AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[a74xhx]

On 7/7/2020 at 4:19 PM, Landohammer said:

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. 

. 

Agreed.

How much of a points drop does the Branchwych need before anyone would play her? Say she was 40 points. Maybe I'd think about it, but I'd most likely prefer to max those Kurnoths. But now we have a problem. 40 points for a wizard. That's crazy. Suddenly you've completely broken the price of a wizard across AOS. It's a race to the bottom. 80 feels right as the minimum price of a 5 wound hero.

It feels initially counter intuitive, but dropping points on the units we are going to play feels much more beneficial in the long run. These new points give me an extra  5 spites or endless spell in a 2k list.

Maybe we'll get FAQ changes to tweak our warscrolls. It wouldn't take much (2 spells on an ancient etc). We wouldn't go to the top of the charts, but it'd be help.

 

(Edit: I missed a page worth of posts when replying.  Seems like we're mostly all in agreement)

Edited July 10, 2020 by a74xhx

[Nos]

4 hours ago, Aezeal said:

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

 

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. 

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

 

Seems an expensive back up just for that.

 

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

 

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.

 

 

I never said you could summon woods directly on or near objectives late game; frankly it would be boring if you reliably could.

The point is you still have the capacity to change the battlefield late game and you *can* play around that fact, even think a few moves ahead around utilising it- say by summoning a spite swarm in anticipation - you can really make a lot of capital out of it. Also for certain scenarios like relocation orb its amazing. If you let the enemy dictate where you put your woods, on your assumption theres only a few good places to put them, you're way behind. 

Re spellcasting- I tend to go Gnarlroot, it's not often most factions can dispel me and frequently  get dispelled themselves, and there are multiple benefits for most phases of the game that come with that allegiance, which is great for an army which is decent in multiple phases.

Winter leaf are very much a combat orientated grove whose main benefit is getting more attacks, this in a meta currently dominated by armies able to save or otherwise eat wounds and mortal wounds. Those few extra attacks on a 6 are paltry compared to rolling a 7 on 3d6, or re-rollings 1's for all attacks near heroes. Winter leaf is very much an eggs in one basket approach for an army far too fragile for it.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Nos

[Mirage8112]

5 hours 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+.  

This is incorrect. Winterleaf T-revs can get a +1 attack from the arch-rev buff.  The +1 attack for Harvestboon is a command ability as well, so it takes a CP just like the arch-rev ability. I doubt you’d use both at the same time (unless you have command points coming out of your ears); in Harvestboon you would probably just leave the Arch-rev out of your list and make use of the points elsewhere. 

That being said, mathhammer has 5 T-revs doing a full point of damage more after saves than Harvestboon. 5 damage per turn vs a 4+ save for Winterleaf vs. 4 damage per turn vs a 4+ save with Harvestboon  (including RR 1’s). This is because exploding sixes do not need to roll to hit: they just double an existing hit. Maybe on a 3+ hit unit like hunters Harvestboon would be better (haven’t done the math) but on 4+ hit T-revs exploding sixes beats RR ones (both get an extra attack from a command ability.)

5 hours ago, Aezeal said:

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.

For every 5 (Winterleaf) T-revs you take, you get 5 damage. A 15 man unit will reliably throw out 15 damage after (4+) saves, and stand a really good chance of landing the 9” charge after teleporting (rr 1 charge die). If you don’t charge something with more than 15 wounds : you’ll be fine. Charge a  30 man unit with a 3+ save: you won’t.

T-rev are basically snipers. You don’t use a sniper to fight an entire battalion of tanks.  
 

6 hours ago, Aezeal said:

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

 
This is what I was mentioning above. You have to lean hard into the Sylvaneth playstyle to have any success with them. I’ve watched a lot of players try to play the army by taking a bunch of hunters and then going toe-to-toe with HoS or OBR. Hunters are strong, but they aren’t that strong.  @scrubyandwells posted an analysis of Sylvaneth a while back that I really wanted to respond to, talking about what kind of army we are. His conclusions were we should be a close combat army, but we aren’t really good at it.

And he’s 100% right. We’re a close combat army. But the main difference is that we aren’t a close combat army that does well in a fair fight. 

