AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion

[Sleepa]

15 minutes ago, Heaven_lord said:

Hey, do you think I can build a competitive anvilstrike list with those models ?

 

6 minutes ago, PJetski said:

You've got the core of the list right there, seems like you're on the right track. 

Like PJetski said, you have the core of an Anvilstrike list. If you wanted to take something with just the models you have, you could try:

Lord Aquilor - General

Lord Relictor

Knight Azyros

Knight Incantor

Liberators (Unit of 5)

Judicators (Unit of 5)

Judicators (Unit of 5)

Longstrikes (Unit of 9)

Evocators (Unit of 10)

Aetherwings (Unit of 3)

Aetherwings (Unit of 3)

It's a fragile version of the army, but the Judicators can poke at things while holding objectives, and the Aetherwings can try to screen your Longstrikes. You'd have two teleport abilities with the Lord Aquilor and Lord Relictor if you choose the Translocation prayer.

[schwabbele]

5 hours ago, frostfire said:

Maybe a good way to sell stocked vanguard models for GW.)

Haha, gonna make those share holders happy 😆 but tbh I kinda suspect something like this will happen. Make older models viable and push sales. 

[Mark Williams]

Game 1 of NZ GT. Star strike. Vs Skaven.

Not much to say. I killed a vermin lord with my Celestant Prime. Major loss, no points scored vs maximum for the opponent. 

Pictures attached.

Edited May 25, 2019 by Mark Williams

[Brother Mayhem]

Hey all, 

Currently speed painting through my stormcast to get ready for a game against my mate coming from the Netherlands with his Legions of Nagash.

As the majority of my force is Warrior / Vanguard chambers, I decided to get some fire power and might to my army in the form of judicators and evocators. The question I want to ask is - what is better for them ? Grandstaves or Tempest Blades?

Thanks in advance !

[Lord Ein]

Deleted.

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by Lord Ein

[Mark Williams]

Game 2 of NZ GT. Three Places of Power vs Sylvaneth.

Very close game. My opponent underestimated the reach of the prime and I killed Alarielle through a screen. After that it was a downhill game for Sylvaneth.

Major Victory for me. 

Edited May 25, 2019 by Mark Williams

[Mark Williams]

Game 3.

Scorched Earth vs Ironjawz. Minor victory for me. 

Lot of mistakes on both sides. And weird bad luck.

Didnt take many pictures because I was getting tired.

[The World Tree]

Cool pics, it would be great to read a reflection on your list afterwards. I have to say the mats seem a little busy and distract from what look like very pretty armies.

[Mark Williams]

7 hours ago, The World Tree said:

Cool pics, it would be great to read a reflection on your list afterwards. I have to say the mats seem a little busy and distract from what look like very pretty armies.

I’ll do a proper writeup after the tournament. As usual it’s looking like I’ll finish mid pack.

[Tsorg]

I've got a rules question. When playing as Knights Excelsior for instance against Khorne I manage to kill so many models in his unit that it routs. Do I get the benefit from Storm of Annihilation or no ? In Blades of Khorne "Blood of the Blood God!" wording it says "whenever a unit is destroyed" so obviously he gets the Blood Tithe point.  Furthermore if more than one unit of mine makes attacks against a unit that routs they all would get the benefit if the answer to the first question is yes.

Edited May 25, 2019 by Tsorg

[Kelsicle]

35 minutes ago, Tsorg said:

I've got a rules question. When playing as Knights Excelsior for instance against Khorne I manage to kill so many models in his unit that it routs. Do I get the benefit from Storm of Annihilation or no ? In Blades of Khorne "Blood of the Blood God!" wording it says "whenever a unit is destroyed" so obviously he gets the Blood Tithe point.  Furthermore if more than one unit of mine makes attacks against a unit that routs they all would get the benefit if the answer to the first question is yes.

That’s a good question. I know that models lost to battleshock count as being slain and so rules that are worded regarding slain models are triggered.

Id say the intent of the rule would be to only trigger when a units attacks destroy an enemy unit, but the wording is ambiguous. Someone with more experience may be able to clarify.

Edited May 25, 2019 by Kelsicle

[Tsorg]

4 minutes ago, Kelsicle said:

That’s a good question. I know that models lost to battleshock count as being slain and so rules that are worded regarding slain models are triggered.

