DISQUS

General Anvilpants · 4 months ago

Heavy Destroyers in amongst just themselves are alright. It's really when paired with a Monolith that they excel. I like to deploy the Monolith about 20" from the table side on a flank opposite enemy armor. A squad of 3 x Heavy Destroyers then deploy closer to the table side, maybe about 14" in, using the Monolith as a shield on their inside flank. A Necron Lord with Destroyer Body and Resurrection Orb then deploys at the far outside flank of the formation, about 12" from the table side, supported by a full squad of 5 x standard Destroyers.

This whole formation glides up one flank using the Monolith to screen it from heavy weapons fire diagonally across from it. The whole formation then focuses fire on enemy directly across from it and flays them. The Heavy Destroyers open fire on armor first, especially if there are transports to force disembarking. The Monolith can then drop a template on the disembarked unit and the Destroyers can strafe them too.

Enemy armor usually ignores the Heavy Destroyers to concentrate on the Monolith which mostly shrugs it off. If a Heavy Destroyer does take a hit the lord is there with the Res. Orb. If a lot AP fire is directed at them the Destroyers will push to the front and take the hits and give the Heavys a cover save. If there are outflanking units the Lord also has a Warscythe and Disruption Field which is enough to see them off. If he gets stuck the Monolith is always right there to yoink him out of combat.

When they get to the other side of the table the formation just turns and fires enfilading fire down the enemies side. It's basically just a refused flank tactic.

I've used this many times and it works remarkably well. The Heavy Destroyers are a vital part of the formation though. Without their high strength cannons Necrons just struggle with reliably penetrating vehicles.

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

For tomb spiders, Pair up 2 spiders (1 with a particle cannon), a lord, plus 2 and only 2 spawned scarab swarms. Find some cover for the swarms and lord and what do you have? A unit that has toughness of 6 and 3+ cover saves of hidden swarms that can regenerate hits and WBB saves in a large radius. That becomes one seriously hard unit to shift.

Always be careful with Heavy Ds. With only 3 in a unit they can be wiped easily in a bad round of shooting. Placement of these units is key. 36" range means they should always be out of range of small/medium arms fire. Only expose them to the vehicle they need to destroy if at all possible. If playing in very open terrain, forget it, they will eat las fire and autocannon, and multilaser and be dead after turn 1. A sneaky trick is to base them directly onto a flightstand without the pole. That way they can get cover from troops and other low objects.

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

That ain't sneaky, that's cheating.

pcrackenhead · 4 months ago

Agreed, might want to check the rulebook on Monstrous Creatures and units...

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

Perhaps you should check the rulebook. I don't see anything prohibiting this and if you do please post it. 2 Tomb spiders consist of a single unit. That unit can spawn scarab bases that become part of the unit. A Necron Lord can join any unit that consists of 2 or more models.

Multiple unit toughness - Use the majority or lacking that the highest toughness value. Since there are exactly 2 spiders and 2 swarms and 1 lord That would be 6 of the spiders.
Allocate wounds to the scarab swarms first then lord, then each spider. Its the same principle as nob bikers with multiple weapons. Only this time you have a 3+ cover save for your first 2 wounds then regular 3+ saves for the rest.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its not legal.

pcrackenhead · 4 months ago

But the Spyders are separate units, even though they take up one force org slot. So the lord can join up with 1 of the Spyders, but not both.

James · 4 months ago

pcrackenhead is right. The Tomb Spyders may come from the same Heavy Support choice but they are separate units, not a single one.

Necron Codex p.20: 'Tomb Spyders are deployed as a single unit but do not have to be placed together and operate as independent units duirng the game.'

Legion3000 is right about the benefits of multiple unit toughness in this combo, though you can only attach a Lord to a 'Spyder once the 'Spyder has spawned at least one Scarab Swarm.

Page 20 of the Necron codex says that spawned Scarabs form a unit with the Spyder that spawned them, page 48 of the 40K rulebook says that independent characters cannot join units that consist of a single model, like Monstrous Creatures.

Pairing a Lord with a Spyder that's spawned a single Scarab Swarm is legal and can be nasty, though when I've tried it they've turned into a firepower magnet so take a lot more Spyders, each spawning a single Scarab swarm. 6+ Spyders in a 2,000 pt army can surprise Marine players but next time they'll load up on plasma, melta and power fists and get their own back.

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

I haven't seen an official faq on the subject. The problem in the rule in the cron codex is that it says "Spyders are deployed as a single unit but do not have to be placed together and operate as independent units"
The problem is the logic operator AND comes after the qualifier "do not have to". Which simplifies to "placed together as a unit OR placed separately AND independent units.

A clear statement would read, "All Spyders are deployed at the same time and operate as independent units". None of that ambiguous "deployed as a unit but may be separate" crap.

IF the rule is indeed they can't be a single unit you still can join your lord to one after they spawn a scarab base in the first turn and the above tactic still applies. A unit with St 6, cover save 3+, then 3+ all around and it can regenerate swarms in the assault phase. If one unit dies, the lord jumps to the second unit.

nick_c · 4 months ago

According to the wording, Tomb Spyders operate as independent units regardless of whether they are placed together or not. They are deployed as a single unit, but once they have been deployed, they are independent.

James · 4 months ago

Agreed.

"Tomb Spyders are deployed as a single unit but do not have to be placed together and operate as independent units during the game." is clear. Tomb Spyders:

i) are deployed as a single unit;
ii) do not have to be placed together [when deployed]
iii) operate as independent units during the game.

That is quite unambiguous. You can of course join a Lord to a unit that consists of a single Spyder and a Scarab base that it has spawned but the Codex states that Spyders are independent once they have been deployed.

Nabterayl · 4 months ago

I agree that the language is ambiguous. I'd suggest that it was written that way because at the time of writing units were deployed one by one in an I-go-you-go fashion, so it was important to know whether a) three tomb spyders forced the enemy to deploy three units or one and b) all three tomb spyders had to start the game in coherency.

