AoS 2 - Cities of Sigmar Discussion

[dekay]

Alright, so, thinking in hypothetical, especially that dreadlord dragon's bite apparently got buffed to 1+.

10 drakespawn, dreadlord, cogs/wildform, aura of glory. Does +1A spell help them in any meaningful way? Plus, if they have access to it they also get 2+ save and +3 move 1st turn. Or is it still just simply better to take and buff demigryphs instead?

[Myrdin]

14 hours ago, overtninja said:

The designer's commentary indicates that when you get to use Behemoths as Battleline, they aren't counted as Behemoths. Looks like you can make yourself a 6-Tank army or a billion Kharybdises or whatever!

You get a Kharybdis ! You get a Kharybdis ! Everybody gets a F-ing  Kharybdis !

We  have Kharybdises for DAYS !

 

On a different note > Dreadlord now has the same degradation profile as the Sorcereres which is good. Much better than the previous one.

As for how they not noticed that units that have DRAGON in their names dont have DRAGON keyword..... bruh... thats just lazy.

Regarding the chariots. At least make it 1 out of 2, not 3 > <

Though honestly, they are still good choice for 60pts. You will sit them at the Hurricanum early game anyway, so the main gun is still scary. Though the repeaters xbows do suffer a bit from dropping to 4+ only (with Hurricanum). I expected this change as it made no sense for there to be a unit champ upgrade for a single model unit. Still gonna run at least 2-4 in my lists.

As for Drakespawns - Rather than a price drop I`d like to see the Cold ones get a -1 Rend, and the Riders get one additional attack. Make them feel like the heavy cav. they are supposed to represent.

 

 

How did the Orruks fare in general. Was there some nerfing done on their side as well ?

Edited October 22, 2019 by Myrdin

[Double Misfire]

11 hours ago, Aelfric said:

Drakespawn Knights are about the only option for me to use my Dragon Blades as an alternative, so I may well trot them out occasionally.  It's probably my unbridled love of the models.

What are mercenary Blood Knights?  

[zilberfrid]

4 hours ago, dekay said:

Alright, so, thinking in hypothetical, especially that dreadlord dragon's bite apparently got buffed to 1+.

10 drakespawn, dreadlord, cogs/wildform, aura of glory. Does +1A spell help them in any meaningful way? Plus, if they have access to it they also get 2+ save and +3 move 1st turn. Or is it still just simply better to take and buff demigryphs instead?

It is possible to use three characters to buff up one unit, and it will always perform well then. I would say that a unit of halberds would be about as good

Try a similar investment with other units, and it will be better. They will have more use of a +1 a spell when charging, because their charge is not worthless.

I would not use Drakespawns in a Tempest's eye list. Yes, they get 2+ (with a reroll one if you put a bit of magic in it) on the first turn, but what would be the use of one (slow) cav unit that's ignorable for weapons (and will get mangled with mortal wounds) for one round?

There are a number of things that could have been done to make the Drakespawn worth it.

• Add rend to claws, add lance attack
• Return reroll on 1-2 on saves
• Add wound to wounds characteristic

Alternatively, their points could be dropped to somewhere in the 120 vicinity.

Edited October 22, 2019 by zilberfrid

[dekay]

39 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

Try a similar investment with other units, and it will be better.

Yeah, I know. Poor drakespawn in current form will never be an optimal choice, I only wonder if they can can be elevated anywhere beyond 'utterly useless'. 

[Forrix]

15 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

I think it only gets playtested by people that have no other cavalry. Or monsters. Or infantry.

Honestly, considering some of the stuff that slips through I think its safe to say their playtesters are either incompetent, aren't being listened to, or that playtesting isn't actually taking place. I suppose I could add a fourth option that playtesting is being rushed so not everything gets tested though that kind of falls into the 3rd category.

[JackStreicher]

1 hour ago, dekay said:

Yeah, I know. Poor drakespawn in current form will never be an optimal choice, I only wonder if they can can be elevated anywhere beyond 'utterly useless'. 

If you find out: tell me how!

[Televiper11]

14 hours ago, Aelfric said:

Drakespawn Knights are about the only option for me to use my Dragon Blades as an alternative, so I may well trot them out occasionally.  It's probably my unbridled love of the models.

