AoS 2 - Idoneth Deepkin Discussion

[Vomikron]

25 minutes ago, Grudgebearer said:

Awesome work, looking really great!!! How did you do the armor parts? Really like the look of them ☺️

Thanks. For the armor I started with a base coat of Rhinox hide followed by stippled layers of RMSP Jungle Moss, Highland Moss, and Pale Lichen. A quick wash of Agrax and then a final edge highlight of Pale Lichen

[woolf]

35 minutes ago, Vomikron said:

Thanks. For the armor I started with a base coat of Rhinox hide followed by stippled layers of RMSP Jungle Moss, Highland Moss, and Pale Lichen. A quick wash of Agrax and then a final edge highlight of Pale Lichen

very nice looking, i'd be curious how u did the skin of the eel? also some stippling?

 

cheers 

[Vomikron]

1 hour ago, woolf said:

very nice looking, i'd be curious how u did the skin of the eel? also some stippling?

 

cheers 

Sure was. The stippling for this one was pretty extensive 

- Vallejo Sinai Grey
- Vallejo Desert Tan
- Vallejo Medium Sea Grey
- Pallid Wych Flesh
- 1:1 Nuln/Lahmian Medium
- 1:1 Agrax/Lahmian
- 1:1 Seraphim Sepia/Lahmian
And a final stipple of Model Masters Transparent Dust to help blend the colors. After that it’s highlight with Pallid Wych Fleah to taste.

For the other two I decided to do a simpler three paint recipe of RMSP Ghoul Skin, Moldy Skin, and Bloodless skin along with the wash stippling from above.

[woolf]

19 minutes ago, Vomikron said:

Sure was. The stippling for this one was pretty extensive 

- Vallejo Sinai Grey
- Vallejo Desert Tan
- Vallejo Medium Sea Grey
- Pallid Wych Flesh
- 1:1 Nuln/Lahmian Medium
- 1:1 Agrax/Lahmian
- 1:1 Seraphim Sepia/Lahmian
And a final stipple of Model Masters Transparent Dust to help blend the colors. After that it’s highlight with Pallid Wych Fleah to taste.

For the other two I decided to do a simpler three paint recipe of RMSP Ghoul Skin, Moldy Skin, and Bloodless skin along with the wash stippling from above.

thx brilliant Shyish look, also love the basing

 

cheers 

[DocKeule]

13 hours ago, camp7325 said:

Hey guys, any thoughts on a namarti heavy list with the point changes? I love the models and have been thinking of diving in for a while but am not sure quite where to start.

I think the point reduction is too small to go Namarti heavy at least until they get 2" reach in melee.

[woolf]

50 minutes ago, DocKeule said:

I think the point reduction is too small to go Namarti heavy at least until they get 2" reach in melee.

I would agree, might be worth trying out in smaller games where they could provide some good value for points

[DocKeule]

Well they are not bad (although they are losing ground compared to newer warscrolls) but they are simply too far from the best choices in the IDK roster.

In a more fluffy game they would be an option for me. If I know my opponent will not bring a maxed out list and I feel like running a thematic army there would be a strong Namarti backbone.

[DocKeule]

BTW: A new round of FAQs went live but the IDK were not updated.

[Hypephoon]

Given the point reductions that we see in other book, especially KO, Idoneth got really shafted this year around. The points would be fine... If things were better. I.e. 2" on Namarti, stronger spellcasting, more potent melee on Storm Eidolon, and actual useful buff from the turtle etc. Really hoping we have a battletome on the horizon within the next 6 months. 

 

Pray for Bow wielding Akhelian seahorse riders!

[Incineroar87]

The FAQs were only for the recent battletomes so we were never going to see anything for Deepkin outside of minor point changes.  

We likely will see a Deepkin battletome soon unless Nurgle or Daughters get their updated ones first, my only issue is if the potential Deepkin Battletome goes down the Sylvaneth route killing it competitively.

[JackStreicher]

This years point updates were utterly random. It shows how little GW Designers know about their own game.

Edited July 21, 2020 by JackStreicher

[whispersofblood]

46 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

This years point updates were utterly random. It shows how little GW Designers know about their own game.

I disagree, if you pay attention to the battleplans and the changes wholistically this round of changes have provided a decent platform to curtail what was actually a lack of proper incentives to list construction. 

