AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[Mirage8112]

39 minutes ago, tman3257 said:

If I could make a few suggestions/throw some ideas out there.  

I don't know if a second Arch-Revenant is worth it.  It would give you a bit more coverage on his command ability but if you drop him and make a few changes you can lower your drop count by 2, get casting support, and an extra CP.  If you're going for an alpha list I feel low drops is very important. 

Changes would be:
-Remove Arch-Rev #2.
-Make Arch-Rev #1 your general, extends the range of his +1 attack ability to make it easier to fit a unit of spites in it after charging.
-Exchange the two T-Rev squads for spites.  I know this reduces the amount you can teleport around but sometimes you want stuff to hold back objectives too, so its not a waste.
-Add the Outcasts battalion now that you have 3x Spites.
-You have an extra artifact now, throw the Spiritsong Stave on the Branchwraith, this lets her cast Throne of Vines and a spell (probably one of your endless) on the same turn.

Thanks for the input! Couple of things though.

That’s a good idea regarding the arch-rev. I doubled up because I thought he could only use the command ability once per model. But after checking the rules, i can use the same ability on the same model as many times as I want as long as I have the command points to do so. 

I’m unsure about making him the General, only because the Ancient will make better use of the wargroves command trait.  It might be a decent trade-off for the 18” range on his command trait, which would give me more room for error to get the +1 attack on both Durthu and the spites. 

The T-revs are required for this to work, because it’s thier job to screen for a counter-charge next turn. Ideally, they will combo-charge with another Killy unit. The idea being that they aren’t there to make attacks, they are there to  pile-in up to 6” toward the adjacent unit (but still outside of 3” to avoid sucking another unit into combat) since units that charged can still pile in toward the closest enemy unit even if they don’t have a target within 3”. The free teleport also allows me a better charge to screen-wide in case something wants to come from a long distance but is still outside the range of my woods. The threat range of this strat is something like 56”. The board is only 72” wide, but I’m still inclined to give me something to run interference if I need it.

Since dropping the arch-rev i have 150 points to play with. By my math I need 220 points to add the outcast Battalion since I need the T-revs. I might be able to drop 1, which would give me just enough points. I’d keep my extra command point and could take spirit staff. That’s a good idea actually, I’d just have to make sure to use those extra 2 spites for screens by dropping them in from off the board.

It’s an extra drop than your list. It’s not an issue because if they move up the board, I can just summon a forest nearby and use the TLA’s free wood ability to give me my Sylvaneth super-highway to the summoned forest. There’s not much that can hide from this list the way I’m thinking of playing it. Also something Gristlegore is min 3 drops, so 5 vs. 6 still doesn't matter.
  

Wargrove: Dreadwood 

Spirit of Durthu (340)
- Artefact: Doppelganger Cloak 
Treelord Ancient (300)
- Artefact: Jewel of Withering 
- Deepwood Spell: Regrowth
Treelord Ancient (300)
- Deepwood Spell: Treesong
Arch-Revenant (100)
- General
- Command trait: Parragon of Terror
Branchwraith (80)
- Artefact: Spiritsong Stave
- Deepwood Spell: Throne of Vines

20 x Spite-Revenants (200)
5 x Spite-Revenants (60)
5 x Spite-Revenants (60)
5 x Tree-Revenants (80)

Treelord (200)

Lords of the Clan (60)
Outcasts (100)

Spiteswarm Hive (50)
Chronomantic Cogs (60)

Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 3
Drops: 6

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Mirage8112

[tman3257]

31 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 3
Drops: 6

You'd have 2 extra CP FYI, you'd start with 3 of course once your turn hits.   Also you're at 1990 instead of 2000 which gives you a (small) chance at a triumph at least.

That's a good point about the drops though, I don't expect to choose vs FEC (part of what makes them hard to fight).  I like this version, I think trading off 1 CP and 1 drop isn't too bad to have a unit of T-Revs.  Even if you don't screen with them having them available to take an untended objective is very strong.

