Necrons 9th Ed Reflections

[Bonzi]

Lately I've been considering the differences on my hot take of our new codex back when it released in October versus how I view it now after time and gameplay has reshaped my view.

 

When our codex was released alongside the drop of the 9th ed ruleset and the new Space Marine dex my initial impression was somewhere between neutral to displeased. I felt GW had been sloppy with our dex and made several big missteps that would keep us from being a top tier army. I was upset at how poor our Command Protocols were (and still am), how needlessly complicated Reanimation had been made and how poorly it works for multiwound models (it kind of is) and the fairly unforgivable treatment of the Monolith (still mad about that). At the time of those nitpicks my upset at what I still consider valid issues hid how good the dex was in general.

 

Time and gameplay has shown me that while the dex has problems, the gestalt result of all the rules and units is something much greater than the sum of it's parts. As I have gotten a better grasp of 9th ed mechanics, gotten more practice with rolling the new reanimations, and gotten over my obsession with our Command Protocols, I've come to see that

 

A) Necrons are now a scary flexible army that can be made into a shooting or melee and horde or monsters and elites style of army and any of the builds can be fairly viable. In my opinion no other army in the game has quite the range of options Necrons have. Many do certain builds far better, but our dex is one of the only where all of them seem possible. That makes us a tough opponent because you can't tool an army to play against 'Necrons' in general because they might be playing a speed melee list or a tide of shooting Obsec warriors and each of those builds have different counters. I play Necrons, BA, and Astra Militarum and I consider my Necrons to be the army that offers me the most list building freedom (fingers crossed that GW does right by the Guard when their turn comes).

 

B) Our unit points values address the diminishing returns of reanimations on multiwound models. Skorpeth Destroyers and the like would be a lot more points heavy than they now are if you were able to bring them back easily.

 

At this time my gripes against the army are far outweighed by my positive and that's been a change brought about by time and gameplay. How have your own thoughts on the Necron codex changed (or not) over time?

[Ahzek451]

Yes and no. My opinion has changed little since the first month of release. There is little to no room for complaint on the overall power level of the book. It is strong. As you pointed out, I can appreciate that our points are not shooting through the roof due to easy RP on multi-wound models. It's still somewhat annoying as a time waster, but perhaps a nice unexpected perk when it does happen. (so far the most insane thing I have done is ressurected a tomb spyder in a 2-model squad). 

Command protocols I still find an annoyance with, simply remove the range restriction and it would be fine. 

Still not convinced with the reanimator, hexmark, and monolith. 

But since day 1 of GW's codex book design, it's always been the same. Not every unit will be as appealing as the others and a handful fall through the cracks. This pattern is entertainingly if not sometimes painfully consistent.  Accepting that this will always be the case, we are left hoping for a decent codex that can hold it's own for an entire edition and IMHO we got a good one this time. Not the messy power of 5th, not the lows of 7th and 8th. The options are aplenty and its fun. 

But going back to the pattern of GW consistently not making units equal...it just somewhat surprises me that GW dropped the ball on the 3 units mentioned above...as NEW MODELS. 

[Mr4Minutes]

You mirror most of my feelings as well.

 

My main gripe now is the lack of synergy and more penalizing nature of trying to run themed lists based on destroyers or Canoptek units.

 

I do think the Necrons Codex was one of the prototype codexes for 9th edition. And that as time passes and new codexes are released, it will definitely decrease in power.

 

Fortunately I agree with you that there are lots of options, so I think we’ll always have the ability to create fun and competitive lists throughout the edition.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Mr4Minutes

[Get Thokt]

I feel there a few things that can be fixed with a decent points drop. Skorpekh Lords (on the front cover but not close to a good unit), Hexmark, Reanimator, Heavy Destroyers.

 

The limitations to core is my most problematic aspect. Canoptek have every part to be part of core.

 

I agree too, that the range limitation to protocol is just not necessary.

 

I may be the only one thinking this, but I feel our shooting capabilities have somewhat gone down. Ever since Tesla took the nerf, we are still looking at pretty average ranged weapons.

