AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[Predien]

40 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

So I 100% understand your logic, and I actually pled the same case a few month's ago. 

But like many other players, I get my rules from websites online rather than buying the codexes. And when you read that sentence out of context, it absolutely implies that the spell is available to any Sylvaneth Wizard.

However, within the book, the rule clearly resides under "allegiance abilities". So the intent is quite clear. And  even if you go the RAW route, you are going to have a hard time getting someone to ignore that heading.

Also no other faction can draw on abilities outside of their warscroll when fielded as allies. So the precedent is also clear. 

Is it ambiguous? Absolutely. Can you get away with it in pickup games? Probably.

But if you bring a Branchwraith ally to a tournament and start throwing forests on the table, you really need an air-tight ruling. Because I guarantee its going to be questioned, and the typical avenues of  discrepancy resolution (RAW, RAI, and precedent) are not in your favor. 

 

I get the argument about it being an allegiance ability since it's under the "allegiance abilities" section but look at the "Types of Abilities" paragraph from the "Allegiance Abilities" section in the AoS rules pdf.

I'm taking this next part directly from the general rules pdf for AoS: "Most allegiance abilities include sets of battle traits, command traits, artefacts of power and spell lores. These are sometimes presented on a table - you can either roll on that table to randomly generate an ability or you can choose one. Remember that allegiance abilities cannot be used by allied units in your army." This rule about Verdant Blessing isn't an allegiance ability (otherwise GW would have put it on page 65 in the Sylvaneth book - they had the room because half of that page is empty). It's not a spell lore because it's not in the table and the Vesperal Gem FAQ. And it doesn't really fit into any of those other categories. I think there's a solid argument for including Verdant Blessing outside of Sylvaneth allegiance. 

This 100% needs an FAQ from GW because I feel like it's a very unique situation to only Sylvaneth that could really effect Living Cities and Seraphon since those are the ones that I see potentially allying in Sylvaneth the most. All GW has to say is that Verdant Blessing is/is not an allegiance ability which would settle this.

Thanks for the discussion on this Lando! Maybe I'll start spamming the GW rules department and see if they can get back to me on it.

[Landohammer]

1 hour ago, Predien said:

I get the argument about it being an allegiance ability since it's under the "allegiance abilities" section but look at the "Types of Abilities" paragraph from the "Allegiance Abilities" section in the AoS rules pdf.

I'm taking this next part directly from the general rules pdf for AoS: "Most allegiance abilities include sets of battle traits, command traits, artefacts of power and spell lores. These are sometimes presented on a table - you can either roll on that table to randomly generate an ability or you can choose one. Remember that allegiance abilities cannot be used by allied units in your army." This rule about Verdant Blessing isn't an allegiance ability (otherwise GW would have put it on page 65 in the Sylvaneth book - they had the room because half of that page is empty). It's not a spell lore because it's not in the table and the Vesperal Gem FAQ. And it doesn't really fit into any of those other categories. I think there's a solid argument for including Verdant Blessing outside of Sylvaneth allegiance. 

This 100% needs an FAQ from GW because I feel like it's a very unique situation to only Sylvaneth that could really effect Living Cities and Seraphon since those are the ones that I see potentially allying in Sylvaneth the most. All GW has to say is that Verdant Blessing is/is not an allegiance ability which would settle this.

Thanks for the discussion on this Lando! Maybe I'll start spamming the GW rules department and see if they can get back to me on it.

Yea no problem. I actually used the Vesperal Gem FAQ point  as well on my original argument FOR the inclusion of Verdant Blessing. Its funny how now I am defending the other side lol. 

It definitely needs a clarification. But personally I will not be using Branchwraith allies in my armies until it does get Errata'd. The forests and extra dryads are a pain to transport and the allied Branchwraith is otherwise useless.

In my experience this kind of stuff ends up becoming an issue at the worst possible times (like on a top table) and I would hate for there to be an asterisk by any of my wins (as rare as they are lol) 

[Predien]

2 hours ago, Landohammer said:

Yea no problem. I actually used the Vesperal Gem FAQ point  as well on my original argument FOR the inclusion of Verdant Blessing. Its funny how now I am defending the other side lol. 

It definitely needs a clarification. But personally I will not be using Branchwraith allies in my armies until it does get Errata'd. The forests and extra dryads are a pain to transport and the allied Branchwraith is otherwise useless.

In my experience this kind of stuff ends up becoming an issue at the worst possible times (like on a top table) and I would hate for there to be an asterisk by any of my wins (as rare as they are lol) 

Totally agree with you! Clarification is needed. I sent an email and if I hear back from an official GW person I'll let everyone know. Fingers crossed we see some FAQ about it in the near future. I'd love to mess with some Living Cities lists with Durthu but only if I can somehow get some trees for him to fight near. 