[Mirage8112]

5 minutes ago, tman3257 said:

You'd have 2 extra CP FYI, you'd start with 3 of course once your turn hits.   Also you're at 1990 instead of 2000 which gives you a (small) chance at a triumph at least.

That's a good point about the drops though, I don't expect to choose vs FEC (part of what makes them hard to fight).  I like this version, I think trading off 1 CP and 1 drop isn't too bad to have a unit of T-Revs.  Even if you don't screen with them having them available to take an untended objective is very strong.

Yes, I meant start the game with 3 CP. Same as before since I lose 1 Cp from being under 50 pts and gain one from the battalion. Dropping 1 unit of rev and the arch-rev for 2 units of spites and an extra item is a great trade-off. 

[Freejack02]

2 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

If you don’t like our woods, then let me ask: why play Sylvaneth at all? Is it just the models that attract you the army? I’m not trying to suggest you play something else (you seem to be an insightful player, I like you on our side!) but we are an asymmetrical warfare/area denial army. Nobody can do what we do which is why I love this army.

Why do YOU love this army?

The year was 1997... I was a freshman in high school, and an avid reader of fantasy novels when I wasn't blasting Metallica too loud to concentrate. Engrossed in Magic the Gathering and still blown away by Diablo on PC, a friend told me we should check out this "cool looking boardgame" called Warhammer. We went to a local hobby store, I picked up the 4E Wood Elves army book... and I was hooked. 

I love this army because the aesthetics and idea behind a forest dwelling faction have always greatly appealed to me. When the first Sylvaneth battletome hit, I put a pause on my SCE army and buried myself in treemen. I didn't love the wyldwood mechanically, but I tolerated it because how often do you get to step back in time for a little while? Now, I wish it was different - but I have no doubt I'll continue playing them and have fun doing it. 

[Mirage8112]

29 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

The year was 1997... I was a freshman in high school, and an avid reader of fantasy novels when I wasn't blasting Metallica too loud to concentrate. Engrossed in Magic the Gathering and still blown away by Diablo on PC, a friend told me we should check out this "cool looking boardgame" called Warhammer. We went to a local hobby store, I picked up the 4E Wood Elves army book... and I was hooked. 

I love this army because the aesthetics and idea behind a forest dwelling faction have always greatly appealed to me. When the first Sylvaneth battletome hit, I put a pause on my SCE army and buried myself in treemen. I didn't love the wyldwood mechanically, but I tolerated it because how often do you get to step back in time for a little while? Now, I wish it was different - but I have no doubt I'll continue playing them and have fun doing it. 

Sounds like your army choices come with a healthy dose of nostalgia. That’s awesome. 

i got into the game (relatively) late, about 2007. I originally started with WoC but also started a Wood elves Army. 

It’s sounds like your main reason for playing the army isn’t necessarily competitive. Sure you like it when you win, (who doesn’t) but thats not your main reason for playing this army. I get that, that’s how I feel about my old WoC army, my Wanderers army, my Disciples of TZ army and my new Kharadron Overlords army. 

But my Sylvaneth army is my main competitive army. It what I play at tournaments and events, and what I spend the most time playing with. I’m less concerned about a “fair game” when I’m playing my other armies, but with the Trees I like a 50/50 shot.

I think this is the reason we are disagreeing on what an “optimum” amount of terrain is. We have different goals when playing the tree people.

And that’s ok. 

[TheGrayKing]

Have a terrible idea for a Heartwood Glave army.

Spirit of Durthu (340)

- Artefact: Thermalrider Cloak

Treelord Ancient (300)

- General

- Command Trait: Legacy of Valour

- Artefact: Horn of the Consort

- Spell: Regrowth

Treelord Ancient (300)

- Artefact: Spellsong Stave

- Spell: Throne of Vines

 

Treelord (200)

 

5x Spite-Revenants (60)

5x Spite-Revenants (60)

5x Spite-Revenants (60)

 

6x Kurnoth Hunters (400)

- Weapon: Greatsword

 

Outcasts Battalion (100)

Lords of the Clan Battalion (60)

 

Chronomatic Cogs (60)

Spiteswarm Hive (50)

1990/2000 points

2 extra CP

3 Artefacts

4 Drops

[Mirage8112]

Deleted post to avoid confusion 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by Mirage8112

[Aezeal]

3 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

It says 6 pieces on a board is a good place to start. It does not use the word minimum, nor maximum. If you want to read it that “more is always better” thats your choice mate, I wont stop you. 