Take your Dragon Blades as the Order of the Blood Drenched Rose merc company.

Edit: see someone beat me to that idea, lol

Edited October 22, 2019 by Televiper11

[Frowny]

I think a little less negativity about gw and balancing drakespawn nights. Yes. They are terrible. But they did a really awesome job balancing like 50 other warscrolls and 6 allegiences. I see people build lists using almost everything. Surely we can forgive them a 2 % fail rate.

[SwampHeart]

20 minutes ago, Frowny said:

I think a little less negativity about gw and balancing drakespawn nights. Yes. They are terrible. But they did a really awesome job balancing like 50 other warscrolls and 6 allegiences. I see people build lists using almost everything. Surely we can forgive them a 2 % fail rate.

That doesn't suit people's narrative so it'll never happen. 

[zilberfrid]

40 minutes ago, Frowny said:

I think a little less negativity about gw and balancing drakespawn nights. Yes. They are terrible. But they did a really awesome job balancing like 50 other warscrolls and 6 allegiences. I see people build lists using almost everything. Surely we can forgive them a 2 % fail rate.

Oh, I do think the warscrolls are a lot clearer than before, not neccesarily all more powerful, but better written. While the musicians and banners are a huge step down in power, it is much more consistent now. Plus, Pistoleers, demis and greatswords read like really fun units, and I like those models.

I am a bit disappointed by some things, but regard Cities of Sigmar very highly for the sheer number of options it brings.

Not getting everything right is kind of expected, and well, the FAQ was probably more about clarifying and errata than rebalancing. I just hoped that the Drakespawn Knights had a typo that would save them.

I don't even have Drakespawn Knights, so I have no bone in this fight apart from not really being able to justify getting them at this moment.

Edited October 22, 2019 by zilberfrid

[dekay]

24 minutes ago, Frowny said:

I think a little less negativity about gw and balancing drakespawn nights. Yes. They are terrible. But they did a really awesome job balancing like 50 other warscrolls and 6 allegiences. I see people build lists using almost everything. Surely we can forgive them a 2 % fail rate.

 

3 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

That doesn't suit people's narrative so it'll never happen. 

I mean, it's neither 'we expect GW to do aeverything perfectly' nor 'we must find a reason to hate GW', guys. It's simply very unfortunate that out of everything that could've been useless, it's drakespawn in particular. Because this unit carries a heavy burden of responsibility ; ).

Why? Because they have no, let's call it 'backup rules'. They are our only standard size melee armoured cavalry (wild riders would be relatively close but for some unfathomable reason they lost their shields. Again.) And, like it or not, but in practice, every cities unit represents not only itself, but also everything else of its type that didn't survive the culling. Or the previous cullings. And drakespawn are possibly the only unit we have that represent an entire category of lost units. Their warscroll would be useful for dragonblades. Empire knights. Hell, brettonians could easily build competitive armies based on them, if only they were useful.

Yeah, vampires are an option for all of those, but it's still not perfect and relegates them to a support role. So yeah, we'll complain about the drakespawn not because we demand perfection, but because of the wasted potential of this one particular unit. I don't think anyone would cry if our most overpriced unit were, say, dreadspears. We'd just see more eternal guard that way. Or freeguild guard with spears. No such alternatives for drakespawn ; )

 

[prochuvi]

I havent read other warscrols because my army are dwars and only dwarfs.

But they did a horrible work balancing the dwarfs units.

Almost every unit have been nerfed from dispossesed to the new scroll and are almost umplayables of how bad they are.

First every unit have lost the ignore spells with 5+ that sure we can get with one alegiance,but every other unit can get it also and we havent got nothing back for this.

Our shields have gone from reroll all saves to only +1 save that is a nerf.

