Another poor showing for Destruction

[Soup Dragon]

So there was a 28 player event in Stirling, Scotland yesterday. I wasn't there myself, but all the reports I've seen show it was lots of fun, pretty competitive and well attended. I've been to Common Ground Games a few times and it's a great venue. 

The final results are posted below. Please have a look down them at how the whole Destruction grand alliance fared and let me know what on earth is happening? 

Next weekend is Facehammer. 100 players, so hopefully this event will buck the trend. I'm taking a Beastclaw list, so there will be at least one Destruction player! 

[heywoah_twitch]

Well yeah. The alliance was standing almost entirely on great destruction abilities and artifacts (and two cheesey lists). The abilities are now poor, the artifacts nerfed, and the two cheesey lists reined in for rukk and killed for triple tusks.

No one got anything decent to replace what was lost so this is not surprising. 

To preempt a 'but ironjawz abilities' response, they got flashy situational stuff that hardly ever works, and btw wastes tons of time rolling for every hero one at a time for something to happen maybe once a game. 

Not trying to whine or anything, it's just this is what over compensation on nerfs looks like. 

Although good luck with your awesome list (no sarcasm). I really love beastclaw though we're in a dark time atm.

[Nico]

I think the fact there are so many Death players in the top 10 is a tribute to good balance.... 

Or it's just a small sample size, strong players who happen to love Death or another reason.

Destruction are significantly weaker. Ironjawz are a lot better than they were. Pigs are now absurdly cheaper per wound than the baseline Liberator for 5 wound models.

I feel you've either got to go Ironjawz or go for a clever Mixed Grots list, perhaps with a Dreadmaw thrown in. Magma Dragon looks better than a Stonelord now.

[Solaris]

Cool to see my boys Stu and Riyathe doing well! It seems our whisky-fueled hotel room discussion at 6 Nations really made an impact on Riyathe  I do think the sample size is way too small to judge anything off of, but I'd agree Destruction as a whole is not in the brightest of spots currently.

[heywoah_twitch]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

Ironjawz are a lot better than they were. 

 Are they really? Everyone says this; why? 

Let's say the next tournament gave you and only you a special option.

Would you today, choose current ironjawz to play with or ghb16 ones? 

Full army guaranteed 2d6+2 hero phase movement every turn. Battlebrew on multiple heroes sipping every turn.   The option of a second battalion after ironfist. 

Or cheaper gruntas and maw crusher. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

3 hours ago, Soup Dragon said:

So there was a 28 player event in Stirling, Scotland yesterday. I wasn't there myself, but all the reports I've seen show it was lots of fun, pretty competitive and well attended. I've been to Common Ground Games a few times and it's a great venue. 

The final results are posted below. Please have a look down them at how the whole Destruction grand alliance fared and let me know what on earth is happening? 

Next weekend is Facehammer. 100 players, so hopefully this event will buck the trend. I'm taking a Beastclaw list, so there will be at least one Destruction player! 

Looks like they don't need no compendium north of the boarder and other than Destruction really interesting mix of factions looks like the entrants wouldn't have got bored having to play the same stuff twice.   

It could be just a case of people wanting to dust off their FEC/Seraphon after them not getting much use last year. Could be sample size, for example there wasn't any Slyvaneth at all. 

I think Beastclaw Allegiance are more of a goer now because of the Allies system allowing you to plug the lack of bodies problem. I wish you well have you posted the your list somewhere or are you playing it close to your chest?

[yarrickson]

Not sure who poor Shane's third opponent was but from the names his first two opponents were a double mourngul nighthaunt army and then an archaon led Slaanesh list, both very strong. Also from what I understand it was a borrowed army that he hadn't played with? Lots of factors to bear in mind. 

 

That said however....

Compared to the last Scottish AOS event (Cry Havoc), which was the last tourney up here under previous GH and I recall there were half a dozen Destruction lists and they took first and Second spots (Rich Payne's Ironjawz in 1st and my Mooclan in 2nd).  Does look to me like destruction as a whole fell off a cliff and replaced death as the poorest of the 4 Grand Alliances. 