The asymmetric scoring in this year's battleplans is throwing my LRL building for a loop forcing me to include or at least consider units I otherwise wouldn't have. 

For example a non-general king is all of a sudden a serious consideration for objective play. Those points need to come from somewhere.

The EotStorm keeps looking back at me tactically. 

[JackStreicher]

I am talking about point updates, not battleplans.

The adapted battleplans still don‘t justify why unit entries that desperately needed an updated were ignored.

[DocKeule]

8 hours ago, Incineroar87 said:

The FAQs were only for the recent battletomes so we were never going to see anything for Deepkin outside of minor point changes. 

I wouldn't have been the first FAQ-update for an older battletome.

Any way, since the Ossiarch Bonereapers' ability "Unstoppable Juggernaut" has been nerved from +1 on saves to reroll saves of 1 in melee that might be a hint on what the Leviadon might become in a new battletome. Which instead of giving cover would be more like a mystic shield bubble.

[whispersofblood]

8 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

I am talking about point updates, not battleplans.

The adapted battleplans still don‘t justify why unit entries that desperately needed an updated were ignored.

Unit entries have no purpose without a battle plan. Its like being a hammer in a world with no nails. Which is why we run into many many warscrolls which points don't seem to fix, beyond just taking up physical space.

[JackStreicher]

12 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

Unit entries have no purpose without a battle plan. Its like being a hammer in a world with no nails. Which is why we run into many many warscrolls which points don't seem to fix, beyond just taking up physical space.

What is so fundamentally different now that it would justify battleplans to dictate point costs (which it doesn‘t, the Designers don‘t think that far)?

The point changes are truly rather random and I highly doubt they were made to reflect the units‘ power in consideration with the updated battleplans 

[whispersofblood]

45 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

What is so fundamentally different now that it would justify battleplans to dictate point costs (which it doesn‘t, the Designers don‘t think that far)?

The point changes are truly rather random and I highly doubt they were made to reflect the units‘ power in consideration with the updated battleplans 

Heroes play a much bigger role in victory literally score extra points, and auxiliaries require some thought to insure you have units available to complete them.

You think and say they are random, care to provide some evidence of this supposition?  

[JackStreicher]

5 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

Heroes play a much bigger role in victory literally score extra points, and auxiliaries require some thought to insure you have units available to complete them.

You think and say they are random, care to provide some evidence of this supposition?  

It‘s not only heroes, it‘s monsters and battleline as well. This enforces balanced lists nothing more. (Basically pushing what non competitive players play)
 

I think it‘s random (not literally, random as in not knowing what to do and therefor just changing points for the sake of it) because it is. Just look at the point adjustments across the armies and try to find a logical explanation:

Kurnoth Hunters - the most used Sylvaneth unit became cheaper.

Hearthguards still overperform, reducing the maximum size doesn’t change much.

Idoneth changes. 10 pts mean nothing if the unit simply does not work.

This list goes on and on. So either GW has no clue what they are doing, or they rushed the adjustments, or this was truly random.

[DocKeule]

The goal of point changes is not necessarily to shake up list building (although in the case of the IDK it should be). 
 

In the case of the Kurnoth Hunters: Even the most used unit could still be overpriced. 

[whispersofblood]

10 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

It‘s not only heroes, it‘s monsters and battleline as well. This enforces balanced lists nothing more. (Basically pushing what non competitive players play)
 

I think it‘s random (not literally, random as in not knowing what to do and therefor just changing points for the sake of it) because it is. Just look at the point adjustments across the armies and try to find a logical explanation:

Kurnoth Hunters - the most used Sylvaneth unit became cheaper.

Hearthguards still overperform, reducing the maximum size doesn’t change much.

Idoneth changes. 10 pts mean nothing if the unit simply does not work.

This list goes on and on. So either GW has no clue what they are doing, or they rushed the adjustments, or this was truly random.

You can't seperate the thing from what the thing is use to do. That's not good analysis. Which is why is Rob about IDK, seeing morrsarr all the time *might* be boring, but there isn't anything wrong or unbalanced about IDK right now (from a competitive perspective), fly is just a rule people mentally struggle with.

1. Sylvaneth are a painfully underpowered book in terms of straight ability to do dmg. Kurnoth Hunters are their go to unit in terms of doing dmg to the enemy it makes sense to decrease their cost, it might not fit more Kurnoth hunters we don't know if that would be good. But it may be enough to get them better support around them. It's not of the few armies I don't write lists for so it's hard for me to exactly say what you can get after the points changes.