Id say the intent of the rule would be to only trigger when a units attacks destroy an enemy unit, but the wording is ambiguous. Someone with more experience may be able to clarify.

Yup, as for lore Knights Excelsior units are mostly hard hitting retributors turning enemy to ash but becouse of the rules I feel cheated whenever for instance 20 model unit gets 19 models destroyed, one flee and I get nothing from that trait. So far I am playing as whenever I destroy a unit in combat I get the benefit. Any thought Stormcast players ?

[Incineroar87]

What's the best way to go with Sacrosanct at 2K these days ?

[Mark Williams]

Game 4 NZ GT.

Knife to the Heart vs Nurgle.

Put up a surprisingly good fight. If I had won priority on turn 3 there was a chance to pull it out. But lack of bodies to hold the objective got me in the end.

[fwlr]

3 hours ago, Tsorg said:

Yup, as for lore Knights Excelsior units are mostly hard hitting retributors turning enemy to ash but becouse of the rules I feel cheated whenever for instance 20 model unit gets 19 models destroyed, one flee and I get nothing from that trait. So far I am playing as whenever I destroy a unit in combat I get the benefit. Any thought Stormcast players ?

I'd say that the trait only triggers if the unit is destroyed after having its last wounds inflicted by that knights Excelsior unit.

Yes it's lackluster, but in terms of khorne, the units that run are still destroyed as they leave the battlefield- the knights, if the last guy runs, haven't actually killed that unit.

Does suck lore wise though

[Mark Williams]

Game 5.

Border war vs Sylvaneth.

Major Loss. 15 to 23. Most enjoyable match of the tournament. Great sportsmanship from the opponent.

 

[Mark Williams]

Summary of thoughts on the Notorious GT in New Zealand this past weekend. I won't repost pictures of the battles, as I've already done that, but I would like to give some thoughts on my list and on Stormcast's placing in the tournament as a whole, and the meta as I've seen it.

This is the army that I took (picture, and list).

Spoiler

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Hammers of Sigmar
Mortal Realm: Aqshy

Leaders
Knight-Azyros (100)
- General
- Trait: We Cannot Fail 
- Artefact: God-forged Blade 
Lord-Castellant (100)
Knight-Venator (120)
Knight-Incantor (140)
- Spell: Lighntning Blast
Celestant-Prime (340)

Battleline
5 x Liberators (100)
- Warhammer & Shield
- 1x Grandhammers
5 x Judicators (160)
- Boltstorm Crossbows
- 1x Thunderbolt Crossbows
5 x Judicators (160)
- Boltstorm Crossbows
- 1x Thunderbolt Crossbows

Units
3 x Aetherwings (50)
3 x Aetherwings (50)
3 x Vanguard-Raptors with Hurricane Crossbows (140)
3 x Vanguard-Raptors with Hurricane Crossbows (140)
3 x Vanguard-Raptors with Longstrike Crossbows (180)

War Machines
Celestar Ballista (100)

Endless Spells
Quicksilver Swords (20)
Everblaze Comet (100)

Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 0
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 96

I'm sorry for the format of this post in advance, but I just have a string of random thoughts and points that I wanted to make, so here goes.

I got a "best of 7" award for painted army, which I was quite happy with. But on a personal level I felt there were a few armies that were much better painted than mine. I talked to one of them after the tournament, and apparently he got disqualified because a unit hadn't been finished painting (ie it was base color only). So I guess I got picked due to the fact that my entire army was painted. In any case, I am happy about it.

There were 50 players in the tournament, but on the day, two people did not show.

This is the final rankings after the tournament:

https://tabletop.to/notorious-gt/ladder

I placed 40th with 2 wins and 3 losses. I'm so much lower than the other people because one of the wins was only a minor victory, and I did not do well scoring my secondary objectives (only 2 out of 5 were achieved).

On the subject of the secondary objectives, we were using "Hidden Agendas":

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/AoS2_GHB19_Hidden_Agendas_Download-1-1.pdf

My only gripe about these is that they seem much easier to get if you are winning. There aren't many good choices in the objective list for armies that are losing. One of the best one for an army that expects to lose is the Secret Objective, which has one of your heroes being removed from battle. It's easy to get (for me), but all of my heroes are extremely important, as they are support heroes, and removing one from the game in the middle of play, when the outcome is unknown, is very difficult to do (and that's the only one I can guarantee to get while playing a losing game). I just find them a bit frustrating.

