Necrontyr Online News: Rules Forum Now Added!: http://w11.zetaboards.com/Necrontyr_Online/forum/4212462/
| Welcome to Necrontyr Online. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU'RE A NECRON FAN! (Or at least interested in starting them) Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Gauntlet of fire skirmisher unit | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 18 2014, 03:03 PM (407 Views) | |
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 18 2014, 03:03 PM Post #1 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey there, lastly I'm into weird tactics. I remember that we once talked about a Ghost Ark filled with gauntlet of fire lords, like a "flamer battleship"... we pretty soon discarted that tactic as " a weird one", however making some adjustments, I think it might just work out well! IMPORTANT: In all my calculations I assume you take Zahndrekh as HQ anyways, so I dont calculate him into the total cost of the unit, while I still profit from the specialrules he offers in the calculations. I think I can do that because: It is never bad to have zahndrekh. So here the "alpha version": 5 lords, all with gauntlet of fire, 2 with MSS 1 Stormtek with lightning field, 1 Timetek with cronometrum, 1 regular Cryptek for the staff of light. - everybody riding a Ghost ark - stick Zahndrekh with them Thats about: 450 points (Ghost ark included) This unit, even if it doesnt seem so, can do a LOT of damage: - it chews trought hordes with the flamers and the following charge to finish off the unit (basically: Everything within 12'' thats horde dies) - it can do a lot of damage against vehicles. 4 haywire shots do damage (also possibly GA in doble tap range), and then you might just charge the vehicle (vehicles with 10 or 11 on rear die quickly to gauntlets of fire, especially if you give them furious charge. - It does even do a lot of damage against MEQ. Saves are failed against sheer volume of (flamer) shots, and then you have 2 staff of light in there. Then you charge the weakened unit and see that the gauntlet is pretty good in CC. - Against TEQ: Avoid them if you cant kill them in one turn, this said I would totally dare to go after small units of terminators. - Against MC: Just charge them if you totally need to, if you do 2 MSS should assure you dont get slaughtered. Furious charge helps to put some wounds on the MC in first round of combat. At the same time, the unit has other advantages: - it is fast and mobile due to the GA (assault vehicle). It gives you about 19'' charge range. - GA has objective secured. - it is hard to kill. A jinking GA (with stealth from zahndrekh) is hard to bring down, and once the GA pops the opponent will still have to kill a lot of T5 3+ models with 4+ RP and everliving, tanked by a 2+,3++ model with one reroll/phase. - it is a nightmare to charge. 5 walls of death & lightning field (with rerollable number of hits!!) put the pain on everything that charges them. - it is a nightmare for open topped transports. Park next to the transport, flamer the crap out of the passengers and then pop it with haywire. Is it possible to feel more pirate? Remember: It is ment to be a skirmisher unit, that means: Choose targets that you will destroy in 1-2 turns, avoid long-lasting close combats!! I'm gonna post a picture of a comparasion between warscythe/gauntlet and hyperphase sword I made a while ago. Everything is explained in the picture and shows that the gauntlet DOES do damage in CC! |
|
|
| Unholyllama | Sep 18 2014, 04:30 PM Post #2 |
|
Lord
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Factoring in Zhandrekh (not certain I understand why we're taking him actually) and the minimum 65pts for a squad of Warriors (to unlock the GA) you're close to about 700pts for a unit that can be severely devastated by a Heldrake or Hellhound. The damage output of RCDI units like this are good on paper but I haven't seen many work in an actual game. And one of the main reasons the Gauntlet of Fire ark was discounted last time was of how it's triple of the cost of a unit of Ork Burnas in a Battlewagon (which was a tactic back in 5th edition). Two reasons why it's not scene much any more is that vehicles are a lot easier to destroy than what they were in 5th edition (even AV13 and 14 are easy to destroy). Also, you cannot move 12" and fire template weapons from the embarked unit - so getting close enough before you are melta'ed off the board is only possible against newer players who aren't expecting it. It does a lot of hits/wounds from all of the flamers; however, getting in close enough to actually pull it off is almost impossible these days in a more competitive setting. |
|
|
| Banshee | Sep 18 2014, 04:30 PM Post #3 |
|
Lychguard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think that you can't use flaming and rerollable to wound at the same turn... |
|
|
| Unholyllama | Sep 18 2014, 05:26 PM Post #4 |
|
Lord
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Correct - if there's a shooting and melee profile to a weapon, you can only use one or the other per player turn. Ork burnas can choose to flame during overwatch but then forfeit the AP3 melee profile. Same thing applies to Gauntlet of Fire. |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 18 2014, 10:49 PM Post #5 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
dang, that sucks...whyyyyyy games workshop whyyyyy |
|
|
| Olfgund | Sep 19 2014, 04:33 PM Post #6 |
|
Praetorian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
One of the most annoying rule for CC weapons... In 6th, the rule for this seemed like GW did not understood the implication on dual-profile CC weapons when making a rule for dual-profile shooting weapons (heat ray, missile launcher, special ammunitions...) But it appear they reinforced it RAW in 7th! Anyway, I sent a FAQ request hoping they counter-rule this the other way ; I admit having a huge bias, I own 10 pretorian w/rod of the covenant! (I just love the look of that model) Edited by Olfgund, Sep 19 2014, 05:31 PM.
