monolith to move troops onto my enemies flank where he is weak.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Spadge said:


> As for the tactic, The reason I chose immortals is because of the assault2 36". If you can get enough distance behind the enemey an assault is unlikely and even if they are assaulted their T5 should keep them alive long enough to VoD them away at the start of the next turn.


Immortals only have a 24" range not 36" range.

Warrior squads should always be within 6" of another warrior squad and the res orb, atleast for the first few turns of the game. Even if one squad gets wiped out, they still get a WBB roll for having another unit of warriors within 6". Most games I have 3x10 units of warriors supporting each other, theres no way someone can take all of them out in one turn.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Daneel2.0 said:


> Well, that’s debatable, but I understand your point. I happen to disagree, but acknowledge that, due to the old language, a raw reading may seem to support that position.


Not jsut a raw reading but a hugely in depth reading by 6+ people all of which don't even play Necrons. Codex trumps rulebook for that. It's very clear.



> No, I didn’t mean just in CC. I meant all around, and I didn’t say that they were identical. If you were to look at just CC, and ignored how the units got to CC then the Flayed Ones have a slight advantage and will probably win through attrition eventually (though it will probably take about 4 or 5 turns). If you include ranged attacks though, the Flayed Ones lose out pretty quickly.


So name one unit without ranged attacks that would win against another unit with ranged attacks from shooting??? Flayed ones are also almost twice as hard to kill in most situations because of WBB.



> I’ve never had a problem with Destroyers and their survivability. I *do* rely on them for the backbone of my army and have never been let down. And at only 9 points difference between them, I don’t think you are really justified in saying they are “extremely” cost effective or “a lot” cheaper :wink:. They’re a little more expensive, but the ability to project their hits at 36” (out of range of many threats) is invaluable.


Destroyers are rock solid, there is no doubt about that! I either use 12 destroyers in my army or 9 wraiths, I switch it up game 2 game. Destroyers however only have a 3+ save, wraiths have a 3+ invunerable save. Wraiths can turbo boost 24" in any direction ignoring cover etc. As long as you have 6+ of them to make sure you get a WBB roll they work wonders if used right.



> And just to be clear, I like the Wraiths. I have 9 of them, and use them with a fair degree of frequency. They do have their uses. My big problem with them is they are extremely wound limited. And with only 3 wounds in a full squad, they die FAST against dedicated CC units who put out so many attacks that, even with a 3+ invulnerable save, they get overwhelmed.


Wraiths are 41 pts a wound, destroyers are 50 pts a wound. If you have 9 wraiths fighting together then you can lose 8 of them and still get a WBB roll. I usually combine this with a destroyer lord to make sure I get the WBB rolls against power weapons and high strenth weapons.




> Lose 4-6 bases a turn vs. a vehicle? Not likely – I didn’t take that many wounds with an entire Tau army firing at a single squad for a turn. And loses due to the fearless armor save only applies in CC (which you don’t have to worry about with vehicles either). And with 10 bases, you’ll get 3 to 4 rolls of 6 on an average charge. That many glances usually results in a stunned or shaken roll which means if you can get there w/o wounds, the vehicle isn’t doing anything to you the next turn (and with cover saves as easy to get as they now are, and the +1 to cover that scarabs get, I’ve never had a problem with it).


With 10 bases of scarabs (160 pts) you should get 2.5 glances, with 0% chance of destroying the vehicle without multiple WD and IMMOB. With 9 wraiths which cost less, you have a 50% chance of completely killing 99% of vehicles except a monolith and a landraider. You also have a 75% of getting either a shaken or stunned vs 82% from the more expensive scarabs. Which sounds better to you? 4-6 bases a turn would be against the only example you could come up with when scarabs are better, CC with a AV 12 walker. The walker will have S10 A2 which should kill 2 bases a turn, and then you will have to take a lot of saves for fearless. It's just not worth it.

Just because I only gave 1 example doesn’t mean there aren’t others :biggin: They are also better against swarm armies (orks and nids) because of the number of wounds and the number of attacks that flow out of those units.



> You’re better off with Immortals actually. If you have that many points left over, you will almost always get more use out of a partial squad of immortals then you would from a full squad of Flayed Ones.


Not true, the Immortals can't deep strike or outflank, flayed ones can, that is their strength.



> Actually, stat wise, I don’t have a problem with Wraiths where they are. I just wish they would increase the squad size to 5 and maybe give the ability to upgrade to rending for a small point increase. With these choices, you will probably want to go all or nothing though (3 x 3 Wraiths or 3 x 5 Destroyers) as points allow.


I'm so there with you on this, wish I could have 5 wraiths in a single squad!!!


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

One more thing before I start to ramble.

There is a reason why they call it the Necron Phalanx. Phalanx doesn't mean a wall of shields as some people think, it means supporting the guys to your left and your right and this is how Necrons work best.

You can't think of your units as how they do on their own, you have to think of everything as a combined force.

Sure flayed ones might not be the best unit in the game, but they have a purpose and that is to outflank or deepstrike where you need them.

Just in the last week I used them to deepstrike onto an IG HQ unit and take them out. That lowered the moral for the rest of the army and allowed me to route them all.

I also used them to outflank, and they ran straight into a leman russ that was shooting battle cannon shots at my warriors, and took out the gun.

Your Necron army has to be a sum greater than it's part to be fully effective.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Hmm... @ NecronCowboy: not impressed with the multi-posting, its a bit over kill m8.

VoD, imho, should only be used as a CC extraction option for lists without Monolith support. End of.

Wraiths: love them for style but not for function. I only use them to a) freak out enemies by harassing things like Devestator Squads that are hiding on the back line or b) vs IG lists with lots of armour. I'm working on a 'c' plan for vs Orks, but don't have the models to play test it, so atm only options 'a' and 'b' are viable.

Immortals: win over Flayed Ones every time. Great gun, very tough, and they get WBB rolls. True Elites.

Pariahs: meh. Quited pissed off with them really - save them for Apoc where they won't be the fire magnate because everyone is shooting at my many, many Monoliths instead.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

darklove said:


> Hmm... @ NecronCowboy: not impressed with the multi-posting, its a bit over kill m8.


Not trying to impress you, so I really don't care.



> VoD, imho, should only be used as a CC extraction option for lists without Monolith support. End of.


I started to use it as that, but it's expensive plus it's so much more difficult to deep strike back where you want to, monolith is just so much easier, and not that much more expensive considering the VoD also needs a 100+ point Lord.