For the armies that I played against, here are my thoughts on them:

1. Skaven

I can't believe how big this army is. It feels like their units cost practically nothing, and there are threats everywhere on the table. I felt like he had three times the army that I did.

I can't believe how they seem to be able to do everything with almost no sacrifice to other areas. They have good combat, good shooting, and a good magic phase. They were strong in every area of the game, and that blew me away. Every phase for my opponent was very busy, with lots of damage happening.

There was a vermin lord on the table with a big green ball in its hand, and it made everything on the table (within range) immune to battleshock. In addition to this, it was impossible for me to kill it, so for all intents and purposes his army was completely immune to battle shock and had 2-3 times more bodies than me.

This game felt unwinnable to me. I could have played better, and made better choices, but in the end it felt like it wouldn't have mattered what I did.

2 and 5. Sylvaneth

Two different sorts of armies, but similar experiences. It takes too long for Sylvaneth to play and do their "thing". The first player took 85% of our time limit up moving his army around while I sat and waited for him to put trees down and then teleport and summon dryads all around. Navigating around and dealing with the trees is not a fun experience for me, and I feel that it creates a frustrating experience for the opponent to have to suffer through. while I do feel this is a strong army, I feel that it's rules don't flow well with the game, and it feels like it was made for a different game or system. I really don't like playing against Sylvaneth and having to wait around while they lay down trees and do teleporty stuff, and I hope that this goes away or at least gets smoother in the next book.

3. Ironjawz

A very fun game, and our armies were very equal. But it seems to me that their book is outdated and their army is very expensive for what they do. They need more bodies and stuff needs more synergy. Feels like playing an older edition of the game when I play them, as the game pace is slower and has fewer moments of intense movement and damage.

4. Nurgle

This game was practically unwinnable for me, and my opponent knew it. I think he was visibly bored playing me, which made me a bit sad. I actually put up a really good fight, and if I'd won priority on turn 3, I might could have squeezed some water out of a rock and pulled a victory, or at least gotten a tie. But it's a terrible strategy to hope for miracles and perfect rolls to save you. All my opponent needed was a single double turn to irrevocably get ahead, so I basically immediately lost the objective and the game without doing much of anything. My Celestant Prime never even hit the table. Oh well.

......................

Thoughts on my army:

When I was deciding on a list before the tournament. I built a very heavy shooting list because I thought that big monster lists were going to be dominating the tournament a little bit, and I wanted a way to deal with them. While that was true, I was unable to win the middle of the pack missions, and thus I never faced any of the big monster lists that were fighting with each other at the top tables. Instead, I got stuck fighting against balanced horde type armies, which I was completely unequipped to deal with. I automatically lost most of my games without really giving my opponents a challenge. This was very frustrating for me as I feel like I played good games and did some cool things with my army, but this was largely unseen by my opponents, who were unfamiliar with stormcast and basically just saw a very mediocre army on the table with a very low model count.

I'm convinced at this point that shooting (at least my brand of it) is a lost cause in today's meta. A little bit of support shooting is fine, but completely investing in it is a waste. The primary reason for this is that it doesn't do enough damage, and the stormcast shooting units are all too small and too bad in combat to hold objectives. You basically jut get blown over by a stiff breeze, and you can't afford enough points to bring a threatening shooting line and also have a wall of defenders to block the enemy while you are shooting at them.

Almost every game i played was just a round of good shooting followed by a tide of bodies crashing into me and then a quick game loss afterwards.

My shooting units do not move forward and assault locations, so I cannot capture objectives on the turn that I land and "attack", which puts me behind on points scoring, which causes a chain reaction where I have to basically quickly table my opponents - somehow - and then capture all the objectives and try to come back from a losing position - somehow. I basically start every game out losing, and have to try to turn water into wine at some point with amazing play and luck. My army, at least, is very low tier, and cannot put up a real fight against the better built armies. I don't necessarily think this is a reflection of stormcast armies as a whole - just my army in particular is essentially a failed experiment.