[scrubyandwells]

On 6/16/2020 at 6:40 PM, Lanoss said:

Hi @scrubyandwells what are your thoughts on the wording next to the Verdant Blessing spell?  It states something like “all Sylvaneth wizards know the Verdant blessing in addition to any other spells they know.” <full stop. It then says “in addition, they can also choose one from the Syl Lore if they’re a wizard in a Sylvaneth Army” - paraphrasing of course. 

My question  to you is, would you assume then that Syl allies in another army can use the Verdant Blessing spell? (And therefore summon trees and dryads and teleport)

I think others covered it really well. Reasonable arguments exist on both sides. We need clarity. Definitely recommend emailing AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. In the mean time, personally would err on caution and play as if it is tethered to Sylvaneth Allegiance Abilities.

[Aezeal]

So I had not played in a while due to COVID regulations. First game against the new Seraphon.

I had taken a bit of a mixed list:

Drycha, Arch rev,  2x wraith, 1x 6 swords, 3 scythes, 3 bows, 20 spites, 30 dryads and 5 T revs and the hive.

He played Coalesced (apparently not even the best lists/lists played in tournaments according to my opponent)

1 slann, 1 EotG, 1 Stegadon with something shooty, 2 bastilladon (shooty), 1 OB on carnosaru, 5 knights, 5 TG and 2 salamanders

 

While it was fun to play again  I couldn't do much. So a bit of a rant below, don't read if you don't like to hear complaining.

Summary: Before I could play my 3th turn I was nearly tabled (3 sword hunters - in a combat they'd loose, 2 bow hunters and 3 dryads - also in a combat they'd loose-  remaining) and was already behind on points.

Now I'll readily admit I made tons of mistakes but it seems to me his book is way better than ours in almost every phase. He didn't use fancy tactics either.. just shoot and magic half my army away while moving melee elements my way.. and even in melee he had the advantage.

Command abilities: He has several good abilities and generates enough points to make use of them

Batallion: The option to run and charge or run and shoot means one of his bastilladons had essentially the same range as hunters.  The alternative to get +1 attack on the batallion is a very good alternative too. Sure it's a bit more expensive than most of ours but it's quite a bit better than the stuff we take mostly to get items and it adresses one of the weaker points in his army (while ours are a bit fluffy.. but also weak and unneeded often).

Magic: A slann killing 2 of my  5 wound characters in 2 turns with magic (@ +2 to cast) and damaging the arch rev so that it's gone too in his 2nd turn shooting phase. And the same Slann unbinds all my spells at +2 (due to some artefact) and having a reroll on that once per hero phase is just nasty. I think I got to try to cast 6 spells the whole game and all failed or where unbound.

Shooting:  His shooters  have less range than my bow hunters (however see batallion.. it's not that bad) but do about 1.5 times the damage I think.. and bastiladons have enough range so they can hit something and do that damage. The Salamanders have a pretty low range.. sure but -2 rend . He had nearly  half my army gone after 2 magic and shooting phases I think.

Combat: All damage against him is at -1 D (min1) making sword hunters effectively useless.  And his bastiladons are pretty hard to kill too (unless with MW .. but our magic that needs to do that damage is unable to do it). His Old blood on carnosaur was pretty terrifying with all the buffs it had (yes some cost CP but his slann generates those too) - +1 to hit, +1 to jaw attack and I think something else too... which means his melee is ALSO better than anything I could put against him.  Slann with temple guard is pretty hard to kill too (especially at -1 D)

Movement : Sylvaneth does have better base movement overall and we have teleport options (though when it's near impossible to place a 2nd forest that is limited). But he had options to give a battalion run and shoot or run and charge in essential turns.

 

Am I missing something? I think I'll be playing again against this guy so I'd really like to know if it's really as bad as I think it is and if not I'd like some pointers in the right direction about how to play this. Even if I tailor a list against him (mostly 1 damage so it's not lowered by the coalesced ability maybe) I just don't see enough potential there to make this a somewhat even match-up.

 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Aezeal

[ppetford]

I was in exactly the same situation as you at the weekend, not having played for a while due to Covid and other commitments. I played against FEC and had the same thoughts about my opponent's army. It moves quicker, can run and charge, is better in combat, is better at damage mitigation, is better at healing and getting models back, is able to generate additional command points and has a decent magic phase. Turn 2 or 3 I was thinking "what does my army have?"