When you play Sylvaneth, you should never ever get into a combat you aren’t absolutely sure you can win. We have the mobility to pick and choose our fights and we have to use it. 9 times out of 10, I see players either picking the wrong fights or letting the enemy pick the fights. Some armies can do this and be fine. We aren’t one of them.

Sylvaneth are about asymmetrical warfare. We cannot win combats by engaging in 1 v 1 fights. If you have 1 unit of hunters fighting 1 unit of something on one side of board and another unit of T-revs fighting something on the other side of the board: you’re doing it wrong. The correct way to do it is have 1 unit of hunters and 1 units of t-revs fight 1 enemy unit on one side of the board, and then you teleport and fight the other enemy unit with the hunters and T-revs the next turn. 2v1, 3v1, 5v2.

This our playstyle. Our army is much more complicated than most, but played this way we’re crazy powerful. I know I’m in the minority, but the idea that we should drop our casters by 20 points or make TL battleline is total overkill. Yes, it would make our army just points efficient enough to play like a traditional CC toe-to-toe army, but if you played with the hit and run asymmetrical warfare at those point levels? We’d be drastically overpowered and totally break the Meta. Nobody want to see that because what the Buff God giveth, the Nerf god taketh away just as fast. 

Edited July 11, 2020 by Mirage8112

[Nos]

I think the new realmscapes are going to help somewhat. Ghur looks awful but theres otherwise 2 (Shyish and Ghyran)  which are straight up great for Sylvaneth when playing to their strengths  (3  with Ulgu if you're not shoot heavy)  and the remaining ones are just as much an issue for other armies but they dont get to change the battlefield in play like Sylvaneth do. 

[Aezeal]

On 7/11/2020 at 4:59 AM, Mirage8112 said:

Sylvaneth are about asymmetrical warfare. We cannot win combats by engaging in 1 v 1 fights. If you have 1 unit of hunters fighting 1 unit of something on one side of board and another unit of T-revs fighting something on the other side of the board: you’re doing it wrong. The correct way to do it is have 1 unit of hunters and 1 units of t-revs fight 1 enemy unit on one side of the board, and then you teleport and fight the other enemy unit with the hunters and T-revs the next turn. 2v1, 3v1, 5v2.

I don't see our army do that though. The fact forest are not that easy to place, certainly not in the places you need them AND the fact our teleports like most of them are still @ 9" and most options to get increased charge ranges are magic based and thus extremely unreliable means it's a to unreliable to base a strategy on.. hell lately I've read that even dreadwood based alpha strikes aren't reliable and that is much easier to pull off than what you say every fight we pick should be like. Not to mention lots of armies have quite a good mobility without teleporting so they'll charge us too and nothing we can do about it.

[Popisdead]

On 7/10/2020 at 7:59 PM, Mirage8112 said:

This is incorrect. Winterleaf T-revs can get a +1 attack from the arch-rev buff.  The +1 attack for Harvestboon is a command ability as well, so it takes a CP just like the arch-rev ability. I doubt you’d use both at the same time (unless you have command points coming out of your ears); in Harvestboon you would probably just leave the Arch-rev out of your list and make use of the points elsewhere. 

+1A is better than exploding 6s.  Did the math out a few times.   It would be Winterleaf +1A and exploding 6s vs +2A for Harvest boon.  I also think the Arch-Rev is good value.  You can toss that +1A on Kurnoth Hunters who don't even need to be within range.  

If you wanted to say a better value is only using 1 CP for +1A in Winterleaf with 6s vs plain +1A  for Harvest boon  then that's a point about CP usage.  And that's okay too.

[Walkirriox]

What do you think about the new terrain placement rules from the new GHB2020?

Distances from objectives have been reduced from 3" to 1" and from edges or other terrain pieces 6" to 3". 

At least the first Wyldwood placement will be easier now!

[scrubyandwells]

28 minutes ago, Walkirriox said:

What do you think about the new terrain placement rules from the new GHB2020?

Distances from objectives have been reduced from 3" to 1" and from edges or other terrain pieces 6" to 3". 

At least the first Wyldwood placement will be easier now!

One potential problem: the "...in addition to any other restrictions that apply."

