My stormcast rant : the good, the bad and the ugly, where they are now, and what should be done

[AdamR]

Probably more in line with how units are done in AoS would be packs of 3 for 60, same as Aetherwings, with 3-12 unit size?

[Okonomiyakimarine]

11 hours ago, PlayerOfGames said:

Gryph-hounds: split warscroll into two warscrolls:

Gryph-hound Alpha: is a single model, has all current rules (Loyal Companion applies to Lord-Castellant and Lord-Veritant) and 3 attacks, stays at 40 points

Gryph-hound hunting pack: any number of models (no Alpha),  and loses all special rules except Darting Attacks. 20 points each

No Warning Cry? So if I want to get that defense (or rather immediate attack) against summoned attacks against my Raptors I could only rely on one or two Alphas, but could not use packs to increase the effective range?  Unsure about the trade offs here with the suggested point-decrease.

[PlayerOfGames]

8 hours ago, AdamR said:

Probably more in line with how units are done in AoS would be packs of 3 for 60, same as Aetherwings, with 3-12 unit size?

I was thinking about this, too. In the end I suggested to keep the current rules, because

- it is a special feature that sets the unit apart, and allows you to use any (multiple of 20) number of remaining points on a hunting pack

- if you buy a box of 6, you can use any number of them as Alphas and take all the remaining minis as a hunting pack.

7 hours ago, Okonomiyakimarine said:

No Warning Cry? So if I want to get that defense (or rather immediate attack) against summoned attacks against my Raptors I could only rely on one or two Alphas, but could not use packs to increase the effective range?  Unsure about the trade offs here with the suggested point-decrease.

But you can take any number of Alphas that you like, and at the same price as before! It is a separate unit with its own warscroll, and not a Hero - so you can take 10 if you like

What unit size do you currently use?

I think taking multiple units of 1 is better than 1 big unit, because:

- if you place them close together and e.g., 2 are in range of intruders, you get to roll the dice for the range of their effect twice

- if you keep them further apart, you can protect your army in a bigger area / from different angles

- you force your opponent to either split his shooting (with the risk of not killing any of them) or to ensure the kill, but risk causing more than 3 wounds  (which are wasted)

 

And if all Gryph-hounds keep the Warning Cry, I think you cannot decrease their points cost at all...

[Okonomiyakimarine]

1 hour ago, PlayerOfGames said:

I was thinking about this, too. In the end I suggested to keep the current rules, because

- it is a special feature that sets the unit apart, and allows you to use any (multiple of 20) number of remaining points on a hunting pack

- if you buy a box of 6, you can use any number of them as Alphas and take all the remaining minis as a hunting pack.

But you can take any number of Alphas that you like, and at the same price as before! It is a separate unit with its own warscroll, and not a Hero - so you can take 10 if you like

What unit size do you currently use?

I think taking multiple units of 1 is better than 1 big unit, because:

- if you place them close together and e.g., 2 are in range of intruders, you get to roll the dice for the range of their effect twice

- if you keep them further apart, you can protect your army in a bigger area / from different angles

- you force your opponent to either split his shooting (with the risk of not killing any of them) or to ensure the kill, but risk causing more than 3 wounds  (which are wasted)

 

And if all Gryph-hounds keep the Warning Cry, I think you cannot decrease their points cost at all...

I see where you are coming from and after reconsidering the use if single Alphas I agree with your ideas how to change the warscrolls and point cost.

My critique stems from the idea to use a spread out pack to support against a flanking maneuver by having warning cry against summoning units and by blocking charges plus the potential to buffer further as chaff. Having multiples of Alphas obviously is a good solution for multi-warning cries, but after that they are not that much help buffering.

Your arguments totally makes sense and as I had written before I do see that one has to scratch a few features to make plausible a point decrease for grouped graph-hounds ('unsure about the trade off'), but I'd love to have the crunch for the fluff with ideally a whole pack give you a more decisive warning cry plus the potential to effectively buffer and counter charge attackers.

