Let's Chat Sylvaneth

[Nico]

 

Quote

 

I'll aim to add some thoughts soon. In general, two Thundertusks + a Stonelord sounds tough but beatable. Personally I'm not a fan of Alarielle lists in tourney play at the moment (maybe if she comes down in price via GHv2, but right now she's extremely high risk, high reward and far too vulnerable to ranged mortal-wound lists). I was a little shocked at how well Craig's list did at B&G because it just doesn't seem very optimal, but clearly he made it work.

The only AoS list I'm completely at a loss against at the moment is Maxine's 3 Huskards on Thundertusk, 1 Frostlord on Stonehorn, 20 Moonclan Grots x3 with 3 Fanatics, and a Moonclan Shaman. That list seems perfectly designed to dismantle the Sylvaneth. Maybe there's something viable with bravery debuffing via Outcasts etc...haven't looked into that yet.

 

Well done - rather more concise and to the point than my list of points (a sign of how tough the match up is - since inherently Thundertusks love elite opponents and fear Grots and Savage Orruks - expendable bodies.

Maxime's list dismantles just about everything. I've constructed lists to attempt to hard counter it at the South London Legion and they haven't worked. The tension is between going first and trying to take out at least one and possibly 2 Huskhorns in turn one (without using any melee units whatosever) and then risking being double turned back by the Stonelord and 1-2 Thundertusks while the Grots run riot over the objectives; or making his list go first and then backlining everything and hoping that he cannot establish a strong position over the objectives in that first turn (and/or just sit there for one turn and let the clock run down).

Maxime ran over @Bowlzee (Sylvaneth), Ben Savva (Sylvaneth) and @Thanatos Ares . The only promising moments for Sylvaneth were when Wyldwoods were blocking/slowing down the Stonelord.

The one I haven't tried yet is Nagash plus Coven Throne plus Tomb King stuff that Nagash can bring models back to plus a Tomb Herald (5 Extra Wounds to Mega Clown). Basically, he will not be able to kill Nagash with snowballs fast enough (4+ Ward, 6s bouncing back mortals AND a 6+ Death save); and he will heal back reliably from Grots. Eventually you get Nagash into Beguile range of the Stonelord and roll a 10 on 3 D6 (with a reroll from the Coven Throne if necessary) - then charge in Nagash. Even this was extreme theory hammer (if the Stonelord does make it into Nagash he will die almost as easily as Alarielle). However, this is such a contrived list that it wouldn't be much use against other armies (it's entirely dependent on the opponent picking the wrong target).

Quote

You need to kill the Grots with shooting and then the Fanatics die with them. Spend the first turn clearing them out or you'll never get a charge off.

This isn't as easy as it sounds. Banner one puts them on a 4+ save vs shooting and banner 2 puts them on effective bravery 7 vs shooting (while Luberators are on Bravery 6). On some Battleplans it is the answer where model count is vital, but it's disheartening in the extreme to waste Kurnoth Hunter pew pew or definition of reliability 3+, 3+, -1, D6 pew pew from an Ancient on Grots (and watch it bounce off some of the time).

Almost anything you put within range of the Grots is going to be in effective range of the Thundertusks.

 

- like my poor 6 wound Runemaster who made the mistake of sitting 3" inches off the backline instead of 2" and got snowball to the face, turn one.

Quote

This matchup is a big part of why I am taking the list I am at the moment; the Sisters of the Thorn are such a good equaliser for Destruction. 

It is good, but it's adding another huge dice roll on top of mystic shield every turn. You can use Throne of Vines to build a reliable mystic shield caster, but you cannot do so with Sisters of the Thorn. It's also dependent on whether the opponent has read the FAQ, how fluffy they are and how much they like dat chopping. While it's still useful to have an enemy unit standing around doing nothing and locking them in with Household, it's not as brutal as watching them kill themselves. Also, if you were Max, you would do only (say) 3 attacks with the -2 rend weapon of the Stonelord, knowing that if one or 2 get in, the Dryads are losing 3-6 models and loving that Battleshock test, whereas the maximum bounce back to the Stonelord is only going to be 3 mortal wounds - halving to 2 mortal wounds (followed by possible double turn and BCR showing you the meaning of reliable healing).

