Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've updated the 1st post with some general info that might be useful for anyone who wants a quick catch up/newer players unfamiliar with Necrons in 10th so far.

Shout out if there is anything you think I've missed that would be important for new players to be aware of and I'll add it in.

 Xyxel wrote:
1. Cryptothralls receive +1 to hit from being in Unit lead by Necron Character?

2. Chronomancer looks to be the best Cryptek for blob of 20 Warriors? (gonna try out soon)
Extra 5" each shooting phase make them fast to grab objective early. -1 to hit makes them more resilient than inv or FnP.

I run a Silver Tide list with 40 Warriors and 10 Immortals as its core and the Illuminor between them all. Warriors have the "Aggressor" build = Plasmancer and Warden....no Cryptothralls
Immortalls usually have Plasmancer + Chrono or the Traveller. Getting Auto wounds on 5s and 6s with 80 Warrior shots and however many Tesla Immortal shots is really nice. Warden allows an advance each move.

 Da-Rock wrote:
I run a Silver Tide list with 40 Warriors and 10 Immortals as its core and the Illuminor between them all. Warriors have the "Aggressor" build = Plasmancer and Warden....no Cryptothralls

Flayers or Reapers on that blob?

With the additional auto-wounds, Flayers are probably more useful. AP-1 this edition is rarely useful in WTC as most targets are SV3 with a wasted cover bonus.

I have struggled with Reaper delivery, the Night Scythe really doesn't get the job done unfortunately.

Ghost Arks have been fantastic for me in that capacity. Fairly vulnerable, however, and capped at 10-squad+character.

How is everyone keeping their reanimators alive?

punisher357 wrote:
How is everyone keeping their reanimators alive?

Mine hangs out just within range but behind cover, preferably out of LoS, as much as possible.
When this isn't possible I rely upon that old saying about the best defense being a good offense & hope what I'm actually attacking with provides a more tempting target than the Reanimator.

Okay, question about Lychguard vs Praetorians.

Lychguard are cheaper, seem to do more damage, and can be led by a bunch of characters for that useful +1 to hit. They seem better than Praetorians on every count.

Am I missing something?!

I notice Praetorians are faster and have the Fly keyword, but is that enough to justify them?

I already have Skorpekhs and Wraiths for melee. (Just bought the Wraiths, haven't used them yet.) If I wanted a mostly-melee list, would I be better off adding Lychguard or Praetorians? The numbers say Lychguard.

Thoughts?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like, if the faster Skorpekhs and Wraiths took the fight to the enemy, while the Lychguard mostly just capped objectives in the same way Warriors would (tar pit)..?

Hecate wrote:
Okay, question about Lychguard vs Praetorians.

Lychguard are cheaper, seem to do more damage, and can be led by a bunch of characters for that useful +1 to hit. They seem better than Praetorians on every count.

Am I missing something?!

I notice Praetorians are faster and have the Fly keyword, but is that enough to justify them?

I already have Skorpekhs and Wraiths for melee. (Just bought the Wraiths, haven't used them yet.) If I wanted a mostly-melee list, would I be better off adding Lychguard or Praetorians? The numbers say Lychguard.

Thoughts?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like, if the faster Skorpekhs and Wraiths took the fight to the enemy, while the Lychguard mostly just capped objectives in the same way Warriors would (tar pit)..?

You're missing nothing really. Praetorians have a decent enough datasheet and a small squad with either loadout would make a good deepstriking utility unit, but they are way overcosted for what they do. Lychguard on the other hand excel at exactly what you highlight - cap objectives, tar pit stuff and just generally be incredibly tough for a much more reasonable price.

Damage wise praetorian dam2 outweights lychguard dam1. Of course could go with warscythe but then you have slow unit wrth reduced durability when point of lychguard is durability.

But not sure fast meq melee killer is highest priority. Those die to shooting generally

Lychguard weapons are higher strength and equal or better AP... Less damage, sure, but still something strong enough to hurt whatever charges them.

Definitely leaning towards Lychguard. Especially with having access to leaders and being so much cheaper.

Praetorians shouldn't be compared to Lytchguard, they fill very different slots in the army. Lytchgaurd's whole thing is durability to protect a Lord. Yes they can have good output in combat but they need to get there first.