The pre-deploy Awakened Wyldwood arguably has two "additional restrictions" in the Sylvaneth Battletome: 1) more than 1" from enemy territory, and 2) more than 6" from any objectives. In particular, they need to clarify whether the Sylvaneth Battletome's more-than-6"-from-objectives requirement overrides "...more than 1" from objectives..." in the GHB. IMO, 6" is an "additional restriction."

Edited July 14, 2020 by scrubyandwells

[Mirage8112]

9 hours ago, Popisdead said:

+1A is better than exploding 6s.  Did the math out a few times.   It would be Winterleaf +1A and exploding 6s vs +2A for Harvest boon.  I also think the Arch-Rev is good value.  You can toss that +1A on Kurnoth Hunters who don't even need to be within range.  

I think you mistaking what I’m saying. 

I’m not saying exploding sixes are better than +1 attack, I’m saying you wont be able to stack the +1 attack from both sources (Arch-rev and Grove CA) for more than 1 combat a turn. If there are 2 combats per round, the damage Winterleaf does over the course of the game is actually more because Harvestboon can only stack +1 attack every 2 turns. That’s 4 combats. Winterleaf exploding sixes do damage over all 4 combats and doesn’t require a CP be effective. I can show you the math if you want. 

Also, if you insist on burning 2 CP in a turn with Winterleaf, you can still buff T-revs with +1 attack and use it again on a unit of hunters anywhere on the board since CA can be used multiple times; just not on the same unit. 

 

10 hours ago, Aezeal said:

I don't see our army do that though. The fact forest are not that easy to place, certainly not in the places you need them AND the fact our teleports like most of them are still @ 9" and most options to get increased charge ranges are magic based and thus extremely unreliable means it's a to unreliable to base a strategy on.. hell lately I've read that even dreadwood based alpha strikes aren't reliable and that is much easier to pull off than what you say every fight we pick should be like. Not to mention lots of armies have quite a good mobility without teleporting so they'll charge us too and nothing we can do about it.

I base a strategy on it all the time. Works like a charm.

I still find it amusing when you tell me it wont work, because I’ve used it and it works great. How can you know it wont work when you haven’t tried? 

You complain about charges being hard pull off with 9”, but T-revs can re-roll 1 charge die. We have a bunch of ways to get more reliable casting (and can pick scenery rules now that help with that.) We can get wyldwoods on the board during terrain deployment, and have other easy way to get more. We have a bunch of tool kits and of course, if you fail every spell and roll and your opponent is God himself, sure: nothing you do will work. Baring that perfect storm,  if you know how to set up combats 1-2 turns ahead you’ll be fine. 

Honestly I’m starting think this is just a difference of Generalship or maybe playstyle. I really love playing the teleporty, stick-and-move, nuke-bomb Sylvaneth that pop on the board and blow something to pieces. It’s hilarious. It doesnt rely heavy on alpha striking or any other tricks like that. It’s just being aware of your opponents units and deploying appropriately. You get woods out where you can, and decide what your going to fight and what your going to screen and what your going to tarpit.  You plan your combats in advance and sometimes you bait, sometimes you teleport, but a good general will be able to make those combats happen.


 

[Mirage8112]

 

2 hours ago, scrubyandwells said:

One potential problem: the "...in addition to any other restrictions that apply."

The pre-deploy Awakened Wyldwood arguably has two "additional restrictions" in the Sylvaneth Battletome: 1) more than 1" from enemy territory, and 2) more than 6" from any objectives. In particular, they need to clarify whether the Sylvaneth Battletome's more-than-6"-from-objectives requirement overrides "...more than 1" from objectives..." in the GHB. IMO, 6" is an "additional restriction."

From what I remember this was a debate when GHB 2019 came out last year. IIRC the settled upon interpretation was you used the least restrictive of the options available. That wasn’t the reasoning (obviously) but it was the conclusion. This was also the general concession of the player base at large, not specifically Sylvaneth players.

Also have we anything to say about the new terrain rules? I.e. Picking 3 wyldwoods and then rolling off to see which player places ALL the terrain. And the other player chooses sides?  That’s got to be a huge win for up in matched play games, although it remains to be seen how this and the other changes are treated by tournaments. 
 

[ppetford]

Lets all hope there is an FAQ this time to put the allegiance Wyldwood placement debate beyond doubt.

Until then my personal choice is to continue playing it 6" from objectives and 3" from everything else.