My opponent is a very good friend with tonnes of games under his belt from various tournaments and helped me loads in my turns. With his help the game ended up a loss for me, but only by 1 point - even though I essentially only had a wraith and summoned Dryads turn 4 & 5 and he still had 2 terrorghiests amongst other units.

I think the army needs alot of finesse and having had a bit of coaching I can now see that what we have is the ability to score late game objectives. The goal is to keep units alive, not to kill the enemy. Play the scenario at all costs even above kill points. That's what I learned from my game.

Interested to see what other players with more experience than me have to say.

Edited June 24, 2020 by ppetford

[Popisdead]

18 hours ago, Aezeal said:

Drycha, Arch rev,  2x wraith, 1x 6 swords, 3 scythes, 3 bows, 20 spites, 30 dryads and 5 T revs and the hive.

...

Am I missing something? I think I'll be playing again against this guy so I'd really like to know if it's really as bad as I think it is and if not I'd like some pointers in the right direction about how to play this. 

Well 1 x 6 Swords vs 1x 3 Scythes is a backwards configuration (feel free to argue swords vs scythes again, and I'll ignore my findings and just quote some UK masters).

You could run the spites a 3x5 in the Outcast battalion.  20 spites on their own are just.. lots of attacks.  It isn't like you're getting the benefit of 40 Ungors in Slaanesh with 3 exploding hits or Beasts of Chaos and multiple stacks of rend and spamming +1A command ability.  

Seraphon are top dog and Sylvaneth are arguably bottom.  

AoS coach interviewed Hugh Laurie (spelling?) and he went into detail about the Dreadwood build and some key things in the book to be aware of in the book that helps (the Places of Power rule, or whatever it's called for immune to Battleshock)

@scrubyandwells just did a good interview with Warhammer Weekly and they talked about the struggles of the book.  Good listen, he's a good and smart guest, knowledgeable but if timing were an issue or well,.. I would just start with the Hugh Laurie interview on AoS coach first.  I would almost argue it's recommended "reading" for anyone who wants to get serious about Sylvaneth as a competitive army.

[Landohammer]

@Aezeal

His list is pretty stout but the true terror of Seraphon is Salamander spam. But do note that Kurnoth Bow Hunters (and maybe even double Branchwraiths) are decisively noncompetitive list selections. Compare Sisters of the Watch, Ballistas, or Vanguard Raptors to your 200pt Bow Hunters and prepare to be pissed off lol. 

But, at the end of the day, Sylvaneth are just in a rough place right now. I hate to say that because they are my favorite army of any game system.  We just don't really do anything particularly well and our strongest mechanics like teleport charges and ASL are simply too unreliable. 

Personally, I have come to a two main conclusions that I wanted to share with the group. These aren't necessarily directed toward you but maybe these will help others who are struggling re-evaluate their list.

-Every competitive Sylvaneth list needs to have at least two units of 6 Kurnoth Hunters and an Arch Rev. These are the breadwinners of the entire army. Swords or Scythes are fine. Screen and buff these units and they can carry the army. 

-Don't overly rely on magic. Right now the competitive meta is full of armies that can simply shut down your magic and its only going to get worse with Lumineth on the horizon. I feel like Dreadwood has been knocked down the "Glade hierarchy" a bit recently with Nagash, Tzeentch, Khorne and Hallowheart becoming more popular. If you can't reliably cast Spiteswarm hive then Dreadwood just isn't reliable enough.

 

[Aezeal]

4 minutes ago, Landohammer said:

@Aezeal

His list is pretty stout but the true terror of Seraphon is Salamander spam. But do note that Kurnoth Bow Hunters (and maybe even double Branchwraiths) are decisively noncompetitive list selections. Compare Sisters of the Watch, Ballistas, or Vanguard Raptors to your 200pt Bow Hunters and prepare to be pissed off lol. 

But, at the end of the day, Sylvaneth are just in a rough place right now. I hate to say that because they are my favorite army of any game system.  We just don't really do anything particularly well and our strongest mechanics like teleport charges and ASL are simply too unreliable. 

Personally, I have come to a two main conclusions that I wanted to share with the group. These aren't necessarily directed toward you but maybe these will help others who are struggling re-evaluate their list.

-Every competitive Sylvaneth list needs to have at least two units of 6 Kurnoth Hunters and an Arch Rev. These are the breadwinners of the entire army. Swords or Scythes are fine. Screen and buff these units and they can carry the army. 

-Don't overly rely on magic. Right now the competitive meta is full of armies that can simply shut down your magic and its only going to get worse with Lumineth on the horizon. I feel like Dreadwood has been knocked down the "Glade hierarchy" a bit recently with Nagash, Tzeentch, Khorne and Hallowheart becoming more popular. If you can't reliably cast Spiteswarm hive then Dreadwood just isn't reliable enough.

