Destruction showing at Facehammer GT - Debrief

[Ollie Grimwood]

I’m always minded of the internet furores a lot of Moonclan players stirred up when the first FAQ invalidated the compendium battalion and how it meant they were completely usable. Didn’t  turn out to be an entirely accurate assessment. 

[scrubyandwells]

Hey @Chris Tomlin sorry man didn't intend at all to sound dismissive of the result, it was brilliant. I'm tempted to just delete the posts and wish I never would've raised the topic of soft scores. Anyway, sorry.

[Chris Tomlin]

1 minute ago, scrubyandwells said:

Hey @Chris Tomlin sorry man didn't intend at all to sound dismissive of the result, it was brilliant. I'm tempted to just delete the posts and wish I never would've raised the topic of soft scores. Anyway, sorry.

Nah don't delete it mate, all good. Soft scores are always an interesting discussion that can divide opinion. As I said, I didn't expect that you would have meant it in that way anyway  

[Sangfroid]

1 minute ago, scrubyandwells said:

Hey @Chris Tomlin sorry man didn't intend at all to sound dismissive of the result, it was brilliant. I'm tempted to just delete the posts and wish I never would've raised the topic of soft scores. Anyway, sorry.

It's an interesting discussion, I love the fact soft score contribute and was only last night discussing this with Chris because I never seem to pick up sports votes myself yet, from feedback from peeps I've played they all enjoy the games I always play fair and often let people do things out of step (like inspiring precence in the combat phase etc...) as well as point out and coach people when they miss things they could help them. It's something I'm going to ponder on and see how I can change if it's even possible to do so :-)

[Chris Tomlin]

@Sangfroid - I told you last night; handjobs!

[Fungrim]

2 minutes ago, Chris Tomlin said:

@Sangfroid - I told you last night; handjobs!

I'll be needing an FAQ on this..

[Sangfroid]

30 minutes ago, Chris Tomlin said:

@Sangfroid - I told you last night; handjobs!

 

[Paul Haley]

23 hours ago, Chris Tomlin said:

Afternoon guys,

Following on from the kind of topics @Soup Dragon has made for BLACKOUT and Stirling recently, I thought I'd get some discussion going following the Facehammer GT this weekend.

This event was 92 players, 5 games of GH2017. By this time most people would have played the new battleplans I guess (unfortunately I'd only played 3 going in) and everything seemed a little more settled than BLACKOUT. Out of 92 players, we had an pretty pitiful 11 Destruction players. Let's take a look at placings and allegiances;

3 - Nicky Myland - Bonesplitterz @?
4 - Chris Tomlin - Ironjawz
30 - Ian Spink - Bonesplitterz @Kanamorf
36 - Kieran Harper - Ironjawz @Sangfroid
39 - Kane Holloway - Ironjawz @?
44 - Mike Thomas - Destruction @?
48 - Paul Haley - Ironjawz @Paul Haley
49 - Ian Gilmore - Ironjawz @Ian Gilmore
57 - William Morriss - Ironjawz @William Morriss
78 - Tom Wall - Ironjawz @Tom
83 - Paul Whitehead - Beastclaw Raiders @Soup Dragon

(full disclosure; this event also had small soft scores for paint and sports)

So actually it seems like Ironjawz are reasonably well represented and this is probably as many as we've seen at larger tournaments. It's the other allegiances and the generic grand alliance that actually appear to be poorly represented.

Whilst Bonesplitterz are widely regarded as being nerfed (a fair obseveration IMO), it does appear that they can still very much compete at the highest level. That said both Nicky and Ian are very good players who have been using the army for some time now. Still, I would've expected more than 2 Bonesplitterz players to be in attendance.