[Popisdead]

9 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

I think you mistaking what I’m saying. 

I’m not saying exploding sixes are better than +1 attack, I’m saying you wont be able to stack the +1 attack from both sources (Arch-rev and Grove CA) for more than 1 combat a turn. If there are 2 combats per round, the damage Winterleaf does over the course of the game is actually more because Harvestboon can only stack +1 attack every 2 turns. That’s 4 combats. Winterleaf exploding sixes do damage over all 4 combats and doesn’t require a CP be effective. I can show you the math if you want. 

Also, if you insist on burning 2 CP in a turn with Winterleaf, you can still buff T-revs with +1 attack and use it again on a unit of hunters anywhere on the board since CA can be used multiple times; just not on the same unit. 

Hmmm yeah mixed signals and good points.  I'm not sure I would be requiring 4 combats for stacking attacks, but I agree thanks, much appreciated.  👍  I am aware of stacking CA, having made use of it in Beasts of Chaos.  Not sure why I missed it here.

Tree Revs still feel like a valid combat threat in larger sizes than 5-man.  They aren't too dissimilar from Thralls (who feel like just a better version of the warscroll) who, while overshadowed by Eels aren't bad either (but I haven't faced them this edition... maybe that speaks for something).  the rend and dmg 2 can be a big surprise.  

I think I missed if you responded to your comment about "druanti" from before if you responded.  What is "druanit"?  Durthu and something?  You made reference to it for Winterleaf.

[Kaylethia]

@Popisdead Druanti is the name of the Arch-Revenant in Looncurse and the single model box. No actual named warscroll.

[Popisdead]

3 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:

@Popisdead Druanti is the name of the Arch-Revenant in Looncurse and the single model box. No actual named warscroll.

oohhhhhh....  .. k. 

 

thanks 

[Lanoss]

While I think a much needed change in this years GHB was for Alarielle to come down - I think the changes that did happen made way for some fun builds

I reckon this list is cool as now as it lets you take ALLLL the fun stuff and making the best of a combat army

Allegiance: Sylvaneth
- Glade: Winterleaf

Leaders
Spirit of Durthu (300)
- General
- Command Trait: My Heart Is Ice 
Spirit of Durthu (300)
Branchwraith (80)
- Artefact: Spiritsong Stave 
- Deepwood Spell: Verdurous Harmony
Arch-Revenant (100)
- Artefact: Frozen Kernel 
Drycha Hamadreth (300)
- Deepwood Spell: Regrowth

Battleline
5 x Spite-Revenants (60)
5 x Spite-Revenants (60)
5 x Spite-Revenants (60)

Units
6 x Kurnoth Hunters (380)
- Scythes
3 x Kurnoth Hunters (190)
- Scythes

Battalions
Outcasts (100)

Endless Spells / Terrain / CPs
Geminids of Uhl-Gysh (60)

Total: 1990 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 1
Wounds: 104

[Rhetoric]

Let’s talk about Artefacts and Spirit of Durthu in Gnarlroot.   Losing Ghyrstrike hurts bad.  Does anyone have an opinion on a good option?

[Popisdead]

2 hours ago, Rhetoric said:

Let’s talk about Artefacts and Spirit of Durthu in Gnarlroot.   Losing Ghyrstrike hurts bad.  Does anyone have an opinion on a good option?

I've used triple Durthu in Harvestboon.  But the 3rd had Ghyrstrike.  I just used someone's list posted a while ago in this thread.  It had Alarielle.  I think it would be much harder to use in a shooting meta.  But you can get a single Durthu to 8 A in Harvestboon.  

[Aezeal]

On 7/14/2020 at 11:21 AM, Mirage8112 said:

 

From what I remember this was a debate when GHB 2019 came out last year. IIRC the settled upon interpretation was you used the least restrictive of the options available. That wasn’t the reasoning (obviously) but it was the conclusion. This was also the general concession of the player base at large, not specifically Sylvaneth players.

Also have we anything to say about the new terrain rules? I.e. Picking 3 wyldwoods and then rolling off to see which player places ALL the terrain. And the other player chooses sides?  That’s got to be a huge win for up in matched play games, although it remains to be seen how this and the other changes are treated by tournaments. 
 