(i have yet to play them)

[PlayerOfGames]

Regarding Gryph-hound Alphas: it would be cool if you could daisy-chain their warning cries: Alpha #1 detects intruders and issues a warning cry. Alpha #2 is in range of this warning cry and issues his own warning cry, and so on ...

 

But this could be (ab)used in gunline lists, so .... nice idea, but sadly potentially OP, depending on the list.

[PlayerOfGames]

Next up: Command Traits (I'll leave Staunch Defender for later, as this is the toughest nut to crack).

Consummate Commander & Shielded by Faith: keep as is.

Zealous Crusader: change to "Select the General and/or another Stormcast unit within 6" of him. The selected unit(s) can re-roll the dice when determining the distance for charging."

(This would be particularly useful for Vanguard (Aquilor+Palladors/Hunters) who have a hard time using Heraldor or Vexillor, especially when re-deploying)

Cunning Strategist: change to "Select up to D3 units in the celestial realm... "  then A or B or C:

(A) These units may each choose to automatically pass or fail their roll for Scions of the Storm. (100% reliable)

(B) These units may each either add 1 to or subtract 3 from their roll for Scions of the Storm. (16.7% chance of failing what you want them to do)

(C) These units may each re-roll the die for Scions of the Storm. (11.1% chance to fail arriving, 44.4% chance to fail staying in Celestial realm)

Champion of the Realms: replace with True Believer: "Add 1 to Stormcast prayer rolls made within 12" of your general."

 

Thoughts?

[chord]

I vote A as this is more strategic and less luck based

[PlayerOfGames]

So, Staunch Defender... a tough one

Strengths as it is right now:

(1) It is active from the get-go, even if your opponent has the first turn.

(2) It can affect any number of units (including the general himself). So, with a compact setup with the general at its center, you can protect your whole army. Together with (1) this is very good against non-MW Alphastrike lists.

(3) As it is always active, you can also buff units  after the Hero phase (e.g., after entering play via Scions) .

Limitations:

- does not work on units that charged this turn

- cannot be combined with cover save

The strengths far outweigh the limitations, so it is no wonder that this is THE #1 Command trait (especially given how bad most of the others are).

How to change it? For example:

(A) In the movement phase, select a Stormcast unit within 9". This unit can add 1 to its save rolls.

-> basically a free, guaranteed Mystic shield with half the range that can be combined with Castellant or a Mysic shield from an allied Wizard (not on Scion'ed units)

-> movement phase so it can buff units arriving via Scions and such (e.g. Aquilor special movement)

-> no limitations regarding charging/cover

(B) In the movement phase, select a Stormcast unit within 18". This unit gains the ability to re-roll failed save rolls of 1. If the unit already has this abiliy, it can re-roll failed save rolls of 1 or 2 instead. Other effects (e.g., from the Shield of LCoSD) still only trigger after a 1 was originally rolled.

-> movement phase so it can buff units arriving via Scions and such (e.g. Aquilor special movement)

-> no limitations regarding charging/cover

-> I have done the maths on a few examples, and the +1 bonus from variant (A) always came out on top. Hence (B) gets better range.

In both cases, the effect on the one unit that is buffed is potentially stronger (with the downside that you have to activate it during your own turn)

Of course, compared to the original these are weaker overall. But viewed on its own, this is not a bad Command trait. And with the proposals above, you have a nice selection of traits to choose from, I think (and you can take something else than Staunch defender without feeling gimped or guilty )

[chord]

I'm not sure I would change Staunch Defender.  Yeah its the most popular, but most likely due to the fact that the others are so poor.   

[PJetski]

Staunch Defender could be a Once Per Game ability that only lasts until your next hero phase

[AdamR]

1 hour ago, chord said:

I'm not sure I would change Staunch Defender.  Yeah its the most popular, but most likely due to the fact that the others are so poor.   

It's this.

