AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[Xil]

Agree. 

BTW.. We are in need of an agreement button to react to posts

[Popisdead]

 

10 hours ago, Kaylethia said:

Tree-Revenants are already a valid (if narrow) choice.

They have no staying power but I kinda like them offensively (I can agree with 4+ being pretty lame).  I just wish a mechanic or validity to take 20-30 would be an option.  Just to explore.  

9 hours ago, Grimbok said:

Can’t they do basic math. Blightkings down to 140 (of all nurgle units, these were fine, many other units needed to drop) and Kurnoths (which is our best unit) is 190.... Blightkings are 6,7 points per wound with 4+ save and often 5+ dpr...and with good damage output and sweet batallion. Kurnoths are 12,7 points per wound. It’s double the points for comparable units (elite units)! 

I was actually wondering if it will push us to KH spam much like Blightking spam.  The Dreadwood list Laurie used had 15 Hunters.  People are quoting the 21 Bow Hunter list.

3 hours ago, Landohammer said:

I don't think Sylvaneth were playtested. These two drops are more than likely concessions to keep the Sylvaneth base happy.

But TBH, our book can't really be fixed with just point adjustments. There are a lot of problems that can only be fixed with additional units or widespread warscroll changes. So this was probably the best we could hope for. 

I don't like to think this way (I would hope for it to not be this blunt) but I often hear points drops are mostly just tournament data analysis from GW.  "oh they aren't taking these units in tournaments so lets drop those".  

The onus should be on GW fixing the book, not relying on play testers.  

[Kaylethia]

Taking 20-30 Tree-Revenants sounds like something I would do. And I think I'll try it out some time in the next few weeks and report back. They need someone or something that can keep them from running away in battleshock, but the hilarity should be worth it.

I actually just today put in an order for a couple more boxes of hunters, planning on building them out with bows, because their MSU leans heavily into my playstyle of shenanigans and artillery. 

On the topic of fixing the book: I'm not even sure which way I'd lean. Having another KO (or was it fyreslayers?) 1.0 book would be bad, I still remember the ramblings that went on about having to tape all of the errata into the book. But I wouldn't say no to some functional errata.

When they teased the endless spells, I was almost certain that was going to be our mobile wooden fortress of teleport-y bullcorn. Alas, no such thing.

I haven't had enough 2k games to fully comment on what I feel could or should be changed, just that I don't think the above-casual level of play encourages the Sylvaneth playstyles. And our book has multiple things that are likely to cause a negative play experience in more casual games like Hunter spam, Dreadwood teleporting (any table-wide reposition, really, as it can feel like a huge gotcha) and our general capability to punish mistakes. 

[Aezeal]

12 hours ago, Kaylethia said:

I'd say problems with Sylvaneth don't stem from our points, but rather a playstyle issue in the current tournament metagame, as well as feelbads from 1.0 days and people overcorrecting for past "sins" like covering the table in woods, congalines, hurricanum + hunters in old Gnarlroot, etc.

Regular TL is basically a unit of hunters with a different dropoff and a different recovery mechanic. 

Tree-Revenants are already a valid (if narrow) choice.

And I think TLA could stay the same but gain a second cast. 

 

We could do more with a few changes to some warscrolls than points changes.

TL:

All TL variants have an insane drop in efficiency after only a few wounds.. Way worse than anything else I see on the table (other armies might have some monsters that have it worse.. but then they aren't played). 

I think Durthu should get another woundbracket  with 6 flat damage. 

TLA should get 2 spells and/or +1 to cast.  (or maybe something like mount choices some armies have, possible +2 to cast, possible +1 spell, spell range, and  extra wounds or something)

RegularTL should get some improvement on the damage table as well.. it's not bad for it's points.. it just GETS bad.

Also: TL are tough monsters.. but a lot of stuff currently has more wounds or gets much more wounds (yes.. this is my coalesced experience again) I think another 2 wounds on either all variants or at least TLA and Durthu would be nice. 