I always play all restrictions on top of each other.  I think it's : in our territory, more than 6' from objectives and more than 3' from every other terrain feature for the pre game forest.

I must have missed the new terrain rules: since when do we place 3 woods (the one in 3 pieces you mean I guess)? I always place terrain in consensus with opponent. Then roll for missions, place objectives, roll off and someone picks a side. Then I place my single wood within limits mentioned above. I know the Seraphon have a different rule which means their terrain piece is placed before table setup.. seems annoying for tournaments though.

 

EDIT: ah googled the new terrain rules.. those help. I guess if we let the GHB 2020 rules not only overrule the GHB 2019 but also the battletome (which is also a possible source for discussion but I think that is the intention), if the rule that it needs to be setup away from enemy territory is really completely gone that helps a lot too. In the link I found I didn't see you place forest first though... I read terrain and then 1' from objectives and 3' from other terrain.

Hopefully I can now more regularly place forests.. though enemy movement often limits my placements a lot if I don't get the first turn even if I get the spells off.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Aezeal

[Rhetoric]

9 hours ago, Popisdead said:

I've used triple Durthu in Harvestboon.  But the 3rd had Ghyrstrike.  I just used someone's list posted a while ago in this thread.  It had Alarielle.  I think it would be much harder to use in a shooting meta.  But you can get a single Durthu to 8 A in Harvestboon.  

Greenwood Gladius is nice. Am I calrazy for thinking Crown of Fell Bowers is worthwhile on Durthu in Gnarlroot?

[Kaylethia]

@Aezeal @Mirage8112

Forgive me if I've missed something, but the new faction terrain rules are the same as GHB 2019 errata ones, including the line about additional restrictions applying.

And how are you getting 3 woods? Sure, the terrain table has Wyldwoods, but our scenery is an Awakened Wyldwood. And if you mean by the Unique entry on the table, the GHB 2019 Designer's Commentary explicitly said not to use the warscroll and to generate a scenery effect when using faction terrain as Unique. I think I'll err on the side of caution until they clarify it either way.

[Zanzou]

On 7/8/2020 at 5:29 AM, Nos said:

Sylvaneth units pay a tax for... manoeuvre, summon and heal... They are not about going toe-to-toe with anyone

This was good before power creep.  Sylvaneth healing looks strong but then you remember the game was patched so that even monsters get bodied in one attack, which a heal does nothing for. In a climate like this, the armies with high defense would survive attacks that sylv wouldn't have a chance to survive to heal.  Manoeuvring and summoning are great but there are factions that can do these things on top of going toe-to-toe.

If sylvaneth are supposed to be tricksy, give TLA dual cast for a start.

I've mentioned before, the lack of dual-cast options in the new sylv gnarlroot, combined with the locked-in artefacts and such of glades had turned me off playing very much, as strategy-wise I felt forced into GW's cookie-cutter guides.  Having a dual caster that could be customized with an artefact would make at least something stimulating to work with, and TLA would instantly be 100% competitive with that one change.

Edited July 17, 2020 by Zanzou

[Mirage8112]

On 7/16/2020 at 2:06 PM, Kaylethia said:

@Aezeal @Mirage8112

Forgive me if I've missed something, but the new faction terrain rules are the same as GHB 2019 errata ones, including the line about additional restrictions applying.

Not exactly the same. There are significant differences regarding set-up and choosing sides. I believe in regard to restrictions, the last FAQ said use the most recent ruleset, this is why we’ve been deploying our free faction woods with the least restrictive placement. As I said before, I don’t remember the exact justification why, just that the was widely agreed upon with official backing from GW. I’ll likely be sticking with that interpretation until I have good justification otherwise. 
 

On 7/16/2020 at 2:06 PM, Kaylethia said:

And how are you getting 3 woods? Sure, the terrain table has Wyldwoods, but our scenery is an Awakened Wyldwood. And if you mean by the Unique entry on the table, the GHB 2019 Designer's Commentary explicitly said not to use the warscroll and to generate a scenery effect when using faction terrain as Unique. I think I'll err on the side of caution until they clarify it either way.