I'd suggest, based on what I know about GW's British/house style, that the meaning at the time of writing was a) tomb spyders are placed on the board at once during deployment (and thus you would place all your tomb spyders, and your opponent would place another Heavy Support unit), b) no tomb spyder must be deployed in coherency of another unit, and c) once on the table, each tomb spyder is its own unit. The sentence isn't grammatical if you read it as "Tomb Spyders are deployed as a single unit but do not have to be ... operate as a single unit during the game."

pcrackenhead · 4 months ago

You'll definitely hear no qualm from me about how saves and multiple units work, and the fact that the Lord can join them once they've made their scarab.

You definitely can't start the game out attached, and depending on when you make the scarab (I can't recall off the top of my head) you might not be able to join first turn. Joining up a unit happens in the movement phase, so unless making a scarab happens at the start of the turn (and I believe it's actually in the shooting phase) the Necron Lord wouldn't be able to join the unit until turn 2.

To me there's no ambiguity in the wording, you deploy the entire force org slot at the same time, but they each operate independently. If choosing to have them operate separately or as a group was a part of the rule, I think the whole thing would need to be worded differently.

pcrackenhead · 4 months ago

Yep, double checked the codex, you can't create a scarab until the assault phase.

So, during the first turn the Lord and the Tomb Spider will have to be separate, since he can only join the unit by moving in coherency with it during the movement phase.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

"Spyders are deployed as a single unit but do not have to be placed together and operate as independent units"

There is no ambiguity here at all.

Each Spyder is a unit itself. Its pretty cut and dry here.

Lerra · 4 months ago

You can't base them directly onto the flying base without the pole. If they allow that at a tournament, it's only out of pity.

If you tried that in a casual game I'd give you the stink eye.

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

I've never had a single person at a tourney or elsewhere question it. Nor have I ever seen a tourney rules set that required you to use x inches of flight pole. The base is still the correct size which is all that really matters when dealing with charges and blasts.

Really it started as a stability thing as I have had my army for several years now. Just about every game something would break off the crappy plastic rods and they would spend the rest of the time sitting on the table anyway. So I figured I might as well just glue them directly to the stands and they don't break off. It was just an added bonus when 5th came out and the new LOS rules, but at the same time completely screwed Necron Close combat.

4thCompanyCommanderCorvus · 4 months ago

Fair enough, maybe invest in Metal Rods wont snap and they will look cool and skimmy again as per the fluff, but hey youre army do what you like with it :), just a suggestion :)

anon · 4 months ago

if you look at the new FAQ for the guard they stat that you have to use the flying base supplied with the new valk.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

That's because in apocalypse it an be a flyer and it doesn't make sense fro a vehicle like that to be be able to hug the ground in the way a skimmer can.

AoM · 4 months ago

Pity has nothing to do with it. As long as the base is the right size, he's good to go.

What if he attached them to a piece of a wall from a ruined building he used on the base? Would you go around measuring it to make sure it was at least as tall as the shorter stick that comes with a GW flight stand?

If he tried to use the smaller flying base from, say, Tau drones, then he'd be cheating. Right now, he's just choosing not to use clear plastic pegs.

Lerra · 4 months ago

The peg is clearly part of the base, though. Sure, you can do whatever crazy conversions that you can think of, but imo it still falls under the rule where your bases can be larger, but not smaller than the small peg.

Also, most tournaments have a rule that conversions are allowed only if they do not benefit you, and modding your destroyers to get extra cover would fall under that.

AoM · 4 months ago

using a taller stem benefits you as you can see easier without cover getting in the way. you also sacrifice your own cover saves. the inverse is also true.

mordiano · 4 months ago

doesnt the models have to be based on the bases they come with (or bigger)? ....no cutting or removing of the base i´d say..

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

What happens when they supply 2 poles of different sizes? Does it say somewhere that you have to use the taller one, or any pole at all? N0, All it says is BASE. You are not changing the BASE just the flight pole. People modify their flightstands all the time with a zillion different techniques some high some low.

4thCompanyCommanderCorvus · 4 months ago

Well then you put whatever pole you like in. But no offence but I can't imagine it looks cool stuck straight to it's base, It sort of rids it of the image of a skimmer in my mind, With me I don't care about loop holes I just like nice looking armies clashing against each other with lots of fluff, with both sides having fun, rarely happens but hey mans got to dream

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

They still look like they are skimming because the base is clear. My army looks very nice, its painted with color shifting automotive paint (metallic purple to green) and often wins best appearance at tourneys in my area. Unlike Eldar jetbikes all the Necron stuff skims pretty close to the ground. The monolith barely hovers over large gravel. Skimmers is probably misleading for crons, it should be more like hoverers.

4thCompanyCommanderCorvus · 4 months ago

Lmfao, well fair play if it looks good :). Wow that colour sounds cool and expensive?

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

In that case, I should base my Valkyrie without the flying standI. I could hide the Valk behind buildings.........Now do you see how silly that argument is? Using skimmers on flat bases is wrong. PERIOD. And you're wrong for doing it and trying to rules lawyer your way through it.

khanaris · 4 months ago

I agree. You can use the shortest pole or the long one, but the stand itself is part of the flying base. You can't base a model by cutting a little circle out of one of the bigger bases and claim that it is still based on the piece it came with. You can't stick a model on its own base and then stick that on a bigger base to increase your threat area.

In general, any basing decision made for game reasons rather than modeling reasons is probably illegal. You should be able to be competitive without resorting to that sort of trick.

AoM · 4 months ago

You wouldn't need to do that, as you could just mount the model onto the larger base to start with. Power armored Marine characters are done on 40mm bases all the time, but 25mm is standard there. In fact, on a nicely built scenic base, you'd never know if the entire thing was bulked up, of if there was a 25mm base hidden on top of that 40mm one you're going to have to measure from for the game.

Legion3000 might not have a popular opinion, but he's right. the footprint of the base is what counts. It can't be smaller than what the model came with, but that's all. If the circle is the same as the large flying base, it doesn't matter if it's a clear circle, a piece of concrete, or a resin base.

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

The issue isn't the size of the base. The issue is trying to manipulate the rules by basing the model lower than intended by GW. It's like putting a sentinel cockpit on a base without the legs to limit line of sight. It's BS and I'm calling BS.

Nabterayl · 4 months ago

Well, it isn't quite like that. There's a difference between changing how you base a model and not actually building the whole model.

