Let's Chat Sylvaneth

[DantePQ]

23 minutes ago, Craze said:

With "KO" in this context you mean Bow Hunters?

My plan (pure theory right now) would be to hammer the Khemist with bow hunters, place Wyldwoods strategically and port in T-Revs to try to pressure Arkanauts in melee, while advancing with Dryads and my Wych. Until i have put some serious damage on the Khemist I would try to keep the T-Revs and Wych out of firing range of the Arkanauts. By placing Wyldwoods to prevent them from running in the first turn I would be able to maximise the advantage of the 30" range of the hunters. Of Course this is pure theory right now...

Sorry my bad yeah it did mean Bow Hunters (I just edited my potst)

Yep your best shot is to shot down Khemist/s with Bows and/or Arcane Bolt. T-Revs would be good against big unit, if you want to run them then they are perfect to take ojectives or/ teleport from the edge/wyldwood to hunt after Khemist. Dryads are good to be placed and they are much tougher then T-Revs as T-Revs are great specialist unit. 

[Craze]

Ok. So I guess I will paint some more Dryads and then decide if I field 20 Dryads or 10 Dryads + 5 T-Revs.

And of course I hope to not play any KO.

[Amradiel]

I can't decide if I should build my 6 Kurnoth hunters with sword or scythe... 

[DantePQ]

3 minutes ago, Amradiel said:

I can't decide if I should build my 6 Kurnoth hunters with sword or scythe... 

Scythes are much better

unless to you want to magnetize them of course. 

[Richelieu]

3 minutes ago, DantePQ said:

Scythes are much better

unless to you want to magnetize them of course. 

GHB2017 made swords slightly better than they were, since the points increase of Kurnoths means you're more likely to run them in units of 3, in which case the extra range isn't as important, but i'll take that -2 rend any day of the week over an extra attack.

[DantePQ]

Yep -2 rend is the main selling point. Swords are better against hordes and that's all - Scythes are just all-around the most point-efficent version of Hunters. 

[Freejack02]

1 hour ago, DantePQ said:

Scythes are just all-around the most point-efficent version of Hunters. 

I really wish I would stop seeing this claim every time a conversation about Hunters pops up, because the math tells a different story for both Swords and Scythes. Now that the range is less likely to matter (as Richelieu pointed out), Swords really do come out on top in most cases. Scythes don't pull ahead on expected damage until you are hitting a 2+ save, which is pretty rare. The biggest reason that Scythes are preferred by most players is the lack of other sources of high rend/mortal wounds. In a white room, swords are superior.

SAVE    SWORD    SCYTHE

--                5.78         4.33
6+             5.78         4.33
5+             4.82         4.33
4+             3.85         3.61
3+             2.89         2.89
2+             1.93         2.17

Expected damage is higher for swords through 3+, then it's equal, then scythes pull ahead. 3 extra attacks makes a larger difference than people think.

[Amradiel]

4 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

I really wish I would stop seeing this claim every time a conversation about Hunters pops up, because the math a different story for both Swords and Scythes. Now that the range is less likely to matter (as Richelieu pointed out), Swords really do come out on top in most cases. Scythes don't pull ahead on expected damage until you are hitting a 2+ save, which is pretty rare. The biggest reason that Scythes are preferred by most players is the lack of other sources of high rend/mortal wounds. In a white room, swords are superior.

SAVE    SWORD    SCYTHE

--                5.78         4.33
6+             5.78         4.33
5+             4.82         4.33
4+             3.85         3.61
3+             2.89         2.89
2+             1.93         2.17

Expected damage is higher for swords through 3+, then it's equal, then scythes pull ahead. 3 extra attacks makes a larger difference than people think.

Yeah I have seen similar posts before. I have played with scythes but never swords so I can't say anything about it. 

[Freejack02]

1 minute ago, Amradiel said:

Yeah I have seen similar posts before. I have played with scythes but never swords so I can't say anything about it. 

Well the numbers favor swords, but if you routinely go against really buffed up saves (Stormcast) or plan to take a large beat-stick unit, scythes are good and well.

If you really like the look of one over the other, just do that

[Amradiel]

4 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

Well the numbers favor swords, but if you routinely go against really buffed up saves (Stormcast) or plan to take a large beat-stick unit, scythes are good and well.

If you really like the look of one over the other, just do that

My long term plan is tournaments.  So the most competitive pick would suit me best. My friends who I will play more casually have Blades of Khorne and Ironjawz

[DantePQ]

23 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

I really wish I would stop seeing this claim every time a conversation about Hunters pops up, because the math tells a different story for both Swords and Scythes. Now that the range is less likely to matter (as Richelieu pointed out), Swords really do come out on top in most cases. Scythes don't pull ahead on expected damage until you are hitting a 2+ save, which is pretty rare. The biggest reason that Scythes are preferred by most players is the lack of other sources of high rend/mortal wounds. In a white room, swords are superior.