 

I agree with all your points. My opponent hadn't played for over a year so both of us didn't know his list was much stronger than mine so I'd not taken a top grade list (as I said.. just a bit of everything).

 

I especially agree on not relying on magic. I don't rely on it this was actually the first time I took spite and I didn't play Dreadwood but winterleaf. Though I loved magic tree at start of AoS (and I hope we'll get it back; Allarielle not having a +2 to cast being a goddess is odd, and while treelord ancients are no slann they are described as wise powerfull mages.. in the current game 2 spells and +1 to cast on them wouldn't be out of line... probably even without point increase). Magic as it is is pretty unreliable for basic mages (unless you have a starmaster with 3 spell @ +2 to cast and unbind and a reroll ofcourse). It's just that I had some points to spare and because I did know seraphon was magicky but didn't know HOW strong I figured a third caster for a 3th unbind might be usefull (of course.. that was a complete illusion. Against his list any point invested in magic was worthless.. and any points in characters too since he can just snipe anything in a few turns with the combination of the Slann spell and running and shooting bastilladons. Combined with his -1 D (min 1) I figure the best against his army is just spamming wounds.. tons and tons of dryads and spites and stuff to buff them might be the best option. And while I agree melee hunters are generally our best bet (will take your advice on taking 2x 6  and forgetting bows in general) I think against this list they might not even be worth it since damage of swords is halved and damage of scythes is.. well not doing the math but I think it's probably lowered by about 1/3 or 3/8.

 

I might try living city (using my old WW or GG as sisters since noone really field GG anyway I think)

[a74xhx]

Not relying on magic... Are we really saying the only worthwhile glade now is Winterleaf? 

[The World Tree]

13 hours ago, a74xhx said:

Not relying on magic... Are we really saying the only worthwhile glade now is Winterleaf? 

Dreadwood is by far the best glade in my experience. Though I do think most of the glades are nicely designed in terms of internal balance

[Kaylethia]

Having started a Tzeentch demon army for an escalation league, 500 point and 1k games with DoT have felt like a breath of fresh air.

That said, I agree with some of the points that Laurie brought up on the AoS Coach podcast:

• Bow Hunters aren't useless (a buddy ran an analysis, and they're roughly equal to 2 Celestar Ballistas in output), the 24 bow Hunter list was hilarious
• Our place in the game has shifted, and we don't necessarily need to kill things to win games thanks to wyldwoods, Dreadwood and Tree-Revenants enabling us to score late. 
• We can play (and focus on) every phase of the game, but we don't have to. The above Arch-Rev, 4x5 Tree-Rev, 8x3 Bow Hunter Heartwood list being a prime example of doing one thing well. You give up magic, wyldwoods and teleports to just delete something each turn while also forcing your opponent honest about moving up the board.
• "The best Sylvaneth army isn't, in fact, CoS Living City"

I'm not a competitive player however, just a random guy who tries to play once or twice a week, forgets rules, has trouble with crowded tables being the norm at 1k, and can't find enough time to finish all the stuff I've bought. I still like my angry demon trees, even if Hallowheart, Seraphon and Tzeentch do magic better, Tzeentch, KO, Fyreslayers and CoS do shooting better, Warclans charge better, Fyreslayers, Chaos and Destruction fight better, Fyreslayers, S2D, SCE and OBR hold the line better, and most things ignore battleshock better (or are actively helped by it, Pink Horrors are disgusting). 

That last line was extremely cathartic to finally get out. I don't think (from my very limited perspective) that Sylvaneth is in a particularly bad place, just that the rules and warscrolls are decidedly middle-of-the-road. Nothing stands out, but nothing is actively bad either. Which is a fine place to be in for an army that during the 1.0 days was regularly named one of the most unfun armies to play against. 

[Lanoss]

I’d agree. While ensuring Sylvaneth get a good magic phase is surely not always possible, we have access to Vesperal Gem to auto cast. Winter leaf, Heartwood and Harvestboon are all very good magic-less Glades

I like the idea of 24 bows btw haha

[Nos]

Sylvaneth are for me exactly where AOS should be rules wise- good internal balance, excellent thematic playstyle, engages with all phases of the turn, no -auto win or auto-pick options,requires synergy and strategy to win.

I wish all other factions were as well designed.

But Sylvaneth can still do well precisley because of the above qualities, they're not weak at all, its just that, as has always been the case with Warhammer, there are deeply imbalanced and over powerful factions where players dont have to play in nearly as considered or thoughtful manner to win with them. But as someone who would like to win because they played well, Sylvaneth are still a very fun option for me.