> Wraiths: love them for style but not for function. I only use them to a) freak out enemies by harassing things like Devestator Squads that are hiding on the back line or b) vs IG lists with lots of armour. I'm working on a 'c' plan for vs Orks, but don't have the models to play test it, so atm only options 'a' and 'b' are viable.


Wraiths are really awesome against ork's!



> Immortals: win over Flayed Ones every time. Great gun, very tough, and they get WBB rolls. True Elites.


How about when there is a tank 4" away from the immortals, and the flayed ones are deep striking from reserves. Are the immortals better then? You are missing the point of flayed ones, they are the only unit you have to effectively deep strike on their own to take out problems. Also the only unit you have to outflank.


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

Spadge said:


> That is certainly a major weakness. Following this topic I decided to play test 3 wraiths versus 5 terminators... man, those wraiths are really missing something. The wraiths lost 10/10 combats, several of which saw them destroyed outright, and they never took out more than one terminator.


Wraith’s are going to win against MEQs most of the time, but the problem with having so few models is a single bad round of saves, or a single good round for your enemy is going to wipe the squad out. And if you don’t have another one handy, they’re done. It’s why I think running Wraiths is an all or nothing proposition. And even then, you’re almost required to run a Destroyer Lord since you can’t make WBB rolls vs. power weapons.



Spadge said:


> As for the tactic, The reason I chose immortals is because of the assault2 36". If you can get enough distance behind the enemey an assault is unlikely and even if they are assaulted their T5 should keep them alive long enough to VoD them away at the start of the next turn.


NecronCowboy brings up a very big concern here. If you opponent is using blast weapons, your Immortals are perfect fodder for them after a VOD move.

VOD use right now is one big catch 22. The big advantage of VOD is you can move short range units into firing distance quickly, which mitigates the disadvantages we see due to the lack of a real transport. In order to make the tactic effective, you want to have as much firepower as possible to bring to bear all at once. These factors together mean VOD works best with squads of 20 Warriors (40 rapid fire shots at very close range). Unfortunately if you VOD into rapid fire range (intentionally or not), you are pretty much required to eliminate that squad as an effective fighting force or risk the CC in the next round. And with the new leadership modifiers for CC, and since Warriors have a 2 Initiative, any CC Warriors lose will almost always result in a sweeping advance. You see the problem? 

I happen to be a fairly conservative player. I don’t gamble with PO that much (if at all), and I’ve been wildly successful by taking that kind of precaution. To me VOD isn’t worth the risk of losing the unit. For one thing, I’m almost always in a position to direct fire from Destroyers or Heavy Destroyers on anything in the back field anyway, and so the cost / risk analysis doesn’t suggest I adopt that tactic.

I have used VOD successfully for late game objective capturing though. Think about it, most players will expect to see a Necron army with a VOD use it during the first couple of turns. If instead you sit on it until the last couple of turns, you can jump a squad of warrior (or even 2) onto the objective that he thought was secure in his deployment zone, and your opponent won't see it coming. It comes as a massive shock to most players when it happens, which can cause them to forget their game plan and react badly (which you can then exploit). And I just think it's funny :spiteful:.



NecronCowboy said:


> I use immortals not in my center but on my flanks, because they can move and fire a full 24", and they don't need the Lord wit res orb, as you are unlikely to come across many S10 weapons. All you have to worry about is high strength power weapons.


Interesting. When I use Immortals, I use them in the back and center of any fixed formation, or I use them as shock troops. I would never have thought to put them on a flank (probably because I generally have Destroyers there). I’ll have to consider that for a while, but thanks for giving me something new to consider.



NecronCowboy said:


> Warrior squads should always be within 6" of another warrior squad and the res orb, atleast for the first few turns of the game.


There are exceptions to this. For instance if you have an objective in the back in good cover, you can plop as Warrior squad there are be fairly confident in its security (assuming no out-flankers of course). There are other examples as well, but you’re right that it’s a good rule of thumb anyway.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Wow.

NecronCowboy:
Thank you, I completely overlooked the no shoot part of the deep strike rule.
Secondly, sorry I should have made clear that I intended to keep the extra lord with the phallanx. One lord w/ VoD and one with ResOrb. One for distraction, one for protection.

As for the scarab/ wraith thing. From my part at least it's not so much a debate over which squad is better against armoury but more a sort of "all things considered" I'd rather use scarabs to mess with the artillery and use the wraiths to shred the infantry.
Of course, if said artillery happens to be a Lemun Russ or other big blasty jobbie then it's fair game.

Now, opening this up to everyone else, and I realise I'm probably gonna get thoroughly flamed for this. I got a little bored so I tried some dummy rolls for Spyders Vs - . So, it seems that so long as you don't attack units with a weapon skill of 5 or up, the spyders are actually crazy mad in CC. I happened to do a couple of rolls for 3 spyders vs 5 terminators (w/ power/chain fists or thunder hammers) and the spyders won every time and even destroyed the terminators outright several times. It might be a waste of their other special rules and defi but I reckon there might be some beastly CC potential in these bumbling scarab factories.

And consider this. Wraiths can move a maximum of 12" and still assault. With a lucky Run! roll the spyders can do exactly the same. They both have 3-4 attacks only the spyder's negate saves Plus with T6 W2 and the +3 save they're more likely to keep up a sustained combat against something like an Ork mob.

Now, before you torch me back to the stone age just remember I'm still effectively a newbie and am yet to become jaded by the 'crons much lamented restrictions.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Daneel2.0 said:


> I have used VOD successfully for late game objective capturing though. Think about it, most players will expect to see a Necron army with a VOD use it during the first couple of turns. If instead you sit on it until the last couple of turns, you can jump a squad of warrior (or even 2) onto the objective that he thought was secure in his deployment zone, and your opponent won't see it coming. It comes as a massive shock to most players when it happens, which can cause them to forget their game plan and react badly (which you can then exploit). And I just think it's funny :spiteful:.


Do you know, I hadn't even considered that. Given the inabillity to shoot after use this definitely seems the best use for the VoD.


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

As to Tomb Spyders vs. Terminators, the spyders are going to get pasted usually. You do have the chance to win that battle since as Monstrous creatures they ignore Armor Save, but in most instances the 200 point Termi squad will take the 165 point Spyder squad.

The math-hammer results are as follows (with no charge):
Terminator Sergeant goes first and with: 2 Attacks, Hit on 3, wound on 4, no save; gives 0.667 unsaved wounds
Spyders Second with: 9 Attacks, hit on 4, wound on 2, invulnerable save on 5; gives 1.25 unsaved wounds
3 Power fist Terminators go last with: 6 Attacks, hit on 3, wound on 2, no save; gives 3.333 unsaved wounds.