Preatorians are closer to Wraiths. They can move fast (for Necrons), have Deep Strike with re-roll charges, and have an actual Ranged Attack. Assuming a 5 man, you can have 15 attacks with Devastating Wound from the Pistol. Wraith, in a 3 man, can have the same but with less output from less shots. In Melee they are very similar (Void Blades vs Claws) The Wraiths advantage is better durability with its 4++

Praetorians are overcosted at 135, Lychguard are undercosted* at 95, characters are undercosted* which benefits units that can have them attached.

* Note that as this would be relative to other factions, undercosted could mean correctly costed depending on how game wide balance is handled.

This is of course ignoring the no weapon costs power level elephant in the room.

EightFoldPath wrote:
Praetorians are overcosted at 135, Lychguard are undercosted* at 95, characters are undercosted* which benefits units that can have them attached.

* Note that as this would be relative to other factions, undercosted could mean correctly costed depending on how game wide balance is handled.

This is of course ignoring the no weapon costs power level elephant in the room.

How much do you think warscythes need to come down to be equally viable to shields? Alternatively how much would the rules for warscythes need to be improved to be equal to shields. It's not like shields have amazing rules this edition, it's just because of multiplicative reasons they're better at the moment right? Wouldn't min-size scythes be better than min-size shields?

 vict0988 wrote:

EightFoldPath wrote:
Praetorians are overcosted at 135, Lychguard are undercosted* at 95, characters are undercosted* which benefits units that can have them attached.

* Note that as this would be relative to other factions, undercosted could mean correctly costed depending on how game wide balance is handled.

This is of course ignoring the no weapon costs power level elephant in the room.

How much do you think warscythes need to come down to be equally viable to shields? Alternatively how much would the rules for warscythes need to be improved to be equal to shields. It's not like shields have amazing rules this edition, it's just because of multiplicative reasons they're better at the moment right? Wouldn't min-size scythes be better than min-size shields?

Avoiding the hypothetical of ‘What If weapons had granular costs again’, I don’t think any increase in warscythe stats would materially affect whether they get taken in the same way. Lychguard are popular now due to the survivability including shields. If Scythes were buffed enough, then possibly we would see 3rd squads being taken with Scythes in addition to singular or double squads with shields—or some other unit would have to take over the Objective Babysitting role so you could max out on 2 or 3 squads of scythe-guard.

I think you would still run into delivery problems as Lychguard are quite slow moving and lack any kinds of charge re-rolls, +distance, and fight first mechanics.

 vict0988 wrote:

EightFoldPath wrote:
Praetorians are overcosted at 135, Lychguard are undercosted* at 95, characters are undercosted* which benefits units that can have them attached.

* Note that as this would be relative to other factions, undercosted could mean correctly costed depending on how game wide balance is handled.

This is of course ignoring the no weapon costs power level elephant in the room.

How much do you think warscythes need to come down to be equally viable to shields? Alternatively how much would the rules for warscythes need to be improved to be equal to shields. It's not like shields have amazing rules this edition, it's just because of multiplicative reasons they're better at the moment right? Wouldn't min-size scythes be better than min-size shields?

1) ?? Both options cost zero pts. So I'm not sure what you're talking about by warscythes "coming down".

2) Scythes & shields do completely different things. One increases the damage output, the other aids in survivability. You'd probably have to boost the scythes ap &/or damage quite unreasonably to be more usefull than the unit surviving in the 1st place.

3) shields have the same nice rule now as they did last edition. A 4++ save.
Very usefull when hoofing it across the field or when tying up melee things with high ap.
And now that units also accompanied by multiple buffing characters.
10 shield toting LG buffed have a 3+ save, a 4++ save, FNP, res protocols, bonuses on res protocols, 30 attacks that hit & (generally) wound on 3s, maybe 4s at a decent AP... am I missing anything?
That's adds up to a damned hard unit to remove.

4) Wich is better: min sized scyth unit or min sized shield unit?
Shields.
I'd prefer more survivability vs more damage/ap.
But I also would never field a minimum sized squad of either type.
Especially not if for some reason I'd chosen scythes.
Especially ++ not if scythes got ramped up.
My opponent will see that big damage unit coming & throw enough firepower with enough ap at it to wipe it out or, if maxed, reduce it down to about min size.

Lychguard could become 17 pts and shields could cost 2 pts, or 18 and 1, I'm trying to understand how much stronger shields are. It sounds like sieGermans thinks it's a big valley if it's not just a question of adding 1 to AP and S.

Don't act like you can't compare Lychguard units with different weapon options ccs, you are being silly. They are the same unit, with a different wargear option.

