Jump to content

Kurnoth Hunters


gummyofallbears

Recommended Posts

Hey Everyone, I recently  bought a large Sylvaneth army. The kurnoth hunters are one of my favorite units in all of AOS, and they turn out to be really strong in game. So I was wondering how many units would be too many, or too 'cheesy'

I will be buying a sylvaneth battleforce for a great deal, and will be getting three more units, for a total of 6. 

I have 3 units built, two with bows, and one with scythes. How many units in one list is too many? For a mid tier game especially. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you need generals and battle line too. It also depends on what your opponents play.

In my experience Chaos, beastclaw raiders have a lot of strong options and against them I'd take as much hunters as you want.  I guess the same goes for the savage orcs and some other really strong armies. Against compendium high elves, dark elves and empire I'd tone the list down a bit. I've also played night goblins and while they aren't that strong 2x mangler squigs they brought where very nasty too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I once faces 5 units of 3 in a 1250pts tournament, everyone with bows. I guess it depends on style and opponents. I suppose you can start with a unit of 6 with Scythes and 2 units of 3 with bows and mix it up from game to game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Sylvaneth player I'd recommend a unit of 6 bows. 3 isn't really punchy, but a unit of 6 can clear a lot of things out. I usually run swords and scythes as swords are a great way of clearing infantry. 

It all really depends what else your running in your list. Durthu, have 3 units of hunters to accompany him, that's enough for the list I'd say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-5-22 at 0:17 AM, ledha said:

More than 4 unit feel really cheap honestly

I repeat.. it REALLY depends on the opponent.

 

On 2017-5-22 at 9:10 AM, Immersturm said:

Well, I once faces 5 units of 3 in a 1250pts tournament, everyone with bows. I guess it depends on style and opponents. I suppose you can start with a unit of 6 with Scythes and 2 units of 3 with bows and mix it up from game to game.

/stunned How does that even fit? No characters at all? /unstunned

Ok let's look at this.

It's 900 points and then you'd need at least 200 points of battleline. Leaving 150 points... (I guess going 1 wych and 2x 10 dryads would be the best option). I'd make a Kurnoth champion the general and give him gnarled warrior. 

I personally wouldn't go 5x3 bows if I'd try this. In 1250 points there just isn't that much to snipe. I think I'd go 2x bows, and 1-2 swords and 1-2 scythes depending on what army (more scythes against stormcasts, more swords against most other armies).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run four units of three, two with scythes, two with swords in an Alarielle combat list. Don't ever believe that the swords are the worst option. Time and time again they come through for me and too often I find three attacks a piece not enough for the scythes. The bows are good if you have some way of mitigating the poor 4+ to hit, such as a Hurricanum or some sort of ability/spell.

Units of six are punchy alright but they can only ever be in one place at once, they have pretty slow movement and are much more difficult to position when teleporting through woods. Three hunters are surprisingly durable, especially in a gnarlroot formation or when you have a wizard with regrowth or even just Alarielles's healing abilities.

Basically, if you like them, take as many units as you can fit in with whichever weapons you prefer. There is no such thing as a bad hunter!

As you can probably tell, hunters are my favourite unit too :x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WAAAGHdogg15 said:

Basically, if you like them, take as many units as you can fit in with whichever weapons you prefer. There is no such thing as a bad hunter!

 

I don't think he's worried about them being bad.. I think he's worried about being "that guy". If there are tzeentch and beastclaw or savage orc players in the meta I don't think he'll ever be that guy and he can just take as many. However.. against people playing with compendium armies.... full hunters might be a bit nasty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're probably right and I understand this viewpoint but my approach has always been to take what you like playing with/looking at on the table. That's why I love Alarielle. She absolutely tanks and rolls over some armies and dies turn 2 against others. I don't use her because she is/isn't powerful, I use her because I love the model, the fluff and the rules. Same with hunters. I think, rightly or wrongly, we spend a lot of time trying to achieve that illusive mistress "balance" and personally I don't think you'll ever know what will or won't be nasty until you've played a few games. Why play those games with anything other than your preferred models? I used to worry about being "that guy" until I realised that I'm not a skilful enough player to be "that guy" with any list ever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own 12 Kurnoths Hunters, 2 units of scythes, 1 unit of bows and 1 unit of swords.
I mainly use scythes and bows. Only swords when i want to kill horde armies. As thats all their good for. 
I bought 12 because the models are insane didn't want to be to power gamey however the mroe the better at times, however beware a points rise as some of us pretty much think they are going to be 200 points or more. Due to re-rolling saves in combat AND Shooting with a TLA as your general. Their OP at times.  But don't rely on them, due to alot of the games is about having more models around the objective, thats why i Run 2 units of Tree Revs, 1 which is 10 man and 1 unit of 5. As they come up when my kurnoths have done clearly the floor or need a hand. Also they are great for protecting objectives, I recently make them surrounded by dryads, as more opponents weapons are 1" and the Scythes are 2" so they get swing over the dryads. 