Another thing that scare me as a Sylvaneth player is enemy unbinders. Imagine if Arkhan (who doesn't cost that much) YOLOs himself forward 16 plus 3.5 inches in the vague direction of your pack of Wizards - then he's locking down two of your key spells with +2 to unbind (which is colossal) - even if you kill him that turn you may have lost Regrowth and Mystic Shield or Mystic Shield and Shield of Thorns. Nagash is literally a hard counter to Sylvaneth (especially with a Tomb Herald and some chaff to keep pesky Durthu away).

Quote

With uncomped sylvaneth wyldwoods these can also be used to block lanes of advance for the monsters. 

You can still create a headache for the Stonelord with a 2-Wood in a line, especially with a building or something else in the middle of the table. Some Sylvaneth players (particularly @Bowlzee) are increasingly forgoing the chance of the double turn for the opportunity to carpet the table with Wyldwoods in turn one (I think of the regulars have mentioned this above).

Quote

Positioning your cheaper units to stop them killing the things that can kill them first, essentially blunting the charge. Dryads and tree revenants will be the guys for this job. 

 

Yup! Dryads in blocks of 20 (so they fit more readily into Wyldwoods) are ideal for the job!

 

Quote

When you deploy don't be afraid to baseline everything. Distance is a big deal. 

This is the second best piece of advice I can think of after read the FAQs on set up and movement on page 2 of the FAQ. There's no magnet on the 12 inch line. It's amazing to me how many people deploy on the 12 inch line when they shouldn't do so.

See the game here entitled Game 3 - The AoS Question you never want to hear:

 

Spoiler

"Is that [Arachnorok] on the 12 inch line?"

 

Quote

When I played Donal I deployed super defensively, baselining everything. I had so few units that I felt screening wasn't an option as it would mean I can't compete on the scenario if I lost what few units I had. 

The trouble was he had less drops (due to formation) and forced me to go first. 

What I should've done on that situation is summon 2 woods and cast mystic shield and inspiring presence then hand back to him

Good advice. You can really throw people off by baselining everything and just doing the defensive buffs like this. Against slow armies, you mioght even be able to have them slog towards you for two turns before potentially double turning them into oblivion. No such luck vs Mixed BCR, but it's still the right move sometimes. Just be aware that some large base units (Alarielle take a bow) are vulnerable to triple Husktusk even if they are baselined. You might want to keep her in the Hidden Enclaves (although this means that you lose all her spells for at least one turn).

Obviously you need to have a way of pulling the score back on certain battleplans where you score in battleround one, but it's perfect for Escalation (don't score battleround one); Gifts from the Heavens (don't score battleround one) and Blood & Glory (cannot autowin until Battleround 3 from memory).

 

 

[Forestreveries]

10 minutes ago, Nico said:

You can still create a headache for the Stonelord with a 2-Wood in a line

By uncomped I mean allowed to summon more than one. 

[Nico]

Quote

By uncomped I mean allowed to summon more than one. 

I see (you mean each Wyldwood = 1 Citadel Wood). Which events are doing that? I don't understand the level of Sylvaneth-bashing when Destruction are so strong at the moment.

@Bowlzee and I need to remind Mo kindly to update Clash Comp v2.2 regarding Wyldwoods.  

[kozokus]

2 hours ago, Nico said:

I don't understand the level of Sylvaneth-bashing when Destruction are so strong at the moment.

TO are usually poor at balancing the game and often follow the whinings of a few player that have lost vs X. Some events in my area simply forbid Forgeworld creation for "balance reasons".... well it is not like if your Tamurkhan Horde is gonna break the dancefloor.

[Nico]

Quote

TO are usually poor at balancing the game and often follow the whinings of a few player that have lost vs X. Some events in my area simply forbid Forgeworld creation for "balance reasons".... well it is not like if your Tamurkhan Horde is gonna break the dancefloor.

But do allow Battlebrew Stonelords.

So that's basically a colossal buff to Stormcast who don't need it. No Sayl, no Destruction monsters, no Legion artillery and Fireglaives.

Of course it also turns away players who have these forces from what is meant to be an inclusive community.

[Aezeal]

How high is the damage output on these destruction monsters precisely (and in comparision to our Durthu and Allariele or an equal points of hunters with swords.

[Forestreveries]

How high is the damage output on these destruction monsters precisely (and in comparision to our Durthu and Allariele or an equal points of hunters with swords.