Total:
Terminators 4 unsaved wounds
Tomb Spyders 1.25 wounds;

Result:
Tomb Spyders must make 3 armor saves of which 2 will fail
Therefore remove 2 Tomb Spyders, 1 wound on the second.

Assault Terminators are worse than this, since all of their attacks occur first, eliminating 2 of the 3 Tomb Spyders before they can strike back.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

Spadge said:


> Wow.
> 
> NecronCowboy:
> Thank you, I completely overlooked the no shoot part of the deep strike rule.


He wasn't saying that you can't shoot after DS. In fact you can. What he was saying is that after you DS, you will be tightly clustered together. If the enemy has something like a battlecannon, or worse a demolisher cannon (!), then you might very well lose most or all of that squad.

After the DS, you can still run in the shooting phase to spread out, but then you can't shoot (which is why you jumped back there anyway). If your opponent doesn't have any deadly large (or small) blast template stuff, then your DSing Immortals or whoever, can jump there and still do all their shooting just fine. If you, like me, play against mostly rhino-based SM lists, then they may not have any trouble at all jumping back there and shooting rear armor for more devastating results.

As I wasn't here earlier to discuss Flayed Ones, I find their application far less useful. Unfortunately, I mostly play against SW or BA and they are mostly comprised of very ultra-killy CC troops so Flayed Ones are really not going to do much. But it really depends on the lists you are going up against. If you have a bunch of friends that meet every once in a while, then you can judge whether they will help you or not.

Lastly, I like Scarabs since they can turbo-boost for a 2+ cover save first turn. Having many more wounds than Wraiths, I definitely have to say that they will rock enemy tanks very well. Sure the Wraiths get stronger attacks, but all you need is to shake the tank for it to become relatively useless. If you don't want to turbo-boost for some reason, you can still DS them to get behind enemy lines although they can't assault that turn. With enough attacks you should be able to make it completely useless in a turn or two. Then they can move on to molest some other troops or other vehicles. By not being able to destroy it first turn, you might also pull some infantry away from the main force in order to deal with you. Since Necron do best when they can vaporize the army one unit at a time, by pulling away some troops, you are helping yourself achieve this goal.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Math-hammer all ya want dude but there are two ways of looking at Spyders vs. Power fist terminators.

If they charge You will probably loose the combat, but there's a reasonable taking out two of the b*st*rds - meaning a marginally less lethal squad and a morale test.
If you charge you're pretty much assured a steam roll situation.

I've also tested the spyder rolls against a full charging ork boyz mob. I've only done it twice but they won both combats.
Dude, I think there's some potential here.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Mud213 said:


> Lastly, I like Scarabs since they can turbo-boost for a 2+ cover save first turn.


Say what now?

*runs for rule book*

Freakin'... WIN!


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

This thread is based on the fallacy that there is a CC potential to unlock. As an army it is quite clear that CC is not the domain of the bulk of the Necron army, and the CC units that do exist leave little to the imagination, and are relatively inadequate. 

There is nothing to make any unit in the Necron army better in CC than it is on the basic stats because there are no ways of upgrading anything for CC other than the Lord. 
So what is there to unlock?


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

darklove said:


> This thread is based on the fallacy that there is a CC potential to unlock. As an army it is quite clear that CC is not the domain of the bulk of the Necron army, and the CC units that do exist leave little to the imagination, and are relatively inadequate.
> 
> There is nothing to make any unit in the Necron army better in CC than it is on the basic stats because there are no ways of upgrading anything for CC other than the Lord.
> So what is there to unlock?


I have to disagree, dude. Obviously you have the experience between the two of us but when I look at the codex my imagination finds a lot that's been left for it. Even if other tactics don't work what's the point of fielding an army that has only one decent method of play, which for the necrons seems to be the stand-shoot-teleport method. Don't take this as a personal slight and this is literally just an opinion coloured by my tastes (and probably my habit of making myself the underdog) but I don't think I could derive any fun from an army or list such as that.

As for calling CC potential a fallacy. Sir. 
Sir, the uses of of wraiths and scarabs have been much expounded in this thread and we've even heard little peeps from the flayed ones. And then of course there's my hopeless tenacity regarding the Spyders and pariahs. So, there's potential there; a point, I feel, that is inarguable. However the magnitude of said potential is unquestionably debatable.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Let me explain a few things about where I am coming from here.

As far as the terminators, I'm probally never going to throw a squad of 3 wraiths at terminators and expect them to win. Terminators are basically the same as a tactical squad. Pretty near in points, shooty wise they are basically the same, and with a 2+ save it makes 5 of them twice as hard to kill as 5 marines, so wound wise they are basically the same. The big difference is Terminators are able to move towards you and still shoot, and when they get to you they have S8 power weapons!!!!! Plus it's twice as hard to cause a wound which makes it hard to keep your LD tests up high. So what a squad of wraiths does is throw their 3+ inv save at the terminators to slow them down. You have a 141 pt unit slowing down a 250 pt unit, taking away their biggest advantage.

You also have to understand where I come from playing the game. I might only have been playing 40K for 4 months now but I've studied, probability, military tactics and theory before and I bring it all to the game.

I don't throw a unit of 3 wraiths at terminators. I use 9 wraiths along with my destroyer lord because they are super fast, and don't take up a lot of room. That lets me stuff a large amount of effectiveness into one tiny area and quickly. So I choose where to attack and how strong I want the attack to be. This is called local supiority. It's like dividing the table up into other tiny little 40K games, and in this case it's like you brought 3 times as many points to the game than your opponent. So this large concentration of force should be able to wipe out an enemy unit rather quickly and then move onto something else. That's how I play, I don't fight fair, either I have the advantage or I'm not going to engadge.

You also have to look at Lancasters laws of square. Basically it says that the greater your effectiveness against your opponent gets, the bigger your advantage, but it's not linear its the square of both sides effectiveness subtracted. So if you have double the effectiveness of your opponent your advantage is actually quadruple that of your enemy. This is amplified if you strike first (I6 + tail that counts as grenades).

If you want to stop being a good 40K player and want to become a great 40K play I feel you have to understand and master these concepts. You will no longer think of wraiths will lose against terminators and start to see them as chess pieces.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

darklove said:


> There is nothing to make any unit in the Necron army better in CC than it is on the basic stats because there are no ways of upgrading anything for CC other than the Lord.
> So what is there to unlock?