[Malakree]

The one advantage of this would be that if it does end up showing the new Destruction Allegiance abilities aren't good enough then we might end up with across the board points cost reductions or other such things.

Honestly I think the one of the biggest disadvantages I've seen is that our heroes are incredibly vulnerable to being sniped off the board which completely neuters the ability. Having each unit individually roll for it (with the same 6+ to get it) with +2 for any unit within 6" of a hero would be much better.

Oh and one other peeve at the moment, why the hell don't brutes/goregruntas have massive unit cost reductions....I want a good reason to a run a unit of 20 brutes damn it!

[svnvaldez]

I don't see why lists like the following  are not still competing. I feel like good players have stopped playing destruction rather than destruction being awful.

Leaders
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Icebrow Hunter (140)

Battleline
4 x Frost Sabres (80)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)
2 x Frost Sabres (40)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)
2 x Frost Sabres (40)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)

Units
20 x Grots (100)
20 x Grots (100)

Battalions
Skal (110)

 

Allegiance: Destruction

Leaders
Savage Big Boss (120)
- Granite Choppas 
Maniak Weirdnob (120)
Maniak Weirdnob (120)

Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline

Behemoths
Rogue Idol (400)

Battalions
Kunnin' Rukk (160)
 

 

[heywoah_twitch]

Because frostlords were only killy enough because of battlebrew and stone skeleton actually sucks now so they are too weak for their points.

Unless you mean thundertusks, but then you'd use Huskards instead of Frostlords, since the frostlord doesn't have the heal but costs 80 more points despite being worse. Those lists were good because of destruction movement scooting 18 ranged mws around to project power at surprising ranges every turn. Now that they're slower with shorter effective range and more expensive that's that. I didn't like waac lists stealing our single best model to spam with other stuff, but the best outcome would've been to nerf the cheese but leave pure bcr mostly unharmed, or hell improved since it wasn't exactly tearing up tournaments before the multiple nerfs.

And sabers and grots give you bodies, but why not play an army that has bodies and ways to make those bodies good?

As for the kunnin rukk list, I don't play bonesplitters so I don't know the ins and outs of their army, but I'd guess its similar to the above. Slower, shorter effective range, more expensive, and smaller unit sizes to reduce the damage, and other lists doing their best thing better, with less downsides to boot.

[Ollie Grimwood]

Pure Bonesplitterz armies tend to use their own Allegiance abilities have only been effected by points/unit size changes.   Stonehorns are still good (not as good granted) they just need to be used in a bit of a different way. 

[Soup Dragon]

1 hour ago, svnvaldez said:

I feel like good players have stopped playing destruction rather than destruction being awful

You have hit the nail on the head. Destruction isn't awful - several of us placed mid table at Blackout. However, most good players like to be competing around the top few tables at events, and Destruction armies aren't going to let you do that at present, so the good players are switching to armies that will allow them to stay around the upper tables. Thus the poor showing of Destruction becomes self fulfilling 

I'm hoping @Sangfroid, @Chris Tomlin, @Donal, Nicky Myland, and myself can put on a good show on behalf of Destruction this coming weekend at Facehammer.

@svnvaldez both those lists are reasonably good, the first one is great fun and the second one a bit boring, but more effective with the extra shooting and bodies.  However, both struggle with the combination of new Scenarios and the current UK meta. I have tried the first one and am running a variation of it at Facehammer - it comes unstuck against Tzeench, Mixed Chaos, Kharadron, Bloodletter Bombs, Fyreslayers, Syvaneth, and Hordes with high bravery - i.e. the top 20 placed armies . The second list is better in terms of pure competitiveness, but even so, fares poorly against Tzeench, Kharadron,  and alpha strikes (Nicky has been playing test games with it). I struggled to finish games when I ran a single 40 man Rukk, there's no way I'm taking even more arrowboys myself, I'd never get past turn 1!!

