AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[Trevelyan]

On 4/6/2020 at 9:41 PM, Landohammer said:

I'm sorry but the TLA spell is bad. Its really really bad. In competitive play, nobody hangs out near my woods. Like ever.  Especially multiple units. 
. . .

I admittedly don't play gnarlroot. I have found that any kind of magic investment is not a good idea in today's meta. There are a lot of armies that just shut down magic, including Tzeentch, Nagash, Khorne, or any list with Archaon. Besides, if I want my wizards to hit hard, winterleaf is just flat out better and doesn't come with any kind of prequisite for the buff.

This baffles me on both fronts, to the point that I wonder whether they are connected. 

When I play Gnarlroot, I put down forests fairly consistently in places that I want them to be. I have multiple treelords to ensure I have options for my Silent Communion, and use casting buffs to reliably cast Verdant Blessing. Either option lets me place a Wyldwood 1” away from enemy units and Awakening the Wyldwood hits enemy units within 3” of the wood.

In the first turn, you can quite comfortably drop a wood in front of one or more enemy units, cast the spell as a softener and then do your usual teleport and charge. I don’t get to fight every fight against every opponent in range of a wood, but neither does every opponent get to ignore them completely. If you are using woods well then you should get at least some down in places where your opponent doesn’t have the option. Absolute worst case, if you’ve parked units in a wood near an objective then your opponent has to either move in or give you the advantage of charging next turn. And you can comfortably have units in a wood controlling an objective. 

All of which requires that you have the ability to cast spells regularly. I suspect you underestimate how much Gnarlroot brings on that front. Giving the Chalice of Nectar to a TLA is very potent - you get the bonus to any spell you cast or unbind. It makes the above viable combo fairly reliable (TLA to summon a free wood then cast his spell). Combine that with the Vesperal Gem on a TLA warlord to consistently cast Verdurous Harmony on a unit of Hunters and gain the extra d3 command trait heal (for wounded Hunters or other units) and you’ve got a chunk of reliable magic and healing, even in the fact of armies that usually make it much harder. 

But if you don’t play Gnarlroot and don’t like TLAs then I suspect you have far fewer Wyldwoods on the table so don’t have as many engagements near them. Which in turn means that you don’t get value from the spell, etc. It’s not that Awakening the Wood is “really really bad”, just that you don’t play a game with the other moving parts that enable you to benefit from it. 

[The World Tree]

I think that's the point though isn't it - you have to spend so much(in terms of unit selection, spell choice etc.) to get the woods on the table. You also have to successfully cast and not be unbound. That is if they can fit at all. The Awakening has clear benefits after that, but the investment is so high for small reward.

Personally I don't see the value at all. I prefer Dreadwood and aggressive, decisive play. With Alarielle as the fulcrum.

Edited April 12, 2020 by The World Tree

[States]

10 hours ago, The World Tree said:

I think that's the point though isn't it - you have to spend so much(in terms of unit selection, spell choice etc.) to get the woods on the table. You also have to successfully cast and not be unbound. That is if they can fit at all. The Awakening has clear benefits after that, but the investment is so high for small reward.

Personally I don't see the value at all. I prefer Dreadwood and aggressive, decisive play. With Alarielle as the fulcrum.

What list do you run with alarielle and dreadwood?

[The World Tree]

7 hours ago, States said:

What list do you run with alarielle and dreadwood?

Something like;

Alarielle (Throne)
Branchwraith (Regrowth)
Durthu (Ghyrstrike)
Branchwraith (Regrowth)

3 x 5 Spites
2x5 Tree Revs
6 Kurnoths with Scythes
Outcasts
Spiteswarm
Extra CP

Some alternate builds are - subbing out Durthu for Drycha. Subbing out Durthu for 6 Morrsarr (probably the best option).
 

[Alessio]

I'm starting assembling a Sylvaneth army, how many sylvaneth wyldwood do you have on avarage?

Let's say playing 2000p games

How many should I buy? But probably it dipends by my playstyle.