[Mandragola]

As someone just getting into Necrons and having played only two games at 1k (but with >20 years of competitive 40k behind me) I agree it's a really interesting book, though also that it has some pretty glaring flaws. I'm definitely enjoying writing up lists for them.

 

On the whole I agree it looks like Command protocols fail as a mechanic. They just look too awkward to make work and the difference they make isn't huge anyway. That's a shame because they're really thematic. I generally dislike the forgettable "something minor happens if you roll a 6" type things, though the options to fall back or do actions and still shoot are great.

 

This has meant that I'm looking fairly seriously at double detachment armies, using different codes. After all, one of the key reasons to take multiple detachments is to fit in a second C'tan, and they don't lose anything at all from missing out on codes. You can also potentially look at Anrakyr for your  Overlord, as he buffs units from any dynasty. I've thrown together a list here designed to spam mortal wounds in often quite targeted ways, which I think might be quite fun.

 

Sautekh Battalion

 

Imotekh the Stormlord (Warlord) 145

 

Plasmancer 70

 

5 Immortals (Gauss) 85

 

5 Immortals (Gauss) 85

 

5 Immortals (Gauss) 85

 

C'tan Shard of the Void Dragon 350

 

Rad-Wreathed/Expansionist Patrol

 

Overlord 125

Voltaic Staff

Resurrection Orb

Thrall of the Silent King

 

Plasmancer 70

Veil of Darkness

 

Psychomancer 95

Atavindicator

 

20 Warriors (Reapers) 260

 

20 Warriors (Reapers) 260

 

C'tan shard of the Nightbringer 370

 

The basic idea is to do lots and lots of mortal wounds and particularly a lot of splash wounds to make characters' lives more difficult. And then to have some pretty respectable raw power from the two C'tan chopping things up. The Overlord is a bit of a funny one as he can reduce a unit's toughness without going into melee - though he's also reasonably good at melee if required. Dunno if it would work but it looks like fun - I should probably just make that patrol obsec instead really.

Edited March 19, 2021 by Mandragola

[Tyriks]

I agree that we are strong right now, but I think that we lack some flavor. I find I struggle most to make characters I actually want to use in my lists. All of the warlord traits and Relics I really liked in 8th are gone or changed so much I don't really care about them anymore. MWBD went from being a necessary piece of the game to a decent bonus, so Overlords feel a lot less urgent to me. Lately I've been making lists with only Crypteks or Lords to see what ends up actually having an impact on the game, since all my slots aren't automatically Overlords now.

 

And yeah, Protocols was a huge miss. It's extremely restrictive for minor bonuses. If it was pick one at the start of battle round and you only need to have a Noble on the table you'd still have some that just don't matter most games. As it is I gave up bothering with it for now.

 

Core was a good idea but the choices they made just don't make sense for us. I honestly don't know why Deathmarks have it, since some Dynasties refuse to use them and most only use them under certain circumstances. But Scarabs or Wraiths should absolutely have it. It wouldn't have been as insulting if the Marine codex hadn't given it to almost every single infantry unit in the faction. It just doesn't make sense.

[Mandragola]

I agree on the lack of flavour. It's a shame that the warlord traits and relics aren't more varied and balanced. You basically have the excellent voltaic staff, VoD and enduring will, and then that's kind of that.

 

If giving up on protocols and souping dynasties, I think the dynastic agent HQs all start to look more interesting. For example Anrakyr buffs all necron core units, whereas an overlord from either dynasty would only buff his own side.  Likewise Szeras (who is still probably overcosted) can repair any unit. 

 

One downside of the special characters though is that they're often rubbish finecast resin. I got my Imotekh and the thin vanes on his staff broke slightly, which will be a pain to repair. Plus for some reason he comes with a stupid 25mm base, which I'll need to stick him on so he's legal for all events. The only other thing in my army on 25mm will be a plasmacyte, if I even take one.

[Plague _Lord]

The worst part is that the monolith is a) so expensive in $$$ and at the same time so bad in gameplay that it's hard to justify the purchase... On the other hamd it's such an iconic unit that it's hard not to want to but it...

