Let's Chat Sylvaneth

[DantePQ]

I think Dreadwood is extra viable in 2k because it gives you all the bonuses but tax is cheaper with Spites being Batteline. Especially that you can take some bodies in it or extra hero/heroes. I will test out Dreadwood with Drycha as well, as she is supreme horde killers (especially with Dwellers) 

[Aezeal]

7 hours ago, DantePQ said:

I think Dreadwood is extra viable in 2k because it gives you all the bonuses but tax is cheaper with Spites being Batteline. Especially that you can take some bodies in it or extra hero/heroes. I will test out Dreadwood with Drycha as well, as she is supreme horde killers (especially with Dwellers) 

Yeah it gives a nearly direct damage advantage with the alpha strike and to me it's the only battalion that seems possibly worth it.. I'm 20 spites short to play it though... so I'll just try my battalion-less monster mash. Alarielles healing ability is sort of an battalion bonus by itself and possibly worth more than many others

[Asu]

Hey guys,

I'm just wondering about Drycha and the FAQ.

Will you keep on playing Squirmlings or some of you plan to play Flitterfuries from now ? 

Personaly, I think Flitterfuries is safer with the range and can do pretty decent damage to a lot of units, but with GH17 and the probable apparition of big blocks, I don't really know.

[BloodTithe]

1 hour ago, Asu said:

Hey guys,

I'm just wondering about Drycha and the FAQ.

Will you keep on playing Squirmlings or some of you plan to play Flitterfuries from now ? 

Personaly, I think Flitterfuries is safer with the range and can do pretty decent damage to a lot of units, but with GH17 and the probable apparition of big blocks, I don't really know.

Personally I still like squirmlings. It's so brutal against hordes.....

[Nico]

The advantage of Flotterfuries is that she can pop onto the table and be comfortably in range.

[Aezeal]

27 minutes ago, Nico said:

The advantage of Flotterfuries is that she can pop onto the table and be comfortably in range.

Yeah but damage doesn't seem that impressive, on average less than 2 per unit.

[Cerve]

1 hour ago, Aezeal said:

Yeah but damage doesn't seem that impressive, on average less than 2 per unit.

Depends. Against monsters and single models is pretty good, expecially if you consider other ranged damages from your army (Kurnoth archers, Treemen shots, spells etc).

[Aezeal]

4 minutes ago, Cerve said:

Depends. Against monsters and single models is pretty good, expecially if you consider other ranged damages from your army (Kurnoth archers, Treemen shots, spells etc).

If the opponent has a lot of stuff together it'll be nice, that is true... squirmling however is about 7 MW on even a unit of 10 models.... that would mean you can only beat it by hitting 4+ units.. and about 14 wounds on 20 models.. which you probably won't ever beat with flitters.

[Asu]

Yeah, of course squirmling is globaly better in terms of damage (except on heroes and monsters) but flitterfuries is easier and safer to play.

I mean, Drycha is less exposed with the better range.

[Nico]

The problem is models within 10" so unless you roll a 6 for navigate Realm roots you will not roll for many models.

[choppa6189]

Used this list yesterday and it worked very well by having a lot of drops I can outdeploy most other armies as I'm not keen on spending so much on battalions now. I basically dropped 4 waywatchers and 2 tree revs first before committing main army.

Tree Lord ancient- gnarled warrior, Oaken armour, regrowth

Drycha- squirmlings, verdant blessing

4x 1 waywatchers

2x5 tree revenants

20 dryads

2x3 Kurnoth hunters bows

1x3 Kurnoth hunters scythes

Even with point increase the hunters were still amazing I might drop 2 waywatchers to add something else though.

[Lanoss]

Havnt played with Drycha much but I tell ya, last game she was next to useless

The two turns she lasted she managed to do 2 mortal wounds and fob all her attacks

Silver lining is it took 8 units of judicators to put her down by turn 2...

 

Is there a better use out there for her? I feel I'd get SO much more out of a (cheaper) Treelord

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Freejack02]

4 minutes ago, Lanoss said:

Havnt played with Drycha much but I tell ya, last game she was next to useless

The two turns she lasted she managed to do 2 mortal wounds and fob all her attacks

Silver lining is it took 8 units of judicators to put her down by turn 2...

8 units of Judicators?!? I mean, what doesn't die to that? 

[Aezeal]

4 hours ago, Lanoss said:

Havnt played with Drycha much but I tell ya, last game she was next to useless

The two turns she lasted she managed to do 2 mortal wounds and fob all her attacks

Silver lining is it took 8 units of judicators to put her down by turn 2...