What size do you usually can field in games?( 3,4,5,6 elements wood)

 

[States]

3 hours ago, The World Tree said:

Something like;

Alarielle (Throne)
Branchwraith (Regrowth)
Durthu (Ghyrstrike)
Branchwraith (Regrowth)

3 x 5 Spites
2x5 Tree Revs
6 Kurnoths with Scythes
Outcasts
Spiteswarm
Extra CP

Some alternate builds are - subbing out Durthu for Drycha. Subbing out Durthu for 6 Morrsarr (probably the best option).
 

Ever put in an arch rev instead of one wraith? Get the rerolls on the kurnoths

Edited April 13, 2020 by States
a word

[Landohammer]

On 4/12/2020 at 3:47 AM, Trevelyan said:

This baffles me on both fronts, to the point that I wonder whether they are connected. 

When I play Gnarlroot, I put down forests fairly consistently in places that I want them to be. I have multiple treelords to ensure I have options for my Silent Communion, and use casting buffs to reliably cast Verdant Blessing. Either option lets me place a Wyldwood 1” away from enemy units and Awakening the Wyldwood hits enemy units within 3” of the wood.

In the first turn, you can quite comfortably drop a wood in front of one or more enemy units, cast the spell as a softener and then do your usual teleport and charge. I don’t get to fight every fight against every opponent in range of a wood, but neither does every opponent get to ignore them completely. If you are using woods well then you should get at least some down in places where your opponent doesn’t have the option. Absolute worst case, if you’ve parked units in a wood near an objective then your opponent has to either move in or give you the advantage of charging next turn. And you can comfortably have units in a wood controlling an objective. 

All of which requires that you have the ability to cast spells regularly. I suspect you underestimate how much Gnarlroot brings on that front. Giving the Chalice of Nectar to a TLA is very potent - you get the bonus to any spell you cast or unbind. It makes the above viable combo fairly reliable (TLA to summon a free wood then cast his spell). Combine that with the Vesperal Gem on a TLA warlord to consistently cast Verdurous Harmony on a unit of Hunters and gain the extra d3 command trait heal (for wounded Hunters or other units) and you’ve got a chunk of reliable magic and healing, even in the fact of armies that usually make it much harder. 

But if you don’t play Gnarlroot and don’t like TLAs then I suspect you have far fewer Wyldwoods on the table so don’t have as many engagements near them. Which in turn means that you don’t get value from the spell, etc. It’s not that Awakening the Wood is “really really bad”, just that you don’t play a game with the other moving parts that enable you to benefit from it. 

Chalice of Nectar on a TLA is potent, I agree.  But you are sacrificing access to Winterleaf and Dreadwood to get your potent TLA. I think the cost is just too high.

 I understood this conversation to be "Gnarlroot can make TLAs decent" which is probably a fair point.   But lets not get that confused with "Gnarlroot TLAs lists are competitive". That would imply that Gnarlroot is in the same realm of competitiveness as Winterleaf or Dreadwood and that's obviously not the case.

In fact, one could argue that a Dreadwood TLA is actually stronger since it gets access to the Dreadwood command ability on top of its forest, possibly giving you two teleports on turn 1. He also is one of the best carriers of the Jewel of Withering (-1 to Wound) on top of being able to cast Spiteswarm Hive itself. Now that's a TLA I can get behind! 

 

 

 

 

[Landohammer]

 

5 hours ago, Alessio said:

I'm starting assembling a Sylvaneth army, how many sylvaneth wyldwood do you have on avarage?

Let's say playing 2000p games

How many should I buy? But probably it dipends by my playstyle.

What size do you usually can field in games?( 3,4,5,6 elements wood)

 

Welcome! This is a fairly common question in this thread so there are already a lot of good answers.

In short: You definitely need at least two. The wood to wood teleport is the main reason for summoning woods, so if you don't have two then you are missing out on one of our strongest allegiance abilities.

Three is probably a good goal. If your table is properly terrained then summoning more than 3 can become pretty difficult.

 Note that the old Citadel Wood models are generally cheaper and easier to transport than the newer Awakened Wildwoods. I would recommend 1 new kit +2 old kits. 

