Jump to content

AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion


Chris Tomlin

Recommended Posts

SCE just arent in a good place right now. Simply put, we're paying too much in points for abilities others get in their allegiance/tome for free. We dont get level 2 sorcery like most of the new factions, we dont get mortal wound negation or regeneration like other factions, and our legendary 4+ save means nothing, now that Ardboyz and Bonereapers (who can go to 3+ across the whole army) are in the game. 

Our units are mostly only as good as their warscroll says they are. We can pull out a couple neat tricks against newer players, but most experienced players will just grind us down, which means Anvilstrike and a bit of luck are our only hope.

Maybe Write to GW expressing this. Until we get a new tome, im honestly considering shelving my SCE until next Summer, with the advent of new Seraphon, Tzeentch, StD and KO the next few months, we'll be further behind than ever. Not trying to be all doom and gloom since im excited about the dracolines going down, but honestly looks like SCE will be my "fun" army for a while

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, crkhobbit said:

Of course I'm serious.

They're expensive.  And doing half damage makes them doubly so.  Even in Anvils, they haven't really been cutting it in the meta lately.  And I've certainly never seen them in a competitive list that wasn't Anvils.

Speaking as someone who doesn't play Anvils and have never had the option to compare them to, I've had good results with a single unit specifically on the board to take out someone's 100 pt heroes and to apply pressure early on in the game. People generally either underestimate them, or commit too many resources towards getting rid of them. I don't use them all the time, and I wouldn't put the sort of points an anvilstrike list does into them, but I like them enough that they see maybe 30-40% of my hobby group games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it would be hard to generalise, but how many tournaments nowadays include Total Commitment mission in their rule packs?

Despite having played and won fair number of games involving that particular mission, it always leaves me embittered.

It adds salt to the wound when SCE battletome is already riddled with overpriced units and worthless artefacts.

And now even one of the official missions outright denies key allegiance ability of SCE.

It is as if the rules designers were genuinely worried that allowing SCE to use their allegiance abilities unhindered would make SCE utterly dominate the podium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Sagittarii Orientalis said:

I know it would be hard to generalise, but how many tournaments nowadays include Total Commitment mission in their rule packs?

Despite having played and won fair number of games involving that particular mission, it always leaves me embittered.

It adds salt to the wound when SCE battletome is already riddled with overpriced units and worthless artefacts.

And now even one of the official missions outright denies key allegiance ability of SCE.

It is as if the rules designers were genuinely worried that allowing SCE to use their allegiance abilities unhindered would make SCE utterly dominate the podium.

Most of the most powerful and cancerous list backs then, either the warrior chamber, the old vanguard wing, the more recent gavbomb, or the full tp sylvaneth as well as the kharadron clown car were based around teleporting and kicking you in the nuts without any counterplay possile.

Like others battleplans that favor sorcerers (and hinder armirs that don't have them) or the one that give bonus to monsters, it's a battleplan made to punish one-trick ponies lists that rely too much on something specific.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ledha said:

Most of the most powerful and cancerous list backs then, either the warrior chamber, the old vanguard wing, the more recent gavbomb, or the full tp sylvaneth as well as the kharadron clown car were based around teleporting and kicking you in the nuts without any counterplay possile.

Like others battleplans that favor sorcerers (and hinder armirs that don't have them) or the one that give bonus to monsters, it's a battleplan made to punish one-trick ponies lists that rely too much on something specific.

Total Commitment was introduced in 2018 GHB, which was released simultaneously with new SCE battletome. So the dreaded Vanguard Wing was already significantly toned down when the mission was in play. 

 

And I honestly cannot see how gavbombs deny counterplay.  Even factions with relatively expensive, few models could bring in cheap allied units for fodder to deny gavbomb from charging key units. And if I recall correctly, even before the 2018 GHB was released Kharadron Overlords were no longer the apex predator at the podium. 

 

Funny thing is, while SCE are denied one of their few saving graces in Total Commitment, other armies have no problem using their movement shenanigans unlike SCE. Sylvaneth which you also mentioned have no trouble summoning and jumping through forests which do not count as reinforcements. Orruk Warclans have the spell Hand of Gork so that they can teleport anywhere on the board more than 9" away mid-game with no penalties. Seraphon without 2.0 battletome do it for free.

 

I have had this discussion several months ago, and I read a memorable comment regarding Total Commitment. Quoting it would do more justice than explaining it by myself.

 

On 8/22/2019 at 11:37 PM, amysrevenge said:

It's another example of an attempt to force balance that only covers one thing and completely bypasses the top tier armies.

