Jump to content

Let's Chat Sylvaneth


scrubyandwells

Recommended Posts

Quote

So 20 Dryads, 20 Dryads and 5 Revenants 

This would be my battleline for 2K points and I'd only see the revenants as a tax (and only slightly). I think they have a role even though it's not always needed. I also think that even for that role they are a little expensive. As a 5 wound speedbump they are way to expensive so try to find another role for them or don't use them. If I wanted a speedbump I'd rather pay 20 points more for 10 wounds in dryads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Nico said:

This story just seems too good to be representative. It does seem that good positioning on your part was pivotal, but with the 2 Maces in combat (which he could have freely positioned to be in combat), that's 4 mortal wounds on average (in a situation where rolling less than 3 mortal wounds takes some real effort). 3 dead is already a battleshock test where a 4+ is a model fleeing away. Or do you mean that he only had 1 models in combat and you had 2? Stringing out a unit to attack two units can be a risky thing to do (unless it's 30 buffed Stormvermin)

Positioning was key. I was able to exploit the pile in mechanic where the only direction his back models could pile in was toward one of his models already locked in combat. With the bulky retributor models he couldn't get within 1"; he was effectively stuck. He was able to get 3 model in combat, vs 7-8 of mine. I could have had more, but that would have allowed him to pile more models in, which wanted to avoid. 

But even with 2 maces, they don't hit every unit. IIRC he chose to split the maces between the two units and rolled low (1 mortal wound on the first, 2 on the second). I also seem to remember the one lightning hammer that was able to hit in CC was only able to target the unit that I had managed to arcane shield and I saved the one wound he put through. Even with 2 mortal wounds revnants are bravery 7 (+1 bravery from the household battalion for being within 3" of an enemy), and only flee on a 6+. I seem to remember rolling a 6, but that reroll saved me. 
 

1 hour ago, Nico said:

I was agreeing with you that they are decent as units of 5.

I was agreeing with your agreement lol. 
 

1 hour ago, Nico said:

I've seen a Stonelord do an about turn around 20 Ghouls in a line (not a brilliant line but still a line) and still charge a unit in my deployment zone. Against normal monsters Tree Revenants could be an effective speed bump as you say (e.g. against Mournguls, which are pretty meh speed and a huge headache for Sylvaneth to deal with - "hello Dryads - welcome to the land of -2 to hit").

They must have been relatively close to the ghouls to start. D6 free move + 12" move + D6 run is at max 24". That's enough to cross the deployment gap if he rolls 6" for both run and rampaging destroyers (if it's a straight shot). To charge he'd probably needing only a 3-4 to come within 1/2 inch of his target. But around 20 ghouls? at a 1/2 inch spacing that should add 36" line he'd have to go around. (assuming no intervening terrain. Were you playing in there realm of bowling ball?) My trig isn't as good as it used to be (and let's be hornet. it was never good.) but that seems like he'd have needed a 10-12 to make that. That's a lot of good ju-ju on his side. In that case the dice gods must have clearly been against you. (who won that game btw?)  

If a stone Stonelord is within 12" of an enemy unit at the start of the charge phase they are required to charge that unit. That's a pretty easy mechanic to exploit with revenants if you're careful on your positioning. Granted, you'll need 2 of them, but that's why I often take 2. Tree revs should be fielded in 5's (as we've agreed) but you really should have more than 1 unit for them to be most effective. 
 

1 hour ago, Nico said:

This is because it's rarely practical to take 3 units of 20 Dryads and I hate taking units of 10 Dryads (because of the extra point of save for 12 or more; and the extra point of effective bravery from having 10 or more models), so 5 Revenants becomes a better option. So 20 Dryads, 20 Dryads and 5 Revenants seems like a good default (subject to battalion requirements).