I played against a Huskard in a formation that allows him and the mournfang to do a mortal wound in addition to the damage specified.

Combined with the command trait for +1 to wound rolls and 2 swigs of battlebrew, all the attacks hit and wound on 2's and any 3+ to wound does a mortal wound on top.

Our normal solution to abilities like this is to stack -1 to hits against them. This doesn't work against this as it's the wound rolls not the hit rolls.

I believe you can also add 1 damage to the weapon profiles on a Huskard or Frostlord, though whether that's from a formation or artefacts I'm not sure actually. Don't think you can have both those setups on the same guy but I could be wrong!

I'm sure Nico will set us straight.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

[Forestreveries]

Short answer, it's pretty horrific.


(And p.s you don't want to take Hunters with swords, they're just flat out worse than scythes imo)


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

[Aezeal]

7 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

Short answer, it's pretty horrific.


(And p.s you don't want to take Hunters with swords, they're just flat out worse than scythes imo)


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Maths says differently. Maybe not against these big monsters but against everything with a save of 3+ or worse.

[scrubyandwells]

7 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

Short answer, it's pretty horrific.


(And p.s you don't want to take Hunters with swords, they're just flat out worse than scythes imo)


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

You may have said and I missed it: Why do you think the greatswords are definitely worse than scythes? I know we've discussed it before in the thread, but curious your take on it. The math on the greatswords is better against low-save units. Is it mainly that you find you're always facing units with an excellent save, or the 1" reach is highly limiting...?

[Forestreveries]

2" reach and Rend 2 .


The 2" is so important not only for attacking across the other models in the unit, but because of the Tanglethorn thicket.

That's where you can throw your math out the window.

Mathhammer is all well and good until you put it on the table.

Also there are a fair few things that ignore Rend -1.

For the record, I have played with both, and the Swords just underwhelmed me.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

[scrubyandwells]

4 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

2" reach and Rend 2 .


The 2" is so important not only for attacking across the other models in the unit, but because of the Tanglethorn thicket.

That's where you can throw your math out the window.

Mathhammer is all well and good until you put it on the table.

Also there are a fair few things that ignore Rend -1.

For the record, I have played with both, and the Swords just underwhelmed me.


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Gotcha, thanks for the details. Going to playtest with greatswords more but yeah I can definitely see the points in favor of sticking with scythes and greatbows.

[Forestreveries]

Gotcha, thanks for the details. Going to playtest with greatswords more but yeah I can definitely see the points in favor of sticking with scythes and greatbows.

I leave the D3 vs 2 Damage out of the argument on purpose, you could argue that one all day.

If the scythes were 2" reach and d3 damage
Rend -1 ...Then there would be a discussion

If the scythes were 1" reach d3 damage Rend -2 ... then there would be a discussion

As it is I think they pip it for me every time.


If TO's allowed you to just list

"3 Kurnoth Hunters 180"

Without specifying the loadout then I would probably have built some sword guys.

Think maybe I'd rather have the swords vs bonesplittas or pestilens or something like that... but as it is...

If you like the Sword models better and want to run them for that reason then tbf, you're not losing much, it's not like they're awful by any means! Haha



Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

[Stevewren]

Thanks for the replies guys - I'm glad its not just me. I have had a lot of the guys in my gaming group banging on about the Durthu and Allarielle lists as they had played Craig at B&G and were telling me how good it was and that I was just getting it wrong, whereas I was surprised how well it did as I know Allarielle tends to die fast and you have so few units. As ever the problem for me is do I take the Allarielle list to Heat 1 as its a strong painting contender, or do I take a spammy Hunter list which might win more games but looks bland for painting. Or do I just take an Archaon list...?

Also I'm not sure about the woods helping to block things too - when I play it I'll always let my opponent come through a wood with a model, no matter the ruling on moving trees, stumps etc. The GW trees are teeny weeny. No way they'd be stopping a Stonehorn! 

This is a personal thing though, so no need to get into the tree movement stuff again! 

[Mirage8112]

@Stevewren Some good answers so far. I'll just add something a bit out of the ordinary. it's a different perspective, buts've found it to be a very worthwhile strategy against this type of opponent. 

I'll echo pretty much everything everybody has said so far about the models you're taking. Beast claw raiders are excellent at destroying units that have a high wound count, (either by virtue of being a big monster, or because the unit has lots of bodies.) Huskhorns are pretty much made eat Hunters and Alarielle, and our -1 to hit in forests does very little against them.