Beastclaw Raiders seem to be in the floor at the moment but I will leave it in the capable hands of Paul to discuss that further. This is a real shame, especially when I look to Paul as one of the top Destruction players in the country over the past couple of years and can see his frustration to the point he may switch armies  

Ironjawz on the other hand seem to be doing ok. Bit of a mixed bag on the results front, but I had a good conversation with Kieran and Ian Spink at the event, discussing how we think for most tournament players that 3 wins (and feeling competitive in your losses) is a perfectly acceptable place to be. Obviously there will be players who are gunning for that top spot, but I think we (as Ironjawz players) can feel we are in most of our games and will have a chance. I suspect there probably is a ceiling for us as you would need a really favourable draw and some luck to be able to hit 5 wins. Incidentally neither myself or Kieran went with the Ironfist and I have to say, I for one did not miss it.

Just some initial thoughts for now to get the discussion going guys. Finally, well done to Nicky for placing highest and to Kieran for taking home the Best Destruction trophy for the highest number of Kill Points.

Chris

I only had 3 practice games with with the Ironjawz before Facehammer so not the best prep. So 2 wins is about right IMO but I can honestly say I really enjoyed playing with them.  They are not even close to the power level of my old mixed Destruction filth (but nothing in Destruction is now)

[Hypno]

Only just seen this so I feel like writing up a bit of a report on my games and list.  I went for something a bit different after a fairly Poor Performance from the Beastclaw at Blackout  

Megaboss Maw-Krusha (Ironclad, Dabs)

Megaboss

Wierdnob 

Warchanter

Warboss with banner

 10 Brutes twin choppas

10 Ardboys with shields

2x3 goregruntas 

2 spearchukkas 

Game 1

first game against Laurie H-W’s gnarlroot, Mawkrusha was tied up by dryads and kurnoth in the Center all game, smashed his way through 30dryads, 3 scythe hunters by the end, the 10 Brutes got stuck on the treelord ancient for 3 rounds until the brute boss had enough so grabbed him and bashed him for 6 damage! Resulted in a minor victory for me

Game 2

in the second game I played Balal Zafar and his wanderers, he deployed off the table and gave me first turn which allowed me to march up and get close to the objectives, the wanderers then came onto the board and shot one of the ranger units at the cabbage with -3 rend shots these didn’t do a great deal managing 4 wounds after Ironclad and Dabs, the mawkrusha responded by charging the eternal guard killing 23 with the other 7 finished off by goregruntas, the wanderers then took next turn and teleported away to deal with the Brutes and all my smaller heros sat on the other objective he fired the other 2 units of glade guard at -3 towards the brutes killing 7 with the other 3 running away after the weight of shots over the next 3 turns finished the cabbage off as he advanced up the board to try get one of the hero’s on an objective, the game ended with me loosing most of my army but winning the scenario 2-1 

Game 3

against  Luke McHugh’s murderhost was what I expected he was extremely fast getting on 3 of the objectives first turn and taking large chunks out of my goregruntas which I used as a wall to stop my unbuffed Brutes from getting hit too hard, I used the spearchukkas to take out the blood secrator and take shots at some letters when no other heros were in range, the krusha won on his flank taking the back objective and keeping my own secure, while the brutes managed to chop through the letters in the center eventually, the 3rd unit of letters managed to take out all the brutes and secure the other flank before my krusha has time to get over and retaliate, resulting in Luke getting a hard fought victory

Game 4

I played against Patrick O’sullivan’s Death game 4 he had a bit of a mixed bag although mostly deathrattle, he moved onto the objectives turn 1 and having multiple units and other threats i had to deal with like a zombie dragon coming for my back objective and a couple of vargulfs running about it took me too long to take the centre objectives back by which point he had scored 20 points and had an unassailable lead although with almost all his army gone by my turn 4 he managed to hold onto his back objective for the 2 turns so that I couldn’t equalise for the minor 

Game 5

I played my 5th game against Sam Watson’s FEC me and Sam seemed to have been following each other throughout the tournament playing on tables next to each other every game since Game 2, we had both spoke about our armies and were up for a good relaxed game, our armies had a big clash in the centre of the table I managed to get a Mighty Waaagh and roll a 6! So all my brutes and the Krusha were able to smash their way through the army of ghouls and then on the next turn I went for another waaagh and rolled a 5 which allowed the Cabbage to finish the other unit of 6 crypt flayers and the brutes to kill his Ghoul king on zombie dragon resulting in a Major victory for me 

I finished on 2 Major victory’s, A Minor victory and 2 losses 

Kane 

[Pedro_L]

Hey all, 

Great thread, and congratulations to all the Destruction players for their finishes, particularly Nicky and Chris for 3rd and 4th place respectively! 

