Shooting and the Meta

[Riff_Raff_Rascal]

5 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

Something interesting that probably merits discussing (from @kenshin620's post) - what is a shooting army? When I originally posted this I didn't intend for it to mean a list that only shoots or is a gun line but it seems that's a pretty common understanding of the term. So - if you'll humor my now 2 question post - how do you define a shooting army? For me its an army that invests in the phase, not to the detriment of being able to play objectives or other good play, but an army that's, lets say, primary driver is the shooting phase.  

Good point. The "investing in a phase" part got me a'thinkin. I personally don't use the phrase "shooting army" but rather a "ranged army". In that light, I consider magic to be lumped in with shooting. Whether its the shooting phase or hero phase that the ranged damage comes from, I deploy and act accordingly if I know its a "ranged army" I'm up against. That said, many other good points I've read above, particularly how shooting is so sub-par compared to magic, whether its visual obstacles, mortal wound damage being better, or the plethora of spells vs shooting units. Ranged armies are a thing in my mind, just not the "shooting kind". 

However, I play Skaven. I shoot mortal wounds. I don't care. Tee-hee. 

[Skreech Verminking]

Say aren’t free people a rather good shooting/long range army?

after all the will obliterate any fool-thing that dares make a charge against one of them.

think of 3units of 20handgunners buffed with a free guild general, building a great companie.

they will be giving up 60shots hitting on 2 wounding on 3s with a - of 1rend. In the shooting phase as well as in the enemy charging phase.

i literally lost 120clanrats in one chargephase, since they were able to shoot every time again and again.

 

[Bufkin]

Its almost impossible to rise to the top of a tournament without playing against sylvaneth. Woods shut down shooting.

[AaronWilson]

The fact wyldwoods now can completely turn off shooting armies is a big factor. They represent a low % of the meta but do hard counter a gunline.

[XReN]

Woods do not cut down shooting, since Citadel Wood and Sylvaneth Wyldwood are two different warscrolls, at least as I remember

[XReN]

I've used to play rather shootey SCE army with Vanguard Wing, where I had 30 libs to tank, few heroes for buffs and literally everything else was shooting, that was great because of VW Stormstreak abilty giving great board control and Staunch Defender not having wholly within wording, to imitate the same thing you need to invest more into heroes, so less shooting and also you can't physically screen ALL your army with 30 libs whille maintainning good footprint and making use of Staunch.
Also Look Out Sir! whille not making shooting bad in any way, still made hero hunting harder, so you have to bring dedicated units to pull it off, like longstrikes.

[syph0n]

I'm building a relatively shooty army for my son, who loves the shooting Stormcast models from his love of using the now defunct Reaper Bolt Throwers. Not an intentional go at the meta (he's 8), just fun rolling lots of dice in the shooting phase!

Some of the AoS1 mixed Order lists that were relatively successful had 4 of them didn't they? I wonder if that has also contributed to the demise of shooting with the removal of Bolt Throwers. To be fair, you could just take Ballista instead... 

Stormcast have so many good options now, aren't even the Hurricanes decent now? I think it's possible you might see someone just try 4 Ballista, Raptors, etc in a shooty Stormcast list that teleports a load of bolts into the worst places. Backed up with Endless Spells to barricade or channel armies into shooting. 

 

 

[Qaz]

36 minutes ago, XReN said:

Woods do not cut down shooting, since Citadel Wood and Sylvaneth Wyldwood are two different warscrolls, at least as I remember

But Slyvaneth Wlydwood is made up of Citadel Wood.

Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?

A: Yes.
 - Slyvaneth Designer's Commentary. 

[AaronWilson]

2 minutes ago, Qaz said:

But Slyvaneth Wlydwood is made up of Citadel Wood.

Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?

A: Yes.
 - Slyvaneth Designer's Commentary. 

Yup as Qaz showed via the FAQ, the citadel wood LoS rules are attached to Wyldwoods (which makes sense as they're just 1-3 Citadel Woods stuck together and a bit more magic-y)

[Tzaangor Management]

I think the changes to the armies that were really good at shooting, as well as GW responding to the communities apparent dislike of shooting are probably the biggest factors here. The introduction of 'lookout sir' played a part and continues to effect the psychologically of the game, as did the IDK Allegiance ability, but the meta seemed to move away from shooting before the changes to the Wyldwod scroll and the introduction of realm rules that potentially shut down the phase. They both probably play some part in delaying this army archetype from returning, which I think is intentional on behalf of GW, but I don't think either were responsible for taking them out of the meta.