If Shielded by Faith was an aura then that would definitely challenge Staunches dominance.

[DanielFM]

7 hours ago, chord said:

I'm not sure I would change Staunch Defender.  Yeah its the most popular, but most likely due to the fact that the others are so poor.   

Quoted for the truth. 

Freeguild get Staunch Defender+ and no one complains it's OP. It needs more competition, that's it.

[chord]

10 minutes ago, DanielFM said:

Quoted for the truth. 

Freeguild get Staunch Defender+ and no one complains it's OP. It needs more competition, that's it.

Good point.

I think people only complain about Staunch Defender when it's placed on something that has a re-roll 1's option.   I didn't see anyone complain when it was on my lord relictor.

[Kaleun]

the 2+ rerollable save is the problem.

[AdamR]

It's not a problem, it's a solution opportunity!

But seriously, are they really a problem for you?  Isn't that what rend and/or mortal wounds are for?

Even if you get rid of Staunch there's still cover/mystic shield/castellants lantern. 

2+ rerolling 1's isn't going away.

[Kaleun]

IF you dont have mortal wounds or rend of -2 or better, a save of 2+ rerollable means that models start being invincible! Which should not happen in my opinion. So yes it is a big problem. Of course there are possibilities around that, but mortal wounds are then the only way to SOLVE the problem. That shouldnt be the case in my opinion.

a 2+ save is hard enough to crack. making it rerollable (or have this crazy heal skill also...).

[PlayerOfGames]

47 minutes ago, AdamR said:

But seriously, are they really a problem for you?  Isn't that what rend and/or mortal wounds are for?

Even if you get rid of Staunch there's still cover/mystic shield/castellants lantern. 

2+ rerolling 1's isn't going away.

So, how much is the average rend? There are tons of units who have no rend at all. And those that do have it, usually have rend -1. Just look at Stormcast: who has rend better than -1? Celestant Prime, Longstrikes, Gryph-chargers. Did I forget anyone?

Also, it matters how easy you can get 2+ re-rolling 1 save. Without staunch defender, you need a Castellant (must be in range, might be problematic with fast units), an allied wizard (costs additional points, must succeed at cast roll) and/or cover (must be where you need it) to get it.

Staunch defender is just so good, that it will always be 99% (or at least 90+%) pick, no matter what other Command traits do. So, to get more variety here Staunch defender should be  tuned down. But not without proper compensation (e.g., better faction ability, better Command trait alternatives,...)!

 

So, how about this: include part of the "Tempest's Eye" city ability from Firestorm as a Faction ability in addition to Scions:

"Add 1 to the save rolls of your units in the first battle round." (even if it were "turn" and not "round", it would still be useful)

Then add a tuned down version of Staunch defender plus the other Command traits I suggested. For my part, I'd gladly take that!

[AdamR]

Did you really just list the 12" range of the warding lantern as a negative compared to the 6" range of staunch? 

[PlayerOfGames]

What I meant is: if you  have LCoD, LCoSD or Aquilor general with Staunch Defender it is easier to provide its buff on fast units like Dracothian guard, Palladors and such (if you make use of their speed)

[DanielFM]

10 hours ago, PlayerOfGames said:

Staunch defender is just so good, that it will always be 99% (or at least 90+%) pick, no matter what other Command traits do. So, to get more variety here Staunch defender should be  tuned down. But not without proper compensation (e.g., better faction ability, better Command trait alternatives,...)!

 

So, how about this: include part of the "Tempest's Eye" city ability from Firestorm as a Faction ability in addition to Scions:

"Add 1 to the save rolls of your units in the first battle round." (even if it were "turn" and not "round", it would still be useful)

Then add a tuned down version of Staunch defender plus the other Command traits I suggested. For my part, I'd gladly take that!

What if Staunch could only affect Infantry? That would remove the complaints about 2+ reroll 1's but still help units that need it. In fact, it sounds more fluffy. Staunch Defender sounds like something related to defensive infantry formation, not to cavalry.

