Jump to content
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

Arkiham

Aftermath of the GT final

129 posts in this topic

Arkiham    1,173

ill get this ball rolling as im very interested to hear about peoples views & talk about the changes

 

As mentioned on stream, large horde armies werent too common, with the reason proposed being it takes time to paint up modes - reasonable

tzeentch was still meant to dominate with its broken magic phase and abusive use of the balewind combined with the apparently still under priced skyfires - hardly any there and it didn't happen as people are used to playing against them now ( in my view )

firestorm was meant to break everything. after the FAQ for it; the tone was lessened but still meant to disrupt the order of things - didn't happen

the apparently under powered karadon overlords put in a good show 

fyreslayers/seraphon also done very well so good to see the GHB17 giving them more fun and viability.

death didnt do as well as others i dont think, maybe due to the change with the mournghul and lack of time for people to practice and hone their lists??

 

all in all the results look much more varied than other tournaments ive noticed ( ive not tracked them all so i may be wrong ) so it appears GHB17 is by in large a large success in mixing up the meta as it planned to 

 

DLoukXqXkAAT9fN.jpg

DLoukXtXUAAvgxf.jpg

Edited by Arkiham
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andreas    259

Yes very varied score card 👍

Do anyone know what the two top fyreslayers lists looked like? 30 Hearthguards, 30 Aurics or the kinband?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polarbear    248

I'm interested in seeing the lists for the top 10 or so armies there, especially the Kharadron one. I heard it was 3 Ironclads? Crazy idea but I can see it working.

Fun to see that order army of old aelves do so well - pretty much exactly the type of model collection you'd always see people saying couldn't keep up on forums and whatnot.

For me anyway AoS is very hard to theory hammer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, polarbear said:

I'm interested in seeing the lists for the top 10 or so armies there, especially the Kharadron one. I heard it was 3 Ironclads? Crazy idea but I can see it working.

Fun to see that order army of old aelves do so well - pretty much exactly the type of model collection you'd always see people saying couldn't keep up on forums and whatnot.

For me anyway AoS is very hard to theory hammer.

From what I've found online, the Kharadron Overlords army by Gary Percival was 1 ironclad with a last Word (as opposed to the aether endrinns almost everyone runs), 3 khemists, 30 arkanauts, 12 skywardens and 9 endrin riggers. Not sure loadouts or unit set ups. I like that he calls his pirate dwarfs Sqwarfs though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polarbear    248
8 minutes ago, Auretious Taak said:

From what I've found online, the Kharadron Overlords army by Gary Percival was 1 ironclad with a last Word (as opposed to the aether endrinns almost everyone runs), 3 khemists, 30 arkanauts, 12 skywardens and 9 endrin riggers. Not sure loadouts or unit set ups. I like that he calls his pirate dwarfs Sqwarfs though.

Thanks! Very simple list really, glad to see it do well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to know what the Ironclad had - probably the volley cannon, and if the last word was on that or something else. How the skywardens and endrinriggers are set up also make a big difference, so am curious the specifics. But it's nice to see the bubble boys/balloon boys enmass doing well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrCharisma    230

Very interesting distribution. I'd love to know how many people took a similiar list that got them to the finals vs. people using a whole new army.

2 Murder Hosts (?) in the Top 10 could be an indication of what is to come.

The power shift might be in effect with a lower amount of Tzeentch and Destruction from the top.

Well done. The Twitch stream looked like there were some amazing games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chikout    372

The results from ghb2017 are very promising so far. Facehammer gt had 5 different factions in the top 5 and the final had 8 different factions in the top 10. That's pretty impressive variety. 

The only downside is the relative lack of death. Hopefully their first big aos release in January will start to redress that balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrCharisma    230
27 minutes ago, Chikout said:

The results from ghb2017 are very promising so far. Facehammer gt had 5 different factions in the top 5 and the final had 8 different factions in the top 10. That's pretty impressive variety. 

The only downside is the relative lack of death. Hopefully their first big aos release in January will start to redress that balance.

I can see Soulblight leading the charge for Death in it's triumphant return to the top. I think the recent tournament scene has been hit by the Moughoul changes, which was being used as a crutch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DantePQ    66
6 hours ago, Nick Dicehammer said:

Anyone know what the top two Sylvaneth lists looked like?