One thing that beast claw raiders are very bad at, (oddly enough) is chewing through small units. Well, to be specific, their damage is too good. So the following list it a way to exploit that. It's not set in stone, and it wouldn't work in all cases, but you might be able to build a sideboard around it. There's some room to tailor so you can sub out a couple units based on what you have or what you think you need. Artifacts are mostly up to you :

Leaders
Treelord Ancient (300)

Units
Spite-Revenants x 5 (100)
Spite-Revenants x 5 (100)
Spite-Revenants x 5 (100)
Spite-Revenants x 5 (100)
Tree-Revenants x 5 (100)
Tree-Revenants x 5 (100)
Tree-Revenants x 5 (100)
Tree-Revenants x 5 (100)
Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180)
- Scythes
Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180)
- Scythes
Kurnoth Hunters x 6 (360)
- Greatbows

Behemoths

War Machines

Battalions
Dreadwood Wargrove (100)
Outcasts (40)

Scenery

Total: 1960/2000

This list will play very differently from our normal fare. Your aiming to start weak and finish strong. If you're playing border war, you'll deploy your free forest between the back objective and one of the side objectives, putting you within range of each. 

Everything can be deployed in one go, but your actually hoping to let the beastclaw player go first. The reasoning for this is that it prevents the double turn, but the way you'll set up will ensure that he can't really take out anything valuable in the first go. set up will be as follows:

First layer is the 2 unit of Tree-revenants, 12" from the center objective. Then 1 unit of 3 hunters with scythes about 2 inches behind them. Then the TLA behind the hunters and 2 units of spites behind the TLA, 7" from the revenants. With 6 bow hunters behind that. 

The idea here is basically to bait a charge. With the revenants providing the first layer of chaff, he'll be forced to clear them before he can get to the hunters behind him. 2 units means he can't just clear it without committing both monsters, and still he'll be vulnerable to a countercharge. He won't be able to hold back and shoot, since dreadwood stratagems limit all shooting weapons to 12" in the first turn. 

So he'll have a choice to make. He won't be able to go around, because the table edge will protect 1 flank, and the second revenant/hunter/spite group will protect your other flank and hold the back objective. 

If he does charge, the best he'll able to do is take out both groups of revenants (but it's probable he'll only be able to take out 1 group without committing 2 huskhorns), from whatever cluster he goes after. That will open him up to a counter-charge from the hunters. 3 scythe hunters do, on average about 8 wounds before saves (5 at -1). If he doesn't charge, then you can just pew-pew him with your bow hunters from a safe distance and charge him yourself.

Then in your turn, between the outcast damage (2d6 minus bravery in mortal wounds), scythe damage, shooting damage from the TLA, whatever revenants are left and hunters in the back with bows. In theory you should be able to drop 1- 1.5 of his monsters before he get's another phase. 

If you get a double turn, rinse/repeat. 

In this strategy you'll probably be giving up objective points early, but hopefully you can exploit this layering mechanic to take out his heavy hitters while only losing chaff yourself.

You can't stop him from killing your units. But you can feed him units you don't mind losing before committing you're damage dealers to combat.





 

[Mirage8112]

1 hour ago, scrubyandwells said:

Gotcha, thanks for the details. Going to playtest with greatswords more but yeah I can definitely see the points in favor of sticking with scythes and greatbows.

FWIW In the game I played this weekend, my 3 greatsword hunters outperformed my 3 scythe hunters (I took both, one for clearing lower armor save units and one for clearing high armor save units). I found positioning when expecting to take a charge meant the 1" pile in wasn't an issue (there were only 3 bases after all) and since the enemy had a save of only 5+ the extra 3 attacks made the difference between my opponent losing enough models to fail battleshock to have the unit flee and sticking around to attack the next round. 

There are good reasons to take both, but it depends on the rest of your list and playstyle. With 4 attacks as opposed to 3, a unit of great swords are like having an extra hunter in combat if the enemy doesn't have a high armor save. 

[Mirage8112]

Sneak peeks for Tzneetch arcanites dropped today (from GW no less). Besides 27" unbinds, an AWESOME "choose your dice roll" mechanic they revealed this little gem below.