Personally I'd be inclined to allow this. I'd hardly claim that a heavy destroyer CAN'T skim only a few inches off the ground, after all. Yes, such a model is more likely to get a cover save, but it's also more likely to CONFER a cover save, or be unable to see its target at all. The eye lasers rule cuts both ways.

mathhammer · 4 months ago

you read the eye lasers rule backwards, as long as you vision isn't blocked they get no cover save, but by your foot being blocked you now have a cover save, so yes the height is very important, otherwise every guard army in the world would have 30 conscript crawling along the ground in front of the lines.

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

Okay, that was an extreme example. However, I have seen people convert the legs on a Sentinel so that the model is shorter. I call BS on that, too. The stim is part of the model, the same way the stim is part of the Valkyrie. It is not allowed to be mounted directly to the base. There is a reason the flying bases are included in the model.

Nabterayl · 4 months ago

No, I get the eye lasers rule. My point was that the lower the firer's eyes, the more likely it is that SOMETHING is in the way of the target. This is particularly true when shooting at vehicles, which is mostly what heavy destroyers are for. It's not that hard for even a low hill to obscure 50% of a vehicle's target facing when you're basically shooting from the height of a regular model; less likely when you're shooting from the highest point on a destroyer model mounted on the top of a flying stand.

If heavy destroyers were skimmers I'd object, as the BRB explicitly says that you aren't allowed to take a skimmer off its flying stand. But it's not; it's a jetbike. I'm not in favor of deliberate cheese even if it's legal, but as Legion3000 has said, this started off as a modeling thing. If it's model/coolness-motivated, doesn't break any rules, and is played consistently with the rules so that you take the good with the bad, then I wouldn't complain even if it does give my opponent an incidental advantage.

an angry jew · 4 months ago

it can't be larger than the size it came with either unless you want to try to shoot through my 29 strong grot squad on 60mm bases

Word_Bearer · 4 months ago

Even better example. I've seem a guy who converted his necrons to appear to be "rising from the sands" of their bases so only the torsos, guns, and heads were above the bases so that they would be shorter and could use more cover. I called serious cheese.

People complained that this conversion I did for my warriors was cheap http://WordBearer.deviantart.com/art/Dragoons-f... for this very reason. As it wasn't my intention to make them shorter for rules purposes I always just rule in favor of my opponent when if causes an issue. Problem solved.

AoM · 4 months ago

If you want to take up that much table space away from the rest of your horde of greenskins, go ahead. if you want to bring true line of sight to that extent, make sure you check each individual boy in that mob when they want to shoot at anything. I'm sure they guys that are in the 3rd or 4th row probably can't shoot anything but the back of their buddy's head.

I'm not defending anyone who would do this for a game advantage. Modeling your snipers laying down/crawling, Wraithlords kneeling, or specifically using older rhinos for their smaller footprint/cross section is definitely B.S. I'm merely pointing out that it's completely legal.

I've seen may armies coming out of the water/sand/whatever. When it's done right, it's an awesome army to look at. And most people who would go to that length modeling things are usually nice enough to just count the model as the normal "average" height for that unit if it wasn't converted.

If I spent the money to use only the kneeling space marine legs, then I'd be using regular, unconverted parts, on regular bases, but it would be the same thing. I'd effectively be lowering the marines by at least 1 helmet's worth.

Quit bitching and roll some dice. If it's that much of a problem, use the same method that Infinity does. If a model is sculpted in a shorter pose than a normal standing model, assume that the model is of average height for a model of that army for all LOS purposes.

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

I don't even remember getting bases with mine :) Granted that was YEARS ago... mine aren't on bases now. I should probably look into that.

Skragger · 4 months ago

The big question with bases in my group is always "what about the old school walkers?" the metal dreadnaught and the current deff dread.. they dont even come with bases!

anon · 4 months ago

thats why GW has base bags on the site and in store . i remodeled my old chaos termies with the new larger termi bas it matters cause game wise you get mor enemy models in base to base than the smaller ones.

Lerra · 4 months ago

A destroyer wing can be very scary, especially at 1500-1850 points, where running multiple monoliths isn't a good option because of phase out. The heavy destroyers tend to last a lot longer when you've got a ton of regular destroyers to support them. As mobile shooting platforms, they are quite strong, especially against assault armies.

I played a destroyer wing list with my Deathwing and got tabled because I couldn't keep up with the destroyers, and I didn't have enough firepower to knock out a whole squad in one round, so the destroyers kept getting back up.

kaptin scuzgob · 4 months ago

i usually went with 3 units of 3 heavy destroyers, and it always went well, since one squad had a very high chance of obliterating a vehicle. they were great for finding the best places to shoot from due to their speed too.
I found them more survivable than a monolith; one lucky lascannon can pop a monolith, but that same lascannon couldnt stop a unit of 3 h. destroyers in one turn. And even then, the destroyer can get back up because the lascannon isnt double its toughness

kaptin scuzgob · 4 months ago

oh yeah! its pretty damn hard to get cover saves with monoliths, and practially everything on the board can shoot it and still avoid its weaponry. but you can hide 3 h destroyers relatively easy

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

That's kinda what I'm thinking. Going to test out the 9 H. Destroyer list tomorrow.

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

IMHO 9 is overkill and a points sink. Try 6 Heavy Ds and add 6 Immortals. For the same points that is 2x the necrons on board for phase out and 3x the shots. Remember after you pop the enemy heavy tanks Destroyers become a liability because they can't kill troops fast enough, where Immortals can kill light vehicles and infantry the whole game through.

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

Probably, it's more of a test to see how they perform in numbers. I've taken 3 squads of 1 in the past and it has been fairly useless.

anon · 4 months ago

what if you have a full squad of 5 thats 15 shots at 36 inch and they have a 12 inch move so if you take 3 squads of 5 that 45 shots with 36 inch range that move 12 inchs a turn that can turbo boost to make it a 3+ invul that should be great by anyones standards

kaptin scuzgob · 4 months ago

you cant have a squad of 5 heavy destroyers, just the basic versions in fast attack

anon · 4 months ago

was talking about regular destroyers and even 9 hds are great.

kaptin scuzgob · 4 months ago

Overkill? In 40k? IMHO, it's either dead or still alive, theres no such thing as overkill. I prefer not to take Immortals anyway, because the models are expensive in money and point terms. Basic necron warriors supported by the H Destroyers have always worked well for me

The True Mooseman · 4 months ago

As an Ork player, I find the idea that a 3+ save is a con laughable...