The only unit in my army that was capturing objectives was the Celestant Prime. He was by far the MVP of the tournament. But the prime model in general is very expensive and spends too much time off the board doing nothing. He's very easy to kill as well, and in two games, he was killed instantly in a single turn, just after he appeared on the board. This guy is way too fragile for costing so many points and spending so much time off the table. My biggest wish is that he gained 2 wounds in addition to 2 attacks, for every turn he stayed off the table. Just a little bit of extra resilience would mean the enemy can't just hit you with a 200 point unit ad remove you from the table. He feels like he was balanced for a game that no longer exists to me.

....................

Thoughts on the tournament and the meta.

Holy heck, the meta is competitive. Over half of the armies there were armies that I would have had trouble beating even on the best day, and many matchups would have been automatic losses for me.

Looking at the final scoreboard, FeC, Deepkin, Death, and Skaven are all fighting with each other for the top spots.

All of the stormcast lists did poorly, and while I admit that none of us had a "great" (or maybe even good) list, it's obvious to me that SCE don't do well with many of their lists. All of the stormcast present had different types of lists, but every one of them struggled and couldn't hang with the top armies.

As for me, if I want to keep playing Stormcast at a competitive level, I'm a point where I have to look at literally rebuilding my army from the ground up, and a lot of what I own is probably unusuable for that future army. It's very frustrating to have 3-4k of painted models in army, and almost 80% of it is rubbish that just doesn't seem to be working. I've walked away from this tournament slightly more demoralized than usual, and it's going to take me a while to try to come up with my next army list and figure out where to go from here.

I admit that it would be a whole lot simpler to just play another army that does naturally well and has fewer trap unit choices to bog me down.

Interestingly there was a Fyreslayer list that did quite well, and I thought that was cool.

 

 

Edited May 27, 2019 by Mark Williams

[whispersofblood]

@Mark Williams

If you are really struggling with SCE I think it's time to do some very sober thinking and deal with some hard truths.

1. Do you want to play SCE? Forget what you have painted or spent money on. If you could choose to play SCE at events today would you? You really need to decide this because it will have a massive affect on what you can do to get better results.

2. Yeah you want to play SCE. Forget almost everything you know about the faction. Like most people who do one thing for a long time we get entrenched in thought patterns, and miss new or tangential avenues of thought. SCE are not a bottom tier faction, but they aren't near the top of the standard grouping either. 

3. The top of the curve can usually just take their best stuff for the most part and make some sacrifices on volume. SCE cannot do this, that means you are making sacrifices on quality. For example anvilstrike takes its highest quality shooting but sacrifices sequitors for liberators because you can't get it all. Especially in an elite army in a game still mostly about model numbers for objectives. 

4. Accept some personal hard truths. You may not be as good as you think, and in fact until you can prove to yourself otherwise it's probably better to assume you are terrible then to put too much responsibility for results on the tools at hand. 

5. If you want to hang with the top 10% at some point, without chasing a strong book every 6 months. You need to goal set, and play lots of games not even necessarily AoS just strategy games in general. Maybe target 3-2 at your next event and do everything in your power before the event to assure yourself you can do it. It's a competitive game you still might not but you will eventually. 

5. Maybe you spend the next 2-3 days really considering the these things, start fresh and throw yourself into it with a new energy and goal. In test games really put your army through the ringer. Come up with theories and then stress test them. Charge that drakesworn into a unit it might be able to deal with and when things go wrong in practice games practice getting something out of the game. Turn a loss to a minor, or practice getting secondaries.

This mindset has work for me for since my football coach really instilled it in me. And it's helped me get over some crushing nerfs to my armies in 6th/7th/8th a AoS and recently the new standard of faction strength in AoS 2.0.

For tournaments it is imperative that you play the package. Know what missions are coming, know what secondaries pair well with the mission at hand and be prepared with a general idea of how you want the battleplan to go. This will change when you see your opposition, but generally when I lose a game it is because I got distracted and forgot to play my game.

[Mark Williams]

Good advice. I don’t think you’ve particularly contradicted anything I said above. My conclusion was that I need to go back to the drawing board and redo my army if I want better results. That’s essentially what you said.

 I agree that I can improve my experience and knowledge as a player. I don’t agree that I am bad at gaming by any stretch of that definition. I’ve beaten almost all of the people who’ve won tournaments in my area in the past 2 years at some point. To the point that I have a reputation of pulling out surprise wins against people who completely underestimate me and don’t take me seriously. In the distant past, I won two 40k tournaments, which wasn’t easy.