Shields don't add 1 to saves like they did in 9th, warscythes got devastating wounds and the difference between AP 2 and 3 is bigger than the difference between AP 3 and 4 for math reasons I can go into if anyone is interested.

My logic is that warscythes ought to be relatively better in 10th compared to shields than they were in 9th. From a logical standpoint, I think we should be seeing warscythes, not shields dominating the tournament scene. Shields were the weaker option in 8th and this is the best warscythes have been and the worst shields have been.

I think warscythe Lychguard deserve a second look, losing a unit of them isn't a big deal and their survivability is higher than ever.

 vict0988 wrote:
Lychguard could become 17 pts and shields could cost 2 pts, or 18 and 1, I'm trying to understand how much stronger shields are. It sounds like sieGermans thinks it's a big valley if it's not just a question of adding 1 to AP and S.

Don't act like you can't compare Lychguard units with different weapon options ccs, you are being silly. They are the same unit, with a different wargear option.

Shields don't add 1 to saves like they did in 9th, warscythes got devastating wounds and the difference between AP 2 and 3 is bigger than the difference between AP 3 and 4 for math reasons I can go into if anyone is interested.

My logic is that warscythes ought to be relatively better in 10th compared to shields than they were in 9th. From a logical standpoint, I think we should be seeing warscythes, not shields dominating the tournament scene. Shields were the weaker option in 8th and this is the best warscythes have been and the worst shields have been.

I think warscythe Lychguard deserve a second look, losing a unit of them isn't a big deal and their survivability is higher than ever.

I think if I understand the point one of the issues is delivery; either pop them in reserves or put them in a Night Scythe (and then put the Night Scythe in reserves cuz aircraft). It seems like the common wisdom is to keep dedicated melee units off the table until you can plop them where they need to go, which is why Deep Strike is so hot.

 vict0988 wrote:
How much do you think warscythes need to come down to be equally viable to shields? Alternatively how much would the rules for warscythes need to be improved to be equal to shields. It's not like shields have amazing rules this edition, it's just because of multiplicative reasons they're better at the moment right? Wouldn't min-size scythes be better than min-size shields?

For Lychguard 2 attacks per scythe is really bad, so a 50% boost to 3 attacks would be the first thing they could consider. At that point I would be tempted to attach Orikan to get a 4++ (but lose out on a 5+++ because of that) and use as a counterpunch unit. But I agree with you that shields combine so much better with everything else the army is doing that 3 attacks might not fix it and they'd have to look at 4 attacks (or 3 attacks and improving S or AP). Maybe adding the 4th attack via a detachment rule rather than a datasheet change.

 Don Qui Hotep wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
Lychguard could become 17 pts and shields could cost 2 pts, or 18 and 1, I'm trying to understand how much stronger shields are. It sounds like sieGermans thinks it's a big valley if it's not just a question of adding 1 to AP and S.

Don't act like you can't compare Lychguard units with different weapon options ccs, you are being silly. They are the same unit, with a different wargear option.

Shields don't add 1 to saves like they did in 9th, warscythes got devastating wounds and the difference between AP 2 and 3 is bigger than the difference between AP 3 and 4 for math reasons I can go into if anyone is interested.

My logic is that warscythes ought to be relatively better in 10th compared to shields than they were in 9th. From a logical standpoint, I think we should be seeing warscythes, not shields dominating the tournament scene. Shields were the weaker option in 8th and this is the best warscythes have been and the worst shields have been.

I think warscythe Lychguard deserve a second look, losing a unit of them isn't a big deal and their survivability is higher than ever.

I think if I understand the point one of the issues is delivery; either pop them in reserves or put them in a Night Scythe (and then put the Night Scythe in reserves cuz aircraft). It seems like the common wisdom is to keep dedicated melee units off the table until you can plop them where they need to go, which is why Deep Strike is so hot.

Delivery is only an issue if you are prioritising them fighting. Lycheguard are incredibly durable - you can walk them up the board, camp an objective, and dare your opponent to try and shift them.

As an example:
*A Lycheguard costs the same as an Intercessor. Using the basic no frills bolt rifle profile (bs3+, s4, ap-1), it would take 120 attacks to kill 10 basic Intercessors, or 180 shots to kill 10 Lycheguard on average (either type as the shield gives no help against ap-1).
*Add a Technomancer and you get -1 to wound rolls and FNP. It now takes 540 bolt rifle shots to shift the 10 Lycheguard. Odds are your opponent doesn't have that firepower lying around, so you don't die in one turn (reanimation protocols kicks in).
*Add an Overlord and you get both a res orb and a free strat activation - use protocol of the undying legions and you get 3 reanimations on the unit per battle round.
*Now add some Cryptothralls on top and you see where this is going (about 684 bolt rifle shots FYI).
*In all of the above, the extras you add cost way less than adding another 10 Lycheguard to your army, but add more than 10 Lycheguard worth of durability so are worth it.