[Perry]

The worst part is that the monolith is a) so expensive in $$$ and at the same time so bad in gameplay that it's hard to justify the purchase... On the other hamd it's such an iconic unit that it's hard not to want to but it...

The new model is fantastic, I bought it on that strength.

[Mandragola]

The Monolith is a tough one. It's kind of almost good, but being a Lord of War is just awful for it. Without that there'd be all sorts of interesting options you might try. It's still a massive unit to be able to deep strike.

 

I don't know if its damage output is quite enough for its price. Actually though it costs a fair bit less than LoWs like knights, and it brings real dakka as well as some interesting tactical options. Just such a shame they come at the cost of a high CP cost, and losing all your dynasty bonuses if taken in an auxiliary detachment.

 

You could potentially consider two monoliths and the Silent King I guess. That leads to more CP problems though. Even though he gives you 3CPs the detachment costs 6, and you'd need at least another patrol to bring some infantry along. 

[Captain Coolpants]

Yeah, the monolith has no appeal to me at all. The direction they took for the monolith this edition was a strange one.

[Tyriks]

Yeah, it is a real shame they made it a Lord of War.

[dice4thedicegod]

Yeah, I’d love to get one but it’s hard to justify when I can’t see how I’d fit it into a list.

 

If it was just heavy support. Or had quantum shielding.

[VoceNoctum]

I do sort of like the Monolith, looks wise, but for $ and Points, I think the Tesseract Vault is just a much neater and more iconic "giant floaty building" for me. The Vault epitomizes the whole "we use star gods for fuel" and everything. I think the Monolith reminds me more of a Drop Pod (yes, I know there is little comparison, just saying "feel" wise) vs the giant floaty gun platform.

 

Though, it would be neat if they had done a terrain thing like a Monolith Drop Pod/ Portal thing, rather than the Convergence pylons. Something that smashes into the ground and lets you teleport units to it. Or something like the Skaven gnaw holes.

 

Sorry, rambling, long day at work. :)

[Get Thokt]

I hope they'll decrease the points for Heavy Destroyers as they are pretty awesome models. I think many can compare our Heavy Destroyers to the Melta ATV, which outperforms LHD in almost every way.

[dice4thedicegod]

Both normal and heavy destroyers seem very squishy for their points. Has anyone got much practical experience with them? They seem weak compared to attack bike (destroyer) or ATV (heavy destroyer). Maybe they are charged a premium for being infantry?

[01RTB01]

 

The worst part is that the monolith is a) so expensive in $$$ and at the same time so bad in gameplay that it's hard to justify the purchase... On the other hamd it's such an iconic unit that it's hard not to want to but it...

The new model is fantastic, I bought it on that strength.

I did too and had an absolute blast painting it. I don't expect much from it in games but there'll be enough targets that it won't matter.

[Mandragola]

Both normal and heavy destroyers seem very squishy for their points. Has anyone got much practical experience with them? They seem weak compared to attack bike (destroyer) or ATV (heavy destroyer). Maybe they are charged a premium for being infantry?

I haven't used them myself but a guy on dakka said he always brings a couple. The point is that they're infantry with quite a good move and fly, making them great action monkeys and relatively good objective-grabbers. At long range you need to fire quite a big gun to get rid of them and they're cheap enough to just sit out of LoS to hold an objective if that's what's needed. And they do still have a very big gun of their own for when it's required.

 

Personally I'm not completely convinced by this. I think something like a unit of immortals or deathmarks might do the job as well, or better. But the LHD can blow up tanks at range, which few other units can do, whereas these other things just add more dakka. HS slots are not exactly hotly contested in necron armies so there's not a lot of opportunity cost for taking them.

[Bonzi]

 

 

Both normal and heavy destroyers seem very squishy for their points. Has anyone got much practical experience with them? They seem weak compared to attack bike (destroyer) or ATV (heavy destroyer). Maybe they are charged a premium for being infantry?