I think there are some better Destruction lists in the rules somewhere, and I'm sure we will tease them out over next few events. Bonesplitterz have a few fun combos, and I've not seen anyone run Grot hordes yet - should be some mileage there. But can they consistently beat Tzeench, Fyreslayers,  KO etc? Let's hope so.

Keep the Destruction faith.

WAAAAGH!!

[Nico]

9 hours ago, heywoah_twitch said:

 Are they really? Everyone says this; why? 

Let's say the next tournament gave you and only you a special option.

Would you today, choose current ironjawz to play with or ghb16 ones? 

Full army guaranteed 2d6+2 hero phase movement every turn. Battlebrew on multiple heroes sipping every turn.   The option of a second battalion after ironfist. 

Or cheaper gruntas and maw crusher. 

It's about relative position. Most good armies and Battalions got nerfed a great deal. Ironjawz got a small buff including two new Battalions. 

Now Ironjawz stomp all over Beastclaw. Sylvaneth took a hit. KO took a lot of hits. Stormcast took a hit. Even DoT took hits.

[heywoah_twitch]

They got a small buff and bigger nerfs, leaving them weaker than before, aka a net negative. Their relative position as this thread points out is now also worse, since ironjaws were hovering around (upper?) mid before and are now totally absent.

Look, of course we shouldn't whine, but let's be honest as well. I get trying to put a good spin on something to avoid being overly-negative, but honest feedback is important, and saying something is better when it is literally worse is shooting yourself in the foot from the very beginning. If we're honest and thoughtful without being hysterically negative nor blindly positive, we can really help GW tighten up these rules and improve balance. I'm told they read these forums, so we should be helpful.

[Nico]

Ironjawz were bottom of tier 2 under the previous book. Inferior to Grots for a start.

They are plainly better relative to Sylvaneth and Stormcast now (the two most Battalion dependent armies).

[heywoah_twitch]

What is their tier now?

 

But now a more useful question: What specifically can be improved for ironjaws, as you play them yes? What worked and what didn't in the update?

[Nico]

I suspect that Fanatics need to be part of a top tier competitive Destruction list. Still the best mechanic they have.

Some of the Destruction FW monsters could be useful too. Dread Maw and Magma Dragon in particular - the latter is especially good vs large blocks of elite infantry.

 

 

 

[Thostos]

3 hours ago, svnvaldez said:

I don't see why lists like the following  are not still competing. I feel like good players have stopped playing destruction rather than destruction being awful.

Leaders
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Frostlord on Stonehorn (460)
Icebrow Hunter (140)

Battleline
4 x Frost Sabres (80)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)
2 x Frost Sabres (40)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)
2 x Frost Sabres (40)
- Beastclaw Raiders Battleline (Icetooth Hunter General)

Units
20 x Grots (100)
20 x Grots (100)

Battalions
Skal (110)

 

Allegiance: Destruction

Leaders
Savage Big Boss (120)
- Granite Choppas 
Maniak Weirdnob (120)
Maniak Weirdnob (120)

Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline

Behemoths
Rogue Idol (400)

Battalions
Kunnin' Rukk (160)
 

 

 Im heading back to my Bonesplitterz after a few months away dabbling with the Kharadron Overlords.My new list is pretty much your second one listed here,though I will be using a Wurgogg and a Wardokk instead of your Maniak`s.I previously ran a Kunning  with a single unit of 40 Arrer boyz ,then mostly Boar Mankiaks as melee,,it was middle of the road in my local meta here on the West Coast USA.Not sure how well I will do now with more than double the number of Arrer Boys but one thing that remains constant for the Bonesplitters is that the Arrer Boyz are still the best value for the army even after the 20 pt increase...and now they are Battle line so no need to fill that slot elsewere.
  Also being able to take the Idol and not loose the Allegiance ability is very nice,,Splitterz could really use a hard pipe hitter to draw attentention away from the heros.

 

[svnvaldez]

Even a mixed list like this would be good I think, ravager would let you push up one unit 6 inches on a 3up. Either the arrowboyz or thundertusks to help get them in range. People are really raging about all the nerfs but destro still has some good warscrolls that we can make work.  We probably will always be on the back foot relative to mixed chaos and order due to the range of scrolls they can pick from, but that doesn't mean we still cant compete.  