We're in agreement regarding 10 dryads. I'd like to take 2 units of 20 dryads, but truthfully I find that a bit excessive as I don't normally need 2. I usually opt for 20 dryads and 2 units of 5 revenants. That extra 140 points means I can often squeeze in that second unit of Hunters, or take a large unit of 6 with scythes. Backed up by a Gnarlroot Branchwytch sporting regrowth and verdurous harmony 6 hunters have enough ablative wounds they can pretty much deal with anything. For big, scary monsters I have the 2 units of revenants to speed bump them and deny them the charge. And since hunters aren't tied to the forests they're free to counter charge. Not something dryads can say, even in groups of 20.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

They must have been relatively close to the ghouls to start. D6 free move + 12" move + D6 run is at max 24". That's enough to cross the deployment gap if he rolls 6" for both run and rampaging destroyers (if it's a straight shot). To charge he'd probably needing only a 3-4 to come within 1/2 inch of his target. But around 20 ghouls? at a 1/2 inch spacing that should add 36" line he'd have to go around. (assuming no intervening terrain. Were you playing in there realm of bowling ball?) My trig isn't as good as it used to be (and let's be hornet. it was never good.) but that seems like he'd have needed a 10-12 to make that. That's a lot of good ju-ju on his side. In that case the dice gods must have clearly been against you. (who won that game btw?)  

He had the extra +2 from Ravagers. It was Max Julian in a practice game on his way to finishing undefeated at Blood & Glory @grunnlock

As I said, it wasn't an optimal line of Ghouls - the key point is that a chaff screen of Revenants can hold up a slower monster - especially a big base muppet like Gordrakk. He has to run to fly over them for example as his base is so wide. Couple this with the impassable bits of a Wyldwood (the stumps) and you really could frustrate monster mash lists.

Quote

If a stone Stonelord is within 12" of an enemy unit at the start of the charge phase they are required to charge that unit. That's a pretty easy mechanic to exploit with revenants if you're careful on your positioning. Granted, you'll need 2 of them, but that's why I often take 2. Tree revs should be fielded in 5's (as we've agreed) but you really should have more than 1 unit for them to be most effective. 

This might work in principle, but even on average he can move 3.5 plus 2 plus 12 away from your Revenant Unit (hero move plus regular move). He doesn't have to charge the nearest unit. I suppose being Sylvaneth you could have every other unit teleport away to a distant Wyldwood perhaps and force the Stonelord to waste a turn.

Quote

We're in agreement regarding 10 dryads. I'd like to take 2 units of 20 dryads, but truthfully I find that a bit excessive as I don't normally need 2. I usually opt for 20 dryads and 2 units of 5 revenants. That extra 140 points means I can often squeeze in that second unit of Hunters, or take a large unit of 6 with scythes. Backed up by a Gnarlroot Branchwytch sporting regrowth and verdurous harmony 6 hunters have enough ablative wounds they can pretty much deal with anything. For big, scary monsters I have the 2 units of revenants to speed bump them and deny them the charge. And since hunters aren't tied to the forests they're free to counter charge. Not something dryads can say, even in groups of 20.   

I'll have to give this a try, as a problem I have is that I do my battleline and battalions, then the Ancient and a few other heroes, then find myself perennially disappointed by the number of Kurnoths I can fit in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right then saplings and ancients; I've been writing a few lists hoping to actually play something competitive in the new year.

I've been restricted by what I could
Take to events by what I had painted so far, but I'm going to make a big push to change that

I've got 12 scythe Kurnoth (6 with bows already painted) on the painting table as well as my Sisters of the Thorn and a tonne more Dryads.

So here are two lists I think could be great going into 2016

This one would be great for events with sideboard where you can just adjust the unit sizes to suit the scenario and opponent.

Alarielle 620

5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100

3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180

2000

With the models I own that would be 2 units with bows and 4 with scythes.
Alarielle would probably take regrowth over verdant blessing which means no woods unless I can get off a cheeky metamorphosis in the right place.