I’m not referring to the “unique” terrain feature myself.  Ruleset says if it’s on the list, and has a warscroll, then that’s what you use. The only warscroll we have for a wyldwood is the awakened Wyldwood. That’s close enough for me to make a decent arguement for, so that‘S likely what I’ll be playing. (Although I’ve been playing it this way since the last GHB, since the entry is the same.) 

Have you sent a FAQ About it yet? 

 

5 hours ago, Zanzou said:

This was good before power creep.  Sylvaneth healing looks strong but then you remember the game was patched so that even monsters get bodied in one attack, which a heal does nothing for.

It’s still good. If your monsters are getting wrecked in one round of combat then your doing it wrong. This typically happens when your monsters try to solo large units of 20+ 3+/3+ -2 rend or thereabouts alone. 

Durthu’s are obviously combat gods (providing they strike first and don’t drop a bracket) and meant to be front-line fighters, but they really need support. This is why they need to be run in pairs with a TL, both to maximize stomp and to have a little extra combat punch. It helps to think of Treelords as support units and not front-line combat units. They are mostly there to disrupt the activation wars (With Stomp) and soak 1/3 to 1/2 a units damage output. If you send them in alone, there’s nothing to support and they get wrecked. Surround them with hunters and they’re baller AF. Surround them with Dryads and you can hold an objective for days. If you’re getting shot to death, why aren’t you using screens to zone out shooting or LoS blocking terrain?  Some armies are harder than others to deal with, but one or both of those two things (screening and terrain) are enough to handle just about anything I can think of. 

 

5 hours ago, Zanzou said:

In a climate like this, the armies with high defense would survive attacks that sylv wouldn't have a chance to survive to heal.  Manoeuvring and summoning are great but there are factions that can do these things on top of going toe-to-toe.

This is tough to respond to, because I don’t know exactly what your referencing. Most every army depends on synergies between units to make something like this happen. It’s not like these buffs are “secret“ and  you won’t know how everything combines to make something a “super” unit.  Sometimes you have the ability to shut 1-2 components (spells can be unbound, you can take out support units ect) to keep this from happening, but occasionally you can’t. What then?

It reminds me of a discussion I had not the long ago regarding petrifex elite Mortek guard. Somebody was asking how you beat a unit of 30 fully buffed with 3+/3+ -2 rend RR hit’s and wounds, RR’ing a 3+ unrendable save And bringing dead back on a 4+ (or something absurd like that).  

The answer is you can’t and you don’t (obviously). You play around it. If you can’t beat it, dont fight it: Tie it down. Keep it fighting 80 point (or free) units  for 1-2 turns before letting it charge a dryad block in a forest.  5 man units of t-revs are great because you can teleport them between the threat and your objective holders in your turn. You move 10 man Dryad blocks and position them in the way (3-4 inches usually does the trick). By turn 4 they should reach your objective holders. I prefer 20-30 Drayds with a TLA in the middle near a WW. It will likely kill all of them, but it will take 2-3 turns to do it (if your smart about using trees/scenery to limit incoming attacks).   You basically feed it chaff until turn 4, and by that time you should be ahead enough on objectives that it doesn’t matter if it kills everything.  

I’ve won plenty of battles even though I’ve lost a significant amount more of my force that my opponent. This is first and foremost an objective game. Objectives are captured by movement and not combat. Sure combat is important, but you can get crushed in combat and still win: if you play smart and don’t waste time trying to kill things that you can’t kill. 

 

5 hours ago, Zanzou said:

If sylvaneth are supposed to be tricksy, give TLA dual cast for a start.

I've mentioned before, the lack of dual-cast options in the new sylv gnarlroot, combined with the locked-in artefacts and such of glades had turned me off playing very much, as strategy-wise I felt forced into GW's cookie-cutter guides.  Having a dual caster that could be customized with an artefact would make at least something stimulating to work with, and TLA would instantly be 100% competitive with that one change.

TLA’s already pretty competitive. I wouldn’t turn down an extra spell, but you’d probably be looking at point increase. I don’t really find that I need the extra spell (I usually run 3 casters, TLA, Bwraith and Drycha or wytch) so sometimes my 3rd cast is a throwaway anyway.

Have you tried perhaps building your own wargrove rather than taking the preset ones? There’s a bunch of decent items/command traits that are well worth taking. I’ve toyed around with some of the builds and found somethings I’d be happy to play.