I see what you are saying and agree that one of the most frustrating things when looking at the codex is that the only upgrades available are that one gun for the Spyder, Disruption Fields, and the Lord's multitude. The only real "unlock" is the proper use of tactics, there isn't much as far as making the right list to do so.

The only thing I can think of as far as list choices could be if you know the enemy will have a LR, taking some Flayed Ones with DF's or something, but more the most part Scarabs would do that job better probably.

The point I was trying to make is that the CC potential is in the application of the units, not trying to see something which isn't there.



Spadge said:


> I have to disagree, dude. Obviously you have the experience between the two of us but when I look at the codex my imagination finds a lot that's been left for it. Even if other tactics don't work what's the point of fielding an army that has only one decent method of play, which for the necrons seems to be the stand-shoot-teleport method. Don't take this as a personal slight and this is literally just an opinion coloured by my tastes (and probably my habit of making myself the underdog) but I don't think I could derive any fun from an army or list such as that.


For the most part stand-shoot-teleport will be the standard tactic since it works so freakin' well. You need to have Warriors since they are the only troop choice (and you dont' want to phase out) and if they get sweeping advanced (which is likely in CC) then the entire squad dies. In order to avoid this dire situation, the stand-shoot-teleport strategy is the best.

You kind of are making yourself the underdog since there is little potential for a CC heavy Necron list although you can still win some assaults if you pick your pick your fights carefully.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

When I first started playing I used to take Tomb Spiders in my army to support my Warriors, because a Tomb Spider added to a CC engadement can really make a unit of Warriors survive.

I don't use them anymore because I no longer play defensively with my Necrons, I'm always on the attack now.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

NecronCowboy said:


> I don't throw a unit of 3 wraiths at terminators. I use 9 wraiths along with my destroyer lord because they are super fast, and don't take up a lot of room. That lets me stuff a large amount of effectiveness into one tiny area and quickly. So I choose where to attack and how strong I want the attack to be. This is called local supiority. It's like dividing the table up into other tiny little 40K games, and in this case it's like you brought 3 times as many points to the game than your opponent. So this large concentration of force should be able to wipe out an enemy unit rather quickly and then move onto something else. That's how I play, I don't fight fair, either I have the advantage or I'm not going to engadge.


You brought up some great points here :victory:

I recently acquired a Necron army (that's why I've been posting on Necron thread lately) and I really like your reasoning here. I also have a CSM army and I always used to think about the effectiveness of what all the points I brought provided to the match. By pouring a lot of points into one super good squad, it was a loss since they can only attack one thing at a time and even if they have a rhino, they aren't moving all that fast so, although they may dominate whatever is closest to them, those enemy units will dry up fast.

One huge thing about Necron is that Destroyers, Scarabs and Wraiths all move as jetbikes so they can really book it if they have too. In your tactic, you are using a lot of points in a small area. Yes they can really pwn, but since they have mobility, they can win "local superiority," as you put it, and take off real fast and win local superiority elsewhere. I can see how Destroyers can use similar tactics. Zoom-zoom over there, mess some stuff up, next turn, zoom-zoom, blow some other things up. By having these fast moving devastating, warbringers, you can really own the enemy one squad at a time.

I now understand the true beauty of the hammer-anvil strategy. I now see how Necron really stand out even more from the other armies. Before I just thought of the obvious WBB, Gauss special rule and the Monolith, but now to me this army really has a unique feel.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Mud213 said:


> I now understand the true beauty of the hammer-anvil strategy. I now see how Necron really stand out even more from the other armies. Before I just thought of the obvious WBB, Gauss special rule and the Monolith, but now to me this army really has a unique feel.


I have two Necron lists I play with right now,

First one is my shooty army
1 lord
16 immortals
30 warriors
12 destroyers

Second one is
1 destroyer lord
10 immorts
8 flayed ones
30 warriors
6-9 wraiths
1 monolith

With the second army I put everything except 20 warriors, my lord, and the immortals in reserve.

I then get the enemy to engadge my warriors, who can take the beating because of the lord and the orb.

Then I deep strike the monolith on their flank, out comes 10 warriors. 6-9 wraiths rush to the flank, 8 flayed ones deep strike there as well. Lord turbo boosts over there.

Next turn everything assaults the flank, and I also teleport of the immortals over to help.

The warriors basically retreat back and hide.

Then my enemy spends the entire game moving towards the flank I'm attacking basically letting me destroy his army with almost everything I have vs about 25% of his army at a time.

This works especially well against static infantry armies etc.

It's also way more fun than just shooting everything.

Like I said I don't fight fair, the fun of the game is out maneuvering your opponent, it's also the best way to deal a quick decisive death to those stupid carbon based lifeforms!


----------



## Wu-Tang-Tau (Apr 2, 2009)

Wraith are gonna have rending for 5th ed!!!! It's gonna be great!


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2009)

i gotta say ive been reading wot u guys hav said and i think these are some great tactics.

Im a huge fan of the destroyer lord but i never thought of having him joined with scarabs, this is genius! although personally ive never really got into using them ive always had them all just sitting there from my battleforces...
im definately gonna try the scarabs ive got a game in a few days and i usually go with this cc destroyer lord:

Warscythe
Destroyer body (obviously)
Phylactery
Lightening Field (you'd be suprised how amazingly good it is against nids and IG)
Phase Shifter (pity its only one per army)

i find this is a great combo and will be even better with those scarabs but i have to say anyone who doesnt have a monolith behind their warriors doesnt deserve to have necrons, i mean the 2nd WBB roll is practically compulsary in my army because i have a low 'necron' body count so im vulnerable to phase out  but im learning to use them better... this is already the end of my 2nd year of collecting them (its gone so fast)

Actually, i had a game today Necrons (me) & SM vs Nids & Eldar... i think it went pretty well, 3500pts per side (my friend with nids had to use LOTR models as gaunts cause he hasnt bought enough to play medium sized matches lol
i went with

10 destroyers
20 warriors
1 destroyer lord
1 lord
1 monolith

my ally had
1 las pred
5 tacticals
2 dreadnaughts (twin-linked autocannons)
1 vindicator
2 attack bikers
20 snipers
about 8 in his devastater squad
and the rest is a little blurry but im probably gonna be versing him in a few days and i think i'll go with cc lord + scarabs and wot not, wot do ya reckon?


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

If you're going to run a scarab lord it'd probably be best to run a 'lith and a second lord with a ResOrb as well in order to keep your phallanx alive.

