AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion

[HammerOfSigmar]

Sequitors can reroll failed save, so they have a much higher survival chance when they hold the objective and facing enemy attacks, unless your enemy don't even bother to take that objective. If you want sacrificial units, why not bring some skinks, they have the same wounds and a great retreat ability with the same cost.  They can help you block the enemy's path and if function properly, the enemy don't even have a chance to hit them.

[stato]

1 hour ago, Isotop said:

Correct. There is no categorical difference between moving 3, 5, 1000 or 0 inches. Some people have the concept of "moving 0" = not moving at all" on their minds. But this concept, while being somewhat intuitive, is not represented in the rules in any way.

Thats not actually correct, there are plenty of instances of rules that apply if 'unit did not move in the movement phase'. 

The language used by GW is very imprecise a lot of the time, so it could easily be understood that choosing to move 0" is the same as not moving, but also having completed the movement action 'step' of the rules, certainly id expect it to be FAQ'd that way if it came up.

Edited January 23, 2019 by stato

[Isotop]

16 minutes ago, stato said:

Thats not actually correct, there are plenty of instances of rules that apply if 'unit did not move in the movement phase'. 

The language used by GW is very imprecise a lot of the time, so it could easily be understood that choosing to move 0" is the same as not moving, but also having completed the movement action 'step' of the rules, certainly id expect it to be FAQ'd that way if it came up.

Well, that is not actually what I said. Sure, there are effects that prohibit movement at all. It is clear that a model has not moved under any circumstances when affected by such an instance. But when a model can move and decides to move 0", the model has indeed moved (even though it did not change its position).

I am not sure if I was not clear in my initial response or we are talking about different things. In any case, I would be glad to clear things up (if nessecary).

[Nos]

52 minutes ago, HammerOfSigmar said:

Sequitors can reroll failed save, so they have a much higher survival chance when they hold the objective and facing enemy attacks, unless your enemy don't even bother to take that objective. If you want sacrificial units, why not bring some skinks, they have the same wounds and a great retreat ability with the same cost.  They can help you block the enemy's path and if function properly, the enemy don't even have a chance to hit them.

Because I like my Stormcast army being comprised of Stormcast, not lizards.

I think you missed my point. Liberators as above can hold out to pretty much anything for as long as is required., which is all they're for. They're not there to do everything or survive forever, they're there to serve a role for minimum  investment while all the rest of your army wins the game. As I said, not in every match up, but in certain instances.  

I'm not saying it's going to work at the most formidable of competitions or anything, but given the advice was requested by someone who is new to the game that hardly matters. What I've outline has worked multiple times against multiple opponents, including netlists etc. Does that make Liberators undeniably amazing? Course not. But they're not bad units for 100 points at all and excellent in certain circumstances. There are many facets to the hobby, including the rule of the cool. The guy said he much preferred how Liberators look. He can absolutley take lots of Liberators and they will do a good job if he plays them right. In most instances, that won't be as efficient as Sequitors on a pure model to model basis, but there's more ways to play than straight power gaming.

And unless you're playing someone much better than you, I'd argue you that a good general could use Liberators and use the points saved elsewhere to good effect. Sequitors are notoriously over powered, that’s the issue, Liberators aren’t bad they’re just not as good as an undercosted unit. You can win without spamming them and I’ve found it enjoyable to do so.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Nos

[stato]

30 minutes ago, Isotop said:

Well, that is not actually what I said. Sure, there are effects that prohibit movement at all. It is clear that a model has not moved under any circumstances when affected by such an instance. But when a model can move and decides to move 0", the model has indeed moved (even though it did not change its position).

I am not sure if I was not clear in my initial response or we are talking about different things. In any case, I would be glad to clear things up (if nessecary).

Yeah sorry i read your argument backwards,  as "moving 0" NOT EQUAL not moving".   My mistake! 

[Bradipo322]

4 hours ago, Nos said:

I think it's situational.

In Warhammer everything is situational.

4 hours ago, Nos said:

In respect to getting the most value out of your points, especially with an army which struggles with maneuvering, I think Liberators serve a purpose in certain circumstances. If you want to either create a battleline as an anvil or hold objectives, and all you want from said unit is to not die fast and choke the point,  Liberators can do this as well as Sequitors with more models for less. If you need a sacrificial unit to hold up some Morghast or Kurnoth Hunters or something, that's a waste of Sequitor's potential killing power, which they do have, and you've lost points on the board you could have used elsewhere. It's not a waste of Liberators potential-you're getting the maximum amount from them. Meanwhile the points saved there can be spent on units whose purpose is exclusively to do damage, in a position where they're able to do it.

