Destruction presence in masters

[Malakree]

So addressing spiderfang as a faction and giving a quick example of all the things they could still have.

• Grot Scuttlings - they even already have rules
• Off that leads the Boss Scuttling, a much larger, hulking grot/spider hybrid.
• Feral Spiders - Spiders with no riders. Comes in blocks of 10, three in every 10 can have a grot handler who get special weapons.
• Grot Big Boss on Arachnarok
• Multiple grots on a single larger spider, 75x42 instead of 60x35, more like a chariot of other races.
• Above mentioned bigger spiders with two grots crewing a huge crossbow/ballista.

That's just one of the factions, I agree fimir won't be expanded because they are forgeworld but there is easily enough for them to be a full faction there. As I said, I think there's tons of room to play in destruction, they are just spending the time required on adding more stormcast models. They're only a few short of having the same number of heroes destruction has as a faction.

EDIT: 

4 minutes ago, PlasticCraic said:

One thing I totally agree with is please don't split up Gutbusters further!  Maneaters and Firebellies are already their own factions, it's already a bit daft.  It's not a crime to have a shooting unit and some combat units in the same army. 

Part of that change would be putting maneaters and firebellies back into the new Gutbusters and then developing a whole bunch of new stuff for the "Scrapheap Ogors". As to not having shooting/combat in the same army, not sure I agree with that. 

[PlasticCraic]

15 hours ago, Fridge_Opener said:

What were you thinking of doing? Cannons? 

Yeah I've picked up a second hand army from a mate which included a few Ironblasters.  This was always going to be an army of love so I didn't care that they were a bit rubbish - that lasted about 1 game.  I don't actually mind that they are dicey and a bit ******, it's the incredibly restrictive range that ruins them for me.  They were making me angry so they are already in the display cabinet.  Beautiful models!

I'm now going down the combined arms path.  I love the Ogors models and a unit of 12 seems like good value for its points.  A bit of a tarpit, a bit of board control, can put out the pain on low armour saves.  I'm also a big Butchers fan so I want AT LEAST 4 of those (pref 5 + a Tyrant).  

I want a Tyrant for the Damage 6 loadout (3" range bopping over the top), plus his command ability to set + forget battleshock resistance is nice. 

I want a block of Gnoblars because 6 attacks (realistically getting a lot in with the short range shooting) plus damage in the shooting phase.  Plus the obvious screening and board control.  Ideally I want to go full 60 because again 270 is decent for them.

I also want a block of 6 Ironguts.  I'm not convinced they are great at 200 points for 3 (seems steep compared to 5 Decimators for example), but it's a good value receptacle for buffs, and the 2" range again allows them to clobber over the top of screens similar to the Tyrant.

General play style is that with 5 or 6 heroes you can realistically double-pop Mighty Destroyers and zoom a unit up the table turn 1.  Cauldron Buffs, Mystic Shield, no battle shock, 48 wounds of Bulls in your face.  They will smash some stuff for a turn or two and take a lot killing, giving plenty of time for the rest of the army to follow up behind, with Leadbelchers shooting over the top into buffing heroes.  The Butchers can put out pulses of mortal wounds to tackle the heavy armour saves that nothing else in your army can deal with (arcance bolt + warscroll spell + hopefully a couple of Cauldron AOE pulses - which is why you need a few of them to have a good chance of getting the right roll).

You won't be dictating turn 1 too often, but the army is resilient enough with its high wound count and large volume of chaff to be adaptable to most opponents and battleplans.  Also it is quite modular - take out the Tyrant and the army still functions just fine.  I actually think you could deal with a couple of top tier armies (KO and Murderhost) reasonably well - there would definitely be a few bad matchups too though!  Generally you will struggle to crack high armour saves unless your Butchers go nuts - but in true Destruction style, you definitely have to chance to ruin someone's day with the right rolls.

The main problem at the moment is that I'm over on points!  The obvious thing to do would to drop the Gnoblars to 40 which brings me bang on 2000 which is basically my intended list currently.  I could also drop the Ironguts to a unit of 3, drop the Tyrant to a 5th Butcher and put in some more Leadbelchers (puts me on 1990).  Whaddya reckon?

