Bell of Lost Souls - Latest Comments in 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

rant_hammer — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:45:04 -0000

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...

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

crossbowsniper — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:56:57 -0000

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

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

crossbowsniper — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:45:18 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Myu — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 09:30:36 -0000

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 ^_^

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Vampire Harlequin — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:46:06 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Conrad — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:00:01 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:44:35 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:48:48 -0000

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).

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

UltramarineFan — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:43:44 -0000

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?

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:39:36 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:57:43 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:35:07 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:24:05 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

crazyredpraetorian — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:05:07 -0000

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

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:57:22 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:50:28 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:43:07 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:39:45 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

BlackSly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:35:57 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Chumbalaya — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:29:45 -0000

Ignorant rhetoric?

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

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

bushidoredpanda — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:23:01 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Vampire Harlequin — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:19:51 -0000

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).

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

bushidoredpanda — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:50:35 -0000

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

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

The Grog — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:54:06 -0000

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.

Re: 40K DISCUSSION: The Other Necron Heavy Support Options

Crevab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:47:07 -0000

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.