 

[The World Tree]

On 4/13/2020 at 12:12 PM, States said:

Ever put in an arch rev instead of one wraith? Get the rerolls on the kurnoths

I have done, but rarely for the rerolls - the hunters are usually teleported around so not in reroll range. It is more for the +1 Attack CA. But tbh, I find more utility in summoning dryads, which can then be teleported.

[bigmoerk]

Vor 1 Stunde sagte The World Tree:

Ich habe es getan, aber selten für die Rerolls - die Jäger werden geführt herum teleportiert, auch nicht in Reroll-Reichweiten. Es ist mehr für die +1 Attack CA. Aber ich finde es anspruchslicher, Dryaden zu beschwören, die dann teleportiert werden können.

Frage: Darf man dryads beschwören und dann teleportieren? Ich dachte, sie können nicht normal bewegt werden, sondern aufladen 

Edited April 14, 2020 by bigmoerk

[Pennydude]

8 minutes ago, bigmoerk said:

Frage: Darf man dryads beschwören und dann teleportieren? Ich dachte, sie können nicht normal bewegt werden, sondern aufladen 

Yes, Dryads that are summoned can charge in the same turn because charging happens in a separate phase.

[bigmoerk]

29 minutes ago, Pennydude said:

Ja, beschworene Dryaden können in derselben Runde aufgeladen werden, da das Aufladen in einer separaten Phase erfolgt.

Ok. Got it.

But teleport is for fresh summoned dryads not availible?

[Trevelyan]

On 4/12/2020 at 2:48 PM, The World Tree said:

I think that's the point though isn't it - you have to spend so much(in terms of unit selection, spell choice etc.) to get the woods on the table. 

The amount that you spend in unit and spell selection is “take a TLA”. That’s it. That’s all of it. There is no other unit or spell choice that you need to make to pull off the above combo. The TLA comes complete with Awakening the Wood on his own warscroll at no additional charge and every caster in Sylvaneth gets Verdant Blessing for free as a bonus spell just for showing up.

The TLA can also summon his own Wyldwood without risk of failure using  Silent Communion. The rest of the post - using artefact combos to drop more woods reliably is optional but also kinda useful in a faction which is themed around woods and benefits from having woods nearby. It’s also not a huge hardship, the only additional choice beyond “take a TLA” is “take one of the best faction artefacts from the book” and/or “take the mandatory glade artefact. 

If you think that “put a TLA in your list” is too much complexity to make the TLA work then the problem really isn’t the TLA. Writing “Gnarlroot” instead of “Winterleaf” or “Dreadwood” isn’t a problem of complexity either.

What this really comes down to is that people who like to play Winterleaf/Dreadwood complain that Gnarlroot doesn’t work as well as those glades at the same tactics those other glades prefer. But Gnarlroot does perfectly well playing to it’s own strengths, which happen to include aggressive use of TLAs. 

 

[Trevelyan]

On 4/13/2020 at 3:59 PM, Landohammer said:

Chalice of Nectar on a TLA is potent, I agree.  But you are sacrificing access to Winterleaf and Dreadwood to get your potent TLA. I think the cost is just too high.

 I understood this conversation to be "Gnarlroot can make TLAs decent" which is probably a fair point.   But lets not get that confused with "Gnarlroot TLAs lists are competitive". That would imply that Gnarlroot is in the same realm of competitiveness as Winterleaf or Dreadwood and that's obviously not the case.

In fact, one could argue that a Dreadwood TLA is actually stronger since it gets access to the Dreadwood command ability on top of its forest, possibly giving you two teleports on turn 1. He also is one of the best carriers of the Jewel of Withering (-1 to Wound) on top of being able to cast Spiteswarm Hive itself. Now that's a TLA I can get behind! 

“You are sacrificing access to Winterleaf and Dreadwood”? I’m sorry, what?!?

You aren’t sacrificing anything. You are choosing to play a different one of the seven available glades. If not picking the current most competitive option is “sacrificing” the option then it’s too late for all of us - we’ve already “sacrificed” the option to play a different and more competitive faction. 