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

How many orks can you get for 55 points? :) Their save is just to remove one of the orks :P

I was more referring to their toughness compared with save, coupled with no really good way to get an invulnerable or cover save (other than sitting behind a building). It's those darn pie plates guard keep dropping that get annoying without a 3+ instead of a 2+.

Haljin · 4 months ago

I really wish you weren't so biased against Guard..
3+ as a con really is quite silly. You could write "not that high survivability" I guess, but armor save in itself is very good...

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

I'm not really biased against them, they just happen to have the highest amount of ap3 weaponry. Also, they are the second most prevalent army around, so they have to be seriously considered a major threat. Just like marines have to be considered, they just have MUCH less ap3.

LEGION3000 · 4 months ago

I agree. As a cron lord I would rather face marines any day than stare at a table of pie plate throwers that can eat your armor for breakfast. Orks at least have to get close to be dangerous but IGs hurt you from well beyond your effective range.

Sathos · 4 months ago

Ooooh we dont have to get close, we just prefer it... BS2 is balanced out by how many shots we can throw at you and the majority of our weapons are assault, not heavy or whatever ;)

Orks are a more valid shooting army than many give them credit for...and my rolls generally suck so I'm not "mr lucky general" for saying it :)

Skragger · 4 months ago

Its so true, nothing like pouring 60 str 4 shots from a skwad of shootas into an unsuspecting foe

Catzilla · 4 months ago

I play guard but I prefer dropping 2+ pie plates with my demolishers.
So I agree in that a 3+ save is a con. ;)

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

either way :)

4thCompanyCommanderCorvus · 4 months ago

Right I am going to be contraversial. This is the hardest army out there and there has been a few articles to make it better. But what about the Inqusition I know Games Workshop has forgot about them, but have we? I mean we have to strengthen the week codexes with shared experiences of the Veterans, Please BoL's XD. But yeah thats all

zenpaladin · 4 months ago

\I've yet to try to use my Spyders but I take Heavies every time. Normally I try to use the Heavy-D's to pop transports, Dreadnaughts and light vehicles. The real issue is of course the cost of the unit and its weakness to the hail of gunfire.

In my game before last I was quaking in my metal boots as my foe ran a Land Raider Redeemer down my line to melt me but before it got there my Mono cracked it open with the Particle whip. After the command squad got out and slaughtered my Lord and the squad he was with my Heavy-D's mowed them down over two turns of fire.
Sadly in that game as in my last four I was phased out.

HighWarlordFearghas · 4 months ago

Yeah, I'm not impressed by the close combat capabilities of spyders, a few days ago I had imperial guard sergeant single-handedly kill one with a chainsword.

Duffin · 4 months ago

Still, that took a 6 to wound and a failed 3+ save, which admittedly isn't going to happen very often.

Duffin · 4 months ago

I really like my Tomb Spyders. I generally keep them in the back of the Warrior line, between as many squads as possible. When outflankers or assaulters arrive, they often help Warriors more often than not. And with one Scarab Swarm to soak up wounds, they have a nice little retinue. I've had a Tomb Spyder lay waste to outflanking Sentinels and even help stomp Kharn and a Wolf Pack Leader off the table (separate occasions, mind you, and they did have help). And it is satisfying to watch a unit of Warriors get up and rapid fire the Genestealers that chewed through them up in the previous assault because of the extended WBB for swept units. At 55pts, who wouldn't want a mini-carnifex? Needless to say, in nasty situations, help from a Destroyer Lord comes in handy.

As for Hvy D., I haven't exactly found them to be all that useful. Certainly not a Monolith replacement, which is something I find indispensable for a good Cron list.

BrotherR · 4 months ago

I like my Spyders as well. They advance with my warriors giveing them a cover save. Helping their wbb rolls and popping transports so the squad can double tap the occupants.

They should stay out of cc with true cc units as they are not that good. I have had luck with mine killing LRs, defilers and dreadnaughts.

NotHim · 4 months ago

Bushido:

By prevalence of power fists, do you mean terminators?

I don't think I've seen a power fist on anything but plague marines and berserkers in over a year, certainly not standard marines anyway.

Not sure how a unit of 3 with 12 MC attacks on the charge isn't devastating to non-CC capable units, could you explain?

I normally run lord, swarms, and spyders as big go away unit myself. It's a last stand sort of thing, but Lords make Thunder Shield terminators cry (if they can hit lol). Having multiple spyders makes them multiple units, so it's less likely they'll be destroyed en masse by volley of fire units like War Walkers.

Heavy D's can get cover while denying cover to the enemy, maybe I play on too much terrain or something...getting stuck in CC should rarely if ever happen, so why aren't the 4+ cover saves good enough?

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

There are plenty of power fist equiped SM here in Austin. Plenty.

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

Yeah, what crazyredpraetorian said. You can generally find the pf/bp sergeants about everywhere you look. Even the Khorne berserkers are taking PF for the champs. 3 (I think) PF attacks is just too good to pass up.

crossbowsniper · 2 months ago

4 PF attacks on the charge at S9 for the Khorne Berserker Champ. A SM sergeant in the new Codex can get similar if they take a double PF, but that's an extra 50 points for just that model and he now has no shooting capability, and he's still only S8

Dooley · 4 months ago

I used to run SM SGTs with thunder hammers and storm shields! Now its Pfists and combi meltas ( darn no +1 attack w/ pistols)!

I think T Spiders are good in "theory" but they are a HUGE target! But if they can assault a squad of Guard, Eldar (dark and light) Tau or Gaunts...well its gonna be a long slow squish fest! And they can pop tanks and such (if they live long enough)

And as far as modeling your Crons/any model to take advantage of the rules is pretty lame! You should have kept that little secret to yourself and passed it off as "I was tired of breaking the sticks" as opposed to "Look how I took advantage of the rules"

Other wise I think we would see alot of little epic dreadnoughts and land raiders running around!

Then again now everything you are shooting at would get a cover save since you are now shooting through whatever was giving you cover!