Overtime you will understand that if you rely on your kurnoth hunters you are going to loose the game and same with having a durthu on the table. Dryads and Tree- Revs are probably one of the best battleline in the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Okami said:

I own 12 Kurnoths Hunters, 2 units of scythes, 1 unit of bows and 1 unit of swords.
I mainly use scythes and bows. Only swords when i want to kill horde armies. As thats all their good for. 
I bought 12 because the models are insane didn't want to be to power gamey however the mroe the better at times, however beware a points rise as some of us pretty much think they are going to be 200 points or more. Due to re-rolling saves in combat AND Shooting with a TLA as your general. Their OP at times.  But don't rely on them, due to alot of the games is about having more models around the objective, thats why i Run 2 units of Tree Revs, 1 which is 10 man and 1 unit of 5. As they come up when my kurnoths have done clearly the floor or need a hand. Also they are great for protecting objectives, I recently make them surrounded by dryads, as more opponents weapons are 1" and the Scythes are 2" so they get swing over the dryads. 

Overtime you will understand that if you rely on your kurnoth hunters you are going to loose the game and same with having a durthu on the table. Dryads and Tree- Revs are probably one of the best battleline in the game. 

I agree dryads are very good. However I seem to recall a lot of very Kurnoth heavy lists doing well in tourneys so I'm not completely convinced by your arguments against them.

I wonder about GHB2: Hunters might need a small increase in points.. but then skyfires would need the same or bigger increase and I wonder if GW will do that with such a new kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, WAAAGHdogg15 said:

You're probably right and I understand this viewpoint but my approach has always been to take what you like playing with/looking at on the table. That's why I love Alarielle. She absolutely tanks and rolls over some armies and dies turn 2 against others. I don't use her because she is/isn't powerful, I use her because I love the model, the fluff and the rules. Same with hunters. I think, rightly or wrongly, we spend a lot of time trying to achieve that illusive mistress "balance" and personally I don't think you'll ever know what will or won't be nasty until you've played a few games. Why play those games with anything other than your preferred models? I used to worry about being "that guy" until I realised that I'm not a skilful enough player to be "that guy" with any list ever!

Yeah I'm going to try her out a few more games too (I've not really got much more to fill out my 2K army anyway :D). I do think that list needs a free spirit batallion since last game the hunters couldn't keep up with Alarielle  and free spirits would definately help there. I still need 3 more hunters for that though. I wish Durthu got a command ability.. something offensive opposed to the TLA ability. Wouldn't even need to be a very strong one.. just SOMETHING so he seems less unfit as general. I think a treelord warrior like them are about the most martial sylvaneth out there and he's obviously a leader in the free spirits and I'd like to use him like that. Even if it's only a small area RR 1's to hit or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Oppenheimer said:

Warning they're going up to 220 ish points per unit in the GHB 2. This was hinted at on Heelenhammer and reverse engineering Skirmish points reinforces it.

That seems excessive unless others get similar increases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ghb 2 will be interesting. As folks have already said if Hunters do increase points wise we would need to see either other sylvaneth units drop in price, other armies power units increase in points (looking at the latest tombs specifically) or possibly split points between different weapon varients of hunters.

Sylvaneth are in no bad shape atm but they certainly arnt running amok and without a whole scale rebalance of either our book or all armies we could see sylvaneth hit hard.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Azurious said:

Ghb 2 will be interesting. As folks have already said if Hunters do increase points wise we would need to see either other sylvaneth units drop in price, other armies power units increase in points (looking at the latest tombs specifically) or possibly split points between different weapon varients of hunters.