 

Tree rev:

Tree-rev currently are only a viable choice because of teleport and cheapness. Making them 10/140 and 30/350  with an extra attack would change their roll drasticly (and more inline with lore) but still not make them overpowered I think. They'd be medium powered infantry with high mobility. They'd loose their speedbump roll except in dire need.  I think our army shouldn't be about cheap speedbumps but about preservation (or use spites if needed since they are outcasts). And  they an affordable 10-20 of them could actually take an objective that is defended in a turn or 2. (maybe not make them 30/350 btw since teleporting units of 30 everywhere is not good for balance in the point scoring part of the game)

 

Spites and dryads are nice as they are but points might need to be dropped due to powercreep in other books.

 

All 5 wound hero's are just... very vulnerable in the current game. There is a reasons CoS has special mechanisms to defend them as generals. Our Arch rev can be somewhat important in strategies but is way to vulnerable as is. The solution isn't easy imho giving each army the same rule as CoS is an option but wouldn't even be that great for us (since archie is s mobile). Just giving archie more wound would mean other models should get it too and I don't think that will happen. Giving all 5 wound generals 2 extra wounds would be a possible idea.

 

I realize my views are a bit Sylvaneth biased

[Aezeal]

12 hours ago, Walkirriox said:

I completely agree with all you exposed. But the only update we will get until the new book comes are points changes or a new unit. We have to play around with the warscrolls we have for a looong while... 
At least GW could reduce the points for suboptimal units in order to see some (tournament) play. 

Also battalions point drop could also help in some cases.

True... point drop across the board would help a lot for non magic based builds. While dreadwood reliability wouldn't increase much some other build might just get the extra hitting powers, staying power or bodies they need.Thing is.. points drops will also work for LC so LC will probably remain the better choice to play with 

 

(this is from hearsay... have yet to try this.. but will).

 

11 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

These point changes are all great, even if its only to two units. I was expecting a drop to Drycha (20 pts is fair) and the drop to hunters is a nice little bonus (Enough to maybe eek out another command point or an extra endless spell). 

It not enough of a point change to actually change how we build our lists, but generally makes everything function more efficiently.  It also shows GW is pretty happy overall with how our army plays . I’d agree, were in the best shape we’ve ever been  (if you discount that brief period where we were super OP).

But compared to newer books not that great unless they get a lot of point increases..  I'm still sore about my coalesced game.. and if his army stays the same I still don't know how to deal with that. I was nearly tabled in 3 turns and he only lost a few models. Now me and my dice take some blame for that... but the difference was really terrible.

 

11 hours ago, Grimbok said:

And the batallions.... 140 for Free Spirits...come on. A drop to 80 would help a lot...it’s not worth more than that. The start tax is massive.

 

Outcasts are Ok, but Forest Folk could use a point drop also. Same with household. 

 

 

Grimbok

True.. If I see what others get for 140 points (that THunderlizard batallsion I played against for example)... it's insane.. 

 

12 hours ago, Grimbok said:

We need warscroll changes, and many other changes (wyldwoods etc). But for now, point drops could help. But nope...

 

It’s a joke. They have no idea...and playtesters, are they not supposed to help here? Oh, I forgot, playtesters don’t play Sylvaneth, only top level competitive ****** armies...

Can’t they do basic math. Blightkings down to 140 (of all nurgle units, these were fine, many other units needed to drop) and Kurnoths (which is our best unit) is 190.... Blightkings are 6,7 points per wound with 4+ save and often 5+ dpr...and with good damage output and sweet batallion. Kurnoths are 12,7 points per wound. It’s double the points for comparable units (elite units)! 

At least Stormcast got som slight point reductions, that adds up. Won’t help them at top level, but will in casual games...

I was hoping for some considerable point reductions to Sylvaneth, to at least have a chance in casual games...and maybe try alternative wyldwood system...but no. Back to Living City and Stormcast...

 

 

Grimbok

LOL last time I played nurgle is a while ago but assuming warscrolls are somewhat similar last 2 years.. it's still odd.. then 5 BK blendered 3 hunters (they got the charge but considering the stuff they can do with their trees I think that will be generally the case)

 

6 hours ago, Xil said:

I just quit the game to have a break. Playing in a semi competitive meta locally. The amount of bullshitery added up to an unbearable level. 