Tzeentch were particularly prevalent, but changes to the points cost of Skyfires, changes to their warscroll so that they triggered mortal wounds on a 6, rather than a 6+ and the changes to Damned terrain neutered their effectiveness. Add changes to Pink Horrors and Marauders, who were the most often used screens and you see an army that was dominating the shooting phase altered almost beyond recognition. KO likewise experienced sweeping changes and Kunning Ruk was also pointed higher and, if memory serves, toned down a little. The Aetherstrike Batallion was removed from the Stormcast book and a number of other armies were affected lightly, but enough to make them unattractive.

There were tonnes of threads on this very forum about toning down shooting and I think GW responded (not just to this forum, but to the community as a whole) and made the worst offenders less effective. There are still lots of good shooting units out there (I actually think that Hurricane Crossbows were already better than Longstrikes in most cases even before their points reduction) and some might be the answer to DOK and LON builds that seem to be dominating at the moment. You will however need to go against what GW is encouraging in order to make one of these armies work, which is more difficult than building towards what is encouraged.

 

[AaronWilson]

Yeah realm rules are another good shout, things like Aqshy & Ulgu can again ruin a shooting army. 

[SwampHeart]

9 hours ago, sloane_paints_stuff said:

I think its a solid theory and I craft lists based on this idea now. I also think it's why this idea of shooting armies isnt great. Lack of balance against more balanced armies

So in effect you're saying that the meta isn't shifting to counter the current hot lists (DoK, LoN/LoS) with shooting because they don't want to run the risk of playing an overall less balanced list? If I've read that wrong I apologize, just trying to get to the root of it. I guess what I'm trying to figure it out is - what does a shooting list being unbalanced have to do with their lack of prevalence in the current meta, despite being an apparently strong choice? 

[XReN]

3 hours ago, Qaz said:

But Slyvaneth Wlydwood is made up of Citadel Wood.

Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?

A: Yes.
 - Slyvaneth Designer's Commentary. 

Well, thats unfortunate

[AaronWilson]

I don't  think there is a single reason why the meta isn't seeing shooty heavy lists rather then a amalgamation of a lot of reasons. 

Realm rules, Wyldwoods, Objectives tending to be closer, Multiple armies doing guaranteed turn one charges, Look out sir, multiple of the better shooting units being nerfed over time. I think the reason we're not seeing it is because it's not the effective way to play the game right now. 

[AaronWilson]

Another reason is also due to the nature of the spells of the realms, currently there's lots of good "Buff this unit to maximum death" spells. If you think of all the units that stand out on the table top right now "Grimghasts, Witch Elves, Morsarr Guard" all can cover the board in one turn and delete whatever they want. 

[SwampHeart]

So effectively the meta simply isn't going to adjust to the top armies and is going to wait until GHB2019 comes out? What I'm seeing in this thread is basically that while shooting armies would perform well against many of the current high end lists they're not good enough against the rest of the field to warrant taking. If that is the case then should shooting be buffed (via changes to realm rules, points decreases, or any other methods) or should it stay the way it is? 

My curiosity here is purely academic as I play primarily BoC with a splash of DoT. I made this post basically as a direct result of tournament coverage over and over saying for example Arkhan would be far less prevalent if there was more shooting (not just Arkhan but he's an easy example). If that's the case (and maybe it isn't, maybe these observers have missed something all together) it would seem like building in more shooting in your list would be the right choice. 

[AaronWilson]

Personally I think shooting would need to see some better units, rather then people just "not bothering" with it. If you work out how many points of shooting you'd need to kill 30 grimghasts which can be resurrected for 1CP and will wipe 20% of your army off in one charge it's no surprise you see so many of them. 

Same with DoK witch elves with 5+/5++ re-rollable, Morsaar Guard which get across 30" inches reliably, SC that deep strike and auto charge you, Sylvaneth with alphas or completely denying shooting. Those armies can pin you into your deployment and if you can't push out of it by turn 2-3 it's game over anyway.

I think the scenarios currently support lots of bodies on the board, or armies that cover the board incredibly fast and can hold onto the gold. Without going over my self, I think it's just how the edition currently sits with the layers and layers of rules we have, they all shift the meta to a primarily melee based objective game.  

[JPjr]

I've just had a look at a few shooting units and I was genuinely surprised to see they mainly seem to have a range of 18-20", with just a few at 30". Which seems pretty rubbish really.

Surprised 30 isn't closer to the norm but even then, especially considering much ground a lot of units can cover plus various movement shenanigans, I just don't think a lot of games are played on tables long enough to let ranged units shine at the moment.

 

[Highwayman]

You pay a premium for shooting units and they are neutered by certain realm rules, wyldwoods, IDK, Plaugebearers, DoK, and “Look out sir”. I saw the writing on the wall when this edition dropped and promptly shelved my shooting based units and armies. I don’t think GW wants much shooting in the game. 

[Skreech Verminking]

12 minutes ago, Highwayman said:

You pay a premium for shooting units and they are neutered by certain realm rules, wyldwoods, IDK, Plaugebearers, DoK, and “Look out sir”. I saw the writing on the wall when this edition dropped and promptly shelved my shooting based units and armies. I don’t think GW wants much shooting in the game. 

