AoS 2 - Idoneth Deepkin Discussion

[whispersofblood]

29 minutes ago, Reezark_SP said:

Interesting that you called out Nighthaunt and Nurgle specifically as being bad matchups. Out of the 3 people I play with on a regular basis (at least once per week) one plays Nighthaunt, the other plays Nurgle, and the third has a bunch of armies and changes what he plays a lot. The Nighthaunt and Nurgle guy I win against most of the time but lost to the third guy's old Empire army.

How optimized are we talking? My nighthaunt prediction is theory since not enough of the range is available. 

But, optimized nurgle just happens to slam down 20 plaguebearers right after high tide. I play nurgle as well, and the army is effectively as fast, much tougher, with very strong magic. 

Why don't you share your list maybe I've missed something. 

[Reezark_SP]

Nighthaunt guy plays Mournghoul, a bunch of Spirit Hosts, Hexwraiths, and the character that lets everything generate mortal wounds on 5s instead of 6s.

Nurgle guy plays the Maggoth lord who resembles a Nurgling, some 10 blightkings, 20 plague bearers, a couple of blightkings on drones, and Spume w/some blightkings to deep strike from the edge.

Sorry I can't be more descriptive I don't know all of their units by heart.

 

While yes it is a pain facing the Nighthaunt because everything is immune to rend and it sucks when they get lucky and generate a ton of mortal wounds, you just got to be careful.

I use Volturnos as my general and tend to save up all my command points so I can give 3 units +3 attacks. I also use a soulscryer to keep my morsarr and allopex units off the board until I need them. The best defense  IMO is to not be on the board at all lol. If all goes according to plan my Leviadon, morsarr, and allopex are in combat with what they want to be in combat with on turn 3 and they all get Volturno's bonus. So far that has been enough to wipe out whatever it is I want dead.

Edited July 26, 2018 by Reezark_SP

[DantePQ]

1 hour ago, JackStreicher said:

Imo the IDK are a cool looking and fun army to play.

the issues I see as a casual are the following:

• Reavers are utterly useless. Their Missle Weapons do nothing, their melee also does nothing. They cost too much since all they can do is look real cool.

• The Battalions are ******. Most need an Allopex (which costs too much and does too little). We‘d need simple battalions: Bat 1: Akhelian King, 2 Eels, 1 thrall (20 or more) ++1 Save for the Thralls if they‘re wholly within 12“ of the eels. Bat 2: 1-2 Allopex, Tidecaster, 1-2 Reavers. +1 to hit with missle weapons if the enemy is within 9“. Etc.

• the EAotS costs too much

• How about a range-focused conclave?

• we lack command abilities 

 

Again

1) Reavers are good, they're not broken but have uses, they are awesome at guarding objectives and doing a lot of little stuff

2) Most armies have useless battalions - what you're proposing is just giving powerful effects to units that you want to include and it doesn't work that way. Daughters of Khaine have bad battalions as well, Nurgle doesn't have much, Death isn't using many as well. I love how battalions are constructed in recent Battletomes. 

3) so what ? There are many units overpriced or underpriced in AoS. Sure Aspect of the Sea maybe is too expensive but on the other hand you got unit of 12 W, that's got bunch of attacks, flies 14'' and igonres rend for 140

4) IDK are not shooting army 

5) many other armies lack them as well (DoK?)and still you got access to generic CA and Akhelian King and Volturnos have amazing CAs. 

 

[Reezark_SP]

18 minutes ago, DantePQ said:

Again

1) Reavers are good, they're not broken but have uses, they are awesome at guarding objectives and doing a lot of little stuff

2) Most armies have useless battalions - what you're proposing is just giving powerful effects to units that you want to include and it doesn't work that way. Daughters of Khaine have bad battalions as well, Nurgle doesn't have much, Death isn't using many as well. I love how battalions are constructed in recent Battletomes. 

3) so what ? There are many units overpriced or underpriced in AoS. Sure Aspect of the Sea maybe is too expensive but on the other hand you got unit of 12 W, that's got bunch of attacks, flies 14'' and igonres rend for 140

4) IDK are not shooting army 

5) many other armies lack them as well (DoK?)and still you got access to generic CA and Akhelian King and Volturnos have amazing CAs. 

 

I love my Reavers. I only use 1 unit of 10, but wow do they get the job done. I really don't understand why they have such a bad rep on this site. Last time I played with them they put a ton of wounds into a unit of 6 Hexwraiths and brought down a Mourngoul from full health down to 3 wounds, making it easy for my eels to finish off. 

I think the key is you have to keep them in the backfield until you tie up their target with something else like a unit of Ishlaen. On turn 2 they should be in a position to pincushion the enemy (move 8, reroll runs, and Flood Tide should be more then enough help to do this).

I also think that them being only 1 unit of 10 they don't appear to be a threat compared to everything else on the table so they're rarely targeted. I also try to keep them close to a table edge and make my opponent think that whatever he commits to attacking my Reavers may be on the receving end of an apperance of my Soulscryer and friends.

I'm not saying Reavers are the end all be all but they're definitely FAR from bad and personally I can't see not including 1 unit of 10 at the very least in any of the lists I make up. 

[Yoshiya]

I think Reavers issue is that there is too many point and click style range units in the game that don't encourage people to think too hard about supporting fire unless it's very strong.

Taken in isolation Reavers are a 10 man squad for 140pts with decent shooting that have great mobility to take advantage of their special fire mode. They also don't have to be as afraid of small units that tie them up in the late game (when they get to their objective) because on turn three they strike first meaning the unit tying them up can't be too weak and on turn 4 they just run away and unleash fire on them. All whilst not having to worry about return fire as they can't be targeted so long as their super mobile tanky eel friends can run around to absorb fire. 

That said I don't think they are amazing I just really don't think they are bad and I think I one buff away from being overbearing. As they are they are designed to be taken in small groups to support a combined arms force (in my opinion).

[JackStreicher]

8 hours ago, DantePQ said:

Again

1) Reavers are good, they're not broken but have uses, they are awesome at guarding objectives and doing a lot of little stuff

2) Most armies have useless battalions - what you're proposing is just giving powerful effects to units that you want to include and it doesn't work that way. Daughters of Khaine have bad battalions as well, Nurgle doesn't have much, Death isn't using many as well. I love how battalions are constructed in recent Battletomes. 

3) so what ? There are many units overpriced or underpriced in AoS. Sure Aspect of the Sea maybe is too expensive but on the other hand you got unit of 12 W, that's got bunch of attacks, flies 14'' and igonres rend for 140

4) IDK are not shooting army 

5) many other armies lack them as well (DoK?)and still you got access to generic CA and Akhelian King and Volturnos have amazing CAs. 

 

1. my Reavers never did more than 2 wounds a game. And those wounds weren‘t at Range. They‘ve to prove themselfs to me yet

2. So you argue it‘s perfectly fine to have utterly bad battalions because others have it (perhaps you realize yourself that Your reasoning is nonsense)

3. AGAIN because others have the same issue doesn‘t make it okay: „ well about some million people have AIDS so it‘s ok if I get it too“ - same reasoning other topic.

4. They‘re not shooting focused but they‘ve a lot of shooting.

5. AGAIN: meme others have it so it has to be fine.

 

if you wonder why my response is a bit passive aggressive: it‘s because yours appeared Plainly aggressive and unnecessariliy rude.

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by JackStreicher

[Gose]

I don't think that reavers are that bad the most annoying thing about them is that they are not Battleline without an isharann general.

Batallion are indeed bad, and DoK's too, but then they released nighthaunt that basically have all batallion playable, with a relative low cost (batallion const is pretty high but the units costs inside them is like 50% of ours).

I'm playing a lot against nighthaunt, and they can be really dangerous, they have tons o way to manipulate and use our very low bravery plus they play with a ton of command points and at least 3 artefact per list.

[RuneBrush]

+++MOD HAT+++

@JackStreicher & @DantePQ can both of you pack it in with the aggressive posts please.

[JackStreicher]

19 minutes ago, Gose said:

I don't think that reavers are that bad the most annoying thing about them is that they are not Battleline without an isharann general.

Batallion are indeed bad, and DoK's too, but then they released nighthaunt that basically have all batallion playable, with a relative low cost (batallion const is pretty high but the units costs inside them is like 50% of ours).

I'm playing a lot against nighthaunt, and they can be really dangerous, they have tons o way to manipulate and use our very low bravery plus they play with a ton of command points and at least 3 artefact per list.

I believe every faction should have a easily accessible battalion so you get the deployment, cp and artifact bonus.

 

Daughters of Khaine have an amazing Battalion: Bloodwrack Sisterhood for 140pts =]

Slaughter Troop is okay as well.

The Battalions of LoN are okay. I mind though that all but one enforce a named character.

Nighthaunt Battalions are very thematic, strong and mostly easy to put together - I agree

 

[Yoshiya]

I really wish that cp and especially artefacts weren't attached to battalions. Armies like deepkin have access to something like 80-90 artefacts including malign sorcery and yet can only take one normally meaning the same things like cloud of midnight are being used in every list. I think there is so much potential to open up the game to customisation etc if they would just let us take artefacts for points (first is free, second costs 20 points, third costs 30 points etc.). Would give get more ways to fill points out as well especially for armies without wizards to take Endless spells with.

That could really help justify the eidolons too. At 400pts with no artefact (normally better choices to take first one) the AoStorm is ok but at 420pts with an artefact like ghyran strike  or sword of judgement he starts getting pretty scary.

[HollowHills]

As I've said elsewhere the problem isn't that IDK got terrible battalions and others got good ones. It's just that there isn't much consistency on how competitive battalions are book to book. I e. DoK and Idoneth don't have great battalions compared to Nurgle or Nighthaunt which are both recent releases. We should be aware however that our enclaves do provide us with benefits not dissimilar to the type of things seen in other factions battalions. 

Reavers are bad. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't done the maths on it. On even at 30 shots per 10 you're looking at 3 to 4 wounds vs a 4 up save assuming no buffs or debuffs. And that's only on your half of the turn. Compare that to the ability of either eels for a similar cost and they aren't even close. And people can talk about objectives but even then 140 points of ishlaen guard or a 100 point tide aster can do that better. 

[Austin]

2 hours ago, HollowHills said:

As I've said elsewhere the problem isn't that IDK got terrible battalions and others got good ones. It's just that there isn't much consistency on how competitive battalions are book to book. I e. DoK and Idoneth don't have great battalions compared to Nurgle or Nighthaunt which are both recent releases. We should be aware however that our enclaves do provide us with benefits not dissimilar to the type of things seen in other factions battalions. 

Reavers are bad. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't done the maths on it. On even at 30 shots per 10 you're looking at 3 to 4 wounds vs a 4 up save assuming no buffs or debuffs. And that's only on your half of the turn. Compare that to the ability of either eels for a similar cost and they aren't even close. And people can talk about objectives but even then 140 points of ishlaen guard or a 100 point tide aster can do that better. 

What is the math you are talking about, particularly compared to other units?  I do think it is worth pointing out that the highest placing tournament list for Deepkin used Reavers. 

A tidecaster would not sit an objective  better than Reavers.  I am not sure how much more to say about that.  A tidecaster could dispel from one potentially, but couldn't cast any spells that would matter, and has less wounds.  And although yes Ishlaen would be harder to kill, why would you want them just sitting somewhere without even the chance to reach out and touch someone?

[thundrchickn]

7 minutes ago, Caladancid said:

What is the math you are talking about, particularly compared to other units?  I do think it is worth pointing out that the highest placing tournament list for Deepkin used Reavers. 

A tidecaster would not sit an objective  better than Reavers.  I am not sure how much more to say about that.  A tidecaster could dispel from one potentially, but couldn't cast any spells that would matter, and has less wounds.  And although yes Ishlaen would be harder to kill, why would you want them just sitting somewhere without even the chance to reach out and touch someone?

 

Updated ID worksheet.xlsx

[HollowHills]

47 minutes ago, Caladancid said:

What is the math you are talking about, particularly compared to other units?  I do think it is worth pointing out that the highest placing tournament list for Deepkin used Reavers. 

A tidecaster would not sit an objective  better than Reavers.  I am not sure how much more to say about that.  A tidecaster could dispel from one potentially, but couldn't cast any spells that would matter, and has less wounds.  And although yes Ishlaen would be harder to kill, why would you want them just sitting somewhere without even the chance to reach out and touch someone?