With similar hit/wound rolls as hunters a 24 inch range, move 16" AND fly, these guys looks like a very attractive answer to our bow hunters. Add to that D3 mortal wounds on a hit roll of 5+ (next to a hero). With ability to change that into an auto hit and auto 3 mortal wounds if they like no less. I'm also guessing (if the previous releases are an indication) 180pts. 

[MidasKiss]

Only seeing what they have shown us it does look like they might give us a run for our money, but the games should be really fun.

Seems like they can dish out the mortal wounds which we are weak to, but they don't have much save or mortal wound protection either so we can hit them nicely back to!

They will have to position their wizards carefully or they will activate the woods so often, but if they get aggressive the 27" dispell could be nasty.

I can't wait, I'm very tempted to build a little force of them for narrative games one the daemon's get their release.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Mirage8112]

21 minutes ago, MidasKiss said:

Only seeing what they have shown us it does look like they might give us a run for our money, but the games should be really fun.

Seems like they can dish out the mortal wounds which we are weak to, but they don't have much save or mortal wound protection either so we can hit them nicely back to!

They will have to position their wizards carefully or they will activate the woods so often, but if they get aggressive the 27" dispell could be nasty.

I can't wait, I'm very tempted to build a little force of them for narrative games one the daemon's get their release.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

by the looks of the warscrolls they've released and also whats implied by some of the wording, the Tzangor shamans casters can ride disks. It also combines and tzneetch keywords models across arcanites, deamons and slaves to darkness. That's pretty crazy . 

[Nico]

Quote

Our normal solution to abilities like this is to stack -1 to hits against them. This doesn't work against this as it's the wound rolls not the hit rolls.

It also doesn't work because they will just double chug battlebrew and that will counter all bar a pair of stomps going off plus Briarsheath/Dryads.

Quote

I believe you can also add 1 damage to the weapon profiles on a Huskard or Frostlord, though whether that's from a formation or artefacts I'm not sure actually. Don't think you can have both those setups on the same guy but I could be wrong!

I'm sure Nico will set us straight. 

The Battalion is the one that Russ Veal used (Eurlbad). On paper it's insane.

It does mean that the Huskhorn actually does more damage than the Stonelord (but has a 4+ save which is a HUGE difference). I think you do mortal wounds on all the attacks on a 6+ to wound (which becomes a 4+ as you say). On top of that the (regular not mortal) damage is increased by one for all the weapons, so 4 damage on the Horns etc.. It's more damage than Gordrakk overall. 

It's also clever as people might focus on the Stonelord (as its reputation is worse) and you could even put a Talisman of Protection on it and mystic shield to make it megatank). Meanwhile the Huskhorn is the real beatstick.

However, the Eurlbad also forces you to take 400 points minimum of unmitigated garbage (Mournfang) - which are hopeless in a game where model count is so important (you would be better off taking Khorgoraths if you wanted tough bodies onto objectives - they are 10 points per wound from memory).

Scythes

It's not about the averages. It's not even about the range (which is a big factor), it's the fact that -2 rend is so valuable and so rare; and that it counters some of the stacked defences that are increasingly common now.

Consider a Sylvaneth vs Sylvaneth match up. Only spells and -2 rend can damage an Ancient with Gnarled Warrior and Oaken Armour. -1 rend could slap him all day and do nothing as he heals back faster. The Swords are going to do much better against the Durthu next door with oaken armour mystic shield (so a 1+ becomes a 2+ rerolling ones). That's before you throw in Shield of Thorns and likely Tzeentch reroll saves as well! 

Ditto a Hunter vs Hunter fight off. In cover the swords will take the saves down to 4+ rerollable (so 75% bounce off), while the Scythes take them down to 5+ rerollable (a massive difference).

Seraphon might make a comeback with all their anti-Daemon trickery to respond to Sylvaneth, which will be yet more ignoring -1 rend.

Quote

If TO's allowed you to just list

"3 Kurnoth Hunters 180"

Without specifying the loadout then I would probably have built some sword guys.

Tournaments where you can would be really good so you can switch between pew pew and scythes as well. I need to check what the Heat One rules are.

 

[Nico]

Quote

Thanks for the replies guys - I'm glad its not just me. I have had a lot of the guys in my gaming group banging on about the Durthu and Allarielle lists as they had played Craig at B&G and were telling me how good it was and that I was just getting it wrong, whereas I was surprised how well it did as I know Allarielle tends to die fast and you have so few units. As ever the problem for me is do I take the Allarielle list to Heat 1 as its a strong painting contender, or do I take a spammy Hunter list which might win more games but looks bland for painting.

