Examining The Stormcast in Light of New and Pending Releases

[hughwyeth]

As someone starting in SCE, i'm loving the huge battletome and choices (though i did previously play Nurgle and always Skaven in the background). I've gone mostly sacrosanct based on the Soul Wars box but it's great you can build so many different types of forces whether you want a few heavy hitting units, alpha striking speedy units, ranged units etc.  I haven't found any units particularly overpowered compared to any other top 50% force. Evocators and Sequitors can be powerful, but they cost points. Though there's not huge cross-chamber syngery, the range of units available make so many interesting lists possible. 

32 minutes ago, Nos said:

[....]

Honestly don’t even know why they play. Just write lists between you, break out a calculator and crunch the numbers. Would be far cheaper and quicker.

This post is totally spot on. The best players aren't looking at netlists- the best players I've met and played against have lists I've never seen on here, combining units in really interesting ways. This forum (and many "competitive" aos players) obsess over the newest powerful units in total isolation whilst the best players are out there building amazing lists. We had a mini 24-player tournament won by Ironjawz. I doubt any netlister would go for Ironjawz!

I think this thread is a great way to discuss SCE.

I think the strangest thing with the sacrosanct release was castigators- generally not that interesting compared to Judicators or vanguard stuff and there's no proper kit for them. I wonder if they've got a 10 man kit coming out soon or if they've already abandoned them as a unit?

[XReN]

20 minutes ago, hughwyeth said:

I think the strangest thing with the sacrosanct release was castigators- generally not that interesting compared to Judicators or vanguard stuff and there's no proper kit for them. I wonder if they've got a 10 man kit coming out soon or if they've already abandoned them as a unit?

I would have loved it, even though I already own more then I'd ever want to field

[Nos]

23 minutes ago, hughwyeth said:

As someone starting in SCE, i'm loving the huge battletome and choices (though i did previously play Nurgle and always Skaven in the background). I've gone mostly sacrosanct based on the Soul Wars box but it's great you can build so many different types of forces whether you want a few heavy hitting units, alpha striking speedy units, ranged units etc.  I haven't found any units particularly overpowered compared to any other top 50% force. Evocators and Sequitors can be powerful, but they cost points. Though there's not huge cross-chamber syngery, the range of units available make so many interesting lists possible. 

This post is totally spot on. The best players aren't looking at netlists- the best players I've met and played against have lists I've never seen on here, combining units in really interesting ways. This forum (and many "competitive" aos players) obsess over the newest powerful units in total isolation whilst the best players are out there building amazing lists. We had a mini 24-player tournament won by Ironjawz. I doubt any netlister would go for Ironjawz!

I think this thread is a great way to discuss SCE.

I think the strangest thing with the sacrosanct release was castigators- generally not that interesting compared to Judicators or vanguard stuff and there's no proper kit for them. I wonder if they've got a 10 man kit coming out soon or if they've already abandoned them as a unit?

I would play them a lot more if they had more varied models, but aside from the three guys in the starter box (which are great) it's all monopose. But you know, again, we're far from the only group have to contest with a small number of model variations for a unit. It's pretty much the way these days. 

[Vakarian]

I love the Castigator models but they feel very underwhelming as a unit, and 3 is a very weird base unit size.  It seems like they're missing just one small thing to make them viable - right now, I don't see why I'd take 6 Castigators over 5 (battleline) Judicators, though I don't really use either.

It would be awesome, like some other posters have said, if a Lord Celestant on Dracoth or Stardrake made Draconian Guard units battleline. That would be an awesome thematic army to build.

[ledha]

20 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

I love the Castigator models but they feel very underwhelming as a unit, and 3 is a very weird base unit size.  It seems like they're missing just one small thing to make them viable - right now, I don't see why I'd take 6 Castigators over 5 (battleline) Judicators, though I don't really use either.

It would be awesome, like some other posters have said, if a Lord Celestant on Dracoth or Stardrake made Draconian Guard units battleline. That would be an awesome thematic army to build.

the castigators are a wasted opportunity. How can you make a unit of ghost hunters with crossbow launching explosives grenades-arrow NOT COOL ?

They could have aoe abilities or not needing line of sights. Plenty of cool things. But no, let's make them judicator 1.1 !

[Nos]

9 minutes ago, ledha said:

the castigators are a wasted opportunity. How can you make a unit of ghost hunters with crossbow launching explosives grenades-arrow NOT COOL ?