Now I'm not a native speaker.. but AT LEAST sort of equals minimum right?

 

About that dreadwood + lords list: Do you think it's better than an optimized winterleaf list? Will you try dreadwood first? If I look at it I'm thinking the winterleaf lists seem better but I have no experience with old dreadwood so maybe I underestimate it.

Edited May 30, 2019 by Aezeal

[Mirage8112]

6 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

Now I'm not a native speaker.. but AT LEAST sort of equals minimum right?

My background is actually in linguistics, so what I’m saying isn’t just my opinion: 

Literally? Yes.

But in English “At least” is considered a colloquialism or idiom, (a figure of speech). As an idiom does it mean minimum? No.

Handing somebody a cup of tea, somebody could say “the least you could have done is add sugar.” What is meant by that, is that adding sugar would have been what you expect a reasonable person to do. The actual “least” a person could do is not give you any tea all. 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Mirage8112

[Aezeal]

2 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

My background is actually in linguistics, so what I’m saying isn’t just my opinion: 

Literally? Yes.

But in English “At least” is considered a colloquialism or idiom, (a figure of speech). As an idiom does it mean minimum? No.

Handing somebody a cup of tea, somebody could say “the least you could have done is add sugar.” What is meant by that, is that adding sugar would have been what you expect a reasonable person to do. The actual “least” a person could do is not give you any tea all. 

 

Hmm interesting. Quick in the reply btw, was still editing my post since that wasn't the real thing I wanted to ask

[ElectricPaladin]

English is such a dumpster fire of a language.

[Mirage8112]

Just now, ElectricPaladin said:

English is such a dumpster fire of a language.

It is! English is all kinds of f-kd up. That’s why its a super interesting thing to study. 

[tman3257]

18 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

Something to think about.

If you read my Dreadwood list, you might have noticed that I have 4 Treelords ( TLA x2, TL, Durthu) in it. This is to maximize the chance of stomps forcing the enemy to fight last. 

We know the FEC Gristlegore has a General that fight’s first and Slaanesh’s new BT has a lot of units that confer strike last. Here’s the relevant  FAQ’s on how those abilities interact. From the Beasts of Chaos BT:

 

In the case of Gristlegore, the abilities cancel out (in our turn) and the Gristlegore General would strike in normal activation order. That means if you combo-charge him, but not kill him, you may activate a unit before he does, but then he can activate the general as usual immediately after, so don’t count on being bale to combo-charge “fights first” models.    

In the case of Slaanesh’s Locus of Distraction or Horrifying image (both conferring strike last), the two effects don’t cancel out, but the one that was applied last takes precedence. This is somewhat counter-intuitive, because our strike-last would take precedence over their strike-last only in their own phase. 

This is because the player whose turn it is gets to use the ability first. So, in your opponents turn,  let’s say he makes a roll for locus or horrify and it is successful. It is the effect that is applied first. Then we make a roll for stomp, and if it is successful, it is applied second. Since the effect applied second takes precedence, their unaffected units fights, then our unaffected units, alternating as normal. Then our affected units with strike last, fight before theirs and then his strike the very last.  

In your turn, you must remember to let them apply their “fight last” abilities before you do, since the players who turn it is decides in what order those abilities trigger.  In your phase, hope he forgets and applies his rolls first. 

TL:DR: Always try to stomp last if possible vs models that can also force you to fight last. Vs. Strike first models, You need to stomp him first in your turn, and hope you wipe him out in the first activation because he will be able to activate as normal.

I don't believe you are correct on this for a couple of reasons.

First I refer you to this article: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/03/21/who-fights-first/

Our new stomp "go last" ability does NOT have the clause that turns "Strike First" into cancelling out and "striking normal".  It simply says they have to go last. Period. Not if they would go first to cancel it out, just straight up back of the line "you go last".  This would entirely cancel Gristlegore's strike first ability during our turn for sure because our stomp activates first and turns them into striking last.  This gets a little fuzzier during their turn.  Their trait says they fight at the start of the combat phase.  Our ability triggers at the start of the combat phase.  According to this article since it is their turn they get to resolve ALL "start of combat" abilities before we get to resolve any of ours.  This would mean he gets to strike first before we even get to stomp.

In Slaanesh's case I do not think that FAQ applies at all.  Slaanesh tells our model to strike last, we tell Slaanesh to strike last.  You do not have 2 abilities that conflict at all.  You simply are setting the combat order of both models to the end of the turn.  When it hits end of turn, if it is our turn we get to hit first with ALL of the things Slaanesh affected with "strike last" then they get to attack with all of the things we stomped on.  During Slaanesh's turn if he confers strike last to us, and us to him, he gets to strike first with ALL of the models we made strike last, then we get to go with all models.

 

[Aezeal]

19 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

It is! English is all kinds of f-kd up. That’s why its a super interesting thing to study. 

Lol.. but is your interpretation (even though it apparently is a figure of speech) RAI or RAW?  I can argue my interpretation is RAW which has always been the standard to which rules are held

Anyway I'm much more interested in which list you actually think is most competitive for now. Also I notice that unlike in previous post you haven't included Drycha or Alarielle in this list.

I must say I favour the idea of keeping 2 TL together in a defensive action to have a high chance of stomping people to the back of the row  

Edited May 30, 2019 by Aezeal

[Mirage8112]

49 minutes ago, tman3257 said:

Our new stomp "go last" ability does NOT have the clause that turns "Strike First" into cancelling out and "striking normal".  It simply says they have to go last. Period. Not if they would go first to cancel it out, just straight up back of the line "you go last".  This would entirely cancel Gristlegore's strike first ability during our turn for sure because our stomp activates first and turns them into striking last. 

So from the Hedonites designers commentary talking about a unit with two contradictory effects:



So this says ASF and ASL cancel each other out if both are applied on the same target.  So what would Gristlegore be any different? I mean what your saying makes sense (sort of) but it seems that’s not the case as I can see. 
 

49 minutes ago, tman3257 said:

Slaanesh tells our model to strike last, we tell Slaanesh to strike last.  You do not have 2 abilities that conflict at all.  You simply are setting the combat order of both models to the end of the turn.  When it hits end of turn, if it is our turn we get to hit first with ALL of the things Slaanesh affected with "strike last" then they get to attack with all of the things we stomped on.  During Slaanesh's turn if he confers strike last to us, and us to him, he gets to strike first with ALL of the models we made strike last, then we get to go with all models.

I think you’re right on this, because the player whose turn it is gets choice. It also means we get to activate all our strikes last before theirs in our turn, but vice versa in theirs.

What’s your thought on the Slaanesh faq above? 
  

Edited May 30, 2019 by Mirage8112

[Mirage8112]

43 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

Anyway I'm much more interested in which list you actually think is most competitive for now. Also I notice that unlike in previous post you haven't included Drycha or Alarielle in this list.

 I must say I favour the idea of keeping 2 TL together in a defensive action to have a high chance of stomping people to the back of the row  

who knows what’s baddest right now. I wrote the DW list above specifically to counter Gristlegore as it is right now. I think our wargroves are super competitive in general, and I think there is a place for allarielle or drycha in just about any list. 

I also have a feeling AGKoT and Royal Terrorgiests will get a points increase in the next GHB. My guess is 20-40 for the Terrorgiests and maybe 50 or more for the AGKoT to make it impossible to take 4 Terrorgiests and the AGKoT. They’re just too fast and hit too hard for anything to counter right now. Eel spam too. I’ve been wrong before, but I guess we’ll see.

[tman3257]

6 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

What’s your thought on the Slaanesh faq above? 
  