Seems super solid as she can heal every unit every turn, and regrow whichever has least wounds left on a model. Those guys will last ages.
Really like this for escalation as well as you can drop Alarielle turn one and the tree revenants, teleport them over to block board edges potentially, then 4 units hunters and then the final 2 (probably the bow ones last depending on opponent)

That list is a bit off the wall but I think it could be really strong if you can keep Alarielle safe.

Second one is going to be my workhorse for the year I'd expect, with 3 solid combat blocks backed up by a strong magic phase and healing, but with access to wyldwoods for the movement shenanigans the previous list lacks. Also it's one drop when the previous list is 10

Treelord Ancient 300
Branchwych 100

30 Dryads 360
6 Kurnoth (Scythes) 360
6 Kurnoth (Scythes) 360
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Sisters of the Thorn 220
Gnarlroot Wargrove 80
Household Battalion 20

2000

Being able to bring back models and regrow wounds thanks to Gnarlroot should make this a super solid army.
Would attempt to cast Shield of Thorns on the Dryads every turn and if successful put mystic shield on them, if not probably switch it to the Hunters in the toughest fight.

Nice thing is you can prettymuch always cast Inspiring Presence once you're in combat as all 3 blocks are already rerolling all saves so shouldn't need the Treelord's Command ability.

Really looking forward to getting these on the table.

I'll post up some run downs of my games at Age of Santa at some point, there were a few interesting matchups there but ultimately I took a list that was very weak in scenario and paid for it in my placing. (Alarielle and 2 Spirits of Durthu!) was a great weekend though and I had 5 awesome opponents and really enjoyable games.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

Right then saplings and ancients; I've been writing a few lists hoping to actually play something competitive in the new year.

I've been restricted by what I could
Take to events by what I had painted so far, but I'm going to make a big push to change that

I've got 12 scythe Kurnoth (6 with bows already painted) on the painting table as well as my Sisters of the Thorn and a tonne more Dryads.

So here are two lists I think could be great going into 2016

This one would be great for events with sideboard where you can just adjust the unit sizes to suit the scenario and opponent.

Alarielle 620

5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100

3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180
3 Kurnoth Hunters 180

2000

With the models I own that would be 2 units with bows and 4 with scythes.
Alarielle would probably take regrowth over verdant blessing which means no woods unless I can get off a cheeky metamorphosis in the right place.

Seems super solid as she can heal every unit every turn, and regrow whichever has least wounds left on a model. Those guys will last ages.
Really like this for escalation as well as you can drop Alarielle turn one and the tree revenants, teleport them over to block board edges potentially, then 4 units hunters and then the final 2 (probably the bow ones last depending on opponent)

That list is a bit off the wall but I think it could be really strong if you can keep Alarielle safe.

Second one is going to be my workhorse for the year I'd expect, with 3 solid combat blocks backed up by a strong magic phase and healing, but with access to wyldwoods for the movement shenanigans the previous list lacks. Also it's one drop when the previous list is 10

Treelord Ancient 300
Branchwych 100

30 Dryads 360
6 Kurnoth (Scythes) 360
6 Kurnoth (Scythes) 360
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Tree Revenants 100
5 Sisters of the Thorn 220
Gnarlroot Wargrove 80
Household Battalion 20

2000

Being able to bring back models and regrow wounds thanks to Gnarlroot should make this a super solid army.
Would attempt to cast Shield of Thorns on the Dryads every turn and if successful put mystic shield on them, if not probably switch it to the Hunters in the toughest fight.

Nice thing is you can prettymuch always cast Inspiring Presence once you're in combat as all 3 blocks are already rerolling all saves so shouldn't need the Treelord's Command ability.

Really looking forward to getting these on the table.