Basically, in the game we've got variable battleplan or realm rules that will occasionally cripple reinforcement-heavy builds (Total Commitment), or  shooting-heavy builds (Ulgu) and many folks tend to say "Well, this forces you to build a more rounded force, not relying on any simple tricks". 

But we don't have similar rules that will occasionally cripple combat builds or magic builds, allowing other armies to very consistently rely on their best simple tricks - there is no realm or battleplan rule that influences FEC army builds away from the main toughest choice, same for DoK, same for Slaanesh, same for other top tier armies.  SCE need to consider all the potential realms and battleplans when they build their lists, these others do not.

I am fine in a world with Total Commitment and Ulgu, if it also includes optional rules that cripple pure combat builds as heavily as Ulgu cripples a pure shooting build, or T.C. cripples a reinforcement build.  Force EVERYONE to build their army as if the only thing they are good at could potentially be unavailable.  If it's only a small selection of them that have to do this, it isn't really fair.  Some people need to chin up/git gud/diversify away from their strengths, others can just ride on their strengths without a care.

 

Edited by Sagittarii Orientalis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lord Krungharr said:

The Longstrike Raptors in a Living City army would still be good, as they can outflank from any board edge and still have plenty of range.  Of course not a SCE army but I love Living City for shooty guys (good for Irondrakes too).

How is that any different from Scions at that point?

8 hours ago, crkhobbit said:

I don't think Longstrikes are worth their points without the ability to shoot twice.

They still can shoot twice. They simply might not be able to do it guaranteed on turn 1, which was always the case against a canny opponent who wouldn't deploy important units within 30" of your line, or used terrain, or used reserve shenanigans - which then forced you to consider burning that CP on a low-priority target and perhaps put your Longstrikes in a bad position. 

Translocation still works... 66% of the time, anyways. Every turn after Turn 1 you'll have something to shoot, since 24" is still quite a good range in AoS and objectives need to be taken. This change is a nerf for sure, but it's only a nerf in that you won't be able to guarantee instagib a unit of choice before the opponent goes. Instead, now it's a chance to instagib, or otherwise allows them to get a turn un-shot.

Overall it's still likely one of the top lists for SCE, given how shooting is really our only way to keep up with a lot of things. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is kind of odd that they have let BOTH of the poster boys of the edition (SC and NH) languish so hard and so long. People hardcore freaked out about Sequitors, Evocators, and Reapers (mostly because of how they were abused alongside Nagash himself in a Grandhost, rather than an actual NH army) a year and a half ago when they dropped, and well here we are.

Edited by AverageBoss
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Marzillius said:

Eyyy, it's my exakt list that I played in my second to last tournament. If you look in my posting history you will find a tournament report using this list. I would use the extra 80 points the list has gained on an additional CP. It's nice having the additional one to be able to make the run roll on the Dracolines into a 6, and with 30 points left over a triumph is highly likely as well.

Cool, I will do that. 
I can see the value of the run roll 6. If going down the Command Point route, the 30 extra points can be used to upgrade Libs to Seqs. 
The reason I am partial towards Judicators is that when I have played with ballistas in another list, they have proven to have really high variance. Sometimes they are just brutal, but at other times they achieve little, even struggling to remove fairly flimsy screens. Judicators could provide a bit of smoothing of the variance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Requizen said:

How is that any different from Scions at that point?

They still can shoot twice. They simply might not be able to do it guaranteed on turn 1, which was always the case against a canny opponent who wouldn't deploy important units within 30" of your line, or used terrain, or used reserve shenanigans - which then forced you to consider burning that CP on a low-priority target and perhaps put your Longstrikes in a bad position. 

Translocation still works... 66% of the time, anyways. Every turn after Turn 1 you'll have something to shoot, since 24" is still quite a good range in AoS and objectives need to be taken. This change is a nerf for sure, but it's only a nerf in that you won't be able to guarantee instagib a unit of choice before the opponent goes. Instead, now it's a chance to instagib, or otherwise allows them to get a turn un-shot.

Overall it's still likely one of the top lists for SCE, given how shooting is really our only way to keep up with a lot of things. 

But from my experience that "instagib" was crucial for 80% of games. If you dont kill the most inportant units in 1 and 2 turn you will ussualy get overhelmed and loose.

Also 24" in standard 72/48 tables is very low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Nizrah said:

But from my experience that "instagib" was crucial for 80% of games. If you dont kill the most inportant units in 1 and 2 turn you will ussualy get overhelmed and loose.

Depends on what you're facing, I suppose. I've played a lot of games with them and often even with 30" off the bat, a good opponent is going to deploy important things out of range, out of LoS, or off the board to prevent that sort of thing. With defensive passive buffs and artifacts, even if you could get in range it was far from a guaranteed shot. The one volley early on is a change, for sure, but it doesn't fundamentally break the list.