2 fully tricked out lords (inc. 1 desL), 40 warriors, 30 scarabs (w/ DFs) and a 'lith costs 1855pts, so tactical wargear for the lords and maybe dropping the Scarab DF's is going to leave you with a mad, hard to kill army for under 1750pts that will only PO after 55 kills.

Necroncowboy: You're a sick, sick man. I may have to borrow some of those tactics. Out of interest, what's the W-L-D for each list and which armies do they tend to be stronger and weaker against?



Mud213 said:


> The point I was trying to make is that the CC potential is in the application of the units, not trying to see something which isn't there.
> 
> 
> > Sorry if this point has become muddied by my easily excited imagination. This was my intention in starting this thread as I saw units with CC capabillities but couldn't see any clear way of applying them. However, that doesn't mean I'm not still hopeful that there might be stumbled upon some previously overlooked item.
> ...


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

Spadge said:


> If you're going to run a scarab lord it'd probably be best to run a 'lith and a second lord with a ResOrb as well in order to keep your phallanx alive.


I used to run 2 fully decked out lords per game. I started to realise 210 pts for something that was just making sure I got a few extra WBB rolls per game wasn't worth it. I now only play with one and use the extra 200 pts to get a monolith or extra unit of destroyers.



> 2 fully tricked out lords (inc. 1 desL), 40 warriors, 30 scarabs (w/ DFs) and a 'lith costs 1855pts, so tactical wargear for the lords and maybe dropping the Scarab DF's is going to leave you with a mad, hard to kill army for under 1750pts that will only PO after 55 kills.


Scarabs do NOT count as Necrons. In this army list only the lords and warriors would count as Necrons, making you phase out after 32 kills.



> Necroncowboy: You're a sick, sick man. I may have to borrow some of those tactics. Out of interest, what's the W-L-D for each list and which armies do they tend to be stronger and weaker against?


Haha no I'm not sick, I'm just very competitive and take things I enjoy way to far. I don't keep track of my record really, but I've only been playing 40K about 3 months now (since Jan 1st). I'd probally say I win 9 out of 10 games, because I don't play that big of a variety of people and I work really hard to do all the right things to win while still having fun. Please don't take that as bragging or anything as I don't do anything special other than appy solid ideas thought up by real world generals etc...



> Sorry if this point has become muddied by my easily excited imagination. This was my intention in starting this thread as I saw units with CC capabillities but couldn't see any clear way of applying them. However, that doesn't mean I'm not still hopeful that there might be stumbled upon some previously overlooked item.


The way I see the Necrons is yeah they have destroyers, but the bulk of their firepower is close ranged. If you want to make the most of the army you are going to have to get close to your enemy. If you get close to your enemy CC is going to happen, so plan for it, or even instigate it yourself. I especially like charging people with my Immortals who I know are going to charge me next turn. I still get to shoot at them and I get the extra attack bonus and rob them of the same bonus.

One more thing I want to share that I have found about Necrons. Don't use the monolith for it's ordinance. It's a waste! The thing only has a 24" range, and a single shot. I usually only use it if there is nothing else available for it to do. You should deep striking it, then teleporting your units around and firing the flux arc. What the monolith adds in tactical advantage is hugely greater than firing a single ordinance with a range of 24" a turn.

Remember a unit of wraiths with a destroyer lord can teleported if they are within 18" of the monolith, then move another 12" and charge another 6". You can even teleport a unit out of CC, get some better WBB rolls, then charge them right back into the same combat with a charge bonus!


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2009)

yeh actually i might go with 2 destroyer lords and scarabs and just leave my warriors marching forward infront of the lith... might work, i dont no if i'll go with destroyers tho cause it'll be a fairly small game (maybe 1250?)


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2009)

yeh actually i might go with 2 destroyer lords and scarabs and just leave my warriors marching forward infront of the lith... might work, i dont no if i'll go with destroyers tho cause it'll be a fairly small game (maybe 1250?)


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2009)

oops lol dam net is lagging posted twice :laugh:


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

The only upgrades that help in CC are for the Lord, all other upgrades are either a ranged weapon swap that makes you worse in CC (TS) or for DisFields for assaulting tanks.

Which leaves you with tactics to 'unlock' this mysterious potential that Necrons supposedly have. The only tactic you need to know is CC avoidance with anything that is not a C'tan.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

darklove said:


> Which leaves you with tactics to 'unlock' this mysterious potential that Necrons supposedly have. The only tactic you need to know is CC avoidance with anything that is not a C'tan.


Regardless of the fact that you have 6500pts of necron and I have, to put it succinctly, not, there's always more'n one way of skinning a cat. Many of our hisory's greatest generals have used surprise to win battles. Take Wellington, for instance, and his lines of muskets "standing up". A strong assault from a necron army (and many tactics have been discussed here) is basically going to be like the spanish inquisition (except that they'll know how many weapons they have).


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

Necrons and assaulting, like everything else in this game, does not occur in a vacuum. Necrons assaulting Tau holding an objective? Not bad, most likely will kill off the tau, giving you the objective. A squad of 5 Immortals assaulting a bloodthirster for no apparent reason? Well, at least the bloodthirster's wings won't be tired from chasing the immortals down, I suppose...

What I'm saying is this... Necrons assaulting under the proper circumstances can sway the game. If you plan on building an entirely CC based necron army, then I think you are going to have a very uphill fight on your hands in a, "take all comers," situation.

X is not always better than Y when there is the possibility of Z. :wink:


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Wraithian said:


> Necrons and assaulting, like everything else in this game, does not occur in a vacuum. Necrons assaulting Tau holding an objective? Not bad, most likely will kill off the tau, giving you the objective. A squad of 5 Immortals assaulting a bloodthirster for no apparent reason? Well, at least the bloodthirster's wings won't be tired from chasing the immortals down, I suppose...
> 
> What I'm saying is this... Necrons assaulting under the proper circumstances can sway the game. If you plan on building an entirely CC based necron army, then I think you are going to have a very uphill fight on your hands in a, "take all comers," situation.
> 
> X is not always better than Y when there is the possibility of Z. :wink:


A fantastic summation.

Given what's been said in this thread I think I'm gonna develop the borin' ol' shooty army replete with warriors and destroyers. However, along side that I'm gonna be going crazy with possible alternatives.

I would like to hear if anyone has had any notable success with either pariahs or spyders (though I've already go a handle on the consensus surrounding these).


----------



## Someguy (Nov 19, 2007)

This is a good thread. It's well worth exploring all your options and it's interesting to think about what can be done differently. Unfortunately, in this case I don't really think that you can make an assaulting necron army that works very well.