The shields are only considered better as they protect against high AP/high damage attacks that could bust through the other defences more efficiently - but if you want to play Scytheguard go for it and just accept that you have merely the 2nd most durable unit available.

Also - Nightscythe is not a delivery service unless you plan on turn 3 charges. Turn 1 off the board, turn 2 on a table edge, turn 3 dissembark/move/charge. You may as well strategic reserve them.

 Insularum wrote:

 Don Qui Hotep wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
Lychguard could become 17 pts and shields could cost 2 pts, or 18 and 1, I'm trying to understand how much stronger shields are. It sounds like sieGermans thinks it's a big valley if it's not just a question of adding 1 to AP and S.

Don't act like you can't compare Lychguard units with different weapon options ccs, you are being silly. They are the same unit, with a different wargear option.

Shields don't add 1 to saves like they did in 9th, warscythes got devastating wounds and the difference between AP 2 and 3 is bigger than the difference between AP 3 and 4 for math reasons I can go into if anyone is interested.

My logic is that warscythes ought to be relatively better in 10th compared to shields than they were in 9th. From a logical standpoint, I think we should be seeing warscythes, not shields dominating the tournament scene. Shields were the weaker option in 8th and this is the best warscythes have been and the worst shields have been.

I think warscythe Lychguard deserve a second look, losing a unit of them isn't a big deal and their survivability is higher than ever.

I think if I understand the point one of the issues is delivery; either pop them in reserves or put them in a Night Scythe (and then put the Night Scythe in reserves cuz aircraft). It seems like the common wisdom is to keep dedicated melee units off the table until you can plop them where they need to go, which is why Deep Strike is so hot.

Delivery is only an issue if you are prioritising them fighting. Lycheguard are incredibly durable - you can walk them up the board, camp an objective, and dare your opponent to try and shift them.
.
As an example:
*A Lycheguard costs the same as an Intercessor. Using the basic no frills bolt rifle profile (bs3+, s4, ap-1), it would take 120 attacks to kill 10 basic Intercessors, or 180 shots to kill 10 Lycheguard on average (either type as the shield gives no help against ap-1).
*Add a Technomancer and you get -1 to wound rolls and FNP. It now takes 540 bolt rifle shots to shift the 10 Lycheguard. Odds are your opponent doesn't have that firepower lying around, so you don't die in one turn (reanimation protocols kicks in).
*Add an Overlord and you get both a res orb and a free strat activation - use protocol of the undying legions and you get 3 reanimations on the unit per battle round.
*Now add some Cryptothralls on top and you see where this is going (about 684 bolt rifle shots FYI).
*In all of the above, the extras you add cost way less than adding another 10 Lycheguard to your army, but add more than 10 Lycheguard worth of durability so are worth it.

The shields are only considered better as they protect against high AP/high damage attacks that could bust through the other defences more efficiently - but if you want to play Scytheguard go for it and just accept that you have merely the 2nd most durable unit available.

Also - Nightscythe is not a delivery service unless you plan on turn 3 charges. Turn 1 off the board, turn 2 on a table edge, turn 3 dissembark/move/charge. You may as well strategic reserve them.

All good points, but I think the point about Techomancer/Overlord/Orb/Cryptothralls apply to any unit they join - Lychguard have the same toughness as Immortals and the same number of wounds as 20 Warriors. The shields do some heavy lifting for me, particularly against multi-damage weapons I like not having to rely on individual 5+++.

I do dig 20 warscythes attacks with Devastating Wounds, quick math works out 18.51 wounds against MEQ (~3.13 being mortals) vs 8.89 wounds from hyperphase swords. That said a unit of Rod Praetorians will give you similar results (albeit without Devastating).

I agree with your point about the Night Scythe, I tried to make it work in a few games but Aircraft are in a rough space this edition.

Neither immortal nor warrior have -1 to wound though.

Which stops unit i have that would wipe 10 immortals and 20 warriors, fully buffed, with overkill, from killing lychguard in one go. Then they res back.

It's not just shield that matters. And it all adds up to point very few single unit can wipe off in one go. And if you don't wipe in one go rp kicks in.