If you mean that six nations list then 1) we don't have other Deepkin lists at tournaments to compare it to and 2) That tournament had an unusual team based format where you were able to choose opponents to an extent and scores were based on aggregate. As for the tide caster if there is an objective I need to hold at the back of the board I'm quite happy to put a tidecaster on it and use Corrasion every turn to do 2-4 mortal wounds reliably assuming nothing is close. If there is something likely to get close I would prefer Ishlaen as they are likely to stick around as opposed to 10 wounds at a 5+ that's likely to die to a stiff breeze.

39 minutes ago, thundrchickn said:

 

Updated ID worksheet.xlsx

One thing to consider when looking at maths for damage is what the deterioration due to losses is going to look like. Reavers and thralls, having one wound each, are going to loss their maximum damage potential much faster especially when you consider any attacks with rend reduce that save to a 6+ at best. Ishlaen might not have great damage potential but they are far, far more durable than the Nemarti equivalent. Overall for the same points cost there isn't any reason to include Reavers. Thralls... they are a more complex conversation.

[Reuben Parker]

Agree with a lot that’s been said here in terms of battalions, artifacts etc. One point I would make for reavers (although not my fav unit) they are better than eels for zoning out space and most missions objectives are held by number of models in 6”. These are passive benefits that offensive and defensive stats can’t take into account. 

 

Still I came back to Mor’Phann (had inspiration for a list while waiting to go to sleep last night) after my first attempt at all Namarti lead to a crushing defeat. I’m thinking more combined arms and stall a bit then win turn 3 (this means battalion and reavers dropped).

volturnos

3 render last lament  

1 scryer

30/30/10 thrall

3 shield eel

6 spear eel 

I think with this list a lot of the time I wouldn’t actually outflank have the scyer just boosting charge and ritual. Slow opponent down with eels early then try to setup a big high tide hit. 

[HollowHills]

11 minutes ago, Reuben Parker said:

Agree with a lot that’s been said here in terms of battalions, artifacts etc. One point I would make for reavers (although not my fav unit) they are better than eels for zoning out space and most missions objectives are held by number of models in 6”. These are passive benefits that offensive and defensive stats can’t take into account.

I agree that having more models helps, I just think it's hard to have more models than my opponent when that unit has a 5+ save.

[thundrchickn]

2 hours ago, HollowHills said:

If you mean that six nations list then 1) we don't have other Deepkin lists at tournaments to compare it to and 2) That tournament had an unusual team based format where you were able to choose opponents to an extent and scores were based on aggregate. As for the tide caster if there is an objective I need to hold at the back of the board I'm quite happy to put a tidecaster on it and use Corrasion every turn to do 2-4 mortal wounds reliably assuming nothing is close. If there is something likely to get close I would prefer Ishlaen as they are likely to stick around as opposed to 10 wounds at a 5+ that's likely to die to a stiff breeze.

One thing to consider when looking at maths for damage is what the deterioration due to losses is going to look like. Reavers and thralls, having one wound each, are going to loss their maximum damage potential much faster especially when you consider any attacks with rend reduce that save to a 6+ at best. Ishlaen might not have great damage potential but they are far, far more durable than the Nemarti equivalent. Overall for the same points cost there isn't any reason to include Reavers. Thralls... they are a more complex conversation.

I've been trying to find a way to compare durability to damage all week but you really can't without skewed ratios.  Comparing each stat separately and then putting side by side was the easiest, cleanest,  and most correct way I could think off.  Charts added for nice visual effect.  I think for both categories, Thralls are the champ.  Speed is their biggest downfall but they have the same speed as the average battleline unit.

Updated ID worksheet 7-27-18.xlsx

[Austin]

3 hours ago, HollowHills said:

If you mean that six nations list then 1) we don't have other Deepkin lists at tournaments to compare it to and 2) That tournament had an unusual team based format where you were able to choose opponents to an extent and scores were based on aggregate. As for the tide caster if there is an objective I need to hold at the back of the board I'm quite happy to put a tidecaster on it and use Corrasion every turn to do 2-4 mortal wounds reliably assuming nothing is close. If there is something likely to get close I would prefer Ishlaen as they are likely to stick around as opposed to 10 wounds at a 5+ that's likely to die to a stiff breeze.

One thing to consider when looking at maths for damage is what the deterioration due to losses is going to look like. Reavers and thralls, having one wound each, are going to loss their maximum damage potential much faster especially when you consider any attacks with rend reduce that save to a 6+ at best. Ishlaen might not have great damage potential but they are far, far more durable than the Nemarti equivalent. Overall for the same points cost there isn't any reason to include Reavers. Thralls... they are a more complex conversation.