There is just no way I can have fun with this army against competitive and competent players with Armys like Seraphon, Fyreslayers, FEC and Tzeench... Glad there are no Lumineth yet

I think that very good players can probably get a little more out of the army... but that isn't good. I don't need an easy army. But currently I feel like only our top 5% players will be getting above 50% win% in a competative setting.

[Kaylethia]

14 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

All TL variants have an insane drop in efficiency after only a few wounds.. Way worse than anything else I see on the table (other armies might have some monsters that have it worse.. but then they aren't played).

My previous point was made comparing the regular TL to a minimum size unit of Hunters, as they are similar in output. Hunters drop almost a third in output per five wounds and require a unique spell to undo that drop, while the TL drops in output every other wound beside the first, doesn't drop roughly 20% per bracket (sorry, that's off the top of my head, I might run the numbers tomorrow unless someone else does) and we have multiple separate sources to restore wounds. 

There are other aspects that make this comparison lean toward one or the other, but it is something I've been throwing around locally for a while, and will try out at some point.

[Mirage8112]

How about we just give everything an extra 10 wounds and give a 2+ shrug save vs wounds and mortal wounds?  Maybe we can make hunter units 50 points and then the army would be fixed 🤣

I kid of course. 

Y’all’ seem to be having mad trouble out there. Granted I haven’t played too recently because of the plague that’s ravaging our idiot country, but from where I’m sitting, trees are still pretty competitive. It’s really tricky to pin down the differences why people are having problems but it’s been my experience that Sylvanethg only really work if you lean hard into their playstyle. This is why I think our points are in the right place  : the faction is super strong played correctly and pretty bad if you try to play them like a normal army. 
 

1 hour ago, Kaylethia said:

Taking 20-30 Tree-Revenants sounds like something I would do. And I think I'll try it out some time in the next few weeks and report back. They need someone or something that can keep them from running away in battleshock, but the hilarity should be worth it.

I’ve tried larger groups of T-revs (10, 15, 20) and they are more effective than you think. Especially if you throw Druanti in the mix with a Winterleaf list. 15 T-revs will throw out 45 rend -1 attacks and exploding sixes easily make up for the 4+ to hit. Rerolling 1 charge dice plus a 6” pile in make them super reliable scalpels when you need to remove something in the backfield. A unit of 15 can reliably peel 10 wounds off a unit with a 4+ save. Not bad for 240 pts. 

They are definitely finishers though.  Never put them into combat with anything that can reliable swing back with any force or they’ll die like flies. Although if its a key unit, sometimes the trade off is worth it. 

[Kaylethia]

1 minute ago, Mirage8112 said:

I’ve tried larger groups of T-revs (10, 15, 20) and they are more effective than you think. Especially if you throw Druanti in the mix with a Winterleaf list.

I argued for units of 10 before the new book, without Arch-Revenant or Winterleaf buffs, and this just makes it much better. 

I think that Tree-Revenants should be almost an auto-include in any list that can spare the points even if you're paying 70 points to have your opponent keep something back for five rounds. I've had an opponents keep 100-200 point units in their backline to keep me from stealing objectives or assassinating a hero and allowing me to leverage that difference elsewhere on the board.

[Mirage8112]

2 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:

I think that Tree-Revenants should be almost an auto-include in any list that can spare the points even if you're paying 70 points to have your opponent keep something back for five rounds. I've had an opponents keep 100-200 point units in their backline to keep me from stealing objectives or assassinating a hero and allowing me to leverage that difference elsewhere on the board.

I’ve been saying it since our first book: t-rev’s are a must have unit in our lists. Not every list I play has them, but I always miss them when I leave them out. They are hands down the best chaff, best for snagging objectives, best area denial, and in larger groups a fair threat to anything less than 10 wounds.  

[Nos]

12 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

How about we just give everything an extra 10 wounds and give a 2+ shrug save vs wounds and mortal wounds?  Maybe we can make hunter units 50 points and then the army would be fixed 🤣

I kid of course. 