And this is the reason I own 6warpflamers.

jokes aside, shooting isn’t what it ones was, but it still can be reliable, in some sort of way, as long as you don’t overdo it.

look at clan skyre who function with the Gautfyre scorch battailon as a shooting army amazingly and sometimes even get on of the 10top spots in some tournaments.

(although the hip has somewhat calmed a bit down)

there are also other army’s which can be potential  good at a competitive match with some shooting. Look at stormcast who have their amazingly too cheap ballistas, with which hero sniping isn’t a big deal (or killing of whole units of 20elite swordsman/Stormvermin etc.) 

Or their counterparts the more humanoid free peoples, who will dominate the enemy charge phase, as long as their opponent aren’t sister of slaughter.

 

 

[Luzgurbel]

What was the last tournament won by a full shooting army?

[Lemon Knuckles]

Lots of good reasons have been offered here.  A couple more thoughts...

Shooting is very tricky to balance from a design perspective.  It is not uncommon to find "feast or famine" situations in games with regarding to shooting.  Why?

Two reasons:

1. You pay a premium for ranged damage
2. Ranged damage tends to have compounding benefit

Think of it as a more extreme version of "Morrsarr Guard" syndrome.  If 3 eels can do something especially good at an effective cost, then it is almost always better to bring 6 eels, or even 9 eels.

What are the things that range does especially good?

Two main things:

1. Inflict damage with impunity
2. Focus fire the units you really want to damage, not necessarily the ones your opponent wants you to focus (eg. severely handicaps opponent's ability to protect units with screens, to dictate what combats happen where, etc)

One of the big changes that happened with the move form AoS1 to AoS2 was the change to the rule that ranged units cannot fire out of combat.  I don't know if that's been brought up yet, but it is another big reason I think that we are not seeing shooting armies much, and why the ones we are seeing are not that successful.

That rule change, coupled with all of the movement meta that @JPjr talked about above, really impacts the two main things that can make ranged damage worth the premium price tag.  If my ranged unit gets locked in combat with an enemy melee unit, I've basically been reduced to a combat that pits my points-inefficient damage against his points-neutral or even points-efficient damage.  That will be losing trade most of the time.

[mastercrafted]

I had my first experience against a shooty army this week - 'twas a harsh lesson. I'd never played Overlords before, so i wasnt fully prepared. But i lost my soul grinder, WOK thirster, bloodsecrator, 10 man reaver unit and some blood warriors to 1st turn shooting. Was quite hard to come back from that

[overtninja]

4 minutes ago, mastercrafted said:

I had my first experience against a shooty army this week - 'twas a harsh lesson. I'd never played Overlords before, so i wasnt fully prepared. But i lost my soul grinder, WOK thirster, bloodsecrator, 10 man reaver unit and some blood warriors to 1st turn shooting. Was quite hard to come back from that

Shooting makes people feel bad when it works against them and makes the player depending on shooting feel bad when it fails, because often they are banking on the shooting doing good damage and don't have the melee to back up the shooting if it fails.

So, either way, someone is leaving the table salty or feeling bad about the outcome of the match, which isn't a great place to be, design-wise.

Still, the game needs to get to a place where shooting is a good supplemental choice for armies that can bring it, for the above-stated reasons of being able to choose your targets, without being the only thing a given faction does really well, or a never-take in favor of better melee that simply does more work and doesn't have the drawback of mediocre melee stats and poor armor at high cost. It's a tough sweet spot to hit, but if there are ranged units in the game they need their niche, while not being so strong that they hose whole armies or so weak that they are hosed by most armies. 

[Aelfric]

Another difficulty, I think, is that some armies, such as Wanderers and KO, have decent to good shooting, but lack good melee units, especially survivable ones, or are weak in other aspects of the game..  Following the rules adjustments,  building a competitive list is much harder.  I have a Wanderers army which is predominantly shooty,  but the faction lacks certain types of units that would allow for a more balanced or melee-focused one.  For some inexplicable reason, our rules were also downgraded which makes being competitive even harder (not that we were  T1 to begin with).   In my opinion, the problems were not with shooting per se, but with a relatively few shooting units, such as Skyfires, that were creating an imbalance.  Unfortunately, LOS and Wylwoods blocking are blanket changes that affect all shooting units, regardless of how powerful they may, or may not, have been.  

For those armies whose schtick is shooting, and I think there is a place for them, a battletome (or a new one in KO's case) is probably the best solution going forward.  Hopefully, GW will work out how to incorporate such a battletome without breaking the system. 

By competitive, I don't meant from a tournament perspective, simply that it can, on the whole, give other armies a decent run for their money.