 

Units of dwarfs NERFED:

Lomgbeards:10 points expensiver,lost damage and tankyness with the lost of 2 hand and shields,lost save even if equip shield(2 save old shield,3 save new)nerfed rangue of aura. So a unit that was bad before is worse now and expensiver. 110 points for 10 attacks of 4hit 3 wound 0 rend 1 damage????? Maybe 60-80 points but 110 is a joke

Ironbreackers:10 points cheapers BUT they have lost everything that made them special. They lost 1 save(from save 2 to 3 now),lost tye ignore spells,they lost tye ignore rend........so they have lost all this for a buff of 10 points.......not worth it even close. Ironbreackers are now a joke,even liberators that people says are bad are 100% better in all and for 30 points less

Irondrakes:a big buff of 30 points but have gone from double shooting for 10 models or more to you cant move,so with 16" rangue they are useless now. Old scroll for 180 points and double fire with 10 or more models was better than the new scroll for 150 points

Warriors:our screen unit have been deleted

Quarrelers\thunderers: our other shooting screen unit deleted too

Unforgued:our damage hero deleted

Runelord: didnt get a prayer book as EVERY other prayer have got in their 2.0 tome,also got a huge nerf to the rangue of the auras 

Wardenking: a nerf to the save from 4 rerolling all(save of 1'5) to only a save of 3, also in almost every scenario the comand ability was nerfed, from +1 wound to every unit rangued or melle for your turn and untill you next turn to only a +1 attack to one unit for only melle and only for this melle turn and with very short rangue

And now the unit that got BUFFED:

Hammerers: same cost for same stats.the rangue of the aura was nerfed(as every aura of our tome)but got a buff in the form of mortal wounds with the 6 

 

So it isnt a 2% of units that have been bad balanced.

 

Only in dwarfs every units is a joke and have been nerfed from dispossesed(who were at rankings around 33th position).

Only one unit from all the dwarfs havent been nerfed.

 

It is pretty sad that my old dispossesed army with old scrolls and old alegiance etc be better than the same units but with new scrolls and new cos alegiance etc.

 

Can dwarfs be playable? Sure but with many non dwarfs unts,the fact is a 100% dwarf army have been NERFED HARD from old dispossesed to new cos

 

[SwampHeart]

9 minutes ago, prochuvi said:

Can dwarfs be playable? Sure but with many non dwarfs unts,the fact is a 100% dwarf army have been NERFED HARD from old dispossesed to new cos

Because you aren't supposed to play mono Dispossessed, or mono Wanderers, or mono anything. The book is called Cities of Sigmar and is about playing with armies of the Cities which are blended forces that represent the various factions in that city. The sooner people grasp this the better. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by SwampHeart

[zilberfrid]

22 minutes ago, dekay said:

 

I mean, it's neither 'we expect GW to do aeverything perfectly' nor 'we must find a reason to hate GW', guys. It's simply very unfortunate that out of everything that could've been useless, it's drakespawn in particular. Because this unit carries a heavy burden of responsibility ; ).

Why? Because they have no, let's call it 'backup rules'. They are our only standard size melee armoured cavalry (wild riders would be relatively close but for some unfathomable reason they lost their shields. Again.) And, like it or not, but in practice, every cities unit represents not only itself, but also everything else of its type that didn't survive the culling. Or the previous cullings. And drakespawn are possibly the only unit we have that represent an entire category of lost units. Their warscroll would be useful for dragonblades. Empire knights. Hell, brettonians could easily build competitive armies based on them, if only they were useful.

Yeah, vampires are an option for all of those, but it's still not perfect and relegates them to a support role. So yeah, we'll complain about the drakespawn not because we demand perfection, but because of the wasted potential of this one particular unit. I don't think anyone would cry if our most overpriced unit were, say, dreadspears. We'd just see more eternal guard that way. Or freeguild guard with spears. No such alternatives for drakespawn ; )

 

My Empire Knights will be Dark Riders. Save 4+ is good enough for plate, and addition of a ranged weapon easily done.

[prochuvi]

23 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

Because you aren't supposed to play mono Dispossessed, or mono Wanderers, or mono anything. The book is called Cities of Sigmar and is about playing with armies of the Cities which are blended forces that represent the various factions in that city. The sooner people grasp this the better. 

Why? In warhammer 40k rigth now dark eldars are better than ynnari.

 

So why is the soap tome supossed to be played as soap and we cant have the option as eldars of play our army as we want?