Had a brief question for @Kanamorf and any other Bonesplitterz player that wants to chime in! Do you still think we're at our most effective with the Arrowboyz list, or do you think there's potential for a close-combat oriented, non-Arrowboyz list to get similar strong results against other top tier armies? 

[Southern trolls]

On 10/2/2017 at 8:07 AM, Chris Tomlin said:

 

**EDIT**

Oh wait, you asked about game 3. The above was game 2. In game 3 my opponent @Ralphy99 (a Destruction turncoat actually! )  had two turns before my first one thanks to the Engine of the Gods!  The extra turn is devastating enough but is bearable, its the fact you score two full rounds of objectives that really hurt. Was still a good game and again its another fun story to tell isn't it.

I like big moments in Warhammer, they tend to be the things I remember...both of the above qualify  

Congrats Chris and all the guys that rep'd destruction! 

Quick clarification, did y'all count him scoring in the round he got the Engine of the Gods free turn!? I have asked for clarification for this from GW a while back, interested in hearing why y'all ruled it as a scoring round if you did? 

[Chris Tomlin]

25 minutes ago, Southern trolls said:

Congrats Chris and all the guys that rep'd destruction! 

Quick clarification, did y'all count him scoring in the round he got the Engine of the Gods free turn!? I have asked for clarification for this from GW a while back, interested in hearing why y'all ruled it as a scoring round if you did? 

Cheers man!

Why wouldn't you score it? The battleplan says a players scores at the end of their turn, the Engine of the Gods allows you to take an extra turn. As utterly broken* as it is, it's unfortunately not the least bit ambiguous. If the battleplan said you score at the end of the battle round (you have used the word round instead of turn above I believe), then yes, you would not score again. I double checked the wording on both sets of rules at the table and there's absolutely nothing that stops it** and it's not even worthy of an FAQ as it's so clear...an errata on the other hand would be nice haha!  

*I say broken as these rules were written before matched play and the idea of turn based objective scoring. The bonus turn is really graphic to face, but tbh it's such a rare event from a model that is relatively easy to kill, so it's not necessarily the end of the world. I actually don't mind it being in the game. The reason it breaks matched play is purely for the ability to rack up another turn of scoring objectives. In some battleplans this will be more detrimental that others. In Total Conquest it meant he got 0-7 up on me, and though I could flip them back for 2pts a time, he was then able to do the same back to me. This meant that it was really tough for me to gain any ground.

**I would love to be wrong on this FYI! I don't think I am though  

 

[Southern trolls]

44 minutes ago, Chris Tomlin said:

Cheers man!

Why wouldn't you score it? The battleplan says a players scores at the end of their turn, the Engine of the Gods allows you to take an extra turn. As utterly broken* as it is, it's unfortunately not the least bit ambiguous. If the battleplan said you score at the end of the battle round (you have used the word round instead of turn above I believe), then yes, you would not score again. I double checked the wording on both sets of rules at the table and there's absolutely nothing that stops it** and it's not even worthy of an FAQ as it's so clear...an errata on the other hand would be nice haha!  

*I say broken as these rules were written before matched play and the idea of turn based objective scoring. The bonus turn is really graphic to face, but tbh it's such a rare event from a model that is relatively easy to kill, so it's not necessarily the end of the world. I actually don't mind it being in the game. The reason it breaks matched play is purely for the ability to rack up another turn of scoring objectives. In some battleplans this will be more detrimental that others. In Total Conquest it meant he got 0-7 up on me, and though I could flip them back for 2pts a time, he was then able to do the same back to me. This meant that it was really tough for me to gain any ground.