11 hours ago, Nizrah said:

Also 24" in standard 72/48 tables is very low.

It's all the range you need when objective capturing is 6" or 3" and objectives are in the center of the map or within 24" of one another. If your opponent hangs back all game and doesn't walk up to contest your Libs/Evos/other support, you win the game. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine it's not just the first turn that'll catch people out though. Having 2 different ranges in every hero phase for the entire game might mean you can't "drill" into the same target twice due to it being slightly out of range, even in subsequent phases. If I were playing that army, it would be interesting to take some notes on how games changed afterwards (although I don't think I'd have been playing it that way to begin with, but that's a separate issue). Anyway, my point is just simply that it's not just the first turn that is affected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the correct ruling for the Celestant Prime and Ghal Maraz, does he gain plus 2 attacks when he is in the opponents as he is in reserve and the FAQ reads every turn that he is in reserve or is it only in the Primes turn that he recieves the attacks. At the moment we've only had split decisions so I thought I'd ask here, solid answers and explanation why would be much appreciated don't just say yes because you want it. I can see RAI should be once a battle round but RAW to me reads per turn as he is in reserve in opponents I can't see why he wouldn't.

Screen Shot 2019-12-19 at 12.06.40.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read the card again.  It only triggers when you choose to keep him in reserve. That decision is only made in your movement phase.

It's not "every turn".  It's "at the end of your movement phase".  The FAQ just clarifies that it happens on each of your turns.

 

Edit: I re-read what I wrote, and it may sound a little cold.  Didn't mean it that way, just trying to be very concise and factual.

Edited by crkhobbit
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, crkhobbit said:

Read the card again.  It only triggers when you choose to keep him in reserve. That decision is only made in your movement phase.

It's not "every turn".  It's "at the end of your movement phase".  The FAQ just clarifies that it happens on each of your turns.

Unfortunately hence how the debate came up and then only getting 50?50 replies of people playing both ways through FB. The paragraph reads at the end of your movement phase you must declare whether or not this model is staying in reserve end of paragraph space new sentence. Now the next sentence in a new paragraph If this model remains in reserve add 2 to the attacks, now he remains in reserve both in your turn and mine with the faq referring to both, now ive played players who've played it both ways, and its never been a bother but running tourneys if this was asked id be inclined to go with RAW because if i can argue it and not really see a hole in the argument then Id have to give them the call. For me i'm an easy going player and when i use him its going to be with dispossessed so he's doing one turn in the sky then dropping anyway so makes no difference. I just want to make the right call if ever in the position and feel it was something missed in the FAQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New paragraph in the same ability - this gives it context.  Just like in a book, a new paragraph doesn't mean a new chapter.  It's just separation for readability.  The box for that ability is drawn around that whole section, so it would be nonsensical to pull one sentence out of it and argue that it means something different than what it says within its context.

Within its context, it reads: At the end of your movement phase, choose.  Option 1, this happens.  Option 2, this different thing happens.

That paragraph out of context doesn't even have a qualifier/trigger.  So it doesn't even work.  "If this model remains in reserve, add 2 to the Attacks characteristic..."  When?  You do not have the opportunity to choose any other time than when it says you do in the previous sentence, so you do not get the benefit of choosing an option.

There is no "when" in that paragraph when taken out of context.  So we can only imagine that paragraph working out of context one of two ways.  Either he gets +2 once and only once ever (which we know from the FAQ to be incorrect), or we imagine triggers for it that don't exist.  I assume the trigger people are imagining is at the end of your opponent's movement phase.  That trigger does not exist anywhere in this ability's text.  So it would be equally logical to assert that he gets an additional +2 for every phase, every dice roll, every second the game proceeds - because he "remains in reserve" for that dice roll as equally as he remains in reserve for your opponent's movement phase.  That would be infinite attacks, and obviously nonsensical.  So the only way the argument for getting the bonus on your opponent's turn works is to use the context of the previous paragraph's "at the end of your movement phase" and then extend that to something that is never said by replacing "your" with "the".

Put another way: it does not say you get extra attacks for remaining in reserve on your opponent's turn.  And no ability in the game does something that the rules do not say it does.  The assertion that it works on your opponent's turn is completely baseless.

RAW, it absolutely happens on each of your turns.  And he gets +2 for each time you choose to keep in reserves.  He would not get extra attacks any other time.  And the only way to argue otherwise is to ignore context and ignore the rules.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.  I promise to be warmer in the spring.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, crkhobbit said:

Read the card again.  It only triggers when you choose to keep him in reserve. That decision is only made in your movement phase.