 

This isnt a soap tome as death,where a skeleton or a ghost are almost the same,for many of us is 100% unthinkeable buy or play with models as humans or dark elfs.

 

If gw would have done a proper work we could field and be competitive with a cos army of only humans,or only dwarfs,or only high elfs etc....

 

The tome is a very poor work,with many marks of a rush work only to get done with the task of bring one book for every faction this edition.

 

Best example? We have a book with humans,high elfs,dwarfs,dark elfs,ironweld and:

 

Best shooting units:stormcast units

Best melle units: stormcast units

Best behemots units:stormcast

Best mague units:close betwen sorceress,human mage or stormcast mage

Best cavalry unit:stormcast cats

 

So how is posible that the citys of sigmar tome be a good tome with a good balance when ever unit from the tome is worse than the suposed to be allied units from the tome?

Other details:

Scenary:none

Endless spells:none

Table of stands or runic icons relics(as every 2.0 tome got):none

Table of prayers for our runelord: only one extra prayer in one specific alegiance

Table of mounts traits as every other 2.0 tome: only in one alegiance and only for black dragon or hydra

 

 So we have many details,as the horrible balance of the units of the tome or all this to show us as this soap tome have been a poor work

 

 

[dekay]

1 hour ago, prochuvi said:

Best shooting units:stormcast units

If we disregard darkshards or teleporting irondrakes/sisters, or maybe crossbowmen hordes, sure.

1 hour ago, prochuvi said:

Best melle units: stormcast units

Make sure to inform everyone falsely claiming that phoenix guard might be the best melee infantry in game, while we continue arguing if greatswords or blackguard aren't maybe better ; )

1 hour ago, prochuvi said:

Best behemots units:stormcast

Unkillable phoenix, bravery bomb battleline kharybdiss? Hurricanum that's in more than a half Cities lists ever built? ; )

1 hour ago, prochuvi said:

Best mague units:close betwen sorceress,human mage or stormcast mage

Soo, what's the problem here? Human and aelf seem to contend for the 1st place ; ). Plus, aforementioned hurricanum?

1 hour ago, prochuvi said:

Best cavalry unit:stormcast cats

Cheap as hell dark rider horde, very buff receptive demighyphs, hallowheart-battleline-wizard-unit-sisters?

And even if stormcast units *were* the best in every category, guess what, due to the 1/4 limit they can't fill all that roles at once. I think only stormcast units I see in City lists are Azyros and Ordinator, both support characters.

But sure, as SwampHeart said, you can concentrate on complaining if you find it fun ; )

[Aelfric]

6 hours ago, Double Misfire said:

What are mercenary Blood Knights?  

That's right! The souls of ancient Aelves, so determined to protect their kin that, on their death, they refused to go to the light and instead slumber in their Mausoleums awaiting the call to rise in defence of their descendants.  

Now I have to decide whether to go with a Vampire Lord and 5 Knights or 10 knights on their own.

Thanks

[tripchimeras]

On 10/16/2019 at 8:38 PM, soots said:

Damage ratings are based off average wounds per 100 pts.

For example. Greatswords are 7.62. A 160 pt unit does 20 * 4/6 * 4/6 (20 attacks, 3s to hit, 3s to wound) is 8.888 wounds. In 20a, they will trigger the 6+ mw 3.33 times for a total of 12.2 wounds. 160 pts for 12.2wounds is a rating of 7.62 wounds per 100pts. This doesnt signify the rend and mw, which is very important and i stated that in the post.

There is a lot of assumptions for stuff like will the unit typically have a freeguild hero within 18" (I would probably not do this as foot gen is very static and the mounted general is a different comp). So i excluded this bonus, but i said you can get it in the notes section. Other bonuses like Darkshards having more than x models is included because that is an easy requirement.

Defensive ratings are relative amount of attacks they can withstand per 100w. The numbers are for comparative purposes.

Greatswords have 8.  To kill a 160pt unit of greatswords. you need to do 20 no rend wounds. (half saved). 160/20 = 8.

Phoenix guard are 4. To kill a 160pt unit. You need to do 40 wounds (half saved by armor, half by ward). 160/40 = 4.

There are obviously other synergies/spells you can pile on. Like, typically you might want to throw an alchemist into a unit of arkanauts to get double shot. In which case, ive added the cost of an alchemist into the cost of the unit (and you can see its not as efficient as 20 arkanauts by themselves).  My assumptions are based off  whether the bonus is typically inherently included or whether you need to pay for (whether its paying points or meeting requirements which you typically would not want to do). 

Its not a perfect system, but it gives a good measurement for optimal efficiencies and makes a lot of units look redundant (e.g. pheonix guard vs sequitors, pistoliers vs gryphon knights)

Thanks for putting in the leg work.  Super good stuff!  I think I would disagree with some of the conclusions you came to in your original post though.  Mainly on  Executioners I feel like they are worse then blackguard for only 10 pts less and fill the exact same role so why would you ever field them competitively?  I also think we all need to be careful when looking at the buffs.  Think Eternal Guard also are being overrated here..

For me I think elite infantry seems to be fitting into 3 tiers based on early observations and the mathhammer I have seen so far for competitive play, obviously very early goings but:

Phoenix Guard seem to be alone at the top tier and can basically function in any city or build without a lot of buff bubbles needed imo.  Hammerers, Greatswords, and Blackguard are tier 2, with being potentially the most efficient unit for a role but very much being  city/army dependent.  Then there is tier 3 which is basically everything else in the elite infantry mould (infantry that is not default battleline and over 100pts). 

What about eternal guard you may wonder?  The list of conditions needed to make them competent I think are just a bit too oppressive and restrictive to make them worth the price of Hammerers and on par with anything in the top 2 tiers, I just don't think there is a good enough reason to preference them in almost any situation that will appear regularly.  Remember that there purpose is not to charge, which means they represent a purely defensive role.  The opponent has no obligation to engage them if they can avoid it, or they will lose the singular bonus that puts them in the conversation.  Additionally their complete lack of rend hides a significantly weaker damage output then the stats first suggest.  Against a 4+ save opponent they do less damage standing still then every other elite unit I have mentioned above AND Executioners.   Defensively they are purely worse then phoenix guard, offensively they are worse then all the other elites against something with any armour, all of this for a unit that can't move so long as it wants to be effective.  Not great imo.

Edited October 22, 2019 by tripchimeras

[Aelfric]

4 minutes ago, tripchimeras said:

Defensively they are purely worse then phoenix guard, offensively they are worse then all the other elites against something with any armour, all of this for a unit that can't move so long as it wants to be effective.  Not great imo

Well, for me, their entire purpose is to sit on an objective for the entire game with the Sisters of theThorn spell on them.  That spell lasts until they move - don't move them and that spell lasts the whole game, leaving your Sisters to go and do other stuff. I think that's a good investment for 130 for 10.

[Arkhanist]

1 hour ago, SwampHeart said:

Because you aren't supposed to play mono Dispossessed, or mono Wanderers, or mono anything. The book is called Cities of Sigmar and is about playing with armies of the Cities which are blended forces that represent the various factions in that city. The sooner people grasp this the better. 

The problem is that dispossessed are middle of the road. They weren't exactly strong before, they all got nerfed or squatted bar hammerers, and in CoS there's basically an equivalent or better unit in every slot point per point - and they've all got faster movement. Irondrakes can easily be replaced by darkshards, or crossbowmen, or sisters of the watch. Longbeards are a sad joke now, and ironbreakers are slower, less tough and do less damage than phoenix guard. Hammerers are hard hitting but fairly easy to kill - and slow. You're better off taking sequitors, or the various cavalry options. Basically, they don't seem to have considered movement at all when pricing units. Sure drakespawn knights suck, and that sucks; but the remnants of the dispossessed faction are all basically meh now.

Have a look at the lists people at putting up, and see how many people are including any dispossessed who *aren't* old dwarf players trying to make use of the handful of units that are left. It's hardly any. It doesn't help that none of the batallions include dispossessed.

Can we spend a lot of effort and points buffing them and replacing the squatted units with freeguild etc to try and make them work? Sure, and that's what old dwarf players are doing, because we already have the models, aned you can still get a fun list for non-competitive play at least - that's what I'm doing. But ultimately you could replace every single dwarf unit in a list with other CoS ones and have a stronger, more flexible army. And that's a shame.