I read Arcane Corrasion to require LoS.  If I am wrong, then that is definitely more useful than I thought (though I am not on the Reavers are the worst train either).

[David Griffin]

My struggle with Reavers is that there are allies who are just flat out better at the same job. Most of the Stormcast shooting is more powerful for a similar points cost. 

Vanguard Raptors w/ Hurricane Crossbows 140 pts: nearly the same number of attacks (compared to Reaver volley) but at 18".

Judicators 160 pts: 24" ranged shooting with rend and bonuses to hit against Chaos

Castigators 160 (for 6): access to -2 rend and the option to improve accuracy

Celstar Ballista 100pts: No need to explain. They're just great.

I LOVE the models, but when I'm looking through a purely competitive lens, it's hard to make a great case for them, outside of them having more bodies or being marginally quicker than the above lists units.

 

[thundrchickn]

Had game 4 last night.  I finally got the Volturnos command ability off and with 5 CPs.  Damned brutal.  I fully expect people are going to complain and we're going to get the nerf bat.  

[HollowHills]

5 hours ago, thundrchickn said:

I've been trying to find a way to compare durability to damage all week but you really can't without skewed ratios.  Comparing each stat separately and then putting side by side was the easiest, cleanest,  and most correct way I could think off.  Charts added for nice visual effect.  I think for both categories, Thralls are the champ.  Speed is their biggest downfall but they have the same speed as the average battleline unit.

Updated ID worksheet 7-27-18.xlsx

 

This is really good, I think there are a couple of things we need to consider when judging units that are hard to evaluate statistically...

1) Movement

Our mounted units have a very high movement characteristic. In general this is either 14 or 12 depending on the models. In conjunction with our forgotten nightmares trait this means we can control our opponents shooting phase very easily. For example going for a set up that puts a unit of Ishlaen Guard at the front with a turtle behind, dumping a mystic shield on for good luck. Or putting a hero at the front next to a unit of 5 or more for a 2/3+ at -1 to hit.  The eel units can also move around the battle field quickly enough that they can basically be where you want all the time. Especially when you factor in run and charge and retreat and charge. 

2) Fly

Our units with fly are really good because of the high movement, the ability to reroll charges, run and charge plus retreat and charge. We can hop over units easily and are very difficult to tar pit. 

[Mark Williams]

3 hours ago, thundrchickn said:

Had game 4 last night.  I finally got the Volturnos command ability off and with 5 CPs.  Damned brutal.  I fully expect people are going to complain and we're going to get the nerf bat.  

I think it’s an oversight that they haven’t. Probably flying under their radar due to having less feedback or representation or something.

[Drofnum]

1 hour ago, Mark Williams said:

I think it’s an oversight that they haven’t. Probably flying under their radar due to having less feedback or representation or something.

Pretty sure its intended honestly.  Its a command ability requiring him to be general and only happens in one turn a game.  Its really easy to play around once you know about it.

[Kitty]

3 hours ago, Mark Williams said:

I think it’s an oversight that they haven’t. Probably flying under their radar due to having less feedback or representation or something.

Definitely not an  oversight because they fixed Death and kept ours the way it is (to the point where they made it abundantly clear in the FAQ). And it works with the tide aspect that with a Leader behind them who has single handedly escaped a God, killed three Greater Daemons and championed the end of the civil wars that those in front of him would be inspired to do great things.

From a non fluff perspective, it is also quite necessary for our army to get anywhere near top tier, we require this ace in the hole to be comp efficient and even then as many have said, once you know how to play against it, it is nowhere near as threatening as it sounds.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Kitty

[Nerdkingdan]

16 hours ago, thundrchickn said:

 

Updated ID worksheet.xlsx

Don't want to nitpick, but 3+ isn't actually 66%, its 66.6 repeating.    You often use 1/2 or 5/6 and the like, but instead in some places you use a rounded percentage,   for example you opted for 66% instead of 2/3 or 4/6.   While this wouldn't be a big change over all its skewing your numbers especially when things are close or have a large number of attacks.    Anything that has a 2/3 chance is losing some of its actual damage, and it does add up when we are comparing things that ultimately vary only a few decimal places.

Otherwise thanks, great info.