 

If I were you (since you're an awesome painter) - I would take an Alarielle list. Maybe drop Drycha and replace her with more Hunters or Dryads or an extra wizard.

Alternatively take this list (I wrote a long time ago with my notes about it. It's in no way original or optimised):

 

Gnarlroot Wargrove 80

Household 20

Treelord Ancient (Briarsheath, Regrowth, Verdurous Harmony, level 2 wizard) 300

Branchwych (Verdant Blessing, Verdurous Harmony, Ranu's Lamentiri, level 2 wizard) 100

5 Tree Revenants 100

600

Alarielle (General, Throne of Vines, Verdurous Harmony) 620

Sisters of the Thorn 220

5 Tree Revenants 100

5 Tree Revenants 100

1640

3 Kurnoth Hunters (Bows) 180

3 Kurnoth Hunters (Bows) 180

460

2000

 

Use against balanced lists. Branchwych puts a Wood near as many enemy units as possible. Ancient wakes that wood up for mortal wounds. Sisters buff Alarielle. Alarielle moves across either through the woods or just using movement 16. Treelord Ancient, Dryads and Hunters set up near the enemy. Hunters, Ancient and Alarielle snipe. Possible charges with Hunters with Scythes and/or Alarielle plus Ancient - target picking essential. Position Alarielle near the Ancient and behind the Dryads in case she fails her charge (she can fly over them if she fails that charge). One goes into an enemy hammer unit, other into an enemy soft unit. Activate against the heavier hitting hammer unit first before it can damage you.

Hope to win the double turn and then use Alarielle's command ability and spam additional woods and spam spells to trigger the woods. If they win the double turn, then they charge into woods and lose some models, hopefully weather the storm, then spam spells when they are in the wood, heal up, bring back models and then punch back.

Very low model count. Very susceptible to mortal wounds.

However, it is a Single Drop Army, which is very important if you're going to be using a mega beat stick like Alarielle. It was fundamental to my games with Gordrakk that I could almost always decide who went first (3 drop army).

Quote

Or do I just take an Archaon list...? 

Unless you mean little Archaon - just don't do it.

Quote

Also I'm not sure about the woods helping to block things too - when I play it I'll always let my opponent come through a wood with a model, no matter the ruling on moving trees, stumps etc. The GW trees are teeny weeny. No way they'd be stopping a Stonehorn! 

I used to play it this way (I was there at the scene of the original #Treegate at Firestorm Fours 2015). I completely sympathise Steve - but your view is not the consensus and not rules as written either. People will stop you when you try to move Alarielle land over a stump of a Wyldwood and you'll have to measure to see whether you can get an Ancient through it as well. 

Naturally, you should reciprocate by blocking their monsters too.

It's not how I would have ruled it, but it will be how it is played at Heat One unless you can agree otherwise with all of your opponents individually.

As ever, let's please not restart the debate over the Wyldwood trunks here, it's gone the other way and we have to live with it.

[Nico]

Quote

One thing that beast claw raiders are very bad at, (oddly enough) is chewing through small units. Well, to be specific, their damage is too good. So the following list it a way to exploit that. It's not set in stone, and it wouldn't work in all cases, but you might be able to build a sideboard around it. There's some room to tailor so you can sub out a couple units based on what you have or what you think you need. Artifacts are mostly up to you :

This is exactly right and very interesting.

I still haven't gotten around to cranking the maths on the 21? units of Prosecutor Javelins list (with a hero and 3 80 point Battleline Units) this actually fits as they are only 80 points each) against Maxime's list. The basic point is that with decent positioning, the Stonelord can only eat one unit per turn and each Thundertusk can only do so as well (assuming it rolls a 2+).

You lose entire units, so there aren't any lost models to battleshock. Meanwhile you can lob very nasty Javelins at the Husktusks (2 damage per hit) (you must make sure that entire Husktusks die each turn, you cannot leave one on 2 wounds left etc.).

[Mirage8112]

50 minutes ago, Nico said:

Scythes

It's not about the averages. It's not even about the range (which is a big factor), it's the fact that -2 rend is so valuable and so rare; and that it counters some of the stacked defences that are increasingly common now.