[tripchimeras]

 

10 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

Well, for me, their entire purpose is to sit on an objective for the entire game with the Sisters of theThorn spell on them.  That spell lasts until they move - don't move them and that spell lasts the whole game, leaving your Sisters to go and do other stuff. I think that's a good investment for 130 for 10.

But its not just a 130 point investment anymore...  Now you are also paying for Sisters of the Thorn to buff them, and expending the spell to do it.  Maybe you take sisters of the thorn anyways, idk, but regardless it is no longer JUST 130pts you are talking about 260pts of models, one of which you are taking more or less primarily for a spell that STILL leaves the unit worse off then Phoenix Guard against all attacks except those that do not have any rend with only 1 battlefield purpose that cannot be altered, vs a unit that can pretty much function in any capacity depending on the whims of the battle.  I just still don't really see it.  All the other units we are talking about in these upper tiers of elite troops do not need all of these very specific circumstances to succeed.  Maybe I prove wrong, as again it is very early to be discussing good vs bad, but with all the caveats I have trouble seeing it in practice.

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by tripchimeras

[Aelfric]

20 minutes ago, tripchimeras said:

 

But its not just a 130 point investment anymore...  Now you are also paying for Sisters of the Thorn to buff them, and expending the spell to do it.  Maybe you take sisters of the thorn anyways, idk, but regardless it is no longer JUST 130pts you are talking about 260pts of models, one of which you are taking more or less primarily for a spell that STILL leaves the unit worse off then Phoenix Guard against all attacks except those that do not have any rend with only 1 battlefield purpose that cannot be altered, vs a unit that can pretty much function in any capacity depending on the whims of the battle.  I just still don't really see it.  All the other units we are talking about in these upper tiers of elite troops do not need all of these very specific circumstances to succeed.  Maybe I prove wrong, as again it is very early to be discussing good vs bad, but with all the caveats I have trouble seeing it in practice.

 

With the spell on, Eternal guard are on a 2+ save hitting on 2s, wounding on 3s, causing MW on a save roll of 6.  Rend 2 will put them on a 4+.  Rend 2 will put Phoenix Guard on 6+ 4++.  Yes, PG have a mortal wound save, but if your opponent is throwing all their MWs at EG, they're not going on your more aggressive units.  Purely as an objective holder, they are good, in my opinion, and 30 points less than PG.  If you want movement, go for PG.

Sot Thorn are a 7 wound wizard (you need 2 min in unit) that can take a lore spell and has a 12" move - it's a good wizard option even without EG. They also have a range attack with rend and more melee attacks than a standard wizard.  You only need to cast their spell once (albeit on a 7, unless you're using Hallowheart).  It's worth 130 points in its own right. It also a wizard that doesn't use a hero slot.

At the end of the day, it's just nice to be able to have these sorts of choices.

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Aelfric

[tripchimeras]

12 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

With the spell on, Eternal guard are on a 2+ save hitting on 2s, wounding on 3s, causing MW on a save roll of 6.  Rend 2 will put them on a 4+.  Rend 2 will put Phoenix Guard on 6+ 4++.  Yes, PG have a mortal wound save, but if your opponent is throwing all their MWs at EG, they're not going on your more aggressive units.  Purely as an objective holder, they are good, in my opinion, and 30 points less than PG.  If you want movement, go for PG.

Sot Thorn are a 7 wound wizard (you need 2 min in unit) that can take a lore spell and has a 12" move - it's a good wizard option even without EG. They also have a range attack with rend and more melee attacks than a standard wizard.  You only need to cast their spell once (albeit on a 7, unless you're using Hallowheart).  It's worth 130 points in its own right. It also a wizard that doesn't use a hero slot.

At the end of the day, it's just nice to be able to have these sorts of choices.

 

Forgot they got the lore spell too.   I still prefer Phoenix Guard, but if you are already taking the Thorn I see your point.   I forgot how decent Thorn are.  That does change it.

[SentinelGuy]

Rending cold ones might actually make the knights and chariot worth it. I shall try it out in my next game.