20 points are non that game-changing from my experience, and for a mere 20 points I like the fact that my anvil can become an hammer. It's the versatility that I like about my Sequitors, they are as much hammers as they are anvils and in a game of random variables I like some versatility.

4 hours ago, Nos said:

My current default strategy is to have a line of Liberators whose job it is to hold my part of the board, buffed with SD and a Castellant and a Priest and Azyr Halo, and then have pretty much everything else off the board. Enemy can't bring all of it's forces to bear on that line because they have to keep things back in anticipation of your elite units, and a big lump of Liberators doesn't cost that many points but is saving on a 2+ rerolling ones and causing mortal wounds on a 6 and healing wounds on a 5+, and if you take the requisite spell and that and the priest's prayer goes off you can make an enemy -2 to hit. You can choke up a huge portion of the enemy for a small points outlay and then use every other point in your army for elites. Currently favour Evos, Evos on Dracolines and then hit squads of 5 sequitors who with their 3 maces each are bringing more attacks to bear with a smaller footprint and more versatility than a single unit of 15, and ideally served to nick objectives and push others off them. 

So you use Liberators because they are cheapest that Sequitors but then you spend around 340 points (Lord-Castellant + Lord-Relictor + Knight-Incantor) just to buff them?!

And in the same setup Sequitors are better as they will reroll all failed saves, even the ones that have some kind of rend.

4 hours ago, Nos said:

I think good opponents make you waste the value of your own units and maximise their own, and Liberators in that sense can provide a far greater economy for holding portions of the board than Sequitors in certain scenarios.  Against an elite or evasive army I would probably take Sequitors because straight trades are more likely, but against a Horde army or one dependent on Characters I would take the Liberators for them to grind on and then let my Elites take the game to their backline. 

Also, and just as important, I actually love the models and enjoy their Yeomanry presence on the table. They make a nice visual default that enhances the charisma of the Elite units.

If you like them you are free to use them, but you can't really say that Liberators are better. They are not.

As the game stands now Liberators need one of two buffs to be worth playing:
1) Lower the cost to 80 or 90 for 5 Liberators or Lower the maximum unit size to 20 and make them cost 350;
2) Make them ignore rend or make them reroll all failed saves with shields (and add something with the double weapons).
So either you make them cheaper or make them more resilient.

[Nos]

51 minutes ago, Bradipo322 said:

In Warhammer everything is situational.

20 points are non that game-changing from my experience, and for a mere 20 points I like the fact that my anvil can become an hammer. It's the versatility that I like about my Sequitors, they are as much hammers as they are anvils and in a game of random variables I like some versatility.

So you use Liberators because they are cheapest that Sequitors but then you spend around 340 points (Lord-Castellant + Lord-Relictor + Knight-Incantor) just to buff them?!

And in the same setup Sequitors are better as they will reroll all failed saves, even the ones that have some kind of rend.

If you like them you are free to use them, but you can't really say that Liberators are better. They are not.

As the game stands now Liberators need one of two buffs to be worth playing:
1) Lower the cost to 80 or 90 for 5 Liberators or Lower the maximum unit size to 20 and make them cost 350;
2) Make them ignore rend or make them reroll all failed saves with shields (and add something with the double weapons).
So either you make them cheaper or make them more resilient.

I havent said they are better at any point though have I. I said they perform well in certain situations and that their reduced cost allows you to do other stuff elsewhere, and that you don’t need to use Sequitors all the time as battleline because Liberators are not as inferior as they are made out to be. The line of my argument was that you don’t need to use overpowered units to win if you don’t want to, essentially.  This way works, often. It’s not the only way. It’s not the best way. But it’s completley viable in non-cutthroat but still competitive circumstances, in my experience. 

Of course everyone likes a unit that can do multiple things. In my experience though it makes games boring. The guy said he likes Liberators and I’m saying that he can take Liberators and do well, in the right scenario. If you cant follow that nuance of argument and want to make everything a tedious binary scenario of one thing is always better than another then that’s on you. I’m personally not interested in predictable repetition and wrote methods. I like to try stuff. I take a new list most weeks with all sorts-Hunters, Gryph Hounds, a Star Drake. Non Meta stuff. Do those lists perform as reliably well as the tedious Sequitor Evocators spam? No. Are they more fun to play? Hell yes. Do they look better? Yup. Are they still good on the table, are they still capable of winning plenty games if you play well and use them to their full advantage? Absolutely they are.  