Consider a Sylvaneth vs Sylvaneth match up. Only spells and -2 rend can damage an Ancient with Gnarled Warrior and Oaken Armour. -1 rend could slap him all day and do nothing as he heals back faster. The Swords are going to do much better against the Durthu next door with oaken armour mystic shield (so a 1+ becomes a 2+ rerolling ones). That's before you throw in Shield of Thorns and likely Tzeentch reroll saves as well! 

Ditto a Hunter vs Hunter fight off. In cover the swords will take the saves down to 4+ rerollable (so 75% bounce off), while the Scythes take them down to 5+ rerollable (a massive difference).

Seraphon might make a comeback with all their anti-Daemon trickery to respond to Sylvaneth, which will be yet more ignoring -1 rend.

There are some units in the game that ignore -1 rend. But it isn't an overwhelming  amount of units. There are plenty of instances where the extra attacks by sword hunters beat out the additional -1 rend. Scythe hunters in 3's have a more specialized role. They are basically tin-can openers, which is awesome if your fighting an army full of tin cans. But if your fighting a high-body count (or high wound count) army, Sword hunters outperform Scythe hunters. 

Consider also there's plenty of ways units that can stack -1 to hit (huskhorn for for example), making those units more common than units that ignore -1 rend. Scythes need a large amount attacks to get through, so the D3 damage can even out. More attacks with guaranteed damage means that when enemy units are stacking hit debuffs, you can actually count on the damage hunters will produce. Sure, over the course of the game it evens out. But some rounds are "make or break" where you need that damage to get through so the monster can't smash you next turn, and less attacks from Scythes means there's a greater chance their attacks won't get through or if they do, they'll do less damage.  Sometimes good generalship comes down to controlling variables and putting tools where they're the most useful.

To be fair, often I'll take a unit of both. You don't want a unit of Greatsword hunters fighting shielded skullcrushers or varagaurd just like you don't want scythe hunters fighting hordes of zombies (no save), ogres (weak save), any other high-body/wound count low-save unit. Say for example you need to clear a unit of Arrowboyz so they can't shoot next turn, those extra three attacks (vs. a 6+ save to boot) from sword hunters means fewer archers left to shoot next turn. Scythes are great but they're not exactly a "one size fits all" load out. 

If you HAD to choose between the two, it really depends on the rest of your list and your play style. 

[Mirage8112]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

This is exactly right and very interesting.

I still haven't gotten around to cranking the maths on the 21? units of Prosecutor Javelins list (with a hero and 3 80 point Battleline Units) this actually fits as they are only 80 points each) against Maxime's list. The basic point is that with decent positioning, the Stonelord can only eat one unit per turn and each Thundertusk can only do so as well (assuming it rolls a 2+).

You lose entire units, so there aren't any lost models to battleshock. Meanwhile you can lob very nasty Javelins at the Husktusks (2 damage per hit) (you must make sure that entire Husktusks die each turn, you cannot leave one on 2 wounds left etc.).

The problem with a list like this is that it doesn't have any crumple zones. Every time the army loses a unit, it loses damage output. It also doesn't have any real way to dial back frost wreathed ice. Space for this type of formation is tight, so there's no way they can get 21 units in range all at the same time, maybe 4, and with 2 husktusks each turn, about 3-4 units (1 from shooting one from CC per husktusk) are completely wiped out, with possibility of putting 2-3 wounds on a 1-2 more units possibly forcing battleshock. And that doesn't even account for the rest of the BCR army who will be holding objectives and making a play for the backfield flank. Revenants have that awesome way pipe ability that they can use to redeploy even if there is only one forest on the board, so being flanked isn't a big threat. 

Sylvaneth also have forests they can use with terrain to help block approach and funnel movement, but Stormcast don't really have anything like that. I think the approach could work with Stormcast (small units meant to take the big damage so heavy hitters can come in and do the work next turn) but it would need to be more diverse. Maybe 3-4 chaff units with Protectors behind them, backed by Javelins and a Knight Azyros or two. Can Stormcast do anything to reduce the frost-wreathed ice range or damage?

[Forestreveries]

6 hours ago, Nico said:

It also doesn't work because they will just double chug battlebrew and that will counter all bar a pair of stomps going off plus Briarsheath/Dryads.

That would still pull the "exploding" ability back to 5's where it could've been 3's was my point.