So I wish this was more consistent, but I think the Slaanesh FAQ only applies to those two specific cases.

Both Locus of Diversion and Horrible Fascination have this clause at the end of them: "If a unit that is affected by this ability is also affected by any rules that would allow it to fight at the start of the combat phase, that unit is not affected by this rule or those other rules (the effects cancel each other out)."

Gristlegore simply says "This general fights at the start of the combat phase, before the players pick any other units to fight in that combat phase"  Our tree stomp ability says at the start of combat, on a 4+ make them go last.  Neither abilities have any mention of cancelling out eachother so I do not think that applies in this case.  If they release a general FAQ that says all "strike first" and "strike last" abilities cancel eachother then that would be another story.  As far as I know nothing like that exists.

[Mirage8112]

1 hour ago, tman3257 said:

So I wish this was more consistent, but I think the Slaanesh FAQ only applies to those two specific cases.

Both Locus of Diversion and Horrible Fascination have this clause at the end of them: "If a unit that is affected by this ability is also affected by any rules that would allow it to fight at the start of the combat phase, that unit is not affected by this rule or those other rules (the effects cancel each other out)."

Gristlegore simply says "This general fights at the start of the combat phase, before the players pick any other units to fight in that combat phase"  Our tree stomp ability says at the start of combat, on a 4+ make them go last.  Neither abilities have any mention of cancelling out eachother so I do not think that applies in this case.  If they release a general FAQ that says all "strike first" and "strike last" abilities cancel eachother then that would be another story.  As far as I know nothing like that exists.

That’s fair reasoning enough for me. 

The problem is that something this would really need to be clarified before the battle. because you would definitely not want to charge anything scary that had a definite chance of hitting you after the first activation. 

You could always dice it, that’s fine for minor rules disagreements but something like that is losing a critical part of your army on a 50/50 shot. I don't like those odds. 

[tman3257]

9 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

That’s fair reasoning enough for me. 

The problem is that something this would really need to be clarified before the battle. because you would definitely not want to charge anything scary that had a definite chance of hitting you after the first activation. 

You could always dice it, that’s fine for minor rules disagreements but something like that is losing a critical part of your army on a 50/50 shot. I don't like those odds. 

To me, RAW it's very clear.  RAI...well that's a whole can of worms usually for GW games.  I typically try to stick to as close to RAW as possible unless a FAQ/Commentary says otherwise, and we'll be awhile yet before we see any of that seeing as the book isn't even officially out yet.

[Mirage8112]

21 minutes ago, tman3257 said:

To me, RAW it's very clear.  RAI...well that's a whole can of worms usually for GW games.  I

I don't go by RAI and always try to work of RAW. I’m not so sure this is a clear cut case, but I lean toward your interpretation.  

Then again, it does benefit me so it doesn’t exactly make me look impartial during a rules disputed with another player.   

[Kairos Tejedestinos]

Just to reiterate what @tman3257 has stated.

 

The Slaneesh FAQ exists for a few different reasons:

- Those rules, as already stated, have the exception built in where no contradiction will happen between strike at the start of the phase and attack at the end of the phase effects.

- Locus happens at the end of the charge phase and Horrible fascination at the start of the combat phase, so you could Locus the Terrorgheist, so he would attack during the combat phase like anybody else, and then at the start of the combat phase you would use horrible fascination to force him to attack at the end of the phase since it wasn't able to attack at the start of the phase. This FAQ corrects that, because you could do it even in your opponent's turn.

 

About the FAQ : effects "cancelling each other".

If it's our turn, Stomp will cause the FEC player to attack at the end of the phase. Both rules (attack at the start of the phase and attack at the end of the phase can't be fullfilled at the same time or canceled out, therefore the last one in the stack will be the one that will be applied, in this case, the Stomp).

It's very much RAW yeah. I don't think you should have much problems about this.

Edited May 31, 2019 by Kairos Tejedestinos

[Mirage8112]

3 minutes ago, Kairos Tejedestinos said:

Those rules, as already stated, have the exception built in where no contradiction will happen between strike at the start of the phase and attack at the end of the phase effects.