I understood this conversation to be about your earlier suggestion that even taking one TLA was questionable (a basic Treelord plus Branchwraith being your preferred use of the points) and more than one being inexcusable. There was some discussion about the rate at which a TLA degrades (until I pointed out that Durthu degrades faster), that the TLA spell is useless because no one ever fights near woods (to which I pointed out that it is fairly easy to force some fights near woods - granted not all of them - because summoning woods is a thing we do) and anyway no one can use magic in the current meta (to which I showed that we have the ability to put out a fairly consistent rate of spells in our spell-casting glade).

Now you want it to be about how competitive Gnarlroot is compared with our top two (current) competitive Glades. And to top it off you seem to have reconsidered the value of a TLA in the one that you don’t play. 

There are some rapidly moving goalposts in all of this. If your argument is now that multiple TLAs are entirely valid in Gnarlroot, but you only play the current top competitive glades so use one at most then that’s fine - I don’t use more than one TLA in Winterleaf myself. But basing your comments on the implicit assumption that Winterleaf and Dreadwood are acceptible and ever unit must be considered for the value it brings those two glades is a fairly hefty qualifier that you didn’t articulate at the outset. 

[Landohammer]

@Trevelyan

Yea I agree our conversation has definitely had some moving goalposts and probably isn't really going anywhere at this point. Probably my fault entirely. I lose track of what I am arguing about sometimes. (forums have that affect lol)

For the sake of consuming this thread I think we can just agree to disagree on the central point of TLAs being competitive (in any form or number). 

On a side note. One of the wargamers I follow on Twitter "Grand Allegiance Smorgan" just posted that, in his opinion,  Sylvaneth is the least competitive codex in the game.

Not sure what to think about that. 😟

 

 

 

[The World Tree]

1 hour ago, Trevelyan said:

The amount that you spend in unit and spell selection is “take a TLA”. That’s it. That’s all of it. There is no other unit or spell choice that you need to make to pull off the above combo. The TLA comes complete with Awakening the Wood on his own warscroll at no additional charge and every caster in Sylvaneth gets Verdant Blessing for free as a bonus spell just for showing up.

The TLA can also summon his own Wyldwood without risk of failure using  Silent Communion. The rest of the post - using artefact combos to drop more woods reliably is optional but also kinda useful in a faction which is themed around woods and benefits from having woods nearby. It’s also not a huge hardship, the only additional choice beyond “take a TLA” is “take one of the best faction artefacts from the book” and/or “take the mandatory glade artefact. 

If you think that “put a TLA in your list” is too much complexity to make the TLA work then the problem really isn’t the TLA. Writing “Gnarlroot” instead of “Winterleaf” or “Dreadwood” isn’t a problem of complexity either.

What this really comes down to is that people who like to play Winterleaf/Dreadwood complain that Gnarlroot doesn’t work as well as those glades at the same tactics those other glades prefer. But Gnarlroot does perfectly well playing to it’s own strengths, which happen to include aggressive use of TLAs. 

 

260 points is a lot though for something that isn't too hard to kill, is slow (except between pre-determined points) and its damage potential (including Awakening) is small. 

There is also the problem that your opponents rarely need to get into woods due to objective distances. 

Incidentally I  don't  think the army benefits hugely from woods. They aren't bad, but I don't think are as integral as they should be. The movement is the major benefit and is limited and stoppable by opponents. The damage to take from it is insignificant. Blocking LOS +cover is good. The problem is you always have to leave to win a game. 

1 hour ago, bigmoerk said:

Ok. Got it.

But teleport is for fresh summoned dryads not availible?

Don't see why not. It is a set up IIRC. Though it is very possible I'm having a brainfart as I don't have the book to hand.

[Trevelyan]

50 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

On a side note. One of the wargamers I follow on Twitter "Grand Allegiance Smorgan" just posted that, in his opinion,  Sylvaneth is the least competitive codex in the game.

Not sure what to think about that. 😟

As a codex/battletome... I’m not sure that I would say we were the least competitive, although maybe we are? I’ve not been overly impressed by the Orruks and neither has our local Orruk player.