I actually think you might be able to do some good things with a unit of flayed ones, led by a lord if required. You could combine them with monoliths to give you a unit able to assault all over the place to answer threats. These guys can't take on everything, but monolith teleportation allows you to fight where you want and run off the rest of the time.

The problem you have is needing a couple of monoliths (which you kind of need anyway to be honest) and the flayed ones, on top of the standard requirements to have warriors and destroyers/immortals. Even so I think they might be an interesting alternative to the more commonly-chosen scarabs because they are quite dangerous and (if res orb is present) really quite difficult to get rid of.


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

Another thing,

You can really surprise the hell out of an opponent and throw him off his/her game by assaulting with a unit that isn't expected to do so.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Wraithian said:


> Another thing,
> 
> You can really surprise the hell out of an opponent and throw him off his/her game by assaulting with a unit that isn't expected to do so.


His surprise will be that you are basically throwing the game! He won't believe his luck.


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

darklove said:


> His surprise will be that you are basically throwing the game! He won't believe his luck.


*chuckles* Hey, I didn't specify that it would be a *good* thing, just that it'd be a surprise...


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

So last Saturday I had my first game with my new Necron force which included almost everything I have. I won't post specifically what I had, but I did have one Spyder. The game had me and a DE player against BA and a list with that cheap Salamanders Commander. ("Everything is twin-linked and he only cost that much?!?") The DE player and I ended up losing, but I did use that one cheap (points wise not like the "cheapness" of the SM Chaptermaster) Spyder for some serious benefits.

That ability to count as a "nearby unit" helped out as the several rhinos got close enough to assault. But what really surprised me was when as a bit of a desperate measure, it assaulted a 5 man squad of jump infantry that had plasma guns. Fortunately no PF. Although it has pitifully low WS, WS almost doesn't matter that much. (I still don't really understand how grots can hit a Bloodthirster on a 5+, while he only hits them on a 3+) So although he didn't hit very often, if he hits anything, it gets pretty well crushed. They couldn't really force many saves either since they can only wound on a 6 :biggrin: I think that I will definitely invest in a couple more Spyders since they can help out my poor Warriors when the eventually get charged.

I realized that when my opponents finally catch on that they need to shoot the Spyders up if they plan to assault my Warriors (who always seem to get wiped out, then just jump back up to rapid fire  ), I can do this crafty move. On the first turn I can make one scarab swarm, if he targets my Spyder with something nasty like a lascannon, I can just take it on my scarab swarm who will get a 3+ cover save behind my line of Warriors. If they die (which they would instantly), whoppie due, my Spyder is (probably) at 2 wounds still. Also, by only creating one swarm, the average toughness of 6, so I kind of have 5 wounds instead of 2...sort of.


----------



## Winst0n (Mar 12, 2009)

Wu-Tang-Tau said:


> Wraith are gonna have rending for 5th ed!!!! It's gonna be great!


i want proof.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

darklove said:


> The only upgrades that help in CC are for the Lord, all other upgrades are either a ranged weapon swap that makes you worse in CC (TS) or for DisFields for assaulting tanks.
> 
> Which leaves you with tactics to 'unlock' this mysterious potential that Necrons supposedly have. The only tactic you need to know is CC avoidance with anything that is not a C'tan.


Wraithwing on the charge....
36 WS-4 S-6 I-6 attacks + 4 WS 4 S-5 I-4 no save ever power weapon and able to move 24" a turn?????? + WBB!!!!

How is that not good in close combat?

A 55 pt T6 monsterous creature, how is that not good in close combat?????

T5 3+ save units vs any unit with a S3 in close combat, how is that not good????

Sounds like you have a total lack of imagination when it comes to 40K to me.


----------



## Wu-Tang-Tau (Apr 2, 2009)

Winst0n said:


> i want proof.


PM me ya e-mail!!!!


----------



## Wu-Tang-Tau (Apr 2, 2009)

NecronCowboy said:


> Wraithwing on the charge....
> 36 WS-4 S-6 I-6 attacks + 4 WS 4 S-5 I-4 no save ever power weapon and able to move 24" a turn?????? + WBB!!!!
> 
> How is that not good in close combat?
> ...


Wraith are pretty fragile at 41 points each...


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

To me, Necrons suffer from 3 fundamental flaws for CC.

1) The lack of any sort of reliable way to get power fists and power weapons... Toughness 4, 3+ armour saves mean nothing when power fists are swinging your way. Lets face it, most armies have some sort of power fist esq type weapon and usually bring 1 or 2.

2) The lack of transports. Sure you can portal with the Monolith, but lets face it - unless the monolith deepstruck its not really getting you there that fast, and if the monolith moved you can't move. Essentially, its a lame excuse for a transport, better used for a second WBB roll.

3) The new way wounds and combat work out. More often than not, Necrons are striking last, and probably going to lose a few before they swing. Unless there is a lord with them, there is no power weapon and no reliable way to kill the enemy. So, Necrons generally lose in combat. What does that mean? It means you are taking minus hits to your leadership, suddenly having to roll like an ork without a bosspole. You'd be surprise how often you can roll over 5, 7, etc. So what happens now? Well, I get to sweeping advance you, and lets face it, I 2 is not going to save your bacon. Squad wiped, no WBB rolls, no chance to use the portal, nothing. It suddenly just became a lot easier to phase out necrons.

A difficulty for necrons is that most of the other armies have a CC unit that is leaps and bounds better than anything hte Necrons can muster for CC. For instance, the two armies I play: Eldar and Orks.

My banshees supported with Eldrad have made short work of any and all Necron they have encountered. Plus, they are sheltered by the amazingly tough wave serpents.

My Orks almost have an easier time. A squad of nobz on bikes gets a 3+ cover save while they are moving to you first turn. Second turn, they assault and all those power fists make mincemeat out of your rear. Even with a nobz crappy I, it's still higher than most Necron units and probably will run you down.

For whatever reason that you do manage to break and run and can make your WBB rolls, if you were dropped below 50% and WBB brings you up past half... You still can't rally according to the FAQ.

I play a small force of Necrons and my strategy, and it works well, is to shoot. Then shoot some more, and finally shoot some more. Basically shoot until engaged in CC, and if I survive the turn, portal out and shoot some more. It works well, Necrons are tough to put down unless they are run down.

I applaud all attempts in trying new things though, so if you manage to make it work reliably and not "this one time against Tau," please let me know.


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

NecronCowboy said:


> Wraithwing on the charge....
> 36 WS-4 S-6 I-6 attacks + 4 WS 4 S-5 I-4 no save ever power weapon and able to move 24" a turn?????? + WBB!!!!
> 
> How is that not good in close combat?
> ...