SAVE    SWORD    SCYTHE

--                5.78         4.33
6+             5.78         4.33
5+             4.82         4.33
4+             3.85         3.61
3+             2.89         2.89
2+             1.93         2.17

Expected damage is higher for swords through 3+, then it's equal, then scythes pull ahead. 3 extra attacks makes a larger difference than people think.

Sure I know that math, but from competitive point of view Scythes are just better, slightly but better.  Sylvaneth has plenty of possibilites to deal with less armoured targets and since Sylvaneth deson't have serious source of mortal wounds you need something to hit hard armoured targets - that's why Scythes are used as our hammer. 

Also range does matter - you can "hide" Scythes Hunter - even in units of 3 for example behind line od dryads protecting your Scythes. You can't do that comfortably with Swords. So Scythes give you more tactical flexibility as well. I love how it's part is ignored. 

 

[Freejack02]

21 minutes ago, DantePQ said:

Sure I know that math, but from competitive point of view Scythes are just better, slightly but better.  Sylvaneth has plenty of possibilites to deal with less armoured targets and since Sylvaneth deson't have serious source of mortal wounds you need something to hit hard armoured targets - that's why Scythes are used as our hammer. 

Also range does matter - you can "hide" Scythes Hunter - even in units of 3 for example behind line od dryads protecting your Scythes. You can't do that comfortably with Swords. So Scythes give you more tactical flexibility as well. I love how it's part is ignored. 

You started with "Scythes are much better" now it's "slightly better"...  Ok.

I addressed the rend/mortals issue in my previous posts, I'm well aware that rend is needed in the army. 

As for the range, it's not ignored, you just can't quantify the benefit of it mathematically. True, you can "hide" Scythes behind a line of Dryads and try to counter-pile in, but how often does that actually work out efficiently? Are you really willing to sit your expensive melee unit behind another throw-away one in hopes the enemy will charge into them, while they know full well what you plan to do?

The point of my post was to address the belief that scythes are far and away the superior option, and swords shouldn't even be considered. 

[DantePQ]

Maybe they should be considered but from competitive point of view you should always take Scythes unless you know that your opponents will bring horde armies. You can't compare them in the vaccum. 

Scythes are better because they are doing what no other Sylvaneth unit is able to do efficently. You need that kind of unit - you don't Sword necessary. Hiding them behind Dryads is sound tactic especially for Sylvaneth. Playing scenarios it's very helpful as it's often comes down to objective bunkering. Range plays even bigger part when running them in bigger units 6-9 units. I run quite successfully Dreadwood variation of Sylvaneth and I would be able to bring all the Swords Kurnoths into CC. 

There is a reason why there are no Swords Kurnoth in majority of successful tournament Sylvaneth builds for all the resons I showed. It's not like all those players missed something, combination of rend-2 (something that no other unit in army can has) and bigger tactical flexibility are the reasons why Scythes Kurntohs are in almost every Sylvaneth build and why Sword Kutnioths aren't. 

[Freejack02]

If you have success with the counter-pile-in strategy of scythes, then that would certainly be something that swords can't reliably do... it's tough to compare that in a meaningful way. 

The "need for rend -2" really isn't much of a need at all, because that's accounted for in the math. Sure, it seems better to have high rend when when that huge block of Vanguard Wing liberators charges into you - but more attacks for swords make up for that and more. 

Swords get dismissed as inferior 95% of the time, when in reality they are an equal or better choice against the majority of armies the average player will face. 

[Amradiel]

This is why I can't decide ?

[DantePQ]

Sure but @Amradielasked what's better taking tournaments into consideration. Sure I agree much better was overstatement but in tournaments builds Scythes are better choice especially when some strong builds need Scythes (Dreadwood with Alarielle for example) 

[Walkirriox]

41 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

The "need for rend -2" really isn't much of a need at all, because that's accounted for in the math. Sure, it seems better to have high rend when when that huge block of Vanguard Wing liberators charges into you - but more attacks for swords make up for that and more. 

Swords get dismissed as inferior 95% of the time, when in reality they are an equal or better choice against the majority of armies the average player will face. 

Maths are just theory... But in a tournament you are facing a lot of units and heroes that negates -1 rend (Seraphon is an example), that’s why it’s “safer” to make a tournament list with scytes, because you don’t know who will you face. 

If you know who you play against, for sure swords are mathematically better.

[DantePQ]

Exactly that's why hardly anyone is running Swords - Scythes are only reliable source of -2 rend attacks in an army that lacks significant mortal wounds output. 

[Freejack02]

2 hours ago, Walkirriox said:

Maths are just theory...

I mean, math is numbers free of personal bias. If the data says swords are superior on paper, but you "like" scythes more - that's where math is useful. Presenting more reasons to back up that scythes are better, now that's really useful.