|
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 19 2014, 05:09 PM Post #7 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@unholy: it is true, when you take zahndrek and more warriors you are close about 700 points. But Zahndrekh also fills the HQ slot (in a util way instead of just riding together with some immortals) and warriors fill the troop slot, so for 700 point you get more than just this unit. (HQ+powerful unit+warrior unit+ GA) The 700 points are very misleading in this context, because you get more than the 700 points make you assume (you fill one HQ and one troop slot) In my eyes, you cant compare the 700 points to "that would be 20 wraiths"...because in every list (assume not unbound) you HAVE to take troop choices and HAVE to take HQ anyways. You dont calculate the cost of an HQ and a unit of warriors to the cost of a wraith unit, do you? As for taking zahndrek: Basically for the furious charge, he is however not necesary. any O-lord with 2+ save and 3++ invul would do. as for flamer range: it is actually 12''+ template. move 6'' the GA, disembark 6'', flamer. Good range in my eyes. Same with haywire and staff of light: 6'' movement, 6'' disembark, 12'' shooting. I would not be so afraid of the helldrake, or does he have a ap3 template?? Zahndrekh blocking shots with possible LOS and one reroll/phase is hard to kill. As for melta: it aint that easy to bring down a 3+ coversave GA, even with melta. (Except you are TAU) Finally: In my eyes this combo has a very small niche, I would only use it if the rest of my army would also get close to the opponent (like 3 units of wraiths). I would not use it if the rest of my army wants to keep distance. |
|
|
| Olfgund | Sep 19 2014, 05:50 PM Post #8 |
|
Praetorian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"unexpected" sure is a pro for that strategy. Also, you would use the remainder of your points to cover the cons : range firepower or counter-charge units, anti-air, anti-MC, and objective-grabbers You also need to go first or be able to shield the court turn one before they can board the ark. With equal number of lords and cryptek, it does mean "majority T5" initially for the group however (or when attacked under the "no escape" rule |
|
|
| Unholyllama | Sep 19 2014, 07:00 PM Post #9 |
|
Lord
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It is never a good idea to disembark your unit from a ghost ark just so you can get within range of a shooting weapon if such a movement will put you into near-guaranteed charge range next turn. We're Necrons, we don't win combat usually. Granted, you are talking about charging but again, that leaves you to not be able to reroll to-hit and to-wound. The other issue with existing hte ghost ark is that you lose the effectiveness of the flame templates. One of the strengths of the burna-wagon strategy with orks is that shooting multiple templates from an open top vehicle allows you to place all templates on the exact same models (so you get the most possible). Disembarking the units now forces the flame templates to originate from the model itself - so each number of models hit will vary. |
|
|
| Olfgund | Sep 19 2014, 07:54 PM Post #10 |
|
Praetorian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
True, but let's not forget the 5-15 hits from overwatching flamers + other weapons; enough to roast the front line of hordes at the potential cost of not making the charge I remember seeing MSS in the OP list too... ; nastier even if the one of the stormtek has the lightning field but still, I would also prefer the protection of the ark, mainly for the enemy shooting phase speaking of not making the charge, space marine assault squads can take 2 flamers but few people do, fearing of killing too much and failing charge and staying in the open out of CC to be shot at. with 5 flamers + other weapons, there is a high potential of clearing the 8" or more between the court and the target, reducing the chance of a successful charge |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 19 2014, 08:19 PM Post #11 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
One doubt about the shooting gauntlet& using it in CC: Does it say I cant use it for both in the same TURN, or in the same PHASE?? Same phase would just affect us in overwatch, while same turn would kinda break the whole plan. (and kinda break triarch pretorians even more :D) While true that protection of the GA is nice, it is always great to have an alternative. Sometimes you really want something dead, and 6'' additional threat range really limits the opponents tactics. (I remember that I had to leave an about 22'' safety bubble around my buddies mephiston, so even if he didnt do a lot he did affect me a LOT in my tactics). The unit is also not easy to take down permanently (even IF the opponent manages to kill all of them in one shooting phase ( a lot of shots needed), half of them get up again...thats why I like everliving units) As for not making the charge: This IS a huge issue against opponents that drop fast. Against orks for example I would not count on making the charge. 5 templates + 2 staff of light + voltaic staff will pretty much leave you with nothing to charge within 12''. However, against opponents that are harder to kill (like a 10 man taq squad) I would still be pretty optimistic to make the charge. Weaken them with shooting, than charge (this is however only effective if you may use gauntlet for shooting and after that for hitting) As for loosing CC: If I manage to weaken the opponent before he charges me, I wouldnt fear anything at all. 5 walls of fire + lightning field does dezimate opponents that charge you, the remaining ones will still have to face 2 MSS till they can hit. (I calculate 8.3 overwatch kills against ork boys (counting the lightning field)....so I would not fear getting charged by a 15 model ork blop) As for first-turn-protection for this unit: Put zahndrekh in front and cheap crypteks behind him, hide all behind the GA. Opponents will have to shoot against T5 with 2+,3++ (one rerollable)...once zahndrek starts entering danger-zone(1 HP) start LOS wounds to the crypteks behind him. I emphasize again: This unit is planned to be a skirmisher unit for experienced players. That means: Attack what you are gonna kill (or at least dezimate a lot), dont get to close to things that are a real danger, use your speed. Charge just to finish weakened units (dont charge units that are at full strength). In general: Use hit & run tactics. (you can even give the unit hit&run with zahndrekh, they will pass the test with a chance of about 55% due to cronotek-reroll) |