- Locus happens at the end of the charge phase and Horrible fascination could be applied before your opponent attacks at the start of the phase during your turn, so you could Locus the Terrorgheist, force him attack normally, and then at the beginning of your turn's combat phase you would use horrible fascination to force him to attack at the end of the phase. This FAQ corrects that.

 

About the FAQ about effects "cancelling each other".

If it's our turn, Stomp will cause the FEC player to attack at the end of the phase. Both rules (attack at the start of the phase and attack at the end of the phase can't be fullfilled at the same time or canceled out, therefore the last one in the stack will be the one that will be applied, in this case, the Stomp).

It's very much RAW yeah.

That’s good enough for me. 👍🏻

[Kairos Tejedestinos]

About the lists look solid right now. I don't really like the Dreadwood choice for the list tho, harvestboon probably could do better imo. Better trait for durthu, better Command ability most of the time, you could even ignore the Arch-revenant altogether.

Also a question to the english speakers here, can you summon an awakened wyldwood for each TLA your army has, or only one no matter how many TLAs are in your army? If my english is right, it's only 1 wyldwood no matter how many TLAs.

The list i am going to try out first is going to be:

Gnarlroot

Drycha @ 320
TLA, Nurtured by magic, the vesperal gem, regrowth @ 300
TLA, chalice of nectar, verdurous harmony @ 300
Branchwraith, spirit song stave, throne of vines @ 80

5 Spite revenants @ 60
5 Spite revenants @ 60
5 Spite revenants @ 60
5 Spite revenants @ 60

3 Kurnouth Hunters with bows @ 200
3 Kurnouth Hunters with bows @ 200
1 Treeman @ 200

Battallions

Lords of the clan
Outcasts

CP : 2
Total : 2000

I chose Gnarlroot for a few reasons:

-  Rerolling 1s to hit work with shooting, not only melee. That way i can attempt to play a shooty/magic attrition list (i am a WE player at heart, i love kiting :P), and even if i decide later on to switch the kurnouth to scythes, i don't need to rely on charges or paying 100 points for the arch revenant (which i won't have, thx GW) to get the rerolls. Also drycha rerolling ones on her 20 attack shooting attack is pretty nice.

- Easy extra healing. Vesperal gem + nurtured by magic means 1d3+1d6 auto heal when needed. Or 1d3 heal + other spells. Good thing  that now we can summon trees anyways!   

- Good casting artifact. Chalice of nectar. I wanted to make a cast heavy list, and we already struggle getting artifacts for all characters.

 

Now on the list. The idea is use revenants as chaff. The branchwraith will first turn be as far away as possible and cast throne of vines, and then summon some dryads, from there on she will be teleporting (which does not count as movement) and summong driads and trees. TLA's will summon trees of their own and then use their spell.  And meanwhile i dedicate myself to score and chip away. Not sure what spell for drycha. Treesong is probably the one i will end up, just to get rerolling to wound on melee, since many things in the army wound on 3+ (even if their damage output is subpar).

Changes that could happen:

I could remove one unit of spite revenants and get endless spell that gives one unit +3 to charges. I think i would so if i changed the kurnouth hunters to a big 6 man scythe unit, but only for that.

Edited May 31, 2019 by Kairos Tejedestinos

[TheGrayKing]

3 minutes ago, Kairos Tejedestinos said:

lso a question to the english speakers here, can you summon an awakened wyldwood for each TLA your army has, or only one no matter how many TLAs are in your army? If my english is right, it's only 1 wyldwood no matter how many TLAs.

I read it as no matter how many TLAs you have you set up one wyldwood, you just choose one and set up the wyldwood by that one.

[tman3257]

6 minutes ago, Kairos Tejedestinos said:

Also a question to the english speakers here, can you summon an awakened wyldwood for each TLA your army has, or only one no matter how many TLAs are in your army? If my english is right, it's only 1 wyldwood no matter how many TLAs.

1 woods, once per game, no matter how many TLAs is correct.