[Kiekeboe]

9 hours ago, Nos said:

Sylvaneth are for me exactly where AOS should be rules wise- good internal balance, excellent thematic playstyle, engages with all phases of the turn, no -auto win or auto-pick options,requires synergy and strategy to win.

I wish all other factions were as well designed.

But Sylvaneth can still do well precisley because of the above qualities, they're not weak at all, its just that, as has always been the case with Warhammer, there are deeply imbalanced and over powerful factions where players dont have to play in nearly as considered or thoughtful manner to win with them. But as someone who would like to win because they played well, Sylvaneth are still a very fun option for me.

If pretty much everyone else is strong, doesn't that simply mean Sylvaneth is weak? Sylvaneth plays in a unique way that makes it fun for me as well, you're absolutely right there. But saying they're okay right now is being ignorant. You can absolutely win games, sure, but you can't make mistakes along the way, and your opponent can't be lucky.

They're also so incredibly far from having an excellent thematic playstyle in my opinion. I played against Nurgle and the way that player spread their trees over the board felt so much more Sylvaneth-y to me than when I tried to cast a wood and it got denied, also ruining the turn I had hoped to play. Try 'thematically' growing your forests against Seraphon/Tzeentch (and probably Teclis in the future) and see how far you get. Sylvaneth is also supposed to be the faction of life/growth but only Alarielle embodies this theme properly, and her healing goes to waste most of the time as well. Lore-wise soul pods play a huge role in Sylvaneth, where are they in the game? Why can't we grow new bodies from pods? Simple rule changes like changing "heal X amount" to "heal X amount or restore X amount worth of wounds in models instead" would thematically make so much more sense.  Then there's the 3 treelords who are supposed to be sturdy, strong, immovable objects in terms of lore, yet they die when they're being looked at funny because they have nothing to save them on top of their normal save. That's even more of the Sylvaneth healing going to waste because if someone wants a treelord dead they can most likely make it happen in a single turn. The only good thing I can say about thematic playstyle is the way we have glades. Glades (their viability left aside) completely change the identity of your army and playing a different glade is pretty much the same as playing a different army, which is great.

 

To sum it up: in my opinion there's a huge disconnect between what the lore says Sylvaneth are, and what we see on the battlefield. Sylvaneth is still great fun to play and I keep returning to it after trying out different armies, but given what currently are the most popular armies they're in a really bad spot.

[Kaylethia]

26 minutes ago, Kiekeboe said:

To sum it up: in my opinion there's a huge disconnect between what the lore says Sylvaneth are, and what we see on the battlefield.

I agree that Sylvaneth has some issues with ludonarrative dissonance that have been brought up earlier (bow hunters being elite but hitting on a 4+, for example).
On the same note, why aren't S2D (especially with Khorne marks) immune to battleshock? Why are Fyreslayers less likely to run away than demons or undead? I digress.
 

The big disconnect (for me, at least) lies in the fact that we don't have any single thing to point at and say "we're the best at this." But we are generally above the bog standard average for everything. Dryads are above average tarpits. Hunters are pure gas monstrous infantry while holding the line as well. Tree-revenants are teleporting speed bumps that force protection on backline objectives and soft units. Spites are glass cannon elite infantry that mess with bravery (and I fully realize that battleshock has become kind of a joke). We have cheap caster options in the B-Wych and B-Wraith. Regular treelords are almost like hunters while having worse bracketing due to damage table granularity, but they take heals better.

46 minutes ago, Kiekeboe said:

If pretty much everyone else is strong, doesn't that simply mean Sylvaneth is weak?

Everyone else is strong in specific things. Sylvaneth have above average options in everything. While we can't build a list that will beat everything out there, we have list that will beat everything but X and Y.

Hoping to dodge certain matchups at a tournament isn't much of a plan, but we do have popularity data to aid in general listbuilding.

[Grimbok]

Above average options in everything? Really now? 

Magic. No...not really. Even non casting KO are better with their spell in a bottle. Sylvaneth have terrible casters, a Goddess that does not even know her spell lore. Actual bad spells in the lore. 

Anvils...no. Dryads, not really. Depends on woods that are not there. 

Hitting power. No. Even Kurnoths are worse than most armies hard hitters per point. (But it is all we got).

Movement. Except for dreadwood, no. Getting woods down is very hard, unbinding, space etc. 

 

I agree that there is a large dissonance. How are Sylvaneth supposed to play? Actually it is hard to say. Mixed arms force, hit at run tactics?  Not really where they are at now? 