I do however think I have a penchant for building quirky lists out of some inner desire to be different or win with an underdog list or units, and I think that’s blowing up in my face a bit. I probably made some quite terrible units do amazingly well for what they were capable of, but a dud is still a dud at the end of the day...

You do bring up a valid question as to whether or not I want to stick with stormcast, or just play an easier army or at least one that matches my play style better. That’s something worth thinking about more seriously going forward. I’m definitely unhappy with the state of my current army, and something will need to change as I feel at this point I’m just spinning in circles.

Edit: I also think I’m not that far off the mark with my assessment of stormcast. If the theory that the army is good, and I’m what’s bad, were true. There would be more evidence pointing to that. Other SCE players would be placing better, and I, placing mediocre, would be an exception. The fact that I even seriously entertain that theory by doubting my conclusions should be evidence enough that my thought processes and logic aren’t just simply clouded by ignorance and naivety.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Mark Williams

[crkhobbit]

Maybe this is old hat that I'm just now getting around to, but why is no one playing Warrior Brotherhood?  Seems like at least a decent mid-tier list.  It's one drop and can ds the entire army.  +1 Bravery and reroll wounds of 1 is icing.

Heraldor, Vexillor, 2x10 Retributors, and then the rest of the reqs is exactly 2000 points.  Drop in the Rets with the Vex and get two re-rollable charges on units that do comparable damage to Evos.  Then drop libs in front of judis somewhere and hold an objective.

Extra CP from the bat, and both heroes can have an artefact.  When compared to Evos, you lose Empower.  But spells seem so ridiculously unreliable that I don't think I care anymore (especially when other armies have bonuses to cast and unbind).  Can't cast Empower the turn you ds anyway.

Obviously haven't played it in the current meta yet.  But my current impression is that it was good once, something changed, and the echo chamber decided it was now bad.  Maybe it should be re-evaluated.  It doesn't have the unfairness of +6" charge with a Gav bomb, or shooting twice with Longstrikes.  But a one drop and deploying anywhere is pretty unfair from a board control perspective.

[JudgeFredd]

Hello everyone,

i'm new to the stormhosts and trying to beat Blades of Khoren. We have some Khorne players and the Great Khorne Deamons are doing prety well in our Gaming Club. (They play mostly with Deamons, few mortals)

Do you have any idea how to aproach them?

Thanks a lot.

[Mark Williams]

6 hours ago, crkhobbit said:

Maybe this is old hat that I'm just now getting around to, but why is no one playing Warrior Brotherhood?  Seems like at least a decent mid-tier list.  It's one drop and can ds the entire army.  +1 Bravery and reroll wounds of 1 is icing.

Heraldor, Vexillor, 2x10 Retributors, and then the rest of the reqs is exactly 2000 points.  Drop in the Rets with the Vex and get two re-rollable charges on units that do comparable damage to Evos.  Then drop libs in front of judis somewhere and hold an objective.

Extra CP from the bat, and both heroes can have an artefact.  When compared to Evos, you lose Empower.  But spells seem so ridiculously unreliable that I don't think I care anymore (especially when other armies have bonuses to cast and unbind).  Can't cast Empower the turn you ds anyway.

Obviously haven't played it in the current meta yet.  But my current impression is that it was good once, something changed, and the echo chamber decided it was now bad.  Maybe it should be re-evaluated.  It doesn't have the unfairness of +6" charge with a Gav bomb, or shooting twice with Longstrikes.  But a one drop and deploying anywhere is pretty unfair from a board control perspective.

I think if retributors had a 3 up save this would really have some chops. Out dropping an opponent definitely has some value as well.

[jhamslam]

16 hours ago, JudgeFredd said:

Hello everyone,

i'm new to the stormhosts and trying to beat Blades of Khoren. We have some Khorne players and the Great Khorne Deamons are doing prety well in our Gaming Club. (They play mostly with Deamons, few mortals)

Do you have any idea how to aproach them?