Imagination is good, and if you have fun putting Necrons in CC then by all means. However, its another story to try to tell someone that the unit is 'Good' in CC.

Take the Wraith that you listed. This is one of the Necrons "CC" units, so it is only fair to compare it to another CC unit. To say that my wraith can slaughter a squad of guardsmen or firewarriors is a bit out of context imo. How do your wraiths work against other CC dedicated units, say:

Banshees, Nobz, Death Company, Vetern Assualt squads, Assualt Terminators, Berzerkers, Genestealers, etc etc. Not too well imo. The other flaw of a lot of the Necron CC units are that they are super overpriced. Ok, yes, the wraith gets a 3+ invuln, 4 attacks. Guess what, its 41 points, and you can take a max of 3. So for for 123 points, you get 3 models and 12 attacks which do not ignore armour. For 123 points, I get 20-21 boyz, or 80 attacks.

The boyz are going to win, and most likely wipe the wraiths - guess what, no WBB.


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

NecronCowboy said:


> Wraithwing on the charge....
> 36 WS-4 S-6 I-6 attacks + 4 WS 4 S-5 I-4 no save ever power weapon and able to move 24" a turn?????? + WBB!!!!
> How is that not good in close combat?


<sigh> 
First, that's 4 FOC slots and a MINIMUM of 549 points. That's more than 1/3 of most army lists I play, and there is NO RANGED ATTACK THERE. 

Second, even including the lord, you're talking about 12 wounds spread through 4 different squads. The only thing that makes it even close to workable is they have a 3+ Invulnerable save and a WBB. 

Then you have to look at what the enemy can get for the exact same points (like 91 Ork Boyz for instance). Your happy about 40 high strength, high initiative hits, but your enemy gets 182 slightly softer, slightly slower hits for the same point cost (assuming you're playing Orks). Now, even *with* the 3+ invuln and the WBB, you're not walking away from 91 boyz with 9 Wraiths and a Lord. 

That isn't to say it's not a hard combination of units. It's decent, but expensive in more ways than just points.



NecronCowboy said:


> A 55 pt T6 monsterous creature, how is that not good in close combat?????


With pathetically low initiative, weapon skill, attacks, wounds and a crappy save. Yeah. Sure.

*EDIT*


Crimzzen said:


> For whatever reason that you do manage to break and run and can make your WBB rolls, if you were dropped below 50% and WBB brings you up past half... You still can't rally according to the FAQ.


You need to re-read the FAQ. If the models the successfully pass the WBB join a broken squad, that squad remains broken, but if the new models push the squad above 50% they may make a regroup test as normal. The last sentence is where it is.


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

Daneel2.0 said:


> <sigh>
> First, that's 4 FOC slots and a MINIMUM of 549 points. That's more than 1/3 of most army lists I play, and there is NO RANGED ATTACK THERE.
> 
> Second, even including the lord, you're talking about 12 wounds spread through 4 different squads. The only thing that makes it even close to workable is they have a 3+ Invulnerable save and a WBB.
> ...


Hmmmm, either that was changed or I read it wrong. I either case, Necrons ain't the best in CC


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2009)

hey Mud213

im sure ur aware of this but its always important not move warriors to far from ur main army (keep close to ur monolith etc) and get close enough to rapid fire but DO NOT get in cc, deep strike them back to ur monolith b4 they get a chance to assault u, or even if they already have (gets triky versing nids)

also ive never actually used a tomb spyder b4 and i dont plan to, they, like any unit CAN be good at times but overall i'd use the points elsewhere but seeing as u have worked well with it i might giv it a shot... possibly.... maybe not


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

Thanatos said:


> im sure ur aware of this but its always important not move warriors to far from ur main army (keep close to ur monolith etc) and get close enough to rapid fire but DO NOT get in cc, deep strike them back to ur monolith b4 they get a chance to assault u, or even if they already have (gets triky versing nids)
> 
> also ive never actually used a tomb spyder b4 and i dont plan to, they, like any unit CAN be good at times but overall i'd use the points elsewhere but seeing as u have worked well with it i might giv it a shot... possibly.... maybe not


As for the first part, although I have only played one game, I found it hard to stay out of CC when there are 4 rhinos charging in. I don't have nearly enough shots to glance my way to stopping them. I understand that you _should_ keep them out of combat, but when there are that many transports the Warriors can't stop them from getting too close. If they are within 24" but farther than 12", then they will use smoke launchers. This makes it much much harder to stop them. If they are within 12" and are still in their rhinos, then I'll probably get enough glancing to stun or immobilize it. It doesn't really mean anything since they can still jump out run 6" then charge 6". Any advice on this?

You should seriously consider Tomb Spyders though. As long as the enemy doesn't have a PF, then you will do a decent amount of damage with your 3 MC attacks. Sure it's WS sucks balls, but it doesn't matter! It sounds bad on paper, but against WS 4 you still hit on 4+, *boo hoo* but it is hardly _terrible_. After that it wounds on a 2+ (against most troops). That 3+ save isn't all that bad since you won't have to take it that often due to his T6 or they used a PF (which you don't even get to save). At the very least, it will hold up some enemies so that they aren't attacking your precious Warriors. Also, being an MC, he gets the extra 2d6 to pen, so unless you roll 3 or less, then you will probably destroy or at least really mess up an enemy vehicle. Lastly, he can count as a "nearest unit". All of that for 55 points.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

Here's a question I want to pose to Necroncowboy.

Wraiths. Are they meant to/ can they be lasting units that continually chip away at the flanks, and suchlike, or are they best employed to cause as much havok as possible for the short while they last. In analogy form: 
are they a cancer or are they menighitis?

Secondly, the argument over 3 wraiths = 20 boyz seems a bit moot. Firstly, as necron players the option for boyz (or like) is unavailable so the comparison seems a bit weak. Secondly against Orkz I would have thought Wraiths would be better off as vehicle hunters/ character assassins. At worse as bait to keep the green tide off your phallanx.

My final point goes out to Mud213. I really like the idea of spyders too. So much so that I did a small playtest of 3 spyders assaulting a Landraider (that hadn't moved). The results seem to speak for themselves. Hope you like 'em.
Round 1:
Glancing hits-3
Penetrating hits-3
Result- Wrecked / immobilised + 2 weapons destroyed + Stunned

Round 2:
Glancing-3
Penetrating-2
Result- Explodes

Round 3:
G-\
P-2
Result- Stunned

Round 4:
G-1
P-3
Result- Wrecked

Round 5:
G-1
P-3
Result- Explodes

Round 6:
G-1
P-2
Result- Wrecked

Round 7:
G-1
P-3
Result- Wrecked

Round 8:
G-\
P-6
Result- Wrecked

Round 9:
G-2
P-1
Result- Wrecked

Round 10:
G-1
P-5
Result- Explodes 

That's a wrecked result 50/60% of the time. That's also a completely useless Land Raider next turn 100% of the time. Tasty.