  

 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Mirage8112

[Kaylethia]

10 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

I believe in regard to restrictions, the last FAQ said use the most recent ruleset, this is why we’ve been deploying our free faction woods with the least restrictive placement.

The 2019 FAQ had this:

In a Pitched Battle, faction terrain must be set up more 
than 3" from any other terrain features and more 
than 1" from any objectives, in addition to any other 
restrictions that apply to it. Sometimes this will make it 
impossible for a faction terrain piece to be set up; in this 
case, it is not used.’

I've always taken it to mean to layer every restriction and use the worst, and I have a rules lawyer-y player in the group, so everything has to be "exactly by the rules or FAQ as written, damnit." I'd be very happy if you, or someone else could point me in the right direction. 

I've popped off an email to aosfaq, will see what comes from it, but my scouring of the internet hasn't turned up anything regarding Wyldwoods and Awakened Wyldwoods rules- or model-wise.

[overtninja]

@Lanoss I run  a similar list, but with Durthu, Drycha, TLA, Branchwaith, and Arch-rev, with 6 scythe Kurnoth, 3 Sword(or bow) kurnoth, and  2x5 spites and 1x10 spites, with the Outcast battalion. The points reductions let me add the spooky ghost bad-touch tree, which is just what I wanted to run with. I usually run a weapon on my Durthu and the auto-cast on my Branchwraith, and it's just awful to fight. I throw out my free tree, and then my free tree with my TLA, and then another tree, and then the midfield is full of angry gardens and it's just bad for my opponent.

I know Sylvaneth aren't a top-tier list, but this is a local meta bully for me, such that I can't trot It out unless I'm playing in a tournament. Its just rude to do. Between tree teleports and command point teleports, you have extreme mobility, and you can summon things to hold your objectives, and you've got alpha-strike with multiple models.

[Nos]

13 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

Not exactly the same. There are significant differences regarding set-up and choosing sides. I believe in regard to restrictions, the last FAQ said use the most recent ruleset, this is why we’ve been deploying our free faction woods with the least restrictive placement. As I said before, I don’t remember the exact justification why, just that the was widely agreed upon with official backing from GW. I’ll likely be sticking with that interpretation until I have good justification otherwise. 
 

I’m not referring to the “unique” terrain feature myself.  Ruleset says if it’s on the list, and has a warscroll, then that’s what you use. The only warscroll we have for a wyldwood is the awakened Wyldwood. That’s close enough for me to make a decent arguement for, so that‘S likely what I’ll be playing. (Although I’ve been playing it this way since the last GHB, since the entry is the same.) 

Have you sent a FAQ About it yet? 

 

It’s still good. If your monsters are getting wrecked in one round of combat then your doing it wrong. This typically happens when your monsters try to solo large units of 20+ 3+/3+ -2 rend or thereabouts alone. 

Durthu’s are obviously combat gods (providing they strike first and don’t drop a bracket) and meant to be front-line fighters, but they really need support. This is why they need to be run in pairs with a TL, both to maximize stomp and to have a little extra combat punch. It helps to think of Treelords as support units and not front-line combat units. They are mostly there to disrupt the activation wars (With Stomp) and soak 1/3 to 1/2 a units damage output. If you send them in alone, there’s nothing to support and they get wrecked. Surround them with hunters and they’re baller AF. Surround them with Dryads and you can hold an objective for days. If you’re getting shot to death, why aren’t you using screens to zone out shooting or LoS blocking terrain?  Some armies are harder than others to deal with, but one or both of those two things (screening and terrain) are enough to handle just about anything I can think of. 

 

This is tough to respond to, because I don’t know exactly what your referencing. Most every army depends on synergies between units to make something like this happen. It’s not like these buffs are “secret“ and  you won’t know how everything combines to make something a “super” unit.  Sometimes you have the ability to shut 1-2 components (spells can be unbound, you can take out support units ect) to keep this from happening, but occasionally you can’t. What then?

It reminds me of a discussion I had not the long ago regarding petrifex elite Mortek guard. Somebody was asking how you beat a unit of 30 fully buffed with 3+/3+ -2 rend RR hit’s and wounds, RR’ing a 3+ unrendable save And bringing dead back on a 4+ (or something absurd like that).  