It is fair to say that we had one of the least exciting new battletomes in which our signature gimmick was nerfed - loosing the random chance of moving again was worth loosing the risk of the delay, but only allowing one navigate per turn was a definite hit. We are also dependent on placement of Wyldwoods - everyone (except the Orruks) has a signature terrain piece, but we are more dependent than most on ours and can struggle to put them on the table given the new restrictions. Tangent: I like the idea upthread of spells to convert scenery into Wyldwoods in some way, but not exactly the spells suggested.

We are also seriously miss-marketed. There is a view that we are a mobile faction, but these days we are no more, and often less, mobile than others. We are a “healing” faction that can’t return models to the table easily (contrast anything undead and most of Chaos) and the healing that we do have is very contingent on spells. 

But we do have a few strengths that I think aren’t values as they might be:

1) We have some very good individual units - Kurnoth hunters are obvious, but Dryads are a very solid tarpit for the price, Spites are a strong cannon even if made of glass. Even Tree Revs have surprising value in their mobility as objective grabbers and charge blockers, just don’t expect them to win a fight. Durthu is a little vulnerable to bracketing but has some of the highest top-end damage you’ll see. Drycha goes without saying. 

2) We have some very good defensive spells - Regrowth is good for keeping monsters alive and Verdurous Harmony on an already tough unit like Kurnoths is bonkers good value. We’ve got some useful faction spells too, notably the Hive. 

3) We have the unique ability, subject to conditions, to drop LoS blocking scenery on the table. 

Against that we have the aforementioned weaknesses. I think that our tournament ranking is slightly held back by the fact that we are a pain to transport - taking all the forests creates transport issues that likely dissuade many people from even trying. But I also suspect that a lot of lists are trying to do something that doesn’t really play to our strengths - Winterleaf Hunters are devastating, but entirely predictable and winning an alpha strike slug fest isn’t enough to win the objective game consistently. 

I don’t think we are hugely competitive, but I think we are more competitive than recent results indicate. The key to improving things is to find a more innovative approach to the faction that capitalises on all of our strengths. That said, I would welcome some changes to the placement and use of Wyldwoods. 

[Xil]

1 hour ago, The World Tree said:

. 

Don't see why not. It is a set up IIRC. Though it is very possible I'm having a brainfart as I don't have the book to hand.

Teleport happens in the movement phase. So I don't see why it should not work. 

[Landohammer]

1 hour ago, The World Tree said:

 

Don't see why not. It is a set up IIRC. Though it is very possible I'm having a brainfart as I don't have the book to hand.

Pretty sure the "the summoned unit cannot move in the following movement phase" part of the spell makes summoned Dryads unable to teleport that turn. 

27 minutes ago, Trevelyan said:

 

We are also seriously miss-marketed. There is a view that we are a mobile faction, but these days we are no more, and often less, mobile than others. We are a “healing” faction that can’t return models to the table easily (contrast anything undead and most of Chaos) and the healing that we do have is very contingent on spells. 

 

I agree 100%. We are marketed as a mobile, healing, magically strong army. But all of those traits really only apply to Alarielle herself. The rest of the army is essentially just a slow combat army. In fact, most of  the models in my tournament list are movement 5  That is 1 inch faster than a Dwarf lol. 

I have said it before, but I really think the Living City nailed what Sylvaneth were supposed to be. Self healing, Deepstriking, double moving, resiliency/healing spells and an artefact that makes any hero a wizard.

 

 

 

 

[The World Tree]

24 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

Pretty sure the "the summoned unit cannot move in the following movement phase" part of the spell makes summoned Dryads unable to teleport that turn. 

 

 

It is a set up not a move and therefore should be legal.

 

As for Sylvaneth, I think the book has some of the best internal balance. It just needs a bit more pumping up. Personally the easiest fix would be to up the wounds of all behemoths by 3-4 / give them a 5+ mortal wound save. They can't heal because they die so quickly. Also then to give wyldwoods a healing capacity of d3 wounds / models (for Revs and dryads) when within x of the woods. Also - the woods LOS blocking doesn't work for the Arch Rev which makes no sense.

If you wanted a bigger rewrite, I'd make Revenants multiwound and 5+ ethereals. Much more expensive and elite. With Dryads being the horde. Make the army defensive and healing, with woods encroaching the battlefield as the game progresses. Less focus on speed outside of the woods, more on entangling and choking opponents through the game.