Leaders
Tyrant (160)
- General
- Command Trait : Might is Right
- Great Gutgouger
- Artefact : Battle Brew
Butcher (140)
Butcher (140)
Butcher (140)
Butcher (140)
Units
60 x Grots (270)
12 x Ogors (400)
-Ogor Clubs or Blades with Iron Fists
6 x Ironguts (400)
3 x Leadbelchers (140)
3 x Leadbelchers (140)
Total: 2070 / 2000
Allies: 0 / 400
Leaders: 5/6 Battlelines: 4 (3+) Behemoths: 0/4 Artillery: 0/4
Wounds: 192

[svnvaldez]

I don't think we are that far from being back in it.

1. Lower Ardboys to say 120 for 10.

2. Fix the other armies that teleport or split into combat that completely lock down melee units.

3. Lower points on BCR monsters across the board and lift the stonehorn nerf.

4. Battletome Moonclan and a few plastic squig kits.

 

All good steps I reckon. We already have 3 wonderful factions fluff wise. Just make them playable by changing the GH2 missions or their points or re balance a few bent armies. There really are only 8 top lists at masters imo:

Tony Moore, Dan Ford, Gary Percival, Joe Purcell, Jack Armstrong, Alex Harrison, Robert Sedgeman, and Tom Mawdsley.

Alex Harrison  has COB stack

Jack Armstrong is combat teleportation on an IP 2+ unit.

Gary Percival has 1 drop hope for the double KO.

Tom Mawdsely has popup bunker fyreslayers who could probably go up a tad in points.

Dan Ford has Murderhost which could be looked at rules wise or raise the cost of letters a tad.

Joe Purcell has 21 Skyfires. 

Robert Sedgeman has army wide teleportation on an IP 2+ unit.

Tony Moore has horror splitting and changehost swap.

 

Destro needs better movement, mortal wound protection, or ranged output... or those other armies could go down in power. Remove those 8 lists and there is no way you can tell me someone like Chris Tomlin and his balanced IJ wouldn't be right in the mix. The way I see the issue, is the above lists make it impossible to use a standard, non game abusing mechanic, army if you hope to win. AOS is still a great game and destro a great faction. There are just glaring issues that could be address quickly through FAQ and I would hope GW is aware and takes some actions.

 

Jack Armstrong has a twitter post going around and I think with minor point adjustments to destro and a FAQ on a few issues we would be fine.

 

Quote:

Jack Armstrong‏ 
@Jackwarmstrong

Replying to @thecountmoore @BadDice_Podcast @CowboyBootsMatt

I don’t agree with all of them needed. For me it’s 
1. Keep coherency when taking casualties.
2. Can’t move back into combat if left (except say Heraldor)
3. Can’t be 3” unless charge

4. No duplication of any ability
5. Not revealed can’t score
6. No balewind
7. KO units on a ship count for number of drops

To my mind it just takes the top edge of filth off but still leaves things competitive. Also takes away ‘negative play’ experiences

 

 

[someone2040]

So here's where I think the problems with Destruction lie.

 

I think it was a good move by GW to nerf the Destruction allegiance ability. IMO the old Rampaging Destroyers Battle Trait was one of (if not the) best in the game. Especially if they want to use it as a building block for some allegiance abilities (like Ironjawz), it can't be super good. It's perhaps a tad undertuned at the moment, but no more so than say the Chaos one IMO. I think people use having poorer warscroll depth as justification for having OP allegiance abilities, but really balance shouldn't be done that way.

 

But overall, I think the biggest problem is the lack of allegiance abilities and old model ranges.

The problem is, Ironjawz are the only ones that benefit from new allegiance abilities, and they were already a compelling faction to collect due to having a battletome and a new model range. GHB2017 didn't make it any more compelling to collect Gutbusters or Greenskinz other than having minor points buffs.

This is completely add odds with the other 3 Grand Alliances. GHB2017 suddenly made factionslike Nighthaunt, Soulblight, Free Peoples, Dispossessed, Brayherds, Clans Skryre, etc more compelling armies, because not only did they gain the same points adjustments everyone else got, but they gained allegiance abilities that made them more interesting to build. A lot of those armies still aren't super great (Mainly because they lack the benefits of a Battletome and warscrolls in line with new thinking), but they're definitely more interesting than trying to build Gutbusters or Greenskinz at the moment.