 

Grimbok

 

 

[Nos]

3 hours ago, Grimbok said:

Above average options in everything? Really now? 

Magic. No...not really. Even non casting KO are better with their spell in a bottle. Sylvaneth have terrible casters, a Goddess that does not even know her spell lore. Actual bad spells in the lore. 

Anvils...no. Dryads, not really. Depends on woods that are not there. 

Hitting power. No. Even Kurnoths are worse than most armies hard hitters per point. (But it is all we got).

Movement. Except for dreadwood, no. Getting woods down is very hard, unbinding, space etc. 

 

I agree that there is a large dissonance. How are Sylvaneth supposed to play? Actually it is hard to say. Mixed arms force, hit at run tactics?  Not really where they are at now? 

 

Grimbok

 

 

The issue with this is that you have a very good player who has convincingly made the case for them not just with words but through tournament placing.

The Sylvaneth are a lot of what I like about AOS at it's best, as above, but their current position exposes for me a lot of the issues with AOS too. I think the best Sylvaneth players demonstrate that there is real objective skill to the game and its systems, through the use of clever movement, placing, counter play etc. They aren't weak but they're sort of a neutral gear. To make them work *you* have to make them work. Profiles and allegiance abilities are not enough.

But the over powered factions also illustrate that any nuance and elegance in the game is frequently just obliterated by smothering it all in the million dice re-rolls in one turn easily facilitated by the crazy profiles and allegiance abilities of other factions.

In short-every mechanic matters when playing Sylvaneth. Whereas with Petrifex et al you can simply ignore most of them if so inclined.

Edited June 29, 2020 by Nos

[Grimbok]

But that one player is:

 

1 A very good player

2 Plays Dreadwood, which eliminates many of the inherent issues with the army

3 His competitive armies er weird unfluffy/spammy and does in no way resemble a typical sylvaneth force (which is fair enough, he has to compete in a rough enviroment out there).

 

Try building and playing a “normal” army even in casual games, the battletome simply does not work, it is that badly designed. A rush job.

 

It’s not only about power or the “meta”, many units have no clear role, function og identity on the tabletop. That is what annoys me the most, why can Tree Revenants not fight? They are the main soldiers of the Household? Why can’t treelords fight? What is the meaning of a branchwychs warscroll spell? How come an Arch Revenants boosts Kurnoths, not Tree Revenants? There are so few warsrolls in this army, every single one needs a role. That’s what I like with the Lumineth, each has a useful and specific purpose. (Although there are other major design issues with Lumineth, mortal wound spam, too many negative play experience rules etc).

 

 

Grimbok

[Kaylethia]

When was the last time you didn't see a casual list inspired by an analysis off the internet? And when you did, how often was the same still true for the next game? When was the last time an analysis wasn't based at least in part on how quickly you table or cripple your opponent or how effectively you can shut down X or Y phase for your opponent?

Our units don't have clearly defined roles because they (pardon the pun) branch out. Dryads carry defensive synergy and an offensive ability. Tree-Revenants can fight, they just aren't meant to take hits (unless they're screening for something else) while also having crazy mobility. Hunters were a meme in 1.0 Gnarlroot or mixed Order Soup, and they have both offensive power, a defensive ability, and increase the range of every CA you have. Treelords are force multipliers, even if they are random, via their stomp; and they can serve as a distraction. B-Wych is weird, but people have run the Bomb build, and she has certain uses in battleplans where you score with battleline and heroes. The Arch-Revenant passively boosts Hunters, and actively boosts everything in our army with the mobility to be where she needs to be if you don't have Hunters nearby. 

Everything has a somewhat nonstandard role, or a mix of roles.

Dreadwood has inherent issues as well. You will not be able to generate enough command points to do all the things you want, for one. If you‘re referring to the version that has Spites for battleline and runs Outcast, you are bound to run into an army that is battleshock immune. Or one that always keeps at least one command point for Inspiring Presence. Another issue is that it forces your unit selection to a degree. You don't rely on wyldwoods, so you don't bring ways to get more, so you don't bring things that rely on wyldwood synergies and you bring things that are easy to teleport and can delete or cripple the unit they charge after teleporting. It isn't exactly a balanced strategy to begin with (it is effective as long as it works). 

If you have problems with wyldwood placement, talk to your opponents about it. In my case, the problem was solved by running more 2k games and starting a second army for 1k, since our 4x4 tables were too crowded. I also put a TLA in almost all of my lists to mitigate failing my casts or being unbound and have put a Branchwraith on a Balewind to summon Wyldwoods even further afield. 