The answer is you can’t and you don’t (obviously). You play around it. If you can’t beat it, dont fight it: Tie it down. Keep it fighting 80 point (or free) units  for 1-2 turns before letting it charge a dryad block in a forest.  5 man units of t-revs are great because you can teleport them between the threat and your objective holders in your turn. You move 10 man Dryad blocks and position them in the way (3-4 inches usually does the trick). By turn 4 they should reach your objective holders. I prefer 20-30 Drayds with a TLA in the middle near a WW. It will likely kill all of them, but it will take 2-3 turns to do it (if your smart about using trees/scenery to limit incoming attacks).   You basically feed it chaff until turn 4, and by that time you should be ahead enough on objectives that it doesn’t matter if it kills everything.  

I’ve won plenty of battles even though I’ve lost a significant amount more of my force that my opponent. This is first and foremost an objective game. Objectives are captured by movement and not combat. Sure combat is important, but you can get crushed in combat and still win: if you play smart and don’t waste time trying to kill things that you can’t kill. 

 

TLA’s already pretty competitive. I wouldn’t turn down an extra spell, but you’d probably be looking at point increase. I don’t really find that I need the extra spell (I usually run 3 casters, TLA, Bwraith and Drycha or wytch) so sometimes my 3rd cast is a throwaway anyway.

Have you tried perhaps building your own wargrove rather than taking the preset ones? There’s a bunch of decent items/command traits that are well worth taking. I’ve toyed around with some of the builds and found somethings I’d be happy to play.



  

 

Quoted all above for truth.

All I can say in response to other posts that quoted mine is that as above I find the toolkit for Sylvaneth to be fairly obvious and use it as such.

Ambush and overwhelm the key enemy pieces with powerful units such as KH and Durthu, which is much easier for Sylvaneth than most due to high mobility, immobilise or sacrifice chaff to enemy elites which Dryads  Spites and Revs are outstanding at (Dryads are free! You can literally make a 500 point unit focus all its killing power on zero points!),  have a reserve to swing late game which again, Revs are aguably best in the game for (Waypipes mean they can set up *anywhere* 9 inches away from an enemy, not table edge remember, late game that's huge), but woods and Dryads also very valuable.

All of these are principles for pretty much any war game concept really and are an extension of Sun Tzu's Art of War. Only fight where you know you'll win, avoid where you know you wont.

In matched play wargames, the extension of this is to make sure expensive units justify or recoup their cost through killing points or taking objectives, and make cheap units more economical by wasting the time and investment of the enemy's expensive units and deny them the fights they want.

The issue with these is having the mobility and adaptability to create such favourable match ups but Sylvaneth are exceptional at that. Likewise in respect to the potential of being double turned, Sylvaneth have excellent capacity to Castle up in defence but also to quickly turn into attack if you get the chance to double turn yourself.

Honestly I dont consider myself some sort of tactical genius and I've certainly lost with Sylvaneth, especially at the release of the new rulebook when I started with them and had to work out how differebtvthey were from Stormcast. But once it clicked, I'be never lost by much, and wins far outweigh losses including against the flavour of the month netlists (before lockdown admittedly).

Sylvaneth epitomise the "cant hurt what you cant touch" maxim. If as a Sylvaneth player you're in a position where big chunks of your army are getting tabled in one go, you're either assessing the wrong fights offensively or setting up badly defensively. Theres no reason with the amount of maneuverability that Sylvaneth have to let a substantial investment be getting munched in one turn or even double turn.

If you're looking for a kill all comers net list that some factions have, with a central gimmick designed to deny the opponent from the get go, Sylvaneth dont have it, you wont find it. They are the antithesis of a point and click approach. That dosen't make them weak though.

At the very top level, where the best players are playing each other, it stands to reason that players whose decision making and understanding of the game is excellent,that in control of an imbalanced faction, they will beat a similarly gifted player using a merely balanced army such as Sylvaneth. Because not only will they have an army designed to win from the outset, they will have the strategic capability to respond to things they wernt anticipating as well.

But that's not 99% of people on here, and most of the issues on this forum or similar on the internet demonstrate that the issue isnt Sylvaneth, it's people trying to play them as something they arebt and ignoring the strengths of what they are. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Nos