4th place list had for sure : TLA, regular Treelord, 2x30 Dryads, 5 Sisters of Thorn not sure about rest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RuneBrush    1,186

Very interesting.  Sadly I didn't get a chance to see any of the live stream over the weekend, but I do think it's good to start to see a real mixture of factions across the board.  I'm finding it interesting that the representation of armies taken seems to roughly balance the number of models/factions available - so lots of Order armies, followed by Chaos, Destruction and then Death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sheriff    274

Destruction is now orcs only it seems, competitively. And Death are garbage tier now it seems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turragor    826

My face when I was looking for BCR :|

My face when I found BCR :/

At the end of last year, after 1.5 years of SCE hobby investment, I spent a while pondering what army I'd build up this year.  I landed on BCR and after a lot of hobby effort this year to date, I'm interested in how they do.

I'm not sad and have no (maybe few) regrets! Not every faction gets to be strong that's just the nature of the beast. I also don't play ONLY matched.

That said, I think if I want 2 tournament options, I might have to look into a few mixed destruction additions.

Edited by Turragor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kozokus    206
1 minute ago, Turragor said:

My face when I was looking for BCR :|

My face when I found BCR :/

Mh.

2/3 of the warscrolls got a price tweak maybe people are not adjusting to what they do now. I am persuaded that Mournfang spam is the key.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turragor    826
13 minutes ago, kozokus said:

Mh.

2/3 of the warscrolls got a price tweak maybe people are not adjusting to what they do now. I am persuaded that Mournfang spam is the key.

Entirely possible this is the case. I'm not about doom and gloom anyway :)

Further discussion about this can be contained in the frosty BCR area of the boards! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sheriff    274
32 minutes ago, Turragor said:

My face when I was looking for BCR :|

My face when I found BCR :/

At the end of last year, after 1.5 years of SCE hobby investment, I spent a while pondering what army I'd build up this year.  I landed on BCR and after a lot of hobby effort this year to date, I'm interested in how they do.

I'm not sad and have no (maybe few) regrets! Not every faction gets to be strong that's just the nature of the beast. I also don't play ONLY matched.

That said, I think if I want 2 tournament options, I might have to look into a few mixed destruction additions.

Mixed destruction did awful too though. It's orcs only. 

Edited by Sheriff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Killax    991
11 hours ago, Arkiham said:

ill get this ball rolling as im very interested to hear about peoples views & talk about the changes

As mentioned on stream, large horde armies werent too common, with the reason proposed being it takes time to paint up modes - reasonable

tzeentch was still meant to dominate with its broken magic phase and abusive use of the balewind combined with the apparently still under priced skyfires - hardly any there and it didn't happen as people are used to playing against them now ( in my view )

firestorm was meant to break everything. after the FAQ for it; the tone was lessened but still meant to disrupt the order of things - didn't happen

the apparently under powered karadon overlords put in a good show 

fyreslayers/seraphon also done very well so good to see the GHB17 giving them more fun and viability.

death didnt do as well as others i dont think, maybe due to the change with the mournghul and lack of time for people to practice and hone their lists??

all in all the results look much more varied than other tournaments ive noticed ( ive not tracked them all so i may be wrong ) so it appears GHB17 is by in large a large success in mixing up the meta as it planned to 

Great topic as always, hadn't seen you around for a while, good to have you back!

I think that your spot on with the Horde armies, especially since this is the 3rd or 4th large event since the GH2017 release. I expect the Hordes to really form in 2018 and not next month just yet either. In my opinion this is still good. I still don't know if the creation concept that is so akin to WFB is so good for AoS but even that is something we can only judge until the next Generals Handbook.

Tzeentch could dominate but I think the reason why we havn't seen it here is because as you said not only Skyfires are now known to tactically play against, your whole typical Tzeentch army is. There is still some list building flexability but the most lists Ive seen pop up contain either two LoC (one Kairos) or one LoC and Daemonic support, pratically all include 3 blocks of Horros with some summonning points left (which is their tactical flexability) and a good ammount of Skyfires is added but we're not talking about 18+. All in all what I can say is that Tzeentch still belongs to Tier 1 but now has the costs reflected well. What keeps them there is the absurdly powerful Destiny Dice. Up until that is changed (as if ever) they are still a blast!

Since the release of Firestorm was only a week ago I too think it's too early to judge it's impact. To me it's only logical to not fundamentally switch over Allegiance just before a massive event. I do think that more mixed Order armies will show up very soon in the top. The Destruction Firestorm Allegiance isn't too interesting, the same applies to Chaos and Death but Death at least has some additional value to go for the Grand Allegiance because their splinter sub-Factions + Allies rules make it quite impossible to create a non-Flesh Eater Courts army that functions well at competative levels.