|
|
| Olfgund | Sep 22 2014, 01:27 PM Post #12 |
|
Praetorian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
it's unfortunately "turn" ; in the beginning of the second page of the weapon section of the BRB: "and you can choose which (profile) to use each turn" (parenthesis mine) Obvious first comment is that, as per 6th, it does not say specifically that you can only use only one profile per turn but the obvious second comment is that WH40K is a permissive ruleset. The new thing in 7th however is that CC weapons are mentionned in the paragraph, so they somehow considered CC weapons to some degres when they wrote this. As for the list, I wouldn't mind trying this, sure would be fun to use that many templates around! Keep the unorthodox lists coming! |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 22 2014, 03:34 PM Post #13 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But where does it actually say that the gauntlet has two profiles?? I just see one profile. "a gauntlet of fire is a close combat weapon". It does however not say it is "also" a close combat weapon. "also" wound kinda tell us there are two profiles, but there is no "also", there is only one profile. Has this been FAQ'ed somehow to give it two profiles? Because if not I think everything should be fine, no 2 profiles --> no choosing between profiles. It does not matter if 7th allows us to have a distinct CC-profile, codex overrides rulebook, doesnt it? |
|
|
| Oberron | Sep 22 2014, 11:28 PM Post #14 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No there aren't two profiles for the gauntlet the gauntlet might as well just be a flamer that gives reroll to hits and wounds while in cc |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 22 2014, 11:40 PM Post #15 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
exactly what I think...as it is at the moment (without 2 profiles) it is ALWAYS a flamer, with the addicional effect (like a piece of normal wargear) that it lets you reroll wounds and hits....so RAW it would be ok to flamer first and then use it in CC; because you use ALWAYS the same profile.. Imagine there would be a sword (i think there is) that is a powersword in CC and also gives the user an invulSave....I doubt anyone would say "If you use it as a powerweapon, then you cant use its invul Save!" But again: This does only apply if no FAQ added an addicional profile to the gauntlet...anyone knows if there is any faq that changes this? (or does know all faqs so well that he can tell me there definitly is NO second profile for the gauntlet? Edited by OhLongJohnson, Sep 23 2014, 12:24 AM.
|
|
|
| Banshee | Sep 23 2014, 04:23 AM Post #16 |
|
Lychguard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Being a cc weapon is its second profile. It has usual cc weapon profile. |
|
|
| Oberron | Sep 23 2014, 06:11 AM Post #17 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But it isn't labeled as a duel profile weapon. Oh an also OLJ in the last greyknights codex the dreadknight's sword gave it rerolls even if it wasn't used or something like that. |
|
|
| Olfgund | Sep 23 2014, 01:12 PM Post #18 |
|
Praetorian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hum... In FAQs of both 6th and 7th, GW had established a dual profile for the rod of the covenant, screwing the preatorians, but didn't/forgot/omitted to define such a dual profile for the gauntlet of fire. I do believe there is enough info to justify one: (str user AP- with special rule melee-equivalent of twin-linked and flame-equivalent of shred) but it hasn't been labeled as such for now like they took the time to do with the rod. Burn&Bash might be back! or at least debatable :D |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Sep 23 2014, 01:45 PM Post #19 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Exactly! It hasnt been labeled so yet, so nobody can force you to choose between the flamer profile and a profile that does not exist..its not enough to say "but a profile COULD exist"..in my eyes burn & bash is totally justified! (rulewhise) this discussion has some similarities to the tau advanced targetting system upgrade. This tau upgrade gives a model that uses it the ability to make precision shots on a 6, however if a character uses it it gives precision shots on 5+. This was obviously designed like that because in 6th edition characters could make precision shots anyways on a 6, so it would be a pointless upgrade for a character. However, as this has not been faq'ed the 5+ precision shots for characters remains!! It would make sense to downgrade it to 6 (as characters lost the ability of precision shots on a 6), however until they do this it remains like it is. I would handle it the same way with the gauntlet.... |
|
|
| Banshee | Sep 23 2014, 04:05 PM Post #20 |
|
Lychguard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Holy s#@t!!! I completely missed that there are no more precision shots and strikes for characters and individual characters... |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Tactica Necrons · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

1:41 AM Jul 11