 

Is there a better use out there for her? I feel I'd get SO much more out of a (cheaper) Treelord

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

2 turns those Judicator didn't shoot anything else... You should've engaged them by then.

[SimonL]

Drycha has been in my army since I started playing Sylvaneth. And usually I played flutterflies.

 

played her at the weekend and plonked her right in the middle of the table and let loose. I managed to get a hit on all but 2 of my mates units. He then doubled his efforts to kill her. Her flutterflies killed two hero's and a whole unit while weakening a lot of other units. She got killed but by Turn 5 all his army was killed. 

 

I doubt she will stay at 280 points though.

[vesco]

just a simple question flutterflies ans Squirmlings are abilities so both can be used when you activate drycha, right?
on my local store they all use 1500 so i was wondering if you guys can help me building up a 1500 
so far i have available:
alarielle
tla
branchwych
~30 dryads
10 tr
3kh with bows
3kh with scythe
3kh with i don't know yet which weapon

 

[Freejack02]

If you read her warscroll, it states squirms/flies are an either/or decision. You must choose which she is equipped with ( I would personally model her with both ).

[vesco]

42 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

If you read her warscroll, it states squirms/flies are an either/or decision. You must choose which she is equipped with ( I would personally model her with both ).

oh thank you didn't read that

[Aezeal]

15 hours ago, Nico said:

The problem is models within 10" so unless you roll a 6 for navigate Realm roots you will not roll for many models.

Usually I just move her up, she should be in range in turn 2. If possible she's joined by some dryads or moves to the least defended flank and goes at it alone. Shooting, then charging with her can really hurt some units.

[Mirage8112]

So,

I've spent the last few days really looking over the changes in the GHB2017 trying to come to grips with how everything has changed, and trying to get a feel for what I'll call "the architecture" of the game. Basically the internal structure of how games work, how armies function, and how we win lose or draw based on various conditions of play. Here are some broad conclusions:

Balance  

I never had any major problem with what was essentially "open play" before the first GHB arrived. When the first book dropped I had the impression that the game was very playable, but the that the book and a few of the concepts felt incomplete; "Rushed" wouldn't be an inappropriate word. It's clear to me now that my original impression was correct, and that this edition of the General's Handbook is far more carefully constructed. I think it would be wise to at least consider the first incarnation of the handbook as a "beta" trial and this new handbook is actually the first complete competitive ruleset we've had for AoS. 

Looking over the broad points adjustments and FAQ's, it seems as if the game designers are really trying to ensure that every available tool that an army has access to has an application on the tabletop relevant to a specific battleplan; with the intention that if you are going to play several battleplans with a single list, it sure as hell better be a balanced list otherwise it will be unlikely to perform well (if your intention is to compete for objective control). It also appears that if your intention is to ignore objectives, and win game through sheer brute force by tabling your opponent, your tools for doing so have been greatly diminished. Kunnin' Rukk is still dangerous, but seems to me to have lost a significant amount of teeth. Likewise Stonehorns are nowhere near as survivable as they have been, and skyfire spam is no longer really feasible. On the flip side, armies that didn't have a new battletome received the tools they needed to play competitively through new allegiance abilities and artifacts, with the ability to ally in necessary key pieces to fill holes in role selection. 

Compared to 40K and WFHB, top tier tournament lists have already been more diverse than we're used to seeing. Rather than 2-3 army lists repeatedly showing up in top 5's we've been seeing a fairly even mix from the Grand Alliances (with death trailing), and even within those grand alliances we'll sometime see 2-3 different builds making the top tables. I actually think some of the worst offenders have been made slightly less dominant, @Nico's observation about the relative reduction of "burst damage" available is spot on, and now through FAQ's we've seen a general re-tweaking of survivability, utility and damage output. 

Sylvaneth 

In regard to the Sylvaneth we have taken a few nerfs. Hunters and battalions costs specifically among the worst. 

However, comparatively, those two changes are relatively small. In my post about 7-8 pages back I suggested that hunters would not go up to 220pts, citing internal balance as the reason. Basically, increasing Hunter costs above 200 without a subsequent reduction elsewhere in codex would completely upend our ability to build competitive lists since we have so little access to anything with reasonable damage output relative to cost. Reviewing the changes in the book and looking the their effects game-wide, I actually believes we've shifted our power level laterally. That is to say, the only build variant we've seen that's been truly "nerfed" is gnarlroot + hunter spam. Army-wise however, we've actually fared much better than other contenders we so often struggle with (Disciples of Tz, Beastclaw raiders, Bonesplittaz ect). Because of that, I actually think are in a better spot competitively than we were in a  week ago. Hunter nerfs not withstanding. 