Y’all’ seem to be having mad trouble out there. Granted I haven’t played too recently because of the plague that’s ravaging our idiot country, but from where I’m sitting, trees are still pretty competitive. It’s really tricky to pin down the differences why people are having problems but it’s been my experience that Sylvanethg only really work if you lean hard into their playstyle. This is why I think our points are in the right place  : the faction is super strong played correctly and pretty bad if you try to play them like a normal army. 
 

I’ve tried larger groups of T-revs (10, 15, 20) and they are more effective than you think. Especially if you throw Druanti in the mix with a Winterleaf list. 15 T-revs will throw out 45 rend -1 attacks and exploding sixes easily make up for the 4+ to hit. Rerolling 1 charge dice plus a 6” pile in make them super reliable scalpels when you need to remove something in the backfield. A unit of 15 can reliably peel 10 wounds off a unit with a 4+ save. Not bad for 240 pts. 

They are definitely finishers though.  Never put them into combat with anything that can reliable swing back with any force or they’ll die like flies. Although if its a key unit, sometimes the trade off is worth it. 

Agreed.

Especially weird at the GHB release to always see people comparing profiles as though that's all there is.

Sylvaneth units pay a tax for the ability to shape the board, manoeuvre, summon and heal and they are among the best in the game at this. They are not about going toe-to-toe with anyone, they're about managing one or two favourable combats in your favour and otherwise ignoring or negating all the others while you play objectives. In particular not only do they have excellent late game nabbing potential they also have the ability to change the shape and nature of the board late game meaning opponents often are not in a position to act as they would maybe anticipate in the final few turns.

A lot of players in particular who complain about abcense of space for woods at the start seem to just stop trying to summon them later on when theres less units to block them. They are *just as useful*. You can summon a wood, 10 dryads and make a fortress on turn 4 at a point when most things that would have thr ability to chew through it are depleted or dead. 

They lack the auto devastation aspects of the favoured and imbalanced current meta factions but a Sylvaneth player has excellent tools to negate these if played well.  The amount of posts which focus on issues around profiles etc just suggests to me people are not playing them to their strengths.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Nos

[scrubyandwells]

In recent months, personal struggles on TTS have tended to be vs many of the top echelon: Seraphon, Legion of Chaos Ascendant, Tzeentch, KO, and IDK. Each of them have elements that can be incredibly punishing to Sylvaneth, e.g.:

• Seraphon: Sallies (hopefully the rumored point increase is real); Kroak's ranged MW spam + horde-unit nuke; bound endless spells; Skink spam; shutting down our magic; multi-layered MSU screening; teleporting; even Coalesced with half-damage reduction can be difficult (e.g., in one game, it took 3 turns to clear 40 Skinks off an obj with 6 Kurnoth Swords).
• Chaos Ascendant: Potentially summoning 10 Pink Horrors every turn on a 9+ or 10+ on 3 dice; shutting down our magic; Kairos' essentially-auto-cast 6MW nuke with ~50" range with Spellportal (he flies, so no-go on woods blocking LoS); and lots of other strengths.
• Tzeentch: Pink Horror spam; teleporting Flamers that bypass our LoS-blocking; and shutting down our magic.
• KO: It can be difficult to deal with their shooting output, when generally everything will ignore our LoS-blocking.
• IDK: They continue to be strong and difficult to deal with.

Some clear patterns with many of the above, and at least 4 out of 5 have been among the strongest factions over the last 4 months. 

Quite a few armies have the means to snipe 5W heroes early and/or shut down magic. I've been feeling this on TTS...a lot.

Hopefully we'll have more equity in the ecosystem and a fatter middle in a few weeks after the FAQ/errata. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by scrubyandwells

[Kaylethia]

Has anyone tried how our old-school woods generation via TLA (I'm thinking bring two, and they can't slag both?) and the artefact? Giving us two extra non-magically sourced woods, although the risk is that you can't really keep them in reserve until later.

I think we could pivot away from a magic-reliant build, without playing MSU 24 bow Hunters, if needed.

[Pennydude]

23 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:

Has anyone tried how our old-school woods generation via TLA (I'm thinking bring two, and they can't slag both?) and the artefact? Giving us two extra non-magically sourced woods, although the risk is that you can't really keep them in reserve until later.

I think we could pivot away from a magic-reliant build, without playing MSU 24 bow Hunters, if needed.