It's not "every turn".  It's "at the end of your movement phase".  The FAQ just clarifies that it happens on each of your turns.

 

Edit: I re-read what I wrote, and it may sound a little cold.  Didn't mean it that way, just trying to be very concise and factual.

Thank you, I was having this debate with Tim and your logic is exactly the same as mine! 👍add +2 when you make the declaration of remain in reserve, you only make that declaration in your own movement phase not the opponents', it's clearly written.

Edited by Warmill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stormcast changes are underwhelming. I might try running the Templar + 6 Desolator block, it would be fun to hit MONSTERs on a 2+ with Astral Templars. I'm also going to try swapping out the 10 Evocators for 6 Dracolines in my Anvilstrike list - the extra mobility and natively rerolling charges seems to be worth losing 8 dice on the lightning blast.

Big nerfs to Skaven and Slaanesh make us indirectly better, but I still hope for a new battletome.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm considering this for a local this weekend.  If I take the hysh mage, it's 4 sources of -1 to hit to help with maintaining board presence/control.  Or I can take ghur mage for wildform, which is comical with the dracs+heraldor.  Currently leaning towards hysh for Pha's.

160    LA
120    castellant
100    heraldor
100    Relictor
90    battlemage, ghur or hysh
100    Liberators
130    Seqs
440    Seqs
520    Dracs
180    Decimators
60    Geminids

I'm thinking my plan is to deepstrike the big seq block, and then a turn 2 charge with the dracs with good target selection.  They can charge turn 1 with wildform no problem, but then a lot of times you're putting 600 points into a 60-100 point screening unit.

Not sure what stormhost I'll pick if any.  Any suggestions?  No idea what the meta is going to be.  Probably diverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are Dracolines good-ish enough now that I could buy the new SCE battleforce box? I have this Cleansing Phalanx list in mind:

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Astral Templars
Lord-Arcanum on Celestial Dracoline (220)
- General
Hamilcar Bear-Eater (120)
Lord-Castellant
Knight-Heraldor (100)

3 x Evocators on Dracolines (260)
3 x Evocators on Dracolines (260)
20 x Sequitors (440)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
10 x Sequitors (260)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
10 x Liberators (200)
- Warhammer & Shield
Cleansing Phalanx (120)

Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 1
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 128

Hammers of Sigmar version with Astreia Solbright as general would be interesting too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PJetski said:

Stormcast changes are underwhelming. I might try running the Templar + 6 Desolator block, it would be fun to hit MONSTERs on a 2+ with Astral Templars. I'm also going to try swapping out the 10 Evocators for 6 Dracolines in my Anvilstrike list - the extra mobility and natively rerolling charges seems to be worth losing 8 dice on the lightning blast.

Big nerfs to Skaven and Slaanesh make us indirectly better, but I still hope for a new battletome.

I'm interested in the options my starcast list has now the two dearest units got a price cut but I am thinking of the 6 desolator and templar lists too. They did just get cheaper as well. 

I'm probably the only sc player satisfied with the changes due to the kinds of lists I take but I'd have taken some super beefed up liberator scroll changes over the templar and LCoSD cuts. 

I guess with how ubiquitous libs are they wouldnt want to make big changes there without new battletome levels of play testing.

One thing that is a concern is how the buffs to the dragons (price reduction) may prove cold comfort if tzeentchs new tome comes out bananas strong.

They were always a counter for us. 

Well I've bought and am painting an obr army which together with my nurgle army should mean I will always have options at tourneys if the stardrakes and prime bore me (but they never do lol) . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Turragor said:

One thing that is a concern is how the buffs to the dragons (price reduction) may prove cold comfort if tzeentchs new tome comes out bananas strong.

They were always a counter for us. 

That was before we had dispel scrolls on a spammable 140p hero 

When playing Aetherstrike I didn't have any problems with Tzeentch, so I don't expect to have any in the future once they get updated. I think the update with focus heavily on Kairic Acolytes and Tzaangors, neither of which are a problem for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, crkhobbit said:

New paragraph in the same ability - this gives it context.  Just like in a book, a new paragraph doesn't mean a new chapter.  It's just separation for readability.  The box for that ability is drawn around that whole section, so it would be nonsensical to pull one sentence out of it and argue that it means something different than what it says within its context.

Within its context, it reads: At the end of your movement phase, choose.  Option 1, this happens.  Option 2, this different thing happens.

That paragraph out of context doesn't even have a qualifier/trigger.  So it doesn't even work.  "If this model remains in reserve, add 2 to the Attacks characteristic..."  When?  You do not have the opportunity to choose any other time than when it says you do in the previous sentence, so you do not get the benefit of choosing an option.

