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: |
| Decurion 2000 pt | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 23 2015, 07:57 AM (288 Views) | |
| Akenaton | Apr 23 2015, 07:57 AM Post #1 |
|
Canoptek Scarab
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hi all, After few games I found a list that really pleased me and which really hit hard against my usual friends' army lists... DECURION CORE ARMY Zandrekh 8 Lychguards Sword & Surf 10 Immortals gauss 5 Immortals Night Scythe 10 Warriors Ghost ark 10 Warriors Ghost ark 5 Tomb blade with Gauss, shield vane and nebuloscope FORMATION Judicator Batallion: Thriach Stalker Heat ray 7 Praetorians with rod 7 Praetorians with Pistol and voidblade Deathmarkrs: 7 Deathmarks Zandrekh goes with the guards, usually retain Zealot till the enemy close combat units are wiped away, or if I really need, I swap it for reserves bonus/malus and then get back to fearless or targeting protocols (depending on my enemy). Deathmarks are there as a kind of interception or against my friend's tyranids. Praetorians are great with T5 and RP 4+ they are fast, stronger enough to being hit and still hit back hard. I use void/pistol as tank hunters unit and rod armed squad as marine/MC hunters. Stalker is a real boost for warriors and Immortals and Tomb blade move around soften enemy units, finishing off hurted units or damaged tanks. Any advise or sharing experience are welcome. |
|
|
| Akar | Apr 23 2015, 05:07 PM Post #2 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I understand that the immortals in the Nightscythe are for far reaching stuff, but have you thought about taking the NS on one of the Praetorains? I only mention it because it becomes a part of that formation and will benefit from the re roll bonus. I also prefer a unit of Warriors on the ground if taking Ghost Arks. You're not really taking advantage of the repair aspect of GAs, and making it easier for your opponent to pick out his targets. Does your group allow the Praetorians to use the Rods as shooting and in CC? I know this is an issue for some people. |
|
|
| Treelamp | Apr 24 2015, 06:26 AM Post #3 |
|
Flayed One
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't understand what you mean here? What is the potential issue? |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Apr 24 2015, 07:12 AM Post #4 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
there is a gray area in the rules, where it says (paraphrased): "if a weapon has several profiles, you can choose each turn which to use" so, this could be understood in two ways: 1: which is exclusive (means just one of the several profiles). This would mean you can just use 1 profile each turn (so either shooting with AP2 or stabbing with AP2) 2: which is not exclusive (means use as many as you want). This would mean you can use both profiles each turn (shooting with AP2 AND stabbing with AP2) maybe its too simplified, but thats basically the issue. |
|
|
| Akar | Apr 24 2015, 04:32 PM Post #5 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OLJ summed it up. Not a real issue for me, I don't even have mine built yet and I plan on 'Deep Striking'. It does mean that it could be ruled that if I use them on Overwatch, then no AP2 in CC. Like disallowing them to start in a Nightscythe, it's a low blow from non-Necron players, but something I'd clear up before taking to any tourney. Edited by Akar, Apr 24 2015, 04:33 PM.
|
|
|
| Treelamp | Apr 25 2015, 08:58 AM Post #6 |
|
Flayed One
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Wait, now why wouldn't they be allowed to start in a nightscythe? Because the formation doesn't declare that they do? |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | Apr 25 2015, 03:32 PM Post #7 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
because they are jump infantry. In all transports you can only embark INFANTRY models (unless otherwhise mentioned). So in order to transport jump infantry, the NS section would have to mention that the NS can carry jump infantry. This was faqed in the previous faq (NS could carry jump infantry then), but its not in the actual faq, which sucks. So, RAW, NS cant carry pretorians. |
|
|
| Akenaton | May 1 2015, 12:50 PM Post #8 |
|
Canoptek Scarab
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No problem with the Praetorians here, just a question Though: May I take the Scythe for the 10 Immortals squad and let it in reserve? Because in this case I can change some options such us use 7 Flyed ones in order to add more disruption units on the board. A unit which can infiltrate, deep strike and hit decently in melee fulfill exactly what I want: divert fire from my core units and being un-ignorable unit, if put in the right place... |
|
|
| Akar | May 1 2015, 04:09 PM Post #9 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is right up there with Gauss doesn't work on Void Shields. I just tell them 'Fine, but if you ever rally after failing a morale test, then the penalty stays for the remainder of the game. It's ridiculous. Akenation, I've been running 2 units of Flayed Ones and really enjoy them for those reasons. It's a little tricky getting used to forced infiltrate, but they still get the job done. They're just good enough now that your opponent can't afford to ignore them, and if he commits, then your shooting units close that range they need. The only unit that comes close that I've seen, is the new Scorpions. Having Shroud until they do something other than move is amazing. |
|
|
| Treelamp | May 8 2015, 07:02 AM Post #10 |
|
Flayed One
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think it is implied by the statement "May select a NS as a dedicated transport." How could a unit of Praetorians take a dedicated transport they can't.. be transported by? I would walk away from the table if anyone even suggested that was how it worked. Besides, the core rule book even specifically says that the "Jump" unit is not a type of it's self, but a modifier that changes how a unit functions. It is still specifically an Infantry model at base. And why would it include the Bulky rule under Jump if "Jump Infantry" were not transportable compared to straight "Infantry"? That is probably the craziest thing I've heard you suggest, although I guess it may have been an issue in an edition just prior to this, but it seems pretty cut and dry in my opinion, even RAW. Edited by Treelamp, May 8 2015, 07:08 AM.