They could have aoe abilities or not needing line of sights. Plenty of cool things. But no, let's make them judicator 1.1 !

They are good against Ghosts and Demons to be fair. Just not other stuff. But then-they're not for other stuff. 

[Bradipo322]

1 hour ago, Turragor said:

But SC are debatably in a better place than Maggotkin at the moment in lots of ways. However, thats not because of their traits, artefacts and allegiance abilities. Those are pretty cool for Maggotkin so that point stands.

Its just that SC have a waterfall of unit options in comparison to like 7 units then 24 named characters.

You totally miss my point.

All I said was that having a lot of choices does not make an allegiance strong.

I'll back this up by saing that there are a few units that you see in almost all the lists (Sequitors and Evocators are the two big offenders here), while there are a lot that are never played (I'm looking at Castigators, Retributors, Prosecutors, Lord-Exorcists, Hunters, ...).

I hate this.

Before the last Stormcast release, back in the previous edition, I never won a single battle, maybe I'm a bad player (but really, I won a skirmish tournament, so maybe I'm not that bad) or maybe Liberators, Retributors and in general a lot of "old stuff" is not that balaced in the game.

And let me tell you, Liberators suck. A lot. Unless you pair them with Staunch Defender and a Lord-Castellant they will die to everything.

I'm so fed up with Liberators that now that I have Sequitors I don't even want to see them on my table.

[prochuvi]

This post seems lack any logic and math and it is only stormcast fanboys ignoring facts.

 

Mathhammer show how ballista evocators and sequitors are undercosted and liberators are the perfect balanced unit.

 

But here people prefer ignore it and compare it to others more undercosted units as dok or lon.

 

The fact is that if gw want balance the game must nerf those 3 stormcast units as wycthes and lon sumon and liberators are 100% fine

[hughwyeth]

37 minutes ago, ledha said:

the castigators are a wasted opportunity. How can you make a unit of ghost hunters with crossbow launching explosives grenades-arrow NOT COOL ?

They could have aoe abilities or not needing line of sights. Plenty of cool things. But no, let's make them judicator 1.1 !

Judicator 0.9 really. They have no weapon options. Judicators have a few that make them more interesting I think. Plus a 24" ranged missile battleline unit is great.

[chord]

Wow, this thread went downhill fast.

For me internal balance means making each unit in our army have a reason to be chosen. As it stands liberators are not as good a battleline choice as sequitors.  Not even close.  To solve this we should just lower the point cost of liberators a little bit.  This would help boost the order grand alliance even as well.  Same with the paladins, all we need is to make them a little lower in point costs to help balance our army internally and not compared to other armies. 

[HammerOfSigmar]

Nerfing the new SCE unit can make the old SCE unit looks better inside SCE, but they will remain weak compared to other races' new unit. In the end, SCE will drop their win ratio from current 50% to somewhat 40% or even lower. 

Raising the ballista to 160 will result in ballista worst than judicators since judicator has a higher average damage per point and smaller variance....

Lowering the vanguard units by 20 points doesn't really help. Their only advantage is running fast and then die fast.

[chord]

1 minute ago, HammerOfSigmar said:

Nerfing the new SCE unit can make the old SCE unit looks better inside SCE, but they will remain weak compared to other races' new unit. In the end, SCE will drop their win ratio from current 50% to somewhat 40% or even lower. 

Raising the ballista to 160 will result in ballista worst than judicators since judicator has a higher average damage per point and smaller variance....

Lowering the vanguard units by 20 points doesn't really help. Their only advantage is running fast and then die fast.

Agreed we should not be raising points of new sce units 

[Vakarian]

The problem with "mathhammer" is that it only gives you a comparison point. It can't say a unit is "perfect." What's the standard? 

If Liberators are your standard, then Sequitors are OP. If Sequitors/Wyches/Grimghast/etc. are your standard, then Liberators are subpar. 

GW gets to choose and set that standard. I'm willing to give them some trust after the most recent changes to AoS (I wouldn't have touched first edition with a ten foot pole). 

Nerfing Sequitors, Evocators, and Ballistae in a vacuum only hurts Stormcast, it doesn't help the game. If GW decides to do a general nerf of all the more capable units, then all is well and good. That doesn't seem likely, though - AoS is built on a more dynamic and deadly baseline that WHFB was. Your stuff will die. So will your opponent's. That's fine - so long as the new baseline reflects it. 

If the new baseline really is meant to be more deadly, then Liberators need a fix, not Sequitors.