 

Lastly, I think it's important to note that of the remaining collectable Destruction factions, Gitmob Grots, Greenskinz and Moonclan Grots are all quite old model ranges. They all includes models dating back to 6th edition (or perhaps even older in some cases). Moonclan has a particular issue where the majority of the range is actually finecast. Moonclan is still compelling because they actually have some Forgeworld support and the models are more recent, so at least the models look good. They also have a good strong identity, which is probably the reason they look as if they'll get some more love in the future.

 

So overall, I think Destruction just doesn't have that many compelling factions to play at the moment. Ironjawz aren't quite top of the meta as they don't really have the long ranged threats. Beastclaw and Bonesplitterz took nerfs to their best units.

Of the rest, Moonclan is full of finecast and forgeworld. Gutbusters I think would be super up there if they had allegiance abilities, but suffer from a lack thereof.  Spiderfang are probably more of a fun army that might pull out some surprises. While Gitmob and Greenskinz have a few interesting units but aren't something you can really build a good army around as they languish in vanilla hell.

[Fridge_Opener]

Some good points here, I won't quote you all individually but I like how you all envision destruction going. My pessimism is more based around the amount other alliances battle tomes were fleshed out and even had points adjusted due to lack of competitiveness (fyreslayers). 

On PlasticCraic, like the idea but i personally wouldn't run that many butchers although you do have serious conversion cauldron potential. I wouldn't touch the Battlebrew in its current format with something like battered talisman. If I'm honest lad I don't have much experience running non Gunline gutbusters so can't speak of the merits of them. Let me know how it gets on though. 

Jack Armstrong makes a few decent points too. 

What I am optimistic about though is the, albeit best case scenario thinking, that factions which didn't get allegiance abilities this GHB will be getting a book in the calendar year. Or at the very least some of the destruction ones will be. I can't see spiderfang being expanded to a full faction although some of the listed ideas are cool. Moonclan tick all the boxes and I'd love some fluff expanded to upon for them in AoS. 

I don't know what the solution to the lack of balance is if I'm honest, I'd like more things to compete at the higher levels but I don't want the game getting cheesier and cheesier in a race to 7th Ed daemons. I think more missions could help with stuff like tactical objectives, I don't feel the current missions do us any real favours

[Malakree]

2 hours ago, Fridge_Opener said:

I don't know what the solution to the lack of balance is if I'm honest, I'd like more things to compete at the higher levels but I don't want the game getting cheesier and cheesier in a race to 7th Ed daemons. I think more missions could help with stuff like tactical objectives, I don't feel the current missions do us any real favours

I think it's less about the missions and more about the mapwide teleportation. Vanguarrd wing or seraphon being exceptionally agregeous examples.

For example on knife to the heart, how are we supposed to compete against an opponent who can teleport from one objective to the other when it takes us 5 turns to run that distance. 

And I agree balewind vortex needs removing from matched play, its simply to strong against melee orientated armies and causes already ridiculous wizard based armies to go off the deep end.

 

[Fridge_Opener]

14 minutes ago, Malakree said:

I think it's less about the missions and more about the mapwide teleportation. Vanguarrd wing or seraphon being exceptionally agregeous examples.

For example on knife to the heart, how are we supposed to compete against an opponent who can teleport from one objective to the other when it takes us 5 turns to run that distance. 

And I agree balewind vortex needs removing from matched play, its simply to strong against melee orientated armies and causes already ridiculous wizard based armies to go off the deep end.

 

You're 100% right on knife to the heart, played it two weeks ago against sylvaneth and got a minor loss but had no chance of winning it mission wise!

[Malakree]

2 minutes ago, Fridge_Opener said:

You're 100% right on knife to the heart, played it two weeks ago against sylvaneth and got a minor loss but had no chance of winning it mission wise!

My two experiences on it have been Sylvaneth and seraphon. The later of the two involved kroak teleporting next to my objective, getting on a balewind and inflicting d3 mortal wounds to my entire army every turn of the game.

[Sheriff]

I quite like that mission but it seems to typically be whoever takes first turn wins, i.e. not me with about 15 drops. I do look forward to having an arachnarok for each objective though 

I never played the game before GHB2017, so don't really know what I've missed out on; I don't really feel like I lack movement, as I typically get 1 destruciton move to use (on my grot meat shield blob), and the spiders can move plenty in turn 1 anyway. Was it possible to get a turn 1 charge before in most games or something? Was the "but cannot run as well" rule still there before with the destruction move? 

Personally I find that reliable damage output, not movement, is the issue. 

[Malakree]

9 minutes ago, Sheriff said:

I quite like that mission but it seems to typically be whoever takes first turn wins, i.e. not me with about 15 drops. I do look forward to having an arachnarok for each objective though 

I never played the game before GHB2017, so don't really know what I've missed out on; I don't really feel like I lack movement, as I typically get 1 destruciton move to use (on my grot meat shield blob), and the spiders can move plenty in turn 1 anyway. Was it possible to get a turn 1 charge before in most games or something? Was the "but cannot run as well" rule still there before with the destruction move? 

Personally I find that reliable damage output, not movement, is the issue. 

Knife to the heart is the one with an objective in each corner and a split down the middle, are you thinking of duality of death which requires heroes?

The old destruction move was far more reliable than the new one. The easiest way to explain it is that the main difference between the current and the old one is as follows.

1. Roll a d6
2. Both: On a 6 move 6"
3. Old one: On any other number move that number of "

It's strictly better in almost every way, all those times you roll a 5 for your destruction move on a random hero you just lost out on 5" of movement. It's the equivalent of a free run every turn with the ability to then run a second time afterwards.

We have damage output in the Grand Alliance but it is hard for us to bring to bear or protect. Best example is Grot Spider Rider, Skyfires are exactly the same unit, but they can fly, have 16" of movement, do D3 mortal wounds not 1 and do that damage at 24" range. Imagine that the Spiderfang venom was on a 24" ranged attack instead of a melee. Oh and the ****** Grot Big Boss, you can pay 60 points more to get 16" flying movement trades his command ability for a passive +1 to hit just for being near him and becomes a wizard with arcane bolt++

As it stands right now, Tzaangors do everything that spiderfang do but at a 24" range with double the movement and flying. That's the issue, the range and the flying, not whether we have the damage or not.

[Sheriff]

1 minute ago, Malakree said:

Knife to the heart is the one with an objective in each corner and a split down the middle, are you thinking of duality of death which requires heroes?

The old destruction move was far more reliable than the new one. The easiest way to explain it is that the main difference between the current and the old one is as follows.

1. Roll a d6
2. Both: On a 6 move 6"
3. Old one: On any other number move that number of "

It's strictly better in almost every way, all those times you roll a 5 for your destruction move on a random hero you just lost out on 5" of movement. It's the equivalent of a free run every turn with the ability to then run a second time afterwards.

We have damage output in the Grand Alliance but it is hard for us to bring to bear or protect. Best example is Grot Spider Rider, Skyfires are exactly the same unit, but they can fly, have 16" of movement, do D3 mortal wounds not 1 and do that damage at 24" range. Imagine that the Spiderfang venom was on a 24" ranged attack instead of a melee. Oh and the ****** Grot Big Boss, you can pay 60 points more to get 16" flying movement trades his command ability for a passive +1 to hit just for being near him and becomes a wizard with arcane bolt++

As it stands right now, Tzaangors do everything that spiderfang do but at a 24" range with double the movement and flying. That's the issue, the range and the flying, not whether we have the damage or not.

I see, thanks for this explanation. Yeah I meant duality of death, my bad. 

Yeah Tzeentch are the worst, I don't enjoy playing them as they just wreck everything and don't even need to roll successful to do so. No fun in getting clobbered even if you play a perfect game with the cards you're dealt. 

Basically what we need is options. The choice of a bunch of abilities and allegiances and items that suit the play-styles we want, some heavy on the randomness, some focused on reliability, some on strengths, some on helping out our weaknesses, etc. All we have now is the shiddy D6 mechanic, take it or leave it. 

(but they'll give stormcast a dozen more options before they focus on NPC factions like destruction, as they seem to see us) 

[Sangfroid]

Just to add some cheer and optimism to this thread, Spiderfang, Grot pirates, moonclan have been directly mentioned in various battletomes therefore “exist” in the realms. While currently they are not fully fleshed out and peeps can sometimes wonder how could they possibly be fleshed out? 