Allegiance: Destruction

Leaders
Huskard on Thundertusk (380)
- Blood Vulture 
Huskard on Thundertusk (380)
- Blood Vulture 
Savage Big Boss (120)
- General
- Stonecleava 
- Trait: Ravager
- Artefact: Battered Talisman

Battleline
20 x Moonclan Grots (130)
- Pokin Spears & Moon Shields 
20 x Moonclan Grots (130)
- Pokin Spears & Moon Shields 
30 x Savage Orruk Arrowboys (360)
- Bonesplitterz Battleline
10 x Savage Orruks (120)

Units
3 x Grot Fanatics (100)
3 x Grot Fanatics (100)

Battalions
Kunnin' Rukk (160)

[svnvaldez]

A Frostlord on Stonehorn with ravager, mystic shield, and a hammerblade still is a beast.  He has 13 wounds on a 2up (and halves damage characteristics), d6 mortals on the charge, still as fast as ever, and trades his punches and kicks for a 3inch bubble causing mortal wounds on 5s.

[BURF1]

5 hours ago, Nico said:

Ironjawz were bottom of tier 2 under the previous book. Inferior to Grots for a start.

They are plainly better relative to Sylvaneth and Stormcast now (the two most Battalion dependent armies).

Stormcast was battalion crutched, not battalion dependent.  People couldn't let go of paladins despite them being pretty bad, and aetherstrike won't be able to compete for as long as tzeentch is busted BS.

[ZephyrExia]

There is always the chance that out of the 28 people that attended, none of them like any destruction army. 

In my local area, of the roughly 14ish people who regularly play, no one plays chaos. Its a small sample size for sure, but still important.

[yarrickson]

1 hour ago, ZephyrExia said:

There is always the chance that out of the 28 people that attended, none of them like any destruction army. 

In my local area, of the roughly 14ish people who regularly play, no one plays chaos. Its a small sample size for sure, but still important.

Of the 28 attendees:

Leigh owns a bonesplittas army. Stu has an Ogor/dread maw force. Scott owns enough destruction for 3 or 4 armies. Rich only recently sold his ironjawz, Nathan still has ironjawz. Gary C has moonclan/ironjawz. I not long sold up a moonclan force. 

So plenty of players had the option of taking destruction armies. But none of them elected to do so. Make of that what you will. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

24 minutes ago, yarrickson said:

Of the 28 attendees:

Leigh owns a bonesplittas army. Stu has an Ogor/dread maw force. Scott owns enough destruction for 3 or 4 armies. Rich only recently sold his ironjawz, Nathan still has ironjawz. Gary C has moonclan/ironjawz. I not long sold up a moonclan force. 

So plenty of players had the option of taking destruction armies. But none of them elected to do so. Make of that what you will. 

Did anyone mention why?  I know people moan about anecdotes on the internet but it would clear things up a little in this case.   

I attended a tournament last weekend and took Bloodbound rather than my Orruks, not because of any weakness in the Orruks but rather because I'd not had the Khorne out since the new Battletome. 

[Lysandestolpe]

I'll jump the thread and agree that ironjawz got better. For one, i can actually use WAAAAGH! now without sacrificing my 10 man brute squad to battleshock. I can make them bravery 9. This gives me at least +1 attack to everythinh within 15"of my MBMK in the combat phase. 

In addition, i can also now field a MBMK for 460pts with 3+ save that reduces the rend characteristic by 1 and ignore wounds and mortal wounds on 6. 

Lastly, i can also get rid of small units that hit hard but are fragile before they get to hit, and still hit before my opponent on the unit that can take a lot of damage and hit hard in combat. 

I'm totally satisfied with the new rules. And if I dont win the tournament or most games, as long as i had a good time and my opponent was fun, I'll be happy. 

I can't speak for the rest of destruction, but my ogres lost their one move to make them fast so gutbusters have to sit thr shelf for now.