**I would love to be wrong on this FYI! I don't think I am though  

 

Unfortunately I don't think you're wrong either, as that's how I viewed it!! However, I had gotten into a long discussion about this very rule a little while ago with an opposing view. I think their main rebuttal was that it's still in the same battle round and you can't have multiple turns in a single battle round? Probably doing their side injustice since I don't recall it to accurately lol. Anyway thanks and great job. You and @Sangfroid have talked me into dropping ironfist this week for a few trial games. Also glad the hag as taken, been loving her in my games! 

[svnvaldez]

7 hours ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Didn’t the successful players play mixed Destruction lists with them and moonclan or Bonesplitterz. I’d be interested how a list like that faired currently (of course one of the list may have been one but I can’t tell till the lists  are published). Granted they aren’t as powerful as they were but that doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t viable. 

I'm of the same thinking...  Take Jack's 6 Nations list which is the pinnacle of the "StoneRukk"

Allegiance: Destruction

Leaders
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
- General
- Trait: Bellowing Tyrant
- Artefact: Battle Brew
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
- Artefact: Battle Brew
Savage Big Boss (120)
- Stonecleava 
Tyrant (160)
- Massive Ogor Club
Moonclan Grot Shaman (80)

Battleline
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
10 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (120)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline

Battalions
Kunnin' Rukk (160)

Total: 2280 / 2000
 

This list can remain at its core  and still fit in 2k

Allegiance: Destruction

Leaders
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
- General
- Trait: Bellowing Tyrant
- Artefact: Battle Brew
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
- Artefact: Battle Brew
Savage Big Boss (120)
- Stonecleava 
Moonclan Grot Shaman (80)

Battleline
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
10 x Savage Orruks (120)
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline

Battalions
Kunnin' Rukk (160)

Reinforcement Points (0)

Total: 2000 / 2000

And what was lost really??? The following numbers I'll spit out are vs no save models and rounded.  Losing Double Battlebrew will decrease the Stonehorns wounds per combat from 25 to 17. Losing Stone Skeleton makes them half as survivable vs damage 1. Losing Bellowing tyrant on the 40 Rukk and reducing it to 30  decreases wounds per shooting phase from 30 to 15. Losing Rampaging destroyer means each unit isn't moving 3.5 inches a turn.

Stonehorns are still beasts... 13 wounds, 3up and one with mystic shield, halve mortals and damage characteristics. Hammer blade on his punches and kicks will do a mortal on a 5up to models in 3inches. Ravager on the general will move a unit up 6inches on a 3up.

30 Rukk will still be 60 wounds with IP on it double tapping units in 18.

4 Drop army.

Is it as bent? no. but I think its still good.

[Kanamorf]

3 hours ago, Pedro_L said:

Hey all, 

Great thread, and congratulations to all the Destruction players for their finishes, particularly Nicky and Chris for 3rd and 4th place respectively! 

Had a brief question for @Kanamorf and any other Bonesplitterz player that wants to chime in! Do you still think we're at our most effective with the Arrowboyz list, or do you think there's potential for a close-combat oriented, non-Arrowboyz list to get similar strong results against other top tier armies? 

I think Nicky is proving that a full archer army is still incredibly strong. I however do not enjoy that sort of army. I prefer a fast moving combat army. Bonesplitterz are in a similar place to IronJaws now. Given the luck of the opponent draw you can win 5 games ( I do surprisingly well against Tzeench, not to say I win every time but have beaten them in 5 of the 8 times I have played them I think I am still the only person to win against @hobgoblinclub) The boar based combat army does have some really hard counters. Anyone rocking 2+ armour will just ruin your day, having said that I have just spent all day at work thinking about work wondering if a unit of 8 big stikkas could work as suggested by @svnvaldez

[svnvaldez]

I haven't seen Nicky's Facehammer list, but going off his Blackout list if he straight swapped 30 arrows for 8 stabbas I wounder if that would help him vs the 2+ armor armies. He would still have 90 arrows and is only losing 28 wounds worth of bodies. I played the StoneRukk under GH1 and am really curious how the pure Bonespliterz work.