Necron_Lord · 4 months ago

I find them (Spyders and HDs) useful in Apocalypse and against Tyranids, otherwise they seem to be points sinks. I often go up against 5 carnie nid lists with 3 with the 2+ save, and the HDs counter that very well. They are also good for taking out Zoanthropes. In Apocalypse, if you use them as units of 1 with Tomb Spyders within 12", it will take a concerted effort to negate their WBB, and usually your opponent will have other higher priority targets to go after so your HDs should stay in the fight. As units of one, they are also good for contesting and controlling objectives.

In normal 40k games, I find it too hard to keep the HDs out of LOS to make them worth bringing except against nids who have even crappier range than HDs.

Myu · 4 months ago

"They don't have the longest range, so keeping them away from las cannon fire is really not going to happen."

Uhh.. I think it's more the case of the enemy trying to keep away from your heavy destroyers. I never play a game without at least 1 or 2 squadrons because they're so deadly and maneuverable. The trick is to hide them behind terrain (in deployment) and then move up to 12" and fire. 12 inches and fire! And don't forget they can turbo boost, reducing greatly the chance of them getting assaulted.

I would have one (or at most 2) monoliths to support them tho. Not because of the killing power of the monolith (the ordinance never get's used thanks to relocating squads and the flux arc is super short ranged tho useful) but for the "look that's big" effect it has. Never failed me yet.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Monoliths suck.

Say it with me.

Monoliths suck.

They eat up points, which means less Necrons and brings phase out quicker. They don't threaten enemy units Necrons need to kill (Destroyers and Immortals superior against infantry, pie plate doesn't threaten vehicles). They serve no purpose other than to scare noobs and make an already gimped army even worse.

Monoliths suck.

As for the other Heavy choices, Spyders can be handy to generate a scarab swarm and join a Destroyer Lord to get a super unit that soaks up a ton of fire. MCs help, but they aren't going to be fighting off Nob Bikers or Assault Terminators.

I'd consider Heavy Destroyers nigh mandatory. Necrons have extreme difficulty dealing with mech and S9 is the best they can do. They're expensive and obvious targets, but fairly resilient and can operate at extreme ranges.

Monoliths suck.

anon · 4 months ago

I would like to just point out that no were in the codex does it state that a unit thats whiped out and gets thier wbb comes back as the same unit that unit is destroyed and the wbb necrons join a unit of the same type on the battle field. no one but guard get to resserect an old unit and even the guard has to place that unit like it came onto the table from resrv

Vampire Harlequin · 4 months ago

Monoliths suck? Uh-uh. Spyders stretch the range for WBB-capable units. Monoliths can just plain give 'emanother 50% shot at standing up again, or magic them away from the trouble in the first place. Or they can be a gateway for reserves, or fie that template. Useless against vehicles? Strength 9 and anything directly in the centre is hit with AP1, and that's no threat to vehicles? That's an odd thing to say considering it's stronger than the Heavy destroyer's weapons, and you're holding them up as the best thing Necrons have for popping cans. Plus, it's worth noting the 'lith get's d6 'free' shots with a weapon that can glance, and therefore cripple a lot of vehicular units. that's especially true if they're skimmers or in a squadron.

Any unit within 12", be it infantry or vehicle, is gonna be subjected to a barrage of gauss fire, which brings us onto the 'lith being less of a threat to infantry than destroyers or Immortals. While they're both great, a unit of either has to fire at a target at a time. The 'lith can zap anything withing 12", no matter how many targets there are, they're all gonna get the good news.

I can see Necron armies without 'Liths. And they aren't perfect, and are still a single target. But:
1) They're an av14 all-round unit that skims but isn't destroyed by an immobilised result
2) Barely affected by, and can't ultimately be destroyed by, a weapon destroyed roll
3) Not affected by AP1,
4) Allow the employment of special rules allowing a unit in trouble to magic awayfrom the threat and have an additional 50% chance of recouping any fallen models. OR
5) wields an AP1 weapon that's also a Str 9 large blast template weapon. OR
6) Allows reservesto enter the playing field exactly where you want them
7) can shoot at anything within 12" and can technically wound a unit no matter how tough, or damage a vehicle no matter how thick the armour with its gauss ability.

They cost a lot less than 300, can do more than perhaps any other vehicle in the game, are easily tougher than any other vehicle, come with a brace of special abilities that are incredibly useful and free, and massively buff the army that uses them.

What would be nice is a discussion on the Necrons other unique units, The C'Tan...

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

We'll get there :)

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Heavy Ds are the Necrons' best bet against armor, but that doesn't make them good.

Monos don't threaten armor because their pie plate scatters and if you're using that then you don't get to use the portal, its whole purpose in the first place.

1) Nobody cares because you just ignore the Mono and phase out what few Necrons are running around.
2) Nobody cares, get phased out
3) Nobody cares, get phased out
4) Then you aren't using the TANK DESTROYING particle whip right? Too bad Necrons that get destroyed by sweeping advance can't get back up.
5) AP1 under the hole, you know, the kind that scatters, otherwise it's just another crappy Earthshaker Cannon. It's either that or your only decent ability.
6) You know, unless the enemy puts units near the portal to block it. But please, put your army in reserve so it can be destroyed piecemeal. Rapid firing Necron Warriors are so good, right?
7) Yay glancing hits. Oh wait, this is 5th edition.

Monoliths suck. Necrons suck as is, taking Monoliths just hurts your army that much more. Go ahead and terrorize some newbies with your crappy army, good luck against anyone halfway competent.

C'tan suck too, I'll save you the long-winded thread that doesn't tell anybody anything useful (brought to you by everyone's favorite 40k strategist, bushido "I don't know what I'm talking about" red panda).

Skragger · 4 months ago

Damn son, that's some real hateorade there..

pyroenthusiast · 4 months ago

Grade "A", even.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Indeed it is.

I hate it when new players or people looking for advice get misled. BoLS has great stuff for painting, modelling, homebrew stuff, rumors, and the like, but they really should stay in their wheel house. Tactics aren't their strong suit.

People like BoLS and they assume that any tacticas up here are good too (Goatboy has solid stuff, but that's about it), so they get stuck down the path to 40k suckdom. Preaching this as gospel only makes the game worse by churning out more scrubs with pointless restrictions like comp whose idea of strategy is lining up across their opponent and pushing their dollies across the table with a broom.

So BoLS, you do plenty for the hobby, but please stay in your comfort zone, not tactics.