If we could get some kind of aura, prayer, or other ability to give a unit a mortal wound save (maybe a Mystic Light?), Dracothian Guard could be more balanced (more vulnerable to normal wounds, not outright garbage against MW).

Plus, the Allegiance bit you suggest: if it was only first turn it would be really bad. The enemy starts? Great. You start? It's almost useless. If you don't charge anyone, you won't save against anything. Wasted ability.

[AdamR]

I think the problem with that is that because AoS doesn't list unit types, you'd have to list them all otherwise someone is bound to start arguing over what cavalry means...

Aside from that though, is it really that much of an issue with dracothian guard?  Fulminators are by far the most popular but they need to be charging so they lose out and with a average unit size of 2(!) there won't be any conga lining of units so all your good stuff is just going to be in a clump, reducing board control. 

Anecdote time! At heat 1 the only game I lost was against a staunch Stardrake with castellant and Fulminators, but I only really lost because his dice were on point and mine went home. And I did succeed in killing the Stardrake, despite only having very limited mortal wounds capabilities. And and, he didn't even qualify for the finals with it, despite the fact he's normally on the top tables!

I dunno, I guess I'm just not seeing the problem with staunch. It's just the rest of the traits need improving to be viable alternatives. 

[PlayerOfGames]

3 hours ago, DanielFM said:

Plus, the Allegiance bit you suggest: if it was only first turn it would be really bad. The enemy starts? Great. You start? It's almost useless. If you don't charge anyone, you won't save against anything. Wasted ability.

Of course it would be much better if it lasts one round instead of one turn.  In the end, it would be a matter of balance that depends on how unit rules, command traits, point costs , etc. change.

One of the strong points of Staunch defender is that it is active from the get-go, so you have some protection from Alphastrike lists. With the ability lasting one turn you have that same (or even better) protection. True, if you start you only have a (small!) benefit if you have an Alphastrike list yourself (e.g., Vanguard Wing, Skyborne Slayers)... but if you start, you have time to fire up your other buffs (Castellant, new Staunch defender, etc.) before the opponent can act.

[Kaleun]

It is managable and certainly there are other disgusting things to play against then the 2+ rerollable. However that is the basic reason some better "mortal wound protection" can not be allowed.

If my opponent fields a Stardrake or Dracoth with that 2+ rerollable i am FORCED to field Mortal wound dealing units. That is the big problem. Even the -2 rend isnt enough in my oppinion to reliably deal with that threat.

the whole "being invincible" thing is a flaw of AoS compared to 40k. In 40k we see a very positive development of the average Guardsmen being able to kill Imperial Knights with pure quantity.

[AdamR]

Quote

If my opponent fields a Stardrake or Dracoth with that 2+ rerollable i am FORCED to field Mortal wound dealing units. That is the big problem. Even the -2 rend isnt enough in my oppinion to reliably deal with that threat.

But isn't that just good list design? In my GT list I took a LCoD with obsidian blade and keen clawed precisely to deal with units like that and rend ignoring 2+ save rerolling ones treelord ancients, despite the fact that it didn't really add anything else to my list. I just wanted the tool available if needed.

[ledha]

8 minutes ago, AdamR said:

But isn't that just good list design? In my GT list I took a LCoD with obsidian blade and keen clawed precisely to deal with units like that and rend ignoring 2+ save rerolling ones treelord ancients, despite the fact that it didn't really add anything else to my list. I just wanted the tool available if needed.

I think the problem is that some armies don't have any reliable way to deal mortal wounds, like the Ironjaw or most of the compendium one.

 

A stardrake with staunch defender and castellant can be invincible against some armies. Most of the people don't complain too much about it, because 1) it's ultra expensive 2) the stardrake have a ridiculously low damage output for his point 3) most of the recent armies deal enough mortal wound or high-rend attack to deal with it now.

 

But yeah, old armies can't do really anything against a stardrake