I take those characters for their utility across the army, not to solely buff their Liberators. I don’t always take them but more often than not that little committee more than pays for itself in any list 2000 points list.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Nos

[Requizen]

The main downside is that you have to use a Lord Arcanum as your General. While all versions (save perhaps the Tauralon) are solid choices that you could easily use anyways, it does mean that there are plenty of builds where you won't have Sequitor Battlelines, simply because your Hero selection is more or less locked in (Stardrake builds) or you lack the points in Heroes because you are investing elsewhere (Anvils with Longstrikes). 

I haven't used Sequitors in a while, because most of the time I'm running one of the two mentioned builds, or am trying something wonky (such as shooting MSU, which actually works really well in many matchups) and I can't be arsed to take an Arcanum. 

Edited January 23, 2019 by Requizen

[Mark Williams]

I’ve been tooling around with a large block of buffed liberators in the center of my board for about a month and it works wonderfully. But I have no delusions that a similarly buffed unit of sequitors wouldn’t do much better for similar or equal points. In this scenario, my general is sitting in the block anyway, so it might as well be an arcanum. The only reason I don’t use them is that I don’t have the models and won’t for a while. Liberators can do it, and I find 15 is just fine, while 20 is almost overkill. If taking sequitors, I would probably take 20 just simply because of the points bargain. But it’s worth mentioning that if all you want is a choke point and nothing else, liberators are better because they are cheaper.

 I have also been experimenting with Vandus in the block, pumping out his CA multiple times in a single phase. When he catches a block of liberators, even they become good at assault, so I shudder to think what would happen with sequitors instead.

On the subject of sequitors serving a role of elites, I use a squad of 5 for that regularly. They are almost as good as evocators, and priced cheaper to compensate. I fully believe that they can substitute for elite units if taken in large enough numbers.

On the subject of Stardrakes piling in 0”, that is always how I have played it.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Mark Williams

[Black Blade]

18 hours ago, chord said:

I agree GW doesn't want to make SCE too good cause people will complain.  I'm not talking about broken like the Warrior Brotherhood etc. 

This. I'm kind of sick of people complaining about them already. There are valid issues but sometimes it sounds like a fervor and it's logic seems to come from a vacuum where only SC appear to have issues.

[Requizen]

2 minutes ago, Black Blade said:

This. I'm kind of sick of people complaining about them already. There are valid issues but sometimes it sounds like a fervor and it's logic seems to come from a vacuum where only SC appear to have issues.

There's a lot that goes into it. Stormcast have, as of yet, not had a point in the meta where they had no viable builds. And even our "less that top tier" options have been good. If you're a non-SCE player, especially with an army that has been languishing in power level for a while (of which there are many), it's easy to look at the posterboys that are always strong in multiple ways and feel upset about it. 

That's why I'm starting Bonesplitterz, so I can go to a casual game night without judging eyes  

[PJetski]

I stopped caring about Sequitors a while back, for a number of reasons

• They're not worth using outside of Battleline, and sometimes you don't want a Lord Arcanum as your general
• The only models worth their points are the Greatmaces, but once you run out of shields you lose rerollable saves
• They're not really worth using in squads of 5. If you want a cheap battleline/screening unit you can just use Liberators; neither will survive a round of combat against any serious threat, they die the same to shooting and mortal wounds, but Liberators cost 20pt less
• In big squads of 15/20 the unit foot print is too large and can be exploited with flank attacks
• Squads of 10 are a good size. You can still get good value from buffs, have enough spare shields to weather a few losses, you're not too big to be exploited by fast cavalry and monsters... but for 240 points you can just take Evocators instead.

Their niche is being able to reroll all saves in combat, and have the option to switch to putting out a respectable amount of melee damage for a battleline choice. I find it more effective to run disposable screens to absorb melee then counter with a stronger unit (like Evocators). Specialization is the key for me.

[Mark Williams]

5 minutes ago, Black Blade said:

This. I'm kind of sick of people complaining about them already. There are valid issues but sometimes it sounds like a fervor and it's logic seems to come from a vacuum where only SC appear to have issues.

The issue I find with SCE is that there’s a “wall” that is very difficult to get past at the tournament level. They do extremely well at the casual level, but once you hit the really tough meta lists, at a certain point it becomes incredibly frustrating to create a good competitive list. My “tournament” list went 2/5 in 5 tournaments last year. I changed the list every tournament, didn’t matter, and I’m basically losing to the same armies in the same ways all year. The tools are there, but you need a cavalcade of skill and luck to pull it off... I think that’s where the majority of “valid” complaints are stemming from. Barring a few very, very specific, special lists, SCE on the whole are mid to upper tier 2 at best. Not a bad place to be, but pretty darn frustrating if it’s your only army and you seriously invested in it.