Sylvaneth are in no bad shape atm but they certainly arnt running amok and without a whole scale rebalance of either our book or all armies we could see sylvaneth hit hard.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

I do not thing different hunter weapons need different points. Swords/scythes is about the same depending on targets. Bows have a MUCH lower damage output but can target key targets. I could live with 200 for each weapon. I'd like to see a drop in points for the TL, Durthu, spite and tree revenants. I think a slight point increase for a TLA and Drycha wouldn't be that odd either. Not quite sure of Alarielle.. if she's not killed then your opponent probably thinks she's way overpowered... however she can get killed by focus fire and mortal wounds in a turn or 3 and then she can't even have pulled her weight. I think dryads are priced well (if you take them in 20's). 

 

Only a a price increase in hunters and nothing else will certainly make them drop on the lists.. and that is without the powercreep of new armies (looking at you bloondwarves).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't think theres a lot of room for tweaking with the points costs. Dryads are definitely fair given their excellent dmg output (for a battleline option) and solid durability against non specialists. All of our characters are reasonable. Durthu does seem expensive but he is a dmg monster and his shooting atk is essentially 3 hunters, combined with magic support to keep his wounds healthy he is quite durable and all in I think hes fair. TLA is a tank as we all know against anything r1 or less but is still vulnerable to mortal output and theres a lot of that, or rend 2 across the new tombs so again I think 300 is reasonable especially as hes a force multiplier first and foremost with mediocre damage output (unless your msu opponant happens to be in your woods). I don't have much experience with drycha or treelords but neither are particularly resilient nor carry any major defensive pros barring cc stomp so for their output their price seems reasonable in the current meta. Tree revs definitely feel a tad over costed but not by much and if they dropped to 80 id be tempted to suggest they were too cheap. Their move is tactically imposing if played right, they just suffer from being very fragile and are therefore difficult to well. Hunters are by far and away the best bang for buck unit we have and I definitely agree that when seen in the first wave of mixed order lists appeared busted as a wraithknight on steroids, however they are our only non character unit that fills a specialist dmg roll and are definitely not impossible to deal with. Now with longstrikes, skyfires and to a degree arrer boyz hitting the shooting meta hard, hunters seem a lot more muted and really stand out more for their wound count rather than dmg. I have yet to use spite revs or alarielle so cant really comment on them.

Melding all of the above I could see some justification for bumping hunters cost up but the only place I think they could balance that would be with a reduction in cost for tree revs. Given that competitively we don't generally spam tree revs and my general feeling that they shouldnt be much cheaper anyway this wouldn't balance our power level sufficiently to stop a points hike being an overall nerf to pure sylvaneth and a nerf to pure sylvaneth could see us going from plucky contenders to the fyreslayers of GHB 2.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Azurious said:

Melding all of the above I could see some justification for bumping hunters cost up but the only place I think they could balance that would be with a reduction in cost for tree revs. Given that competitively we don't generally spam tree revs and my general feeling that they shouldnt be much cheaper anyway this wouldn't balance our power level sufficiently to stop a points hike being an overall nerf to pure sylvaneth and a nerf to pure sylvaneth could see us going from plucky contenders to the fyreslayers of GHB 2.


Hunters damage output in mixed order lists is the reason everybody hates them (especially stacking bows + hurricanum). The easiest fix to take is to adjust the hurricanum's points (I actually think 300 some-odd points is undercosted for an AOE +hit bubble). I don't put a lot of stock in reverse engineering matched play points from skirmish rules. You can reverse engineer points from open play as well, and in that scenario hunters are 0 points.... 

i'm going to go out on a limb as say no cost increase or possibly a very very slight one. The internal balance of the Slyvaneth book would be grossly effected by a large points increase to hunters. I could maybe see a points increase if they added something else to the Sylvaneth book to compensate, but right now there just isn't another unit capable of decent damage output that isn't a monster/character/both.

People love to complain about units but often forget that units exist in the context of an army. It was very clear from GW that fyreslayers had their points dropped because they weren't performing well in matched play; hence they got a points decrease.  With tomb kings it was the opposite problem, they over performed (as an army) and as such got a (fairly hefty) points increase. Sylvaneth certainly do well at tournaments and you'll usually see 1-2 in the top ten tables, but haven't exactly been dominating the tournament circuit. Based on that I'm very skeptical that a points increase is warranted. 



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...