Now, as for other stuff.

S9 pie plates aren't good, not against Land Raiders.

And yes, I have lost plenty of games. There's no shame in it, that's how I learned how to be a better player. That's how you figure out what is sucktastic and what is useful, which units fit your style of play, and which armies are gimpy and which are awesome.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

You'd need to learn if you though that you should try out firing S9 pie plates at raiders. I didn't do that when I started, come on, you need 5s to glance, not everyone's that stupid. They are however good against tac squads, nids, dev squads, guardians, khorne berserkers, noise marines, normal chaos space marines, possessed, boyz, nobz, ork trukks, warbikes, devilfish, grey knights, fire warriors, kroot, guard platoons, rhinos, daemonettes, bloodletters, chimeras, sternguard, vanguard, assault marines, land speeders, marine bikes, whirlwinds, thunderfire cannons, techmarines and servitors, stormtroopers, guard veterans, piranha, vespid etc...

Yeah S9 pie plates are rubbish, don't know why you would take them, especially when their mounted on such a crummy armour 14 vehicle.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Wait, a pie plate kills infantry in the open?! This changes everything! Oh wait, cover. Man, this 5th edition thing is a killer.

Like Necrons need any help blasting infantry apart. Mech is what kills them now. Any army that can run a Land Raider or 3 down your throat unmolested will stomp you, Monolith or no Monolith.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

An army that can ram A unit or three down your throat unmolested will probably beat you. I don't know if you are really bad when rolling dice or something but you seem to have this image that land raiders are invincible. They really aren't, they huge fire magnets that often don't survive the battle. Anyhow you don't have to use the mono against the land raider if you want. As for cover well, again it's the all powerful 4+, they can take a cover save against anything, does that make all weapons bad?

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Against Necrons, it's extremely difficult to stop a and Raider, let alone 3. Glancing hits don't work, and S9 is where their shooting caps. Land Raiders are pretty easy to knock out with meltas and S10 ordnance, but Necrons don't have any of that, hence the problem.

Cover affects every weapon, but some are more suited to taking advantage of it. Cover-ignoring weapons like flamers are obvious, but also weapons that generate lots of wounds and force lots of saves.

Conrad · 4 months ago

You can glance a raider to death with necrons....and with every weapon able to give a glancing hit, you can soon do the job.

Even 10 warriors do a nice job with rapid fire.

20 shots. 3+ to hit that's about 13 hits of which 2 can glance. You've got at least 1 shout destroying a weapon or immobilising the vehicle.

Sure, it's not a huge acheivement but if you've got 3 Land Raiders, you can buy 40ish warriors.

BlackSly · 4 months ago

Are you saying that if something isn't good against Land Raiders, it's not good at all? Seems like weird reasoning to me.

Monos kill infantry in cover... the rest of the army has AP4 or 5 weapons in general, without templates, so they may as well fire at the troops in cover. Use the ordnance plate vs troops in the open, and Immortals vs troops in cover.

More importantly, however, is the whole "smart generals ignore your Monoliths and phase you out"... but when you run 1-2 Monos as roadblocks and fire blocks, you're using them to shield your units from half the enemy's firepower. The enemy can ignore a moving wall, but if they can't shoot past it, then they can't shoot at your juicier targets. As someone put down earlier about a tactic of running one Mono down a side, using it as a moving shield for their fragile Destroyers, a major purpose of a Mono is moving cover.

When you reduce it to "it has X firepower for Y points", and "it doesn't matter how tough it is, because if they ignore it they can Phase Out your army", Monos suck. But that's hard to reduce, when you can use them as walls to prevent part of the enemy army from shooting and/or assaulting, unless they deal with the Monos first.

In other words... you're assuming that because they can sometimes be ignored, depending on positioning and movement, that they are always not worth their points. That's a logical fallacy... not every unit it worth its points in every battle, so saying that there are some battles where they aren't worth it, doesn't mean that the unit is always not worth it. There are other battles where putting up two Monos between your army and a squadron of Leman Russes that would otherwise pie plate your "I spent those points on extra Warriors" army to death is invaluable.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Necrons can kill infantry and light tanks just fine with all their multi-shot weapons, they need something to deal with heavy armor, and they don't have anything to do that. Heavy Destroyers can try, but S9 hampers them. Monos have the whip, but it scatters and is also S9.

So if your army is incapable of reliably handling AV14, a crucial component of many lists and a fact of life in 5th ed, you have a bad army.

If a Necron player brings 2 Monos, that's an even easier win. That's 470 points going into 2 units that lower your Phase Out count and don't help you get rid of heavy armor. Warriors aren't helping you either, and Monospam armies feature them prominently for some reason. With this sort of army, vehicles are practically immune to your fire and can roll up and smash the Warriors, forcing the Phase Out.

They can always be ignored and should be, which is what makes them bad. Every game it's just go around the Mono, laugh at their lack of anti-tank, and munch Warriors until Phase out.

Against crappy foot armies and the like they will dominate, which is why they are in the elite ranks of armies like Daemons and Tyranids as super noobcrushers.

BlackSly · 4 months ago

Well, I do agree that Necrons have a major problem when facing heavy armor. That 10% chance to kill from a Mono, at 235 points, is not good, especially when there isn't much backing it.

But the problem is army-wide, not a Monolith problem, and there isn't another competing unit that clearly solves the problem. HDs, as my math indicates, are a little better (10% more killy per Heavy Support slot, and 30% more killy per point spent), but not so much that they're the clear choice considering how much tougher Monos are. Tomb Spyders are probably more killy than both, but due to having to enter close combat to do it, and slow speed, they're not anti-armor either.

Scarabs may be a decent place, especially against tank armies that move 6" or less in order to shoot. But again, they're not great either, just another "meh" choice at killing armor. Pariahs also get decent killy ability vs armor, but are short ranged and expensive.

So, Monos aren't a bad choice. They fail to deliver the anti-armor that Necrons need, but there aren't any other units that can deliver it, either. So they're not a bad choice in the army, and while they lower the number of Necron units fielded, they also protect them from fire and help with WBB rolls so they're making the fewer units more survivable. Overall, with Phase Out, I think they're a wash... some armies are fast and go right around them, other armies depend on static firepower and will be blocked by Monos.