I'll post up some run downs of my games at Age of Santa at some point, there were a few interesting matchups there but ultimately I took a list that was very weak in scenario and paid for it in my placing. (Alarielle and 2 Spirits of Durthu!) was a great weekend though and I had 5 awesome opponents and really enjoyable games.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

I'm excited to see the first list play out, with the second list not too far off what you've been playing (and I played a little of) this year already. The only thing worth mentioning will be trying to find out what the optimum grouping of hunters will be in any given game. As you have said in the past, 6's are nice on the scythes, but then that minimises the healing capacity which is why I'm assuming you've gone for 3s. Depending on the mortal wounds / shooting capacity of the armies around in the meta though I've found that 3 can be taken off under certain circumstances, but I imagine things are going to be going for Alarielle anyway.

Obviously in combat you want your odd numbers of units charging in so that you can have first attack in more of the combats than your opponent, so it's going to depend how many units you will expect to be charging in and how many will be hanging back. ATM it will be 4 hunters plus alarielle, so if you were going to be protective of her for the first few turns it might be worth having a big block of 6 scythes and then two of 3 to maximise that first charge? I guess half the time we will be getting charged into anyways so it might not be too important, and I'm pretty average at the game who am I kidding talking strategy (you did ask me to comment so blame yourself...) ;) 

I'm thinking that you might end up running Verdant Blessing on her for the flexibility of movement around the board without the free spirits extra 5"

I'm waiting on confirmation from the TO of the January tournament, but asking opponents one by one in my group people are all alright with using the free spirits move to go through woods so I'm planning on running that for a while (until my Soulblight slow grow starts up in Feb/March). From 5" to 10" move is nice anyways, but from 9" away to 4" away is brutal on the teleport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@midaskiss ha, don't worry man all these points are valid!


yeah I think one 6 is probably a good shout as it's a great target for Mystic Shield as well.

I think the champions on the scythe units hitting on 2's is insane though. On the turn i use Alarielle's command ability they will just destroy everything Haha.
Also a big consideration based on what I played and Age of Santa was the scenarios. I spent almost 3/4 of my army points on 3 models and really struggled to cover all the objectives. It was no shock that I lost on Blood and Glory and Border War but won Take and Hold, 3 Places of Power and A Gift From the Heavens.

I'd have to play it a bit to decide on the Verdant Blessing vs Regrowth. Could just work out with the extra cover I lose less in the first place. Perhaps if I go with the 6 take Regrowth to make sure they keep going as long as possible. If I take all the 3's then VB to make the most of the flexibility of movement.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facehammer's latest podcast includes a discussion on Sylvaneth. They said a Sylvaneth Wyldwood's "up to three Citadel Woods placed within 1" of each other" means literally all of the Citadel Woods must be within 1" of each other. Thus, you couldn't do the common initial deployment of stringing out three Citadel Woods vertically, diagonally, or horizontally across the middle. In that scenario, the first and third Citadel Wood wouldn't be within 1" of each other – only the middle would be within 1" of the other two.

Facehammer's view is different than how I've heard most folks playing it, but their reading of the Wyldwood description does sound more spot on. And as Byron mentions in the podcast, in order to deploy three Citadel Woods as one Wyldwood, you would have to form a triangle with the three bases, which could be quite difficult spacing-wise.

It seems subconsciously I've always interpreted the Sylvaneth Wyldwood as synonymous with a "unit" – in this case, a unit comprised of up to three models/bases (i.e., Citadel Woods), which must maintain the equivalent of 1" unit coherency. So, similar to how a unit of five Liberators maintains 1" coherency at the level of the unit (rather than each Liberator base must be literally within 1" of every other Liberator base), I had interpreted the Sylvaneth Wyldwood as operating by the same rules.

Personally I do hope Facehammer's view is right. Up to two Citadel Woods per Wyldwood has always seemed like a more-appropriate sweetspot.