|
|
|
| Akar | May 9 2015, 01:18 AM Post #11 |
|
Destroyer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm 100% on board with you, but you still need to be aware that not everyone feels that way. Tactically, the only reason to do it is to deploy spread out exactly where you need them to. Other than that, they're pretty much the same if you were to DS them. |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | May 9 2015, 02:59 AM Post #12 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
While I understand your frustration, it is EXPLICITLY stated that Transports normally cannot carry jump infantry. BRB>transports> transport capacity: "Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise. Some larger Infantry models count as more than one model for the purposes of Transport Capacity, and this will be specified in the model’s rules." emphasis mine. |
|
|
| Treelamp | May 9 2015, 07:31 AM Post #13 |
|
Flayed One
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ahhh, interesting. Well what does that mean if you elect to take the dedicated transport then? You just get a NS without taking up any force org. slot? I guess if that's how people call it, it doesn't bother me. But to straight up say the Codex is written to the point where I have to just entirely ignore an option on the unit seems ignorant. Besides you're forgetting, my personal favorite, The Most Important Rule: "In a game of the size and complexity of Warhammer 40,000, there are bound to be occasions where a situation is not covered by the rules, or you can’t seem to find the right page. Even if you know the rule, sometimes it is just a really close call, and players don’t agree on the precise outcome. Nobody wants to waste valuable gaming time arguing, so be prepared to interpret a rule or come up with a suitable solution for yourselves (in a manner befitting the better class of Imperial Citizen, of course). If you find that you and your opponent cannot agree on the application of a rule, roll a dice to see whose interpretation will apply for the remainder of the game – on a result of 1-3 player A gets to decide, on a 4-6 player B decides. Then you can get on with the fighting! Once the game is over, you can happily continue your discussion as to the finer points of the rules." AKA the disclaimer that says GW doesn't know how to write rules in the first place, make sense of it yourself logically. AKA, the unit selection allows transport option, IT CAN TRANSPORT IT. No one in their right mind can come to a different conclusion, unless they are being boorish and unreasonable. |
|
|
| OhLongJohnson | May 9 2015, 04:47 PM Post #14 |
|
Cryptek
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Im just pointing out rules here. Of COURSE its stupid that pretorians can take a NS and cant embark onto it, but RAW its like that, and while you can decide to not play against somebody because he doesnt allow you to embark pretorians onto nightscythes, you wont be able to do so in a tournament. If Id play with you I would definitely allow you to put them into NS, but not all players think that way... For me, it just shows that GW doesnt think things throught. Seriously, they dont care about this kind of stuff. If they would employ some guys just to LOOK FOR LOOPHOLES and errors, the whole rulesystem would be MUCH more consistent. Most of these problems are really not hard to detect, and ONE single sentence in the BRB or codex would solve the whole problem. They also dont answer to FAQ requests... They do a lot of stupid stuff like my friend mentioned. He plays IG, I think the new IG codex came out just a few weeks before the new BRB...so many things are not in the spirit of 7th edition. WHY did GW not wait with the codex release until the new BRB came out? back to topic: Luckily, it doesnt seem that much of a problem in the case of pretorians, as they dont NEED the NS....in some situations it might be nice to have them within NS, but I think they are happy on their own. They are tough and fast |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Army Lists · Next Topic » |





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


9:46 AM Jul 11