I don't say that you must field Monos to run a viable list, but neither does fielding them cripple you. They're a great all-around unit, but only mediocre at anti-tank, in an army that's begging for anti-tank firepower.

rant_hammer · 2 months ago

Necrons against armour.... you take a warrior squad... oh no i didnt destroy it... but wait because i glance on 6's your land raider is immobilised and has one weapon left.... oh well.. they dont need to spectacuarly destroy your ass raider. A necron army works around monoliths with the teleporting and wbb re-rolls if your using it purely for the partical whip to kill tanks you suck. Your being abit of a hater against the 'lith obviously cus u wouldnt know what to do with one...

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

HAHA, apparently, you haven't played any of the BoLS guys.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Yeah man, those Monoliths and Penal Legions are so scary.

I'm sure jwolf could whip out his awesome Reaver Titan, the epitome of skill.

crazyredpraetorian · 4 months ago

Yeah, you really have to hate those wimpy scattering pie plates. :rolleyes: I would imagine you'd have to lose alot of games to build up such a negative attitude.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

'crappy earthshaker cannon'? 'ignore the mono'? have you ever even played against necrons? The ONLY unit that does real damage is the mono. So what you're suggesting is that we ignore their most powerful unit and leave it to destroy our own army. Wow look at that guy he's only got his mono left, he must be rubbish, oh wait, his opponent's got even less.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

He only has his Mono left, looks like Phase Out to me.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

Whatever, you get the drift, I mean, when did S9 become crappy?

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Learn to play 40k and you'll figure it out. I'd recommend learning the basics of every army first, stuff like Phase Out is kind of a big deal.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

Yes, I didn't say that necrons weren't crap I just said that monoliths aren't.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

That doesn't make sense. Necrons are a poor army, and since Monos are part of said army they would be bad too. You can't look at this stuff in a vacuum, that serves no purpose.

janekk · 4 months ago

Its all conected. If you take pricy mono you don't take heap load of crons which help to not phase out. Mono is slow a** and shortish range of weapons doesn't help to fry stuff so in terms of raw firepower it doesn't help army much as well (which is not so impressive as some people might think, 1 pie plate OR flux arc from LandRaider priced vehicle, not impressive considering Leman Russ is around 100p cheaper). Sure you can deepstrike them but chances are that before they arrive you will phase out so this just helps enemy to avoid them. So to summarize Mono doesn't help much your army to stay around and doesn't help that much to decimate enemies. As not good looking heavy destroyers are, they still are better choice.

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

If you have nothing intelligent to say, please keep your ignorant rhetoric to yourself and stop wasting everyones time.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Ignorant rhetoric?

You mean like "monoliths are awesome!!oen1!!"

BlackSly · 4 months ago

Shooting at Land Raider:
3 HDs: 11.1% chance to destroy.
1 Mono, assuming 50% chance to hit with the hole: 10.2% chance to destroy. Remember that the center hole is AP1, and that being an Ordnance weapon it gets to roll two dice for penetration and take the best one.

Less killy, but far more survivable. Better against most infantry/hordes while HDs are not very useful against infantry. HDs are better vs MCs and more maneuverable, Monos allow Teleportation.

All in all, I find it kind of amusing that a 10% chance to destroy a Land Raider is worthless vs heavy armor, but a 11% chance is the army's best bet.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

Factor in the mobility, range, Necron rules and lower cost and that's why Heavy D's win.

They aren't great, but anything is better than the Monofail.

BlackSly · 4 months ago

In a Monolith comparison, I give less weight to mobility and range. The reason is that a Mono has so much survivability against the same volume of fire, especially the shorter-ranged anti-infantry fire that could just take down HDs, that you are quite willing to advance it forward into the middle of the enemy army. As you and others say... anyone wasting shots on the Mono is wasting shots, so why would it bother me to move it closer to them? With 24" on its dangerous weapon and a 6" move, it commands the middle of the battlefield. It also can add mobility to other units, which occasionally is more important than one salvo.

Granted, it doesn't move around to play flank denial games. The Necron rules are a red herring, change it to say "survivability", and the Mono remains ahead. The point cost is also a red herring, change it to "points lost per enemy lascannon shot" or something else reasonable, and you're still losing more points of HDs than of Monos.

Now, if you look at "killy per point" the Mono does lose to HDs. But it shoots at infantry better, and has other purposes than only being killy, while HDs had better win the KPP (killy per point) comparison, as they do nothing else.

Chumbalaya · 4 months ago

If you've got the Mono tank hunting, it isn't using its portal, which would be its primary purpose. It plods along 6" a turn with a 24" range weapon.

Heavy Ds move 12", can turbo-boost if necessary, get back up, have 48" range weapons and end up cheaper.

It's all about utility to the army. Monoliths make your army easier to phase out and really don't help against units Necrons struggle eith, namely Land raiders.

Heavy Ds are Necrons, are cheaper, are faster (objective contesting), and what they lack in AP1 they make up for in accuracy and volume of fire. They are far from good, and any army that has to rely on lascannons for its AV14 killing has serious problems. They aren't good, just better than the Monolith (which isn't very hard).

Anonymous · 4 months ago

Vampire Harlequin said:

"1) They're an av14 all-round unit that skims but isn't destroyed by an immobilised result
...
7) can shoot at anything within 12" and can technically wound a unit no matter how tough, or damage a vehicle no matter how thick the armour with its gauss ability.

They cost a lot less than 300, can do more than perhaps any other vehicle in the game, are easily tougher than any other vehicle, come with a brace of special abilities that are incredibly useful and free, and massively buff the army that uses them."

1) Welcome to 5th Edition. No skimmers get destroyed by immobilized anymore, unless they moved flat out. The AV doesn't matter because no one is going to shoot at them, since they really aren't all that scary.

7) Sure, you can shoot at anything within 12". Unless of course that thing is locked in CC with the Necrons that just popped out of the hatch (hint: if they're within 12", they will be). Or you want to use your one-shot-wonder pie plate to kill a rhino (maybe).

They really can't do a whole lot more than any other vehicle. The big reason people like vehicles is because they 1) Protect your troops from fire and 2) Move fast. The Monolith does neither of these things. Sure they come with some special rules (most of which are mutually exclusive: Whip OR Gauss, Whip OR Teleport), but they aren't free. You pay a lot for those abilities that you can't even use all in one turn, and in return all you get are fewer Necrons for the enemy to kill before they win.