@Ben, @Ben Johnson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facehammer's latest podcast includes a discussion on Sylvaneth. They said a Sylvaneth Wyldwood's "up to three Citadel Woods placed within 1" of each other" means literally all of the Citadel Woods must be within 1" of each other. Thus, you couldn't do the common initial deployment of stringing out three Citadel Woods vertically, diagonally, or horizontally across the middle. In that scenario, the first and third Citadel Wood wouldn't be within 1" of each other – only the middle would be within 1" of the other two.
Facehammer's view is different than how I've heard most folks playing it, but their reading of the Wyldwood description does sound more spot on. And as Byron mentions in the podcast, in order to deploy three Citadel Woods as one Wyldwood, you would have to form a triangle with the three bases, which could be quite difficult spacing-wise.
It seems subconsciously I've always interpreted the Sylvaneth Wyldwood as synonymous with a "unit" – in this case, a unit comprised of up to three models/bases (i.e., Citadel Woods), which must maintain the equivalent of 1" unit coherency. So, similar to how a unit of five Liberators maintains 1" coherency at the level of the unit (rather than each Liberator base must be literally within 1" of every other Liberator base), I had interpreted the Sylvaneth Wyldwood as operating by the same rules.
Personally I do hope Facehammer's view is right. Up to two Citadel Woods per Wyldwood has always seemed like a more-appropriate sweetspot.
@Ben, @Ben Johnson


I posted on this a few weeks back, but nobody commented; so I assumed that was how everybody was already playing it or it wasn't an issue worth worrying about.

The rules for unit coherency say that they must remain within 1 inch of "at least" One other model from the unit.you'll notice the rules for the Wildwood don't share the same wording. That could be intentional, or an oversight. As much as there are other things that I would like to see FAQ'd I suspect this one is probably a literal reading, and an FAQ would rule that they have to be at least 1 inch from every other Wildwood.

That being said it's not total disaster. To Wildwood together give us a range of about 22 inches, which is a range of 28 inches if your teleporting within 3 inches of the Wildwood. The other aspect of this is that it's not just a triangle that we can use but a star as well. With the juncture of three Wildwoods forming the center of the star.

Still eminently playable, but I do imagine that official events will start using this one inch rule literally as written.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mirage8112 said:

I posted on this a few weeks back, but nobody commented; so I assumed that was how everybody was already playing it or it wasn't an issue worth worrying about.

The rules for unit coherency say that they must remain within 1 inch of "at least" One other model from the unit.you'll notice the rules for the Wildwood don't share the same wording. That could be intentional, or an oversight. As much as there are other things that I would like to see FAQ'd I suspect this one is probably a literal reading, and an FAQ would rule that they have to be at least 1 inch from every other Wildwood.

That being said it's not total disaster. To Wildwood together give us a range of about 22 inches, which is a range of 28 inches if your teleporting within 3 inches of the Wildwood. The other aspect of this is that it's not just a triangle that we can use but a star as well. With the juncture of three Wildwoods forming the center of the star.

Still eminently playable, but I do imagine that official events will start using this one inch rule literally as written.

 

Hey Frank, sorry man I missed the post (...fell behind on our thread), I'll go back and look for it. Thanks for the follow up. Definitely agree re: still eminently playable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the things coming up that people have considered restricting sylvaneth have not made much (if any) difference to me personally. I've only ever really placed 1 Citadel wood per Wyldwood since the release and never used Free Spirits to teleport so that's why I haven't commented so much.

I've said these things multiple times already so don't want to clog up the thread with old posts being repeated


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to post in the generals rule forum, but thought I might start here. Does our household "no retreat" rule prevent things like skinks, and other skaven style disengagements during combat phase or otherwise under their own named special rules?

I originally thought it would, but the skinks rule doesn't use any words like retreat in it, and I had it argued that it wasn't a retreat move. As they shoot and charge before the combat phase there hasn't been any other areas where this has mattered, and the 4 page rules on fleeing combat are awfully vague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ben Johnson said:

@scrubyandwells

"What do the words say" - Ben Curry 

My favourite quote at the minute ?

The Wyldwoods description says how they should be set up, no mention of using the normal unit coherency.

IMG_9578.PNG

I think Les was spot on with his thoughts on Facehammer this week. 