I'll admit, I was comparing Lychguard and Praetorians because the models look so similar. Didn't realise they filled different niches.

As for the Night Scythe... Instinct says it should make things quicker, but it'd be turn 3 before it can deliver a unit onto a key location. That's just not good enough, generally.

Seems a 10-person Lychguard unit is cheaper than 20 Warriors, so may be the best "sit on an objective" unit. Like, have a heavy unit on your home objective (Doomstalker, Deathmarks etc.), then advance the Lychguard onto the centre objective, if possible. They seem to be a good choice for victory points rather than killing stuff. Better than Warriors, maybe.

Of course, they're not available on the Australian GW site, so it's kind of moot right now.

Definitely want 10 Lychguard now. Played a game today, and yet again my Warrior blob wasn't hugely effective, simply because of getting charged early on. They were okay, but not great.

But a Lychguard blob would be fine getting charged. They'd probably survive, then could do actual damage back.

My Warriors have wound up in early melees in pretty much every game of 10th so far. Not sure about how to stop this... The 12" range weapon is simply stronger, but it means not hanging back as much. Still... They distract the enemy really well. Took 'til end of turn 4 for my opponent to finish them off.

tneva82 wrote:
Neither immortal nor warrior have -1 to wound though.

Which stops unit i have that would wipe 10 immortals and 20 warriors, fully buffed, with overkill, from killing lychguard in one go. Then they res back.

It's not just shield that matters. And it all adds up to point very few single unit can wipe off in one go. And if you don't wipe in one go rp kicks in.

Yer right, I wasn't taking that into account. Immortals and Lychguard, same toughness, get hit by bolter fire and one gets wounded on 5+ and the other on 6+ - that adds up over the course of a game.

Hecate wrote:
Definitely want 10 Lychguard now. Played a game today, and yet again my Warrior blob wasn't hugely effective, simply because of getting charged early on. They were okay, but not great.

But a Lychguard blob would be fine getting charged. They'd probably survive, then could do actual damage back.

My Warriors have wound up in early melees in pretty much every game of 10th so far. Not sure about how to stop this... The 12" range weapon is simply stronger, but it means not hanging back as much. Still... They distract the enemy really well. Took 'til end of turn 4 for my opponent to finish them off.

Hungry Void is a great stratagem to throw on a group of 20 warriors but unfortunately we're often so strapped for CP. An Orb Lord is a cheap way to keep Warriors alive but then you lose the once-per-round free Stratagem, but if you throw an Overlord in you're probably using the free stratagem on Undying Legions.

Oh, the Warriors usually survive for a long time. That's not the issue. The issue is that they're rubbish in melee, and thus get charged early on and do very limited damage.

If they were fast enough to get on the centre objective in turn 1, it'd be fine. They could just sit there and generate VP for most of the game. But they're not really fast enough for that. And I'm hesitant to sit them on the home objective, where the stronger weapon will be out of range most of the time.

They're just sort of an in-between unit... Still decent, but not as good as I want them to be.

If we had a "fall back and shoot" stratagem, that'd be a great use of the Overlord's free strat. Alas...

If you dont have a particular reason for an Overlord in warriors you could use a Warden.

Can still attach crypteks with a warden around

Warden makes the guns heavy and assault. The heavy is a bit redundant unless youre hitting at -1 to hit targets but the assault means they can advance at least and still shoot.
Theres also Chronomancers which let them move another 5" after they shoot (cant charge or move out of combat of course)

Doesnt solve not having a fall back and shoot but you can make a warrior blob surprisingly fast at least, and the Chrono's -1 to hit rule is "attack" so it also helps in melee

I was using an Overlord for the free strat, but admittedly I was using the Assault one so I could advance and shoot. Still didn't really help... Might try a different character next time.

Chronomancer could be good with Overlord OR Warden with the Assault thing. Might get me onto a no-man's-land objective in turn 1, which is mostly what I want. A turn of shooting, then objective capping.

Still think Lychguard are the better choice, though.

The way I use Warriors is I pretend they have 0 shots in shooting and 0 attacks in combat.

So list building, waste no resources on buffing their shooting or combat. Focus only on resilience and movement.

In game, waste no resouces on buffing their shooting or combat. Focus only on resilience and movement.

This is a little toungue in cheek but you get the idea.

So for weapon choice I go with the now allowed 10 of each, because it gives some flexibility for plinking a single wound off a tank or killing two grots, but doesn't fall into the trap (in my opinion) of expecting output with 20 of either choice.