Kharadron Overlords mixed plus practically all mixed Order lists should eventually make a good re-appearance because if we're honest about it this is what Firestorm fully supports and supports in a manner that is worth it in terms of competative play. However I also think that still many players are uncertain to pick them up, like with Khorne and other new but smaller factions they get rewarded when played well, the power doesn't just come out of thin air :P 

As per GH2017 discussions, I think the game has improved for Order, Chaos and Destruction. Unfortunatly Death is completely left out, the prime reason, their sub-sub-Factions killing internal synergy choices. So what we're probably all hoping for is some new Battletome's for Death and basically continue the year as they did for 2016-2017. Step by step the game is certainly improving and I'm quite proud of what Games Workshop and their several design teams have archieved.
I do fully agree with all Death players nothing that they are not where they want and need to be to be a competative part of this game. Because of that I hope Games Workshop's AoS team will put the focus on Death as soon as possible. What I hope for (and might be too much) is a larger overhaul to their Warscrolls as step 1 and then add Warscrolls to the sub-Factions they actually intend to carry through. 

To me the only way to continue improving the game remains to keep sub-sub-Factions as Keywords but not have them function as a complete Faction on their own. It's also funny to see that this would basically mean that the Warhammer Fantasy armies re-appear in AoS again but it's also a logical outcome as long as the Generals Handbook follows rules design that really match WFB's rulesdesign (max Battleline/Core, Leaders/Heroes etc.).
 

10 hours ago, Olincay said:

All hail our new lord Byon Orde. 

FOR THE ORDE! ;) 

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

Very interesting.  Sadly I didn't get a chance to see any of the live stream over the weekend, but I do think it's good to start to see a real mixture of factions across the board.  I'm finding it interesting that the representation of armies taken seems to roughly balance the number of models/factions available - so lots of Order armies, followed by Chaos, Destruction and then Death.

As someone who's played a lot of different games the quantity of Warscrolls/unit options making a large difference is logical for reasonably balanced design, as the only other thing that is left when most design is done well is to look at tactical variance, which for AoS translates in number of different Warscrolls (Battalions included).

So overall that is actually done reasonably well and I don't mind it. What I also think plays a secondary role is tactical variance within factions. Both Stormcast and Seraphon are 'huge' factions in that sence, meaning it's not too difficult to incorporate what's needed for a competative army/game and thus obtain the rewards for everybody thanks to Battle Traits. In many ways the same applies to Khorne and Tzeentch, now being merged into one Faction with logical Ally choices.

At the same time the lack of this merge in Brayherds or Grand Allegiance Death in general is what will prevent varied competative armies appearing for them. It's not that the armies lack the visual matching models, it's the sub-sub-Factions paired with new Ally doing it's (aweful) work ;) The sub-sub-Factions are losing their impact because they are stuck in unit choice which makes them un-fun to build and very easy to predict on the board. However what keeps more Death players from appearing is truely the un-fun to build part. Why play a faction with 6 unit options (Nighthaunt) and no Battalion to speak of? They do have Allegiance abilities but what's that worth if you can't even play certain Allies that visually match your army design? It would be the same for Khorne if Battletome Blades of Khorne didn't mix the logical Khorne choices. It's the same still for Everchosen, Brayherds and basically any force that narratively and visually could match but don't.

Edited by Killax
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aginor    140

As a Seraphon player I wonder about the following:

We have quite some improvements for Seraphon in the GHB2017.
Basically everything, even cheap units, got cheaper by 20 points at least, and those new allegiance abilities and traits and artefacts are cool. Up to the point where people started whining about (or celebrating) them before they even played with or against a single Seraphon list "Age of Skinkmar" and all that jazz.

Yet we see only five Seraphon armies on place 26,52,57,66,and 73. Some of the mixed armies probably contain a few Skinks (like the one posted above) or maybe there is a SCE army or two containing a Starpriest as an ally for the buffs.

I also wonder how many of the five lists are actually variants of the Kroak +Vortex+Shadowstrike list made famous by Darren Watson.

So was it "false alarm" and Seraphon are really not that strong (well, better than before obviously so I won't complain), or maybe people just haven't adjusted yet?

It would be interesting to hear from tournament players how they feel about it. Are Seraphon more seen as a looming danger on the horizon that is just not yet there, or as something that can easily be dealt with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaz Taylor    605

Firstly congratulations to Byron! Well deserved win! :D 

Secondly, thanks to everybody who tweeted stuff as that was the only way I was able to keep a track on what was happening. Looked like a great event.

Thirdly, I think we need to remember these words from Mr Curry about the final

https://twitter.com/BadDice_Podcast/status/917347346798833665

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×