I wasn't aware that there were a lot of units that ignored -1 rend, all I know of are Saurus Guard shields for Seraphon and the Gnarled Warrior trait for Sylvaneth... are there really a lot more than that? I'm quite unfamiliar with Seraphon as opponents. If it's a common occurence among tournament lists, then I would probably just take scythes to avoid any headache matchups and eat the dps loss against light/middle armor saves. 

[Richelieu]

10 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

I mean, math is numbers free of personal bias. If the data says swords are superior on paper, but you "like" scythes more - that's where math is useful. Presenting more reasons to back up that scythes are better, now that's really useful.

I wasn't aware that there were a lot of units that ignored -1 rend, all I know of are Saurus Guard shields for Seraphon and the Gnarled Warrior trait for Sylvaneth... are there really a lot more than that? I'm quite unfamiliar with Seraphon as opponents. If it's a common occurence among tournament lists, then I would probably just take scythes to avoid any headache matchups and eat the dps loss against light/middle armor saves. 

This is simply untrue.  Raw data isn't even free from bias, because a human chose to collect or calculate it in a particular way.  Math and data are only relevant to humans in a given context.  In this case, the context is that Sylvaneth has any number of other units that can deal with low save models, namely hordes of dryads.  

This mythical unbiased data that is being referenced is also only basic probability.  If you use a binomial distribution instead, which is a more appropriate measure for this problem, you will discover that scythes are actually more reliable against 3+ save units than swords, even if the average is the same.  Strategies are only repeatable, and thus only usable competitively if they are reliable.  Add in the extra inch range and the advantage is clear.

[Freejack02]

7 minutes ago, Richelieu said:

Raw data isn't even free from bias, because a human chose to collect or calculate it in a particular way.

How is there bias in a direct numerical comparison between swords and scythes  hit/wound/rend values? 1 million different people could calculate those numbers 10 million times, and they would still be the same. Dice don't change. 

[DantePQ]

16 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

How is there bias in a direct numerical comparison between swords and scythes  hit/wound/rend values? 1 million different people could calculate those numbers 10 million times, and they would still be the same. Dice don't change. 

Yet from your data Swords are better then Scythes but no one uses Swords as far as competitive gaming is concerned. 

Your data didn't show how they fare against units/models that ignore - 1 rend and better range also wasn't considered. 

That's why it was biased because both of those things are important reasons why Scythes are so much preferred over Swords. 

[Freejack02]

5 minutes ago, DantePQ said:

Yet from your data Swords are better then Scythes but no one uses Swords as far as competitive gaming is concerned. 

Your data didn't show how they fare against units/models that ignore - 1 rend and better range also wasn't considered. 

That's why it was biased because both of those things are important reasons why Scythes are so much preferred over Swords. 

Again, that doesn't mean the NUMBERS are biased - my OPINION is. The numbers show only the relevant information of those specific weapons against those specific saves. No bias in that small table I posted back there, at all. Anyone who looks at those numbers, and only those numbers, would not be subject to my bias in any way. 

I don't even think that swords are exceptionally better than scythes, I'm just tired of no one giving swords a fair shake and admitting that they have a place among the Hunter loadouts. If I'm being honest, I would probably just label each option something like:

Swords - dps?

Scythes - tactical?

Bows - range?

So I guess for the original question, @Amradiel - just use scythes, because it isn't worth the headache. 

[MayItBe]

On 1.02.2018 at 11:23 AM, Walkirriox said:

Hi! Congratulations about the tournament! Thank you for sharing your experience, it really help us to learn different lists and strategies!

I'm really interested on your list, as I have a match this weekend against a tzeentch player (daemon list). We are playing a firestorm campaing and I have 1800p to build a list. Would you recommend me playing your list but without one unit of kurnoth hunters? 

Could you explain more details about your tzeentch match? I would like to read some strategies, tips and "what/what not to do" about playing against tzeentch daemons.

Thank you very much!

Hey, thank you

Main problem with DoT for me is Herald od Tzeentch getting on Vortex and Changelig swap. First turn using range i'm sniping characters who can summon vortex and block changelign, so he cannot swap with Lord of Change. If he is not playing changeling you could give him 1st turn, as he will be out of range with everything and 2d6+d3 MW is something you should endure. 3 units of hunter is enough, and I just wanted to be sure i can deal enough damage first turn to cripple key elements in my opponent army to have easier game later. My dices hated me that weekend, but with better (or just normal :P) rolls it would be enough.
 

This weekend i'll have more tests of my list in another tournament, and i'll keep you informed how it went

[Lhw]

With @DantePQ and most other players when it comes to Scythes vs Swords - Scythes are better. As you say, @Freejack02, they're best against high armour targets, but I disagree that you don't often come against them. A lot of armies will have 1 unit that is running around with a 2+, once shield is off. I think it's also worth noting how popular SCE are, and, as a result, how popular Staunch Defendered Fulminators are. Without Scythes, they're very hard to kill (unless your opponent kindly runs them towards/into a Wyldwood).