Another interesting tip from Laurie: if you have at least three sets of Awakened Wyldwoods and struggle with placement, use the smallest pieces from each. Each piece in the kit is a Citadel Wood model, and you can mix and match them how you want, making the footprint bigger of smaller.

6 hours ago, Grimbok said:

Above average options in everything? Really now? 

Magic. No...not really. Even non casting KO are better with their spell in a bottle. Sylvaneth have terrible casters, a Goddess that does not even know her spell lore. Actual bad spells in the lore. 

Anvils...no. Dryads, not really. Depends on woods that are not there. 

Hitting power. No. Even Kurnoths are worse than most armies hard hitters per point. (But it is all we got).

Movement. Except for dreadwood, no. Getting woods down is very hard, unbinding, space etc. 

 

I agree that there is a large dissonance. How are Sylvaneth supposed to play? Actually it is hard to say. Mixed arms force, hit at run tactics?  Not really where they are at now? 

 

Grimbok

 

 

Magic: 3d6 casting. Autocast a single spell from the lore per turn. Heal from casting. Positioning, as always is key, except a few exceptions that unbind anywhere. And you have valid list options that don't use wizards at all. 

Movement: Spiteswarm Hive, Wyldwoods, dryads, Tree-Revenants.

Shooting: Treelords shoot. Hunters shoot. Heartwood makes Hunters shoot even better. Drycha.

Charge: Tree-Revenants reroll one dice, Hunters are always in range for a CA, Spiteswarm Hive.

Combat offense: Dryads hit on threes, even better with Winterleaf, Tree-Revenants can reroll a single dice, Spites have a big volume of attacks, Hunters swing and trample, Durthu can smack something, Arch-Revenant gives something more dice to throw. Drycha.

Combat defense: Treelord stomps, Dryads are -1 to be hit near woods, Hunters reroll saves, TLA command ability.

Battleshock: Place of Power, Hunters can spread Inspiring Presence.

 

[Sleepa]

1 hour ago, Kaylethia said:

Magic: 3d6 casting. Autocast a single spell from the lore per turn. Heal from casting. Positioning, as always is key, except a few exceptions that unbind anywhere. And you have valid list options that don't use wizards at all. 

The 3d6 cast and heal are only available in Gnarlroot, and the autocast can't cast the only spell we desperately need to resolve (Trees). I don't think it's fair to factor glade abilities into an analysis of 'average' capabilities, unless you write out a comparison for each glade specifically.  I personally lover Gnarlroot, but I'd never take it to tournament now. The game has reached a critical mass of armies that have truly powerful magic and denial, and if you can expect 30% of the people you face to have the power to completely negate the benefits of your glade; then you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

1 hour ago, Kaylethia said:

Movement: Spiteswarm Hive, Wyldwoods, dryads, Tree-Revenants.

Hive is amazing, but is rapidly becoming invalidated by the prevalence of powerful Magic armies that may be able to deny it at their leisure (Keep in mind that the new GHB may include smaller table sizes to match the changes to 40k), which may also mean that positioning your caster 30" may also stop being an option, potentially. Wyldwoods are obviously awesome for movement, but we're able to summon what, and average of 1.5 per game besides our free wood? If we can proliferate them, they become easily counterable by opponents simply stationing troops in them. That's assuming we don't get denied when trying to cast them. 

 

1 hour ago, Kaylethia said:

Charge: Tree-Revenants reroll one dice, Hunters are always in range for a CA, Spiteswarm Hive.

Tree Revenants are laughably inefficient in melee combat. They're paper thin and hit unreliably within so few attacks. They seems so versatile with the reroll, but realistically they are only effective at zone control and objective grabbing (assuming the objective is undefended). I've tried to take an objective from a 5-wound support hero before with 10 revs, and they failed miserably.

1 hour ago, Kaylethia said:

Combat offense: Dryads hit on threes, even better with Winterleaf, Tree-Revenants can reroll a single dice, Spites have a big volume of attacks, Hunters swing and trample, Durthu can smack something, Arch-Revenant gives something more dice to throw. Drycha.