2. This may be an experience difference in don't know. But personally HGB were one of the easiest units to play around, and it's probably why I find Stone guard so underwhelming. People's obsession with fighting their opponent's units creates ineffeciency where there need not be. HGB are a strong unit, string units should exist it's a reasonable strategy in the global sector of strategies, there will be suboptimal battle plans for such units though. Every unit doesn't and shouldn't hit the same point per X ratio, that would preclude unique aspects like; fly, movement, charge rules, etc things outside the realm of giving and receiving dmg.

I've not found HGB to overpreform in the one metric that totally matters, winning games via points on the board. 

3. But that is exactly my point isn't it. That points are representative of a units nominal value inside the game. The game being the selection of battleplans that you need to play, in a relationship with the sorts of strategies you will likely encounter. Namarti probably need to be about 110 points, to provide an alternative playstyle to the cavalry styled IDK build. But, is that what GW invisioned for the faction? Is that good for the game? Boredom isn't a good measure for changing something. If anything I think they missed the mark on eels. They 3 should pack the punch of 5-6 eels and be priced as such so that you need the bodies provided by Namarti to capture and hold objectives. Eels kind of sit in a sweet spot of dmg per point and bodies per point which makes the warscroll actually pretty well balanced.

4. The truth is there are many considerations needed to adjust points cost. And GW are being more conservative then you would like to see ideally. That doesn't make them unthought out or random. When GW are heavy handed they tend to break things. HoS are basically worse off then they were before they got a new book the result of a few overlapping changes that caused a complete internal collapse.  

 

[JackStreicher]

2 hours ago, whispersofblood said:

from a competitive perspective

That's the point, isn't it? 80% of the players don't care about competetive play. For them (and for GW afaik) points are used as a metric to  balance armies against one another.

 

Ofc competetive players look at the game from another perspektive, and they also want to win at all costs, min-maxing and all that. "Normal" players want to have somewhat optimal lists as well but not in the same manner as competetive folks
GW has never been pushing competetive gaming as the main aspekt of AoS that's why I really don't think they thought about anything you mentioned, when adjusting the points (that's not meant to be an offense btw)
 

[whispersofblood]

31 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

That's the point, isn't it? 80% of the players don't care about competetive play. For them (and for GW afaik) points are used as a metric to  balance armies against one another.

 

Ofc competetive players look at the game from another perspektive, and they also want to win at all costs, min-maxing and all that. "Normal" players want to have somewhat optimal lists as well but not in the same manner as competetive folks
GW has never been pushing competetive gaming as the main aspekt of AoS that's why I really don't think they thought about anything you mentioned, when adjusting the points (that's not meant to be an offense btw)
 

Competitive and WAAC are not the same thing though. Competition is about winning inside the spirit of the competition as much as it is about winning. So when I say "competitive" what I mean is "Trying to win the match, by playing the game" not tournament play. Your definition is more about playing the metagame, which I think is where most of the discussion of balance starts and stops.

[DocKeule]

11 hours ago, whispersofblood said:

Namarti probably need to be about 110 points, to provide an alternative playstyle to the cavalry styled IDK build. But, is that what GW invisioned for the faction? Is that good for the game?

I think you are giving GW way too much credit for their ability to plan ahead or keeping the whole picture in mind. There is not much evidence in the last couple of releases to support that point of view in my opinion. 

IDK especially have "half baked" written all over. Nothing really seem thought through. 

And as far as what GW hat in mind for the IDK: At least judging from the lore Namarti should be the backbone of most armies, Judging from a design standpoint Leviadons and Eidalons of Mathlann should be the centerpieces.

[DocKeule]

A new community article hints to an upcoming DoK release after the Lumineth Realmlords have been fully released in September. So hopefully IDK might be next after that?

[Sonnenspeer]

Mini battle report, because it was such a nice trap:
Sent in  the storm eidolon to capture the centre objective.
Two bloodthirster with the "we all fight first" shenanigans chargeing the eidolon.
Eidolon releases cloud of midnight, so no melee. Sorry demons.
Time for eels to charge the bloodthirsters
😁

Spoiler

Edited July 29, 2020 by Sonnenspeer