Perhaps have spells/CAs that allow for objective(s) to be entangled by woods.

Edited April 14, 2020 by The World Tree

[Landohammer]

9 minutes ago, The World Tree said:

It is a set up not a move and therefore should be legal.

The Navigate Realmroots rule actually says "instead of making a normal move in your movement phase".

We probably still need an FAQ on the matter, but that sentence is a pretty big indication of what the intent was. So most people I know play it as you can't teleport that phase. 

 

[The World Tree]

11 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

The Navigate Realmroots rule actually says "instead of making a normal move in your movement phase".

We probably still need an FAQ on the matter, but that sentence is a pretty big indication of what the intent was. So most people I know play it as you can't teleport that phase. 

 

I agree about navigate realmroots, I was referring to dreadwood  

[Landohammer]

1 hour ago, The World Tree said:

I agree about navigate realmroots, I was referring to dreadwood  

My bad. I managed to miss that part. Yea Dreadwood is very different.

Though I can't imagine ever using Sinister Ambush on 10 dryads.  🤣

[Trevelyan]

On 4/12/2020 at 2:48 PM, The World Tree said:

I think that's the point though isn't it - you have to spend so much(in terms of unit selection, spell choice etc.) to get the woods on the table. You also have to successfully cast and not be unbound. That is if they can fit at all. The Awakening has clear benefits after that, but the investment is so high for small reward.

 

5 hours ago, The World Tree said:

260 points is a lot though for something that isn't too hard to kill, is slow (except between pre-determined points) and its damage potential (including Awakening) is small. 

There is also the problem that your opponents rarely need to get into woods due to objective distances. 

Incidentally I  don't  think the army benefits hugely from woods. They aren't bad, but I don't think are as integral as they should be. The movement is the major benefit and is limited and stoppable by opponents. The damage to take from it is insignificant. Blocking LOS +cover is good. The problem is you always have to leave to win a game.

That right there is what I mean about shifting goalposts. But those didn’t so much shift as navigate the realmroots. First, making the TLA work involves too many complicated choices. When I point out that isn’t true, the problem becomes that the TLA is too expensive. Those are two very different issues. 

To your actual criticisms of the TLA, it is no easier to kill than other treelords, including Durthu, and is arguably more durable if you consider the command ability it brings and the chance to self heal using a spell. It’s the same speed as Durthu too, and only one inch slower than standard treelords. Limitations teleporting are likewise common to them all. It does have lower damage potential than Durthu, but that potential declines far less rapidly, and a healthy TLA can still put out multiple 3+/3+/-1/d6 attacks - that’s not nothing. Plus ranged attack, spell casting and other abilities for the 260 points. It could be a little cheaper, but probably not by much - I could see a point drop to the 240-250 range, but not really any less.

The point being that the TLA isn’t a perfect unit, but neither it is complete dross - it has more value than a lot of people who don’t use it seem to realise (funny that) and most of the criticisms levelled against it are common to other, more popular units. 

You seem hung up on the idea of your opponent needing to be in a wood for us to gain any benefit. That’s simply not the case. Consider fights over objectives as the obvious case; you can place a wood 1” away from the centre of an objective, that means around half the control zone can be exposed to Roused by magic and the Wyldwood charge phase wound. More than half is potentially vulnerable to the TLA spell (which can also trigger Roused) and most of the zone offers various buffs. Sometimes other terrain might limit placement of Wyldwoods, but equally it can limit available space outside the influence of the wood - we should be benefitting as often as we lose. It’s also worth remembering that you don’t have to put the Wood on the ‘near’ side of the objective - if you can put the wood down between enemy units and the centre of the objective then they don't have a lot of choice.

There will be many different factors in each game, sometimes we get less value than others, but if you never get to place woods where you want and never (or even rarely) get to benefit from woods then either you aren’t trying or you just aren’t seeing the options. It’s not about staying in the wood - that’s a false premise on which to base your objections - but about using them as optimally as each game permits. 

[Nixon]

I was just wondering if there are any good listes that does not need the Wyldwoods to compete or are fun to play?