Think of what GW did with effectively a tree-kin, treelord (old model), dryads and a branchwitch (or wraith can’t remeber which one is wytch ba dum dum daaaaa!) . They took those models from the wood elves and created Sylvaneth, new book new models everything. Ironjawz is effectively born from the old Black Orc models (now Ardboyz) new faction boom. 

With bonesniffas and beastclaw there was enough there to just repackage (plus models were relatively newish plastics)

looking at at the destruction factions you could envisage a repackaged ogors easily being splashed released like BCR & BS but the other three.... I have a lot of faith GW will produce the magic eventually 

[Fridge_Opener]

Another optin with allies is just to allow any grand alliance factions to go with any others, gutbusters could ally with orruks, ironjaws with beastclaw etc

[Sheriff]

52 minutes ago, Sangfroid said:

Just to add some cheer and optimism to this thread, Spiderfang, Grot pirates, moonclan have been directly mentioned in various battletomes therefore “exist” in the realms. While currently they are not fully fleshed out and peeps can sometimes wonder how could they possibly be fleshed out? 

Think of what GW did with effectively a tree-kin, treelord (old model), dryads and a branchwitch (or wraith can’t remeber which one is wytch ba dum dum daaaaa!) . They took those models from the wood elves and created Sylvaneth, new book new models everything. Ironjawz is effectively born from the old Black Orc models (now Ardboyz) new faction boom. 

With bonesniffas and beastclaw there was enough there to just repackage (plus models were relatively newish plastics)

looking at at the destruction factions you could envisage a repackaged ogors easily being splashed released like BCR & BS but the other three.... I have a lot of faith GW will produce the magic eventually 

Yeah for sure. I'm happy as it is, as a new player everything is new and fun to me. When the new goblins come out I'm guessing they'll be the shiny new OP thing for a while. 

[MrCharisma]

On 1/2/2018 at 4:29 AM, Fridge_Opener said:

With the lists for the masters having  just been posted.    baddice.co.uk/lists/

What do you think needs to be changed for destruction to have a larger presence? Only one player 

If it makes you feel a little better there were 2 Destruction lists at the Australian Masters:  http://www.heraldsofwar.com/documents/masters-lists-2017.pdf

At least you're not playing Death... there isn't a Death list at the UK Masters

 

[PlasticCraic]

28 minutes ago, MrCharisma said:

If it makes you feel a little better there were 2 Destruction lists at the Australian Masters:  http://www.heraldsofwar.com/documents/masters-lists-2017.pdf

At least you're not playing Death... there isn't a Death list at the UK Masters

 

15 of the 16 armies at the UK Masters are Order 'n' Chaos.  In fact it probably would have been 16 /16 if it wasn't for for dropouts (the only Destruction player came in at 23rd in the rankings), because the UK's top Destruction player (Nicky Myland) has dropped them for Order.

That doesn't make me feel great tbh!  Makes me feel like we've joined Death on the scrapheap. 

I don't mind not being at or near the top all the time - I'm sure it'll come back around at some point, and this thread has kicked up some great practical suggestions for how that could be achieved.  But for that to happen, I would have thought it does need to be recognized that we're not in great shape currently, and in need of some love?

[MrCharisma]

I agree with you mate. Destruction was hit too hard in GHB17

[svnvaldez]

What would be great is if GW would implement the below format into AOS. 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/

Honestly, if it didn't happen I would be surprised and disappointed. Enough noise and constructive feedback and things are bound to get better. Would recommend anyone who is even a casual acquaintance with top tournament players, pod casters, and GW representatives to keep waving the banner of AOS and Destruction and demonstrating the need for fixes and tweaks to our game.

Destro and Death will always be behind the 8 ball due to lack of releases compared to Order and Chaos, which is fine imo, but the disparity is shocking right now.

[heywoah_twitch]

That being said I certainly hope they don't make heroes untargettable or any such nonsense that maybe 40k needs, but would totally warp AoS gameplay in a real bad way.

[svnvaldez]

Im just looking forward to the day BCR monsters are all 100 points and there is no behemoth restrictions. That will fix destro surely!!!

[heywoah_twitch]

I'd rather each faction be viable enough not to need to steal OP bcr behemoths.

...and for the behemoth army to have the best behemoths again  

[bonzai]

On 1/1/2018 at 8:58 PM, svnvaldez said:

Agree with all of the above.