There is no "when" in that paragraph when taken out of context.  So we can only imagine that paragraph working out of context one of two ways.  Either he gets +2 once and only once ever (which we know from the FAQ to be incorrect), or we imagine triggers for it that don't exist.  I assume the trigger people are imagining is at the end of your opponent's movement phase.  That trigger does not exist anywhere in this ability's text.  So it would be equally logical to assert that he gets an additional +2 for every phase, every dice roll, every second the game proceeds - because he "remains in reserve" for that dice roll as equally as he remains in reserve for your opponent's movement phase.  That would be infinite attacks, and obviously nonsensical.  So the only way the argument for getting the bonus on your opponent's turn works is to use the context of the previous paragraph's "at the end of your movement phase" and then extend that to something that is never said by replacing "your" with "the".

Put another way: it does not say you get extra attacks for remaining in reserve on your opponent's turn.  And no ability in the game does something that the rules do not say it does.  The assertion that it works on your opponent's turn is completely baseless.

RAW, it absolutely happens on each of your turns.  And he gets +2 for each time you choose to keep in reserves.  He would not get extra attacks any other time.  And the only way to argue otherwise is to ignore context and ignore the rules.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.  I promise to be warmer in the spring.

 

So you've ignored the FAQ, I'm not saying your wrong I'm looking for the correct ruling and unfortunately your hypothesis undermines itself therefore undermining your entire view.

1) FAQ reads every turn so it would not be an infinitive number, it would be per turn as per the FAQ

2) First Paragraph ends with a full stop not a colon or semi colon ending that paragraph which GW use frequently to list condition effect but not ending the sentence, had it been continued it would be an easy reader example you use a colon to make a list not a full stop. Thats to end a sentence though my grammar stops at GCSE grade C level 18 years ago which is basically forever.

3) Your never ending attacks makes no sense as you including every phase and Faq reads every turn. Phase is different to turn 2 player turns divided into phases  per battle round which undermines your argument had you not put this sentence or section in I would readily accepted it and just say he's the most overpriced model n the game as battle round 2 coming he could not do the output as a 270 bt of insenate rage he'd need 9 attacks and still not be able to do the damage output in the time taken to accumulate them.

3) Why put every turn if its not intended for every turn?  why not once per battle round or in stead of remains in reserve delete those words then it would only be in your turn, so many different ways to make it easier to read. You have remained in reserve in your opponents turn condition of remains in reserve in that turn met, if he has not remained in reserve wheres he gone? I'd be a bit peeved but also amazed if he's gone for a brew.

4) It's not split as an option just an effect of whether he comes down or not. So end of my movement phase I stay up fair enough who wouldn't plus 2, now your TURN end of your movement phase, he's remained in reserve condition met, add 2 to the attacks. Where has it broken the rules? The only thing I have to do is remain in reserve to gain attacks, but in my turn I have to declare whether or not he's coming down just like and unit in a stormiest army deployed in the sky you must declare it coming down.

(I'm not even running him now found a worse army trying to make good till it gets FAQ in a week  but a solid answer would be good)

 

 

Edited by TimM85
missed a sentence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the paragraphs were in different boxes with different ability names, I'd be on your side.  But they're not.  They're all part of the same ability, and are required to be treated as such.  Your assertion requires the disregard of context.  To ignore context is to willfully misunderstand.

But since you want a solid answer, I'll try again.

1 hour ago, TimM85 said:

now your TURN end of your movement phase, he's remained in reserve condition met, add 2 to the attacks. Where has it broken the rules?

In this scenario, you're saying he gets +2 attacks at the end of your opponent's movement phase.

Why then?

Opponent's movement phase isn't mentioned on the entire warscroll.  So where did you get that trigger from?

Did you get it from the first paragraph?  Of course you didn't.  Not only are you ignoring it, but it says your movement phase.

Did you pick the end of the movement phase because that's when things usually come out of reserves?  Of course you didn't.  Because that happens at the end of your movement phase and no ability in the entire game allows you to deploy at the end of your opponent's movement phase.

So why does it happen then?  You don't have a rule that says it happens then.  So it doesn't.

He's still in reserves at the end of my hero phase, right?  Does it happen then?  Of course not - there isn't a rule that says it happens then.

He's still in reserves when I successfully make a charge roll.  Does it happen then?  Of course not - there isn't a rule that says it happens then.

Does it happen at the end of your movement phase after choosing for him to remain in reserves?  Of course it does - that's what the ability says.


Hopefully that clears it up.  If it doesn't, then I recommend contacting GW for further clarification.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...