[Tizianolol]

Where we can find all facehammer tournament lists?:)

[Sangfroid]

Which lists do you want to see @Tizianolol

[bonzai]

6 hours ago, Pedro_L said:

Hey all, 

Great thread, and congratulations to all the Destruction players for their finishes, particularly Nicky and Chris for 3rd and 4th place respectively! 

Had a brief question for @Kanamorf and any other Bonesplitterz player that wants to chime in! Do you still think we're at our most effective with the Arrowboyz list, or do you think there's potential for a close-combat oriented, non-Arrowboyz list to get similar strong results against other top tier armies? 

Arrow boys are our only really efficient damage dealers in the battle tome.  For competative tournament scenarios, they really are our only option. 

That being said, I am playing around with a Drakkfoot warclan. With the bonus spell and Wurrgog, you get two bonus pile ins a round. That and can resist spells on a 6+, so it' an extra bonus vs tzeentch. Just put together my rogue idol so I'l be trying out my list soon. Not expecting to wreck face with it, but we will see.

[heywoah_twitch]

4 hours ago, svnvaldez said:

I'm of the same thinking...  Take Jack's 6 Nations list which is the pinnacle of the "StoneRukk"

Total: 2280 / 2000

And what was lost really??? The following numbers I'll spit out are vs no save models and rounded.  Losing Double Battlebrew will decrease the Stonehorns wounds per combat from 25 to 17. Losing Stone Skeleton makes them half as survivable vs damage 1. Losing Bellowing tyrant on the 40 Rukk and reducing it to 30  decreases wounds per shooting phase from 30 to 15. Losing Rampaging destroyer means each unit isn't moving 3.5 inches a turn.

Is it as bent? no. but I think its still good.

I'm glad you parsed this out with a few basic numbers, although it's lead me to the opposite conclusion as yours. Losing a hair shy of three hundred points out of your army list is simply staggering. On top of that, the meaningful offensive and defensive stats literally cut in half - SH wounds and damage, army-wide guaranteed 3.5" move, bellowing tyrant, rukk damage.

Your post has totally convinced me of how dead and buried this list is.

[svnvaldez]

14 minutes ago, heywoah_twitch said:

Your post has totally convinced me of how dead and buried this list is.

You might be right lol... Every day I try to convince myself I don't need to buy and paint 120 arrowboyz

[heywoah_twitch]

The idea of painting 120 tiny men leaves me tossing and turning in troubled sleep at night. Even the current state BCR is in I can't bring myself to ally in and paint a hundred tiny stupid looking grots. I just don't like how they look, and I don't want to play with hordes of chaff. I want the viable super elite monster mash I was advertised!

So I'll just be over here allying in a butcher and 6 battleline ogors, and hot swapping stonehorns for mournfangs (4 of which I think are now just superior to a stonehorn for less points).

At a point in every player's life they must make a choice whether or not to chase the meta. Maybe that's how I'll start on a second army, who knows?

[Tizianolol]

@Sangfroid I m really curious about top 10 lists!! I m waiting bad dice if they post it:)

[Chris Tomlin]

11 hours ago, heywoah_twitch said:

I'm glad you parsed this out with a few basic numbers, although it's lead me to the opposite conclusion as yours. Losing a hair shy of three hundred points out of your army list is simply staggering. On top of that, the meaningful offensive and defensive stats literally cut in half - SH wounds and damage, army-wide guaranteed 3.5" move, bellowing tyrant, rukk damage.

Your post has totally convinced me of how dead and buried this list is.

Yeh I agree. I obviously realised the reduction in power, but seeing those numbers was indeed staggering.

11 hours ago, Tizianolol said:

@Sangfroid I m really curious about top 10 lists!! I m waiting bad dice if they post it:)

@Terry Pike has said he will be compiling a list PDF at some point, so keep your eye out in the Event subforum for that. Having done 80+ after BLACKOUT I can confirm this is an arduous task, especially after a full weekend of staring at a spreadsheet. So I'm sure it'll be done in due course when he's had some much deserved relaxation!

[Nico]

Those allied Ogors cannot be Battleline - but only a big issue if taking BCR allegiance.