Nicky M. not taking Bonesplitterz to masters is saddening... We should ask him on FB but I would guess he probably didn't feel like he could take the top armies and I ran his list at a USA GT and its soul crushing to roll all the dice. Is the Bonesplitterz that is going a friend of his and using his army since he is rolling with wanderers?

I'll be taking Nicky's Facehammer list to LVO at the end of the month. USA players are about 6-9 month behind the meta of UK players so expecting a strong result with it, Tony Moore is coming over so I expect Tzeentch to clean up here as well.

 

The problem with Bonesplitterz (i.e. Kunning rukk), is that it is a spoiler list. It will dominate a lot of lists, but will run into a wall when it hits one of its counters. Basicly it's a one trick pony. It will clean up at RTs, but rarely win GTs without good match ups. Sadly, I can certainly understand why he would choose something  else for a big event.

I can agree that destruction lost a lot more than it gained in the GH17. Tzeentch is still the undisputed top battle tome. But at least it was taken down a notch or two, and a few lists can  at least challenge them now. 

Rather than nerfing things, I would rather see a few new units get introduced to existing factions. Body guard units that help against hero sniping, and units with dedicated range defense. Do that and it will at least give a fighting chance to compete with the range heavy armies. 

That, and BCRs need help. Only thing I can see them doing in the short term is reversing the stone horn nerf. That would give them a bounce back in the right direction, but still not top tier. The faction has bigger issues, but at least this can be done without anytghing new having to be printed.

[svnvaldez]

23 minutes ago, bonzai said:

The problem with Bonesplitterz (i.e. Kunning rukk), is that it is a spoiler list. It will dominate a lot of lists, but will run into a wall when it hits one of its counters. Basicly it's a one trick pony. It will clean up at RTs, but rarely win GTs without good match ups. Sadly, I can certainly understand why he would choose something  else for a big event.

I don't disagree that the Rukk has limitations but still contend it's the only highly competitive destro build.

No way that wanderers list Nick is rocking is would have done better than his 1 drop Rukk but I'm sure he will have more fun with it.

if it was me I would have been thinking... well I can go 4-2 with the Rukk. But 4-2 doesn't win the event and it will be boring to play.... I'll take wanderers!!!

[Malakree]

1 hour ago, svnvaldez said:

I don't disagree that the Rukk has limitations but still contend it's the only highly competitive destro build.

No way that wanderers list Nick is rocking is would have done better than his 1 drop Rukk but I'm sure he will have more fun with it.

if it was me I would have been thinking... well I can go 4-2 with the Rukk. But 4-2 doesn't win the event and it will be boring to play.... I'll take wanderers!!!

I dunno about the wanderers list. He's running Waystone Pathfinders so it's a 1 drop itself, combine Realm Wanderers with the Stalker of Hidden Paths and he can reposition his entire army to any table edge on his first movement phase meaning he can gladly give up priority while having most of his army not even on the board to take damage. It also happens after his hero phase so he can buff up with his 2 wizards then teleport across the board.

Eye Thief from the nomad thief is devastating for small units which rely on rolling 6s to hit in order to get mortal wounds. 

Oh and that unit of Eternal Guard with Shield of Thorns/Mystic Shield/Fortress of Boughs  is one of the most disgusting things ever, 3+ save, Rerolling fails, reflecting a mortal wound on 4+ or 3+(and 2+ save) if they are in cover. 

All that is ignoring the ridiculous power of the shots he's taking after that jump ontop of you. 52 shots hitting on 3s wounding on 4s with -3 rend is deleting heroes.

So he starts the game hidden and out of range of you, teleports into whatever is the place you don't want him to be, guns down all your heroes with a ridiculous round of fire and charges you with his Eternal Guard to lock you in combat. THEN he has a chance to double turn you, get even more shots, and suddenly his Eternal Guard inflict more wounds back at you than you inflict on him when they attack. Oh and if by some miracle you do managed to engage his archers in combat, he can retreat and still shoot you.

Yeah the Rukk is totally a better version of the wanderers list and not just a laughable shadow of it.

 

[stratigo]

I don’t think you’ll see moonclan soon. The herald is, in my estimation, a test model to gauge interest. If that succeeds, then you’re looking at roughly a two year time to go from concepts to release