Also, I really like the fact that they don't have to maintain coherrence.


----------



## Wu-Tang-Tau (Apr 2, 2009)

I am thinking about fielding a scarab swarm list with mass tomb spyder. 

3 full squads of scarabs, 9 tomb spyders  

3 squads of 10 warriors and maybe 1 - 2 lords.

Ha ha would be funny just to see what happens! (Thats about a 1750 list)


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Spadge said:


> Here's a question I want to pose to Necroncowboy.
> 
> Wraiths. Are they meant to/ can they be lasting units that continually chip away at the flanks, and suchlike, or are they best employed to cause as much havok as possible for the short while they last. In analogy form:
> are they a cancer or are they menighitis?
> ...


There is very little chance that people will leave their tanks just sitting around waiting to get hit. By moving even 1" they improve their safety by requiring a 4+ to hit. Most players will do that. This means the TSs will only hit 50% of the time. 
You also forget that your TSs can't be locked with the Land Raider so they can be shot and attacked by other units in the intervening turns.

If you want to pop tanks in cc use Destroyer Lords with Warscythes or C'tan, TSs are a poor choice.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm planning to playtest attacking a landraider at combat speed. I've got a feeling you're still going to be looking at common -weapons + immobilised results. I'm also gonna test 'em against various infantry units and such.
Whatever way you look at it for 55pts you're gettin' a monstrous creature. For 165pts you get upto 12 attacks that will usually hit on 4+ and unsavably wound on 2+. How can that be written off as useless?


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

> Wraiths. Are they meant to/ can they be lasting units that continually chip away at the flanks, and suchlike, or are they best employed to cause as much havok as possible for the short while they last. In analogy form:
> are they a cancer or are they menighitis?


I mean I don't know what they are meant to be. To me they offer a great amount of speed and flexibility. I will use them differently against different armies, deployments etc.. The important thing for me is to understand the math of the game, so I can better tell what they are good/bad at in a certain situation. What is important is they move in large numbers with a destroyer lord w/res orb to maximise WBB rolls.



> Secondly, the argument over 3 wraiths = 20 boyz seems a bit moot. Firstly, as necron players the option for boyz (or like) is unavailable so the comparison seems a bit weak. Secondly against Orkz I would have thought Wraiths would be better off as vehicle hunters/ character assassins. At worse as bait to keep the green tide off your phallanx.


Wraiths are far more flexible and maneuverable than 20 boyz, so I don't see the comparison here.



> My final point goes out to Mud213. I really like the idea of spyders too. So much so that I did a small playtest of 3 spyders assaulting a Landraider (that hadn't moved). The results seem to speak for themselves.


I think playtesting can be a waste of time and not quite accurate. You should learn the probability theory instead, or you could wait until next month when I make my mathhammer app web based.

As for wraiths being vehicle killers, even having to roll a 4+ makes them extremely effective. With a unit of 3 charging a vehicle with AV 10 in the rear, you get the following effectiveness.

shaken: 57.83%
stunned: 39.99%
weapon: 39.99%
immob: 39.99%
wreck: 28.68%
explode: 28.68%

combined prob of wreck + explode = 49.63%

Also in an army where just about every ranged weapon can glance a vehicle on a roll of a 6, then your shooty guys should have no probally getting a vehicle to not move for a turn so the wraiths can tear it up.

I don't see why people think wraiths are so fragile,
1 T4 3+ inv save for 20% less points than a destroyers 1 T5 3+ not inv save.

They do suck against mass amounts of small arms fire, but that's just something you have to try to keep them clear of.


----------



## BrotherR (Oct 10, 2008)

Let me relate some from my last game against marines. I turboboosted 8 scarabs 24" 1st turn making sure they were not in any units assault range. then a 12" 2nd move and 6" assault into a 6 strong marine devastator squad. The scarabs finally lost on turn 4 after he brought another squad over to help. leaving 2 marines from the devastator squad standing.

I deep struck 8 flayed ones. one was lost to shooting after wbb rolls. Moving a destroyer lord up to support they proceeded to kill 2 10 man marine squads.

a tomb spyder charged a terminator serg and terminator wearing librarian. the Librarian managed to kill it after 2 full turns of cc the sgt never wounded it before he died.

I always have good luck with scarabs as long as you look at them as tarpits allowing the rest of your army to deal with other threats.


----------



## NecronCowboy (Jan 8, 2009)

BrotherR said:


> Let me relate some from my last game against marines. I turboboosted 8 scarabs 24" 1st turn making sure they were not in any units assault range. then a 12" 2nd move and 6" assault into a 6 strong marine devastator squad. The scarabs finally lost on turn 4 after he brought another squad over to help. leaving 2 marines from the devastator squad standing.
> 
> I deep struck 8 flayed ones. one was lost to shooting after wbb rolls. Moving a destroyer lord up to support they proceeded to kill 2 10 man marine squads.
> 
> ...


Sounds like you smartly used Necron's in close combat to win a game, well done!!! I have similar experiences, and you just can't ignore close combat.


----------



## Spadge (Apr 6, 2009)

*BrotherR:* Mate, excellent. There hasn't been enough speciffic personal experience expounded here, which is more valuable than anything else. I'm glad You had such luck with your guys, I wonder though if you've had any spectacular failures when it comes to Necron cc?

NecronCowboy:


> I think playtesting can be a waste of time and not quite accurate. You should learn the probability theory instead, or you could wait until next month when I make my mathhammer app web based.


Wrong. At least in part. I agree with you. I also like doing the math as it helps paint a picture but any gamer knows that sometimes the dice just don't roll in your favour. This is why I also like playtesting as it can validate the numbers and give you a better idea of exaclty how good/bad it can get. So while I like the mathhammer approach I'm also mindful that, if you will, It take more than music theory to make a musician.
To clarify: I'm not suggesting that you rely solely on math over experience but that perhaps you might be a bit rash in discounting playtesting as, any empiricist might tell you, the theory and practice are mutually dependent.

Also I'll open the question out to you, and everybody else too for that matter. Have you found any particular CC unit+tactic to have catastrophic results?


----------