 Dryads can swarm pretty effectively.... on our turn only, and assuming you have woods down. Away from woods they fold like paper, and why they only enrapture on our own turn is beyond me. Nobody has called Dryads a broken unit. Compare them to something like even the new nerfed plague monks and tell me you still think they are above average offensively. Spites have good volume of attacks, but they are also paper thin, and relatively rare, because they cost so much money. Hunters are hands down the best warscroll in the book, and we should all be thankful for it; but it's also boring to have one unit so obviously superior to all of our alternative hammers. And Hunters are only just 'above average' as a hammer. If you set the bar at Hearthguard Berserkers, buffed Wytches or Eels, then I'd say Hunters aren't even rated above Ironjawz Brutes, which themselve are less points-efficient that 'Ardboyz. Drycha has phenomenal offensive output, but you don't really want to put her into melee with anything remotely formidable. She's really a shooting unit who can occasionally assassinate an out of position caster, ranged unit or support hero; with a charge. The Arch-Rev is great with Hunters, but needs to stay near the hunters, which brings us back to our mobility problems. The Arch-Rev is even fast, but you don't want to charge anything with it. If one is using the Dreadwood/Spiteswarm/Hunter bomb, it's incredibly unlikely you'd be able to get your Arch-Rev where it needs to be, unless you staying on your side of the table. Hilariously, being a flying unit is also a huge vulnerability for the Rev, because it's faster than most of our army, but can't take advantage of that speed without becoming susceptible to enemy shooting or magic.

 

2 hours ago, Kaylethia said:

Combat defense: Treelord stomps, Dryads are -1 to be hit near woods, Hunters reroll saves, TLA command ability.

Stomps are great, but the everything that can stomp is struggling to find a home in competitive armies, Dryads again need the wood for the -1 to be hit, and the TLA command ability is the same as the generic command ability everyone has now (I know it's a little better because of Hunters broadcasting it, but we won't often have multiple melee engagements, so it's almost negligible).

All this to say, I don't think Sylvaneth are 'above average' really. I think they have a few glades and a few key units that are just good enough to give that impression, but against competitive lists, we're almost always starting every game with a sizable disadvantage. I think the recent tome was trying to let the army be 'average' at everything, but failed at that due to a few specific decisions: Woods summoning spell NOT being part of our lore, TLAs being single casters with no bonuses and not being able to stack their free Woods, leaving the Branchwych scroll unchanged instead of completely rewriting it, Leaving the Treelord scroll unchanged except for nerfing the impaling talon (Whyyyyy?),  restricting the Wyldwoods teleport to once per turn (this change was fine as long as it's easy to proliferate trees, but it's not, so the this change is twice as painful), removing all 'bonus to save' rules from our command abilities/artefacts/etc..., and essecntially all the changes to Alarielle (spear nerf, healing nerf, command ability nerf; plus not knowing our whole lore - The change to the beetle's charge was welcome)

I also get the sense the writer of this book was unaware how the GHB 2019 was going to affect terrain placement rules, or they may have made some different decisions as well. 

[Nixon]

Hi There

Just a quick question. In Heartwood, would you play Durthu as your general and should it have the horn or would it make more sense to give it to another hero? 

[Grimbok]

@Sleepa

My arguments exactly, just better written 🙂

 

 

Grimbok

[Aezeal]

2 hours ago, Grimbok said:

@Sleepa

My arguments exactly, just better written 🙂

 

 

Grimbok

I agree with him too.

Tree revenants. They are too weak offensively to take an objective that has ANYTHING guarding it.

Summoning trees should become a prayer and wraiths should become priests (and give the summon spell to wyches then instead of their useless spell - wait it's GW: just make a new priest model they can sell ). Having 2 wraith that can get a forest on a 3+ isn't odd considering what Khorne priests can pull off.. and it's even fluffy I'd say. We have a goddess in our army and no priest for that religion.  A 66% chance is not a full proof way for a strategy but it's better than nothing. 

I think Kaylethia isn't completely wrong: our army is reasonablly internally balanced.. which means all of our stuff is about average (hunters slightly above) BUT since other armies all are less balanced people you face will often only be bringing their BEST stuff ... so even if 2/3 of their warscrolls are abysmal that doesn't matter if you only face the 3-4 warscrolls that are better than the rest of their army  and sadly also better than anything in our army.

Going back to my original post: I'm pretty sure my Seraphon opponent has warscrolls and battallions that would make his army way less strong ... but he has access too Slann, salamanders and bastilladons.. and a batallion that migitates their weaknesses ... so he brings them. I can't fault him I'd bring those too when playing coalesced. 

Edited June 30, 2020 by Aezeal

[Landohammer]

@Grimbok and @Sleepa

You guys repeat my thoughts exactly. 

Sylvaneth are in a rough spot right now. We need magic to make our mechanics work but our magic is too easily shutdown. Faction terrain has too many restrictions. How many other factions can have their core mechanic stripped by unfavorably table setups/battleplans?

Whats discouraging is that we continue to get point drops on our units but it doesn't appear to be helping.

Not sure what the solution is. I will still continue to play them at pickup games but I am personally sticking to Living City for tournament play.