[Nos]

15 minutes ago, Requizen said:

There's a lot that goes into it. Stormcast have, as of yet, not had a point in the meta where they had no viable builds. And even our "less that top tier" options have been good. If you're a non-SCE player, especially with an army that has been languishing in power level for a while (of which there are many), it's easy to look at the posterboys that are always strong in multiple ways and feel upset about it. 

That's why I'm starting Bonesplitterz, so I can go to a casual game night without judging eyes  

Aye, SC have so many options which, while not as good as Sequitors (ie essentially broken) are still very reliable in their role. Nerf Sequitors and Evocators and they will still be a strong army with good defence and attack in melee , decent cavalry and magic, powerful shooting, tactical flexibility,  and multiple build and strong synergy options.

Nerf two units from most other factions  which are similarly as ubiquitous and powerful as the Sacrosanct mainstays though and they would be pretty much ruined at a competitive level.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Nos

[LordCelestant Imperius 1st]

Don't forget that our dear sons of the storm are poster boyz. They are easy to learn, hard to master. We don't need that much combos and every unit can stand by themselves and that comes with a price. 

When not talking about tournaments, they are really strongs in casual games. 

Assumption is play and have fun. All the opposite of a competitive aspect.

Edited January 23, 2019 by LordCelestant Imperius 1st

[Nos]

8 minutes ago, Mark Williams said:

The issue I find with SCE is that there’s a “wall” that is very difficult to get past at the tournament level. They do extremely well at the casual level, but once you hit the really tough meta lists, at a certain point it becomes incredibly frustrating to create a good competitive list. My “tournament” list went 2/5 in 5 tournaments last year. I changed the list every tournament, didn’t matter, and I’m basically losing to the same armies in the same ways all year. The tools are there, but you need a cavalcade of skill and luck to pull it off... I think that’s where the majority of “valid” complaints are stemming from. Barring a few very, very specific, special lists, SCE on the whole are mid to upper tier 2 at best. Not a bad place to be, but pretty darn frustrating if it’s your only army and you seriously invested in it.

That’s more of an issue with people investing in the game at a level GW aren’t though. It’s not a balanced game at the top tier. If you want to only play one army against the best players, and your intention is to win, and the game only caters for meta armies, then you’re either going to have to stick with the meta or just hope that on top of doing everything right, the majority of luck based plays in a fairly luck orientated game roll your way, 5 games in sequence.

I respect you for wanting you to win with your guys, but I think anyone who has that mentality is going to get burnt playing AOS at the top level for the foreseeable future at the very least unless they’re just fortunate enough to play a faction who remains consistently effective . The game is rigged and they’ve shown no inclination to sort that.

[Nos]

37 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I stopped caring about Sequitors a while back, for a number of reasons

• They're not worth using outside of Battleline, and sometimes you don't want a Lord Arcanum as your general
• The only models worth their points are the Greatmaces, but once you run out of shields you lose rerollable saves
• They're not really worth using in squads of 5. If you want a cheap battleline/screening unit you can just use Liberators; neither will survive a round of combat against any serious threat, they die the same to shooting and mortal wounds, but Liberators cost 20pt less
• In big squads of 15/20 the unit foot print is too large and can be exploited with flank attacks
• Squads of 10 are a good size. You can still get good value from buffs, have enough spare shields to weather a few losses, you're not too big to be exploited by fast cavalry and monsters... but for 240 points you can just take Evocators instead.

Their niche is being able to reroll all saves in combat, and have the option to switch to putting out a respectable amount of melee damage for a battleline choice. I find it more effective to run disposable screens to absorb melee then counter with a stronger unit (like Evocators). Specialization is the key for me.

Think we’re of the same mind on this 

[Black Blade]

53 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I stopped caring about Sequitors a while back, for a number of reasons

• They're not worth using outside of Battleline, and sometimes you don't want a Lord Arcanum as your general
• The only models worth their points are the Greatmaces, but once you run out of shields you lose rerollable saves
• They're not really worth using in squads of 5. If you want a cheap battleline/screening unit you can just use Liberators; neither will survive a round of combat against any serious threat, they die the same to shooting and mortal wounds, but Liberators cost 20pt less
• In big squads of 15/20 the unit foot print is too large and can be exploited with flank attacks
• Squads of 10 are a good size. You can still get good value from buffs, have enough spare shields to weather a few losses, you're not too big to be exploited by fast cavalry and monsters... but for 240 points you can just take Evocators instead.

Their niche is being able to reroll all saves in combat, and have the option to switch to putting out a respectable amount of melee damage for a battleline choice. I find it more effective to run disposable screens to absorb melee then counter with a stronger unit (like Evocators). Specialization is the key for me.