You can only use the TLA's ability once per game total regardless of the number of TLAs you bring.   Hell, you can have all 4 of your monsters be TLAs but you will only get one free woods out of it.

[Kaylethia]

4 minutes ago, Pennydude said:

You can only use the TLA's ability once per game total regardless of the number of TLAs you bring.   Hell, you can have all 4 of your monsters be TLAs but you will only get one free woods out of it.

I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.

[Popisdead]

16 hours ago, Aezeal said:

Spites and dryads are nice as they are but points might need to be dropped due to powercreep in other books.

I think 30 Dryads for 270 points are in a good place.  

16 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

I’ve tried larger groups of T-revs (10, 15, 20) and they are more effective than you think. Especially if you throw Druanti in the mix with a Winterleaf list. 

What is Druanti?  I did math a while ago on Tree Revenants and they weren't terrible and surprised me with output.  I think the 5-man unit that bounces is what people skew their opinion on.

14 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:

I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.

Maybe Lords of the Clan Gnarlroot since you have to bring two anyway.  BUt then you're spending points on models that won't get to cast so,.. you're paying more for something that's weaker than the generic poor dmg output regular TL.

[Pennydude]

I'm still a fan of using Lords of the Clan every once in a while.  Still gives you 2 beefy caster heroes, a support monster to either go with Kurnoths/battleline or be a distraction, ability to teleport for free when near woods, lower drops, extra artefact, extra command point, and 3 stomps.  Just having the threat of the stomp has made my opponents second guess some combat choices.

[Pennydude]

Also, can confirm the points changes.

Drycha is now 300 and the Kurnoths are 190.

[Sleepa]

10 hours ago, scrubyandwells said:

Some clear patterns with many of the above, and at least 4 out of 5 have been among the strongest factions over the last 4 months. 

Quite a few armies have the means to snipe 5W heroes early and/or shut down magic. I've been feeling this on TTS...a lot.

Hopefully we'll have more equity in the ecosystem and a fatter middle in a few weeks after the FAQ/errata. 

I think Sylvaneth need a few pieces of emergency errata in the upcoming FAQ if they hope to have a future in the competitive scene before we get a new Battletome (Which isn't likely for at least a year-and-a-half). 
My suggestions include:

-Treelords now count as a Awakened Wyldwood for other Sylvaneth units in a Sylvaneth Allegiance army. (For example; TLA's wouldn't count themselves, but if they were near a regular Treelord or a Durthu and the TLA successfully cast a spell; the other treelord would roll to see if it deals 1d3 Mortals to nearby non-sylvaneth models. The treelords could also be used for Forest Spirits and/or Navigate Realmroots, they would convey the defensive bonuses to Dryads, etc...)

-Sylvaneth needs a new allegiance ability that gives some kind of a "Ignore Magic" or "Ignore MW" Save to heroes within a certain range of Wyldwoods. 4+ would be ideal but even a 5+ would make a big difference.

-Wyldwoods need an errata stipulating that Flying units should not be able to ignore the LOS blocking effects they convey to Sylvaneth models with less than 8 wounds, (while those unit are wholly within 1" of a Wyldwood)

-TLAs need the Wizard portion of their warscroll reworked. Treelords in general need help, but TLAs legitimately NEED some magic potency.

-Verdant Blessing NEEDS to be ruled as being part of the Deepwood Spell Lore. It's not even explicitly excluded. This was simply a previous FAQ ruling which could easily be reversed.  Let's MAGA (Make Gnarlroot Great Again)

I'm not trying to promote changes to make Sylvaneth an S-tier army (lol I don't think we're in danger of that happening), but I think some serious changes are needed so matchups with the real S-tier armies get better for us than 20-80.

[Marius au]

I think a basic addition to the awakened wood warscroll of +1 to cast if within 6" or so would make a big difference.

[Baardah]

Was flipping through the book today...it’s been a while. Was looking for combos within the artefacts in the book.  Would there be legs in taking a BW with the voice of warding and spirit song stave, in a no glade list? Would make her 2 cast/2 unbind wizard... could even take a Balewindvortex as well...

been tinkering with a list...