I haven't used them myself but a guy on dakka said he always brings a couple. The point is that they're infantry with quite a good move and fly, making them great action monkeys and relatively good objective-grabbers. At long range you need to fire quite a big gun to get rid of them and they're cheap enough to just sit out of LoS to hold an objective if that's what's needed. And they do still have a very big gun of their own for when it's required.

 

Personally I'm not completely convinced by this. I think something like a unit of immortals or deathmarks might do the job as well, or better. But the LHD can blow up tanks at range, which few other units can do, whereas these other things just add more dakka. HS slots are not exactly hotly contested in necron armies so there's not a lot of opportunity cost for taking them.

My last several games have included a squad of 3. Yes, they do compare as being too expensive when stacked next to attack bikes and ATVs but my opinion is that those units are undercosted rather than the baseline we should be moved towards.

 

I have found Heavy Destroyers to be my favorite source of AT in a list due to their absolute reliability in scoring hits and doing great damage. Units like the Doomsday Ark and the Doomstalker are too swingy with their D6. They also have the advantage of 36" range which is handy for keeping them out of reach Eradicators and Inceptors. I have found most of my Marine opponents have absolutely abandoned long range weapons because in general they are not needed. Having my AT operate safely outside of retaliation range has made them far more durable than their statline would suggest.

Edited March 30, 2021 by Bonzi

[Captain Coolpants]

What weapons are you finding better on the heavy destroyers?

 

More strength that does 3D3 damage? Or less strength that has 3D3 shots at 1 damage?

[Bonzi]

What weapons are you finding better on the heavy destroyers?

 

More strength that does 3D3 damage? Or less strength that has 3D3 shots at 1 damage?

I only use the heavy damage variant. If I want a lot of str 7 shooting I'll bring an Annibarge. It loses an Ap, but I reliably has more shooting and is more durable. My personal opinion is that the Emetic weapon range was a big miss by GW. They don't give us anything we needed. I find myself wishing GW had made them flamer type weapons because that's a weapon type we lack.

 

Give the Locust Emetic 24" 3d3 autohits + ignores cover, give the Skorpeth Lord 18" 2d3 autohits + ignores cover, and give the Hexmark 12" d3 per pistol + ignores cover. Leave the ap -1 and make the guns assault. Suddenly you have a unit that plays wildly different than the other weapon type and gives the Necrons something they don't already have, crazy cover melting long range flamers.

Edited March 30, 2021 by Bonzi

[Tyriks]

I agree. The heavy option is what I always take. The enmitic gun is good for killing high toughness infantry which is what every other gun we have is good at. We have so many guns that are best against heavy infantry. Even all our melee is geared toward that. I really wish we had more reliable anti tank guns, and any cc units at S9+. Especially with Ophydians and Skorpekhs I wish they had made Skorpekhs higher Strength but give Ophydians more attacks. Those plus Wraiths all feel like the same unit with subtle tweaks.

[Plague _Lord]

I allways take 3-4 destroyers and a heavy as a single unit. They do work - good at clearing out screens/objective holder due to decent rate of fire, but also usefull against tanks thanks to the great ap and potential damage output. They tend to get ignored turns 1-2 as my oponents would rather take care of the wraiths and melee destroyers rushing their lines. I do, however, agree with all that the 3d3 shot weapon is meh - it's good against targets which our whole army is good against, but I'm starting to think it was created with a certain future army of renoun list where you might not be able to take warriors/immortals and thus diminishing your anti horde firepower?

 

Back on topic -  the Monolith needs to move to heavy or not cost CP, because it's just not worth spending 3cp over that horrific points cost...

[Mandragola]

I agree that the enmetic gun is basically pointless. It just does what troop weapons do. The heavy gun is definitely something different.

 

That said, a unit of three is a very different idea to taking one or two individual ones. That’s an investment in a proper combat unit rather than an action monkey or objective sitter. They might be able to do both roles but they aren’t the same.

[Get Thokt]

Also to note, those who are looking to make big gains with Phylacterine Hive should have their Technomancer next to a unit of 3 Heavy Destroyers. If I'm looking at this right, reanimating a Heavy Destroyer is the best use of it, points wise.