Is the answer that Liberators need a slight buff? I think so. 140 would make Sequitors a never take. Id like to see a bump in special weapons per squad and identical weapon profiles. 2/3/3 on hammers and 3/3/4 on blades. Sequitors would still be superior enough to consider 

[PJetski]

7 minutes ago, Black Blade said:

Is the answer that Liberators need a slight buff? I think so. 140 would make Sequitors a never take. Id like to see a bump in special weapons per squad and identical weapon profiles. 2/3/3 on hammers and 3/3/4 on blades. Sequitors would still be superior enough to consider 

Sequitors are fine at 120. Personally I would like to see Liberators have their max unit size reduced from 30 to 20, and then either a) go down to 80 or 90 points;  or b) have their warscroll updated to allow 2 in 5 models to equip a Grandhammer/Grandsword.

[chord]

20 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Sequitors are fine at 120. Personally I would like to see Liberators have their max unit size reduced from 30 to 20, and then either a) go down to 80 or 90 points;  or b) have their warscroll updated to allow 2 in 5 models to equip a Grandhammer/Grandsword.

I'd rather Liberators to 3+ to hit with hammer and 3+ to wound with warblade.  

Edited January 23, 2019 by chord

[AngryPomeranian]

3+ 3+ and reroll saves if they don't move for liberators. 

 

Edited January 23, 2019 by AngryPomeranian

[Nos]

3 hours ago, Black Blade said:

Is the answer that Liberators need a slight buff? I think so. 140 would make Sequitors a never take. Id like to see a bump in special weapons per squad and identical weapon profiles. 2/3/3 on hammers and 3/3/4 on blades. Sequitors would still be superior enough to consider 

They don't need a buff. If they were in anyone else's faction they would be worth 100 points. I think a reduction to 95 points would illustrate their quality notably. But again, I don't think they need it. People are taking other things that are uniformly better because they're more versatile. That's the issue, as it is with most AOS factions. It's not that other stuff is bad, it's just that if you're only interested in the best pound for pound option there's an easy answer every time. If Sequitors didn't exist and Liberators were the only battleline option I don't think anyone would be saying they needed a nerf or a buff.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Nos

[Rotten]

14 minutes ago, AngryPomeranian said:

3+ 3+ and reroll saves if they don't move for liberators. 

 

Have to agree here. They are a low cost battleline and open up options to allow me to use other generals but the Hit Wound numbers feel kinda flat. Or give me mortal wound on nat 6 or something?

[Requizen]

Nah, I think both Warscrolls are fine as is. Arcanum + Sequitors is great thematically.

The main issue, I think, is that having a brick unit (either Libs or Seqs) is too valuable in general, and having a Wizard is too valuable in general. This makes Sequitors a non-question, since if you're taking a Wizard (and you want at least one if not two), you're probably gonna take an Arcanum. And if you're taking him, might as well make him the General for Seq Battlelines.

One thing they could do is make the other Wizards more attractive. The Exorcist is way too overpointed, he should be 110 at best, probably 100. Incantor probably could stand to go down as well - the auto-dispel is really good, but most people go Arcanum anyways (or in addition) because the mounted versions are so much better. Heck, making the Veritant more affordable might make taking a Wizard less necessary because he can dispel (he should be 100 imo).

They could also make other Heroes more attractive as General options.
-LCoD should make Concussors and/or Fulminators Battleline, should have since the start.
-Zephyros General should make Hunters Battleline as well, so you're not forced into the (imo overcosted) Aquilor General. Or an Aquilor foot version.
-Give some of the other Heroes CAs or abilities that only work if they're the General. Celestant on Foot generates an extra CP on 4+, but only if you're the General. Venator has a CA to give out ranged rerolls to nearby Stormcast, but only usable if the model is the General. That sort of thing.

They could even split the Command Traits up for different groups like they do in other books. If Staunch was only available to "wave 1 Heroes" (Castellants, Celestants, Relictors, etc), then Arcanums wouldn't be nearly as ubiquitous. Or they would, but then you wouldn't get the great Staunch combo with Sequitor blocks.

 

IMO it's not that Arcanum + Sequitors is just too good not to take, it's that there's no incentive to take other stuff. You're probably going to take an Arcanum due to the nature of the game (Endless Spells, Realm Spells, etc), and he'll probably be your General since there's no reason to make anyone else your General unless you're doing Stardrake shenanigans. Other options, while still strong, are not as appealing, because making Sequitors into Battleline just fits into the army anyways. If there were other reasons not to make the Arcanum into the General, it would still be seen (10 man Sequitors are great anyways), but it wouldn't be a given.

[Twh30]

Hiya what do people think of this list ?