General:

BW

-voice of warding

-spirit song stave 

spell: throne of vines

 

heroes:

TLA

-vesperal gem

Spell: verdiuos harmony

TLA

-deadly harvest

SoD

-greenwoodgladius

 

battleline:

3x10 dryads

5 treerevs

 

Other:

TL

3xbow KH

 

Endless spells:

balewindvortex

gladewyrm

 

battalions:

- forestfolk

-lords of the clan

extra command point 

1980

4 drops...

 

could take out the SoD and takea unit of 6 scythe hunters in stead....could also put the tree revs to 10 then....comes in at 1960...

[Popisdead]

23 hours ago, Sleepa said:

I think Sylvaneth need a few pieces of emergency errata in the upcoming FAQ if they hope to have a future in the competitive scene before we get a new Battletome (Which isn't likely for at least a year-and-a-half). 

I would recommend emailing GW at AoSFAQ@gwplc.com and express your concerns.  The more GW hears hopefully it will spur them to take action.  I wouldn't expect a book for ~3 years.  It is 1 year old now?  I don't see it a 2 year cycle.   But seriously email them.  My understanding is they read them all.  Being rational, clear and concise helps too.  Don't call them names or tell them they are clueless 😉  When I emailed them I mentioned becuase they had adjusted the Slaanesh summoning table it isn't unreasonable for them to update Alarielle's summoning table and allow for 20 Spite Revs which cost the same as 3 Kurnoth Hunters.  I feel that's not an unreasonable expectation.  

[Landohammer]

On 7/9/2020 at 12:18 PM, Baardah said:

Was flipping through the book today...it’s been a while. Was looking for combos within the artefacts in the book.  Would there be legs in taking a BW with the voice of warding and spirit song stave, in a no glade list? Would make her 2 cast/2 unbind wizard... could even take a Balewindvortex as well...

been tinkering with a list...

General:

BW

-voice of warding

-spirit song stave 

spell: throne of vines

 

heroes:

TLA

-vesperal gem

Spell: verdiuos harmony

TLA

-deadly harvest

SoD

-greenwoodgladius

 

battleline:

3x10 dryads

5 treerevs

 

Other:

TL

3xbow KH

 

Endless spells:

balewindvortex

gladewyrm

 

battalions:

- forestfolk

-lords of the clan

extra command point 

1980

4 drops...

 

could take out the SoD and takea unit of 6 scythe hunters in stead....could also put the tree revs to 10 then....comes in at 1960...

For a fun list, dropping glades is fine. But competitively it never make sense.

You are essentially trading army-wide bonuses just for the ability to choose your warlord trait.  The current meta is full of magic and shooting so the Branchwraith would likely get sniped early on unless it hides in a wood all game.

If you want a magic focused list then just bring Gnarlroot with a battalion + stave. 

Regarding the rest of your list:  You dont' have the bodies to take or hold objectives. If I was playing against this list I would just kill Durthu and sit on objectives knowing that TLAs, TLs, and Small dryad units don't have the output to do any real damage to me. 

 

 

[Aezeal]

On 7/7/2020 at 11:37 PM, Mirage8112 said:

Y’all’ seem to be having mad trouble out there. Granted I haven’t played too recently because of the plague that’s ravaging our idiot country, but from where I’m sitting, trees are still pretty competitive. It’s really tricky to pin down the differences why people are having problems but it’s been my experience that Sylvanethg only really work if you lean hard into their playstyle. This is why I think our points are in the right place  : the faction is super strong played correctly and pretty bad if you try to play them like a normal army. 

Results I've read about online don't seem to back this but maybe I'm mistaken.

 

On 7/8/2020 at 12:29 PM, Nos said:

Agreed.

Especially weird at the GHB release to always see people comparing profiles as though that's all there is.

Sylvaneth units pay a tax for the ability to shape the board, manoeuvre, summon and heal and they are among the best in the game at this. They are not about going toe-to-toe with anyone, they're about managing one or two favourable combats in your favour and otherwise ignoring or negating all the others while you play objectives. In particular not only do they have excellent late game nabbing potential they also have the ability to change the shape and nature of the board late game meaning opponents often are not in a position to act as they would maybe anticipate in the final few turns.