List building with Sylvaneth with the GHB2017

Looking at the battelplans and actually reading the stipulations in victory conditions, I do not believe hordes are absolutely mandatory when building lists in GHB2017. It seems objective control makes hordes attractive, since they take precedence over any other units under 20 models strong. But again, that only if you can get that horde within 6" of an objective. With our ability to deep strike into the woods and our superior mobility, it shouldn't be too terribly hard to shoot down onto an objective, and teleport across the battlefield to claim another objective (since some scenarios allow to to still "control" an objective even if the capturing unit moves away) or to simply prevent the enemy horde from coming within 6" of said objective. 19 dryads and a treelord may not be enough to take an objective currently held by a horde, but will certainly be able to get to the objective first and prevent the enemy from capturing it for several turns if not the whole game. 

That being said, building lists with hordes will make some things easier, depending on play style and the type of list you want to play. There should be a few things you should consider when building a completive Sylvaneth list. I would suggest, that if you do not plan on building a list with hordes you consider paying the extra points for one of the meta-battalions to ensure a one-drop army. This will allow you to get to objectives first and set up defense bunkers to prevent the enemy hordes from getting within 6" before you can. If you do plan on building a list with hordes, one drop is not as mandatory, but might still be useful depending on your strategy.  You should definitely consider adding at least 1-2 Treelords, TLA's, Durthu's, Drycha or Alarielle in your lists, as Behemoths have better points efficiency than they used to, and are able to capture objectives in at least 1 scenario. 

The one type of list I don't think is viable for us is the brute force list. It is becoming more and more apparent that the designers are pushing gameplay and list design toward objective based victory and away from victory through taking all your opponents models off the board. As such, I do not think the points values allow us to build a list that is capable of putting out the required damage. We are certainly capable of building lists that hit hard in one particular spot, but not the type of "everywhere at once" damage that will be required to take out an entire army and forget about holding objectives. We are now arguably the most resilient, and the most mobile army in the game it will bear keeping our armies design concept in mind when building competitive lists. 

Allies

Wanderers and Stormcast. Not incredibly helpful, but I believe that is the point. Bring too much and the allies become mandatory. Most of what the two armies offer us is either redundant or too spendy to be effective. However, Wanderers do offer us easy access to shooting through (either heros or regular units), and a few utility-specific units (Wildwood Rangers and SotT), while Stormcast offer mostly resilient MSU support and mortal wound generation (both ranged and in CC) with a few utility units (gryph hounds, and hunters) thrown in for good measure. 

Conclusions 

There are still some things in the game that are definite threats to us (ranged mortal wound generation is still a problem, as before) but overall I actually feel our power level has actually improved; provided good choices are made from list building, to in-game tactics. Be prepared to see some new things across the table from you as new (old) armies begin to build more completive lists with better synergy. 

But, all that being said, it's a good time to be in wargaming my friends. 

-F
 

[Mune]

Nice write up, but if I'm not wrong SotT are not wanderers anymore.

[Mirage8112]

3 minutes ago, Mune said:

Nice write up, but if I'm not wrong SotT are not wanderers anymore.

no. They are definitely still wanderers. It's only the legacy stuff that lost it's keywords

[Aezeal]

Yeah our allies don't bring that much but EG has been mentioned already. I agree that the rangers are something to be considered. We have good damage.. but I doubt anything out does these guys in monsterkilling potential (fragile as they are though).

[WABBIT]

But I can still buy legacy stuff under wanderers on Azyr and the points are all upto date. Only Waywatcher scouts are missing.

[WABBIT]

2 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

Yeah our allies don't bring that much but EG has been mentioned already. I agree that the rangers are something to be considered. We have good damage.. but I doubt anything out does these guys in monsterkilling potential (fragile as they are though).

Rangers are still too pricey for what they do but we have little choice if we want to use Wanderer allegiance. Rangers have a weaker save than other Aelven elites and a niche ability that's easy to avoid (monsters move faster) and some armies don't even field monsters. How can Rangers cost the same as Executioners?  They should be 160 pts like Phoenix guard or 140 pts like Storm Vermin who have the same stats and get access to +1 Attack buff.

 Wanderers keep getting given niche/situational abilities which are not easy to use where as everyone else seems to get good solid always usable abilities like 4+ ward save or Mortal wounds on 6's etc.   It's bad enough our war scrolls give us bonuses when we don't move or when we stay in cover as they clash with our allegiance abilities. Wanderers needs a proper overhaul and I fear after this update we won't be getting anything else.