Awesome, thanks bud. Yeah this was a weird experience...a ~6-month subconscious interpretation that hadn't heard/seen anything to challenge it until Les's remarks. Better late than never! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome, thanks bud. Yeah this was a weird experience...a ~6-month subconscious interpretation that hadn't heard/seen anything to challenge it until Les's remarks. Better late than never! 


Believe it came up at Blood and Glory, not sure if you saw that Tyler?


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does the photograph on the Warscroll show? It might just be a line of 3 Citadel Bases in an extended line, not in a Les Martin Cluster*. I said this to Les in the morning of Blood & Glory. 

I think lawyers could fight over the meaning of "within 1" of each other" for a whole day - it could bear either of the meanings suggested. There are good arguments both ways (e.g. by comparison to the other wording etc.).

To me though, the photo tips the balance against the Les Martin Cluster.

If someone at GW wants to FAQ it then please do so, but it seems debatable either way at the moment. It obviously would be an irritating nerf to Sylvaneth (in a situation where TOs are already nerfing them and not the Kunning Rukk and not repricing Huskards on Thundertusks).

Quote

I was going to post in the generals rule forum, but thought I might start here. Does our household "no retreat" rule prevent things like skinks, and other skaven style disengagements during combat phase or otherwise under their own named special rules?

I originally thought it would, but the skinks rule doesn't use any words like retreat in it, and I had it argued that it wasn't a retreat move. As they shoot and charge before the combat phase there hasn't been any other areas where this has mattered, and the 4 page rules on fleeing combat are awfully vague.

I would say no it doesn't.

It would work on Tretch Craventail's spectacular , hilarious and could not be more fluffy if it tried troll on being charged rule - "Stay Here, I'll Get Help!" (used this against Mark Wildman at Blood & Glory - he still won, but it was a great moment), since that does use the word "retreat".

*Will this be what Les is remembered for in years to come? Surely his ace painting? Surely Facehammer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Most of the things coming up that people have considered restricting sylvaneth have not made much (if any) difference to me personally. I've only ever really placed 1 Citadel wood per Wyldwood since the release and never used Free Spirits to teleport so that's why I haven't commented so much. 
 

I think it matters most for the opener Wyldwood. I would be tempted to string it out to link both deployment zones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/12/2016 at 11:37 AM, Nico said:

If someone at GW wants to FAQ it then please do so,

Hi All,

We have spoken about this rule today and feel the intent is clear in that all of the Citadel Woods need to be within 1" of any of the other Citadel Woods making up the Sylvaneth Wyldwood. 

I hope this clears thing up for you all. 

Photos added for extra clarity, I hope this putts the question to bed now.  

IMG_9609.JPG

IMG_9610.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All,
We have spoken about this rule today and feel the intent is clear in that all of the Citadel Woods need to be within 1" of any of the other Citadel Woods making up the Sylvaneth Wyldwood. 
I hope this clears thing up for you all. 


Right you are then.


More decisive statements like this please!


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Hi All,

We have spoken about this rule today and feel the intent is clear in that all of the Citadel Woods need to be within 1" of any of the other Citadel Woods making up the Sylvaneth Wyldwood. 

I hope this clears thing up for you all. 

Cool. So we'll cite this post as if it were an official FAQ going forward. 

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon my lack of understanding, but in other words the first of the following two statements is correct then?

1. Every citadel wood must be within 1" of any other citadel wood, e.g. can have a line of woods. True

2. Every citadel wood must be within 1" of every other citadel wood, e.g. cannot have a line of woods. False

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

That forces you to place 3 emoji1304.png

Good point. I was going for brevity.

"If a Sylvaneth Wyldwood comprises 3 Citadel Woods, then each of the 3 Citadel Woods in that Sylvaneth Wyldwood must be within 1" of both of the other Citadel Woods.

If a Sylvaneth Wyldwood comprises 2 Citadel Woods, then each of the 2 Citadel Woods in that Sylvaneth Wyldwood must be within 1" of the other Citadel Wood."

How's that?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...