A lot of players in particular who complain about abcense of space for woods at the start seem to just stop trying to summon them later on when theres less units to block them. They are *just as useful*. You can summon a wood, 10 dryads and make a fortress on turn 4 at a point when most things that would have thr ability to chew through it are depleted or dead. 

They lack the auto devastation aspects of the favoured and imbalanced current meta factions but a Sylvaneth player has excellent tools to negate these if played well.  The amount of posts which focus on issues around profiles etc just suggests to me people are not playing them to their strengths.

Except you need room for the forest and the dryads 9" out of enemy range.. and enemies will usually be at the objectives at that point and other places are less interesting late game. If I don't have first turn most armies are so quick that after their first move there isn't much room for forest in interesting locations (for me that is in enemy territory or in midline)

Also: a 6+ and a 7 + cast and neither of them should get unbound which is getting a problem these day. In my winterleaf builds (which will be the same for all build except those which get a casting item) I often have problems getting a 2nd forest on the table because enemies seem to crash my spells left and right. Summoning dryads is really getting hard for me. 

On 7/8/2020 at 3:12 PM, Kaylethia said:

Has anyone tried how our old-school woods generation via TLA (I'm thinking bring two, and they can't slag both?) and the artefact? Giving us two extra non-magically sourced woods, although the risk is that you can't really keep them in reserve until later.

I think we could pivot away from a magic-reliant build, without playing MSU 24 bow Hunters, if needed.

I don't think 24 bow hunters will be a winning strategy against most armies tbh.. if I thought it was good I might try it (with proxies) but I really don't think their damage output is anything near enough to win games.. and their mobility and lack of bodies means you'd need to win games by damage output

 

On 7/8/2020 at 3:40 PM, Kaylethia said:

I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.

Seems an expensive back up just for that.

On 7/8/2020 at 3:56 PM, Popisdead said:

I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.

Yeah. Maybe.. the powercreep in other books is a thing though maybe not yet enough to say it should be lower... 

 

On 7/8/2020 at 10:48 PM, Pennydude said:

Also, can confirm the points changes.

Drycha is now 300 and the Kurnoths are 190.

Yeah.. really odd.. our strongest stuff gets cheaper.. It's been said before.. but still.. really gonna lock us into these units instead of improving in-army balance. Everything that helps us is nice.. but lowering these while weaker stuff stays the same is still an odd choice.

 

 

[Popisdead]

On 7/7/2020 at 2:37 PM, Mirage8112 said:

Especially if you throw Druanti in the mix with a Winterleaf list. 15 T-revs will throw out 45 rend -1 attacks and exploding sixes easily make up for the 4+ to hit. 

Actually,. Tree Revenants are better in Harvest boon.  +1A is better than exploding 6s.   Plus it grants them RR1s on the charge I recall?  Also cast the Spiteswarm before you teleport them for RR charge looking for a 6+.  

So the question is Household worthwhile in Harvestboon... Is the treelord that much a tax?  You can make use of a Branchwych even if less optimal than a Branchwraith.

[Aezeal]

44 minutes ago, Popisdead said:

Actually,. Tree Revenants are better in Harvest boon.  +1A is better than exploding 6s.   Plus it grants them RR1s on the charge I recall?  Also cast the Spiteswarm before you teleport them for RR charge looking for a 6+.  

So the question is Household worthwhile in Harvestboon... Is the treelord that much a tax?  You can make use of a Branchwych even if less optimal than a Branchwraith.

I think household (and basicly all our batallions) do not give a lot in comparison to other army books (at least in comparion to the batallions I see on the table).

While I usually take a unit of T-revs to force the opponent to keep something back, hopefully more points and thus giving us an edge (in points at least) elsewhere on the table as mentioned before.. however.. in combat efficiency they lag a lot behind other units so even a unit of 20 will have a hard time actually conquering an objective so I'd hesitate to try and use a unit of 20 for that purpose.

I think assuming +1 attack from archrev or harvestboon is not the most likely scenario when attacking a backline objective after a teleport btw (especially with a unit of 20). Also it's another 100 points and 1 CP.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Aezeal