Crevab · 4 months ago

This is silly. Sure if someone is running 3 Monoliths at 1500, they are going to phase out hard and fast. Other than that, their power matrix tricks easily make it a prime choice. And if a newbie wastes time trying to pop it, all the better.

The Grog · 4 months ago

This is silly. S9 AP 1 Ordinance is the best tank killer Necrons have baring Ctan in assault. The AP 1 part is even decently accurate against the usually large models of heavy armor.

This doesn't mean it's good compared to say, MeltaVets, but it is the best option at hand. Heavy Ds can't do much that Monoliths cannot either, and are much easier to kill. Good if you worry about 2+ saves I suppose.

Spyders are best in melee, with support. Usually as countercharge, but Warriors and Immortals can't really survive the round of combat to get help.

Vampire Harlequin · 4 months ago

Woah! What a response! All I said was that 'Liths are viable units, and look at some of the responses! I know we're on the internet but seriously, relax. Just 'cos I said 'Liths can be useful doesn't mean I think Heavy destroyers are rubbish, or that 'liths are flawless, so pretending I that I did is just silly.

Something that is a prob is that it's a chunk o'points for something that doesn't help prevent phase-out. I think that's a viable arguement. But then how far do you take it? Always write off the option of taking anything that doesn't have the 'necron' rule? pare it down further and have just as many (relatively) cheap warriors as possible at the exclusion of anything else. Oh, yeah, except Heavy destroyers of course 'cos they're AWESOME!!!!! H.D.'s Rulez! ;)

It should be pointed out that you don't instantly risk phase out as soon as you field a 'lith as has been suggested. That's silly, and fielding a list that does nothing but prevent PO would not necessarily be competitive, and would be oh so very, vrey dull, which is a factor to consider. With all it's funky rules I find the 'lith to be fun in an army that can feel stilted. Looks great on the board too.

I'm just surprised that the 'lith is getting sooo much flack when the Necron has some genuinely indefensibly useless 'gimmick' units (Pariahs).

bushidoredpanda · 4 months ago

Don't worry about Chumbalaya. He is part of a group of BoLS haters. It's best to just ignore them. They generally have no idea what they are talking about.

BlackSly · 4 months ago

Heh, Pariahs aren't indefensible. A line of Scarabs to take a charge (4-5 units cover a large area), then the Pariahs shoot and charge in, can mess up a lot of otherwise nasty melee units. Also, the Mono makes the Pariahs better as it provides cover for them from most of the enemy army, allowing them to face a limited amount of fire, and the Scarabs give them Cover save against that fire. Not that bad a combination for an army that otherwise folds like a house of cards vs any melee unit.

As for Monos and Phase Out, I find that they help me avoid Phase Out because by advancing two Monos, I can put my Warrior squads in reserve, and still Teleport them forward to grab objectives late in the game. They don't "directly" protect the Warriors, but they do give me the option to keep them back, where they only face shooting that they are tough against, and not the assaults that wipe them out every time.
Edit: by that, I mean keep the Warriors in normal Reserve, then they can come out to grab objectives in your zone, OR come out and get Teleported forward near objectives in the enemy's zone. I don't like using the "must come in via Teleport" option, as it blocks you from choosing to fire the Particle Whip even if you have a really juicy target.

timjonesiddqd · 4 months ago

Rulebook page 71. In the "Shooting at Skimmers" section. 3rd paragraph, 4th sentence down, quote " Note that it is not permitted to remove the flying stand other than in the two cases above, skimmers cannot land " bla bla bla :P

BlackSly · 4 months ago

However, that should apply to Skimmers, not to other units mounted on flying bases such as Destroyers, Jetbikes, Crisis Suits, etc.

Crisis Suits are a great example as I have seen lots put down on their base, and also lots on stands as if mid-jump.

Vampire Harlequin · 4 months ago

I like Blacksky's arguement for the 'Lith. I was gonna say something similar, but why say the same thing a dozen times when once will do. What do you all mean 'someone' has been doing that throughout this whole discussion? Oh, yeah, I see who you mean now ;)

Anyhoo, Black's summation of how the monolith is competitive not just 'cos of what it can do but the role it serves on the battlefield nails it. The 'lith is a different unit to HD's, has a different purpose and does it well. It's a big, towering bully that can go toe-to-toe with an army while the HD's are nimble little blighters with a nasty long-range sting. If an arguement is to be considered on the basis that its concise, defended by evidence, and presented in a clear (and mature) way, then after listening to both sides of the discussion I for one am even more certain that 'Liths are worth taking.

Still not too darn sure about those Pariah's though. The fact that their lack of transport options ('Lith is out 'cos they aren't necrons) results in them plodding across the board possibly exposed to fire, and unable to use their potentially game-winning skills until they reach enemy lines. Their very high cost nails that coffin. And while the whole 'field-anything-that-isn't-necron-and-you'll-be-phased-out-half-way-through-turn-one' arguement is wrong, PO does mean you have to carefully consider you non-necron choices. For my money if I decided I really wanted something expensive, slow, but devastating in CC, I'd have to go for a C'tan, for the fact they have other effective abilities, look funky, are nothing less than Gods, and seem to be more survivable. I'd like to hear the counter-arguement though.

Myu · 4 months ago

I agree about the heavy destroyers and monoliths, because that's how I use them and it is nifty.

I don't know about the rest - not because I disagree, but because I haven't tried it. I thought Pariahs looked kinda cool, but the points cost scared me. Well, that and like no-one I know uses Psykers, or at least not for a long time now.

Maybe if psychic powers were more dangerous for their points I'd take an anti-psyker unit, but it's way to easy to neutralise them via other means. E.g. My units of ordinary destroyers love Eldar seer councils ^_^

crossbowsniper · 2 months ago

My friend found the best combination of heavy supports by having 2 units of 2 Heavy Destroyers and a Monolith in a game of 1000-1500 points. The Heavy Destroyers worked together as one big unit, but were separate and made it harder to kill do to wound allocation (and giving each other cover saves) and the Monolith used deep strike to reek havoc in enemy lines later in the game.