Thanks a lot.

take 9 longstrikes in a unit, anvils of the heldenhammer. Screen his daemon charge then take out his bloodthirsters and heroes

[Lucur]

I'm tinkering with my Kittycator list. Currently i'm thinking of ways to stack -1 to hit on the big baddies, in conjunction with buffed and rerollable saves on my cats. That's a LA on Dracoline with Thundershock and Earbursting Roar. Add a Lord Castellant and chronomantic Cogs for reroll saves. I shy away from Staunch Defender as it goes contrary to what the cats should do, which is charge each turn. There goes the Heraldor. I'm thinking of Spellportal to deliver thundershock more generously. I fear this leads to too much of a loss of bodies, though.

Is there more than the dracoline mount trait and Thundershock? Which (cheap) allies can deliver innate -1 to hit modifiers?

[whispersofblood]

22 hours ago, Mark Williams said:

Good advice. I don’t think you’ve particularly contradicted anything I said above. My conclusion was that I need to go back to the drawing board and redo my army if I want better results. That’s essentially what you said.

 I agree that I can improve my experience and knowledge as a player. I don’t agree that I am bad at gaming by any stretch of that definition. I’ve beaten almost all of the people who’ve won tournaments in my area in the past 2 years at some point. To the point that I have a reputation of pulling out surprise wins against people who completely underestimate me and don’t take me seriously. In the distant past, I won two 40k tournaments, which wasn’t easy.

I do however think I have a penchant for building quirky lists out of some inner desire to be different or win with an underdog list or units, and I think that’s blowing up in my face a bit. I probably made some quite terrible units do amazingly well for what they were capable of, but a dud is still a dud at the end of the day...

You do bring up a valid question as to whether or not I want to stick with stormcast, or just play an easier army or at least one that matches my play style better. That’s something worth thinking about more seriously going forward. I’m definitely unhappy with the state of my current army, and something will need to change as I feel at this point I’m just spinning in circles.

Edit: I also think I’m not that far off the mark with my assessment of stormcast. If the theory that the army is good, and I’m what’s bad, were true. There would be more evidence pointing to that. Other SCE players would be placing better, and I, placing mediocre, would be an exception. The fact that I even seriously entertain that theory by doubting my conclusions should be evidence enough that my thought processes and logic aren’t just simply clouded by ignorance and naivety.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you personally were bad. It is more of a useful fiction for maximising the tome, if you assume you are the problem and question your own thoughts when building your list it should work out that you get more imaginative results and sometimes those results are very good. 

I think SCE like Space Marines where the fluff sometimes covers up what is actually happening in the story, and fluff for good or for ill colours how people perceive rules. In almost every action SCE are fighting some sort of desperate battle against the odds, where they don't have as many resources as they would like, but are individually so capable that it always gives them a chance at victory. Usually this is at great personal cost, as the reforging fluff demonstrates to great affect.

Translated that to game play and to me I see the units much different that other people people perhaps do. Individual stormcasts, and retinues will die without a doubt, the questions is will they achieve the objective before they go up in lightning.

So how do we look at the game through that lens?

-To win the game you generally need to score the majority of objectives 3 of 5 turns, but for stormcasts you should look at it as the opponent can control the majority of objectives for 2 turns. To be clear you can't control 0 objectives in multi objective games, just don't need a majority. 

- Everything is disposable, the army doesn't function as a preserve the force style set up, its too easy in AoS2.0 for factions to focus their killing power into a fine point and delete a unit, especially combat units. Even units of 20 sequitors can be removed in a single go, I've done it personally with IDK, DoK, HoS, and MK. That isn't a fault of SCE, or a bug in the game its a feature. So you need to question if that is a good use of your very limited resources, if your unmovable object just isn't unmovable in the face of general unstoppable forces available to factions.

- From this perspective I love the liberator, they cover more space than 5 models have any business doing, they take dedicated effort to remove in one go, are battleline, and pretty cheap as far as modern battleline go. The most interesting thing about them is that more is not necessarily better, and frequently it is worse.

Personally I think it is probably about time for the majority of the wisdom in this thread to burn and for a new philosophy to come through that might open up the book a bit. I will say that is is quite clear that a lot of the original SCE content is just not mechanically appropriate for AoS2 anymore, and the book is showing its lineage a bit, similar to Khorne. On the other hand most factions if we are talking about competition really only skim the top 10% of their content as well, its just that SCE have SO much that it looks shocking in comparison

I do agree with @PJetski that there are probably 4-5 meta dependant builds in the book that are sitting beneath the global meta builds.