[Nos]

2 minutes ago, Bradipo322 said:

You totally miss my point.

All I said was that having a lot of choices does not make an allegiance strong.

I'll back this up by saing that there are a few units that you see in almost all the lists (Sequitors and Evocators are the two big offenders here), while there are a lot that are never played (I'm looking at Castigators, Retributors, Prosecutors, Lord-Exorcists, Hunters, ...).

I hate this.

Before the last Stormcast release, back in the previous edition, I never won a single battle, maybe I'm a bad player (but really, I won a skirmish tournament, so maybe I'm not that bad) or maybe Liberators, Retributors and in general a lot of "old stuff" is not that balaced in the game.

And let me tell you, Liberators suck. A lot. Unless you pair them with Staunch Defender and a Lord-Castellant they will die to everything.

I'm so fed up with Liberators that now that I have Sequitors I don't even want to see them on my table.

Most people would kill for a Battleline like Liberators. I still use them as at least one of my choices. 100 points 10 wound minimum +4 re-rollable 1 save 40mm footprint unit to slow down Morghasts, Kurnoth, Scary heroes etc or death blobs? Pretty good. Look at the artwork. They’re a shield to crash into while your stuff crashes into the bad guys. They’re very good at it too.

And since AOS 2.0 I’ve won about 70% of my games and I’d say 90% of those I had at least one unit of Liberators. If they’ve died it’s nearly always against something that needs to do more than just kill Liberators to justify its expense. Often they don’t even die though. Usually a model or two left because my opponent has had to retreat or reposition that unit elsewhere because they expected to chew through the screen quicker than they were able.

And you make it sound like a LC and SD are somehow bad. Castellant has 18 inches for his buff so it’s not like he has to just sit behind Liberators or buff them to be of use. He makes any unit better from anywhere central on the battlefield. Likewise SD, range not as big but it’s a pretty elementary synergy.  It’s not exactly a hardship taking either of them. Add in Azyrite Halo and it’s almost like you’re *meant* to play Stormcast by using unit abilities to make each one better than the sum of its parts.

[Nos]

2 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

The problem with "mathhammer" is that it only gives you a comparison point. It can't say a unit is "perfect." What's the standard? 

If Liberators are your standard, then Sequitors are OP. If Sequitors/Wyches/Grimghast/etc. are your standard, then Liberators are subpar. 

GW gets to choose and set that standard. I'm willing to give them some trust after the most recent changes to AoS (I wouldn't have touched first edition with a ten foot pole). 

Nerfing Sequitors, Evocators, and Ballistae in a vacuum only hurts Stormcast, it doesn't help the game. If GW decides to do a general nerf of all the more capable units, then all is well and good. That doesn't seem likely, though - AoS is built on a more dynamic and deadly baseline that WHFB was. Your stuff will die. So will your opponent's. That's fine - so long as the new baseline reflects it. 

If the new baseline really is meant to be more deadly, then Liberators need a fix, not Sequitors.

Having a unit who blunts the deadliness of expensive units by making them waste  their potential is precisldy why  I like Liberators.

Not everything is meant to kill everything.

[HammerOfSigmar]

SCE doesn't get summoning and ability to bring dead model or units back except the very unreliable CA in Hammer of Sigmar, Hence, if we don't get the units to be better than other races', which someone call underprice, how can SCE to compete with other races...

If SCE don't get underprice units and just same value per point unit as LON, guess what? SCE loss half of the army, LON loss half in the same round. In the next round, LON get its whole army back...So that's the balance you guys want, those non-SCE players?

I know some playing races without updating so long will hate SCE get new powerful rules periodically, but nerfing SCE won't help you do better when playing against the other new races. GW's newly released army are all very competitive. The correct way is the hope your races get updated because GW will never nerf all races stronger than you to your races current level.

[hughwyeth]

Just now, chord said:

Wow, this thread went downhill fast.

For me internal balance means making each unit in our army have a reason to be chosen. As it stands liberators are not as good a battleline choice as sequitors.  Not even close.  To solve this we should just lower the point cost of liberators a little bit.  This would help boost the order grand alliance even as well.  Same with the paladins, all we need is to make them a little lower in point costs to help balance our army internally and not compared to other armies. 

Yes, just ignore and keep discussing the original discussion point is best.

RE "For me internal balance means making each unit in our army have a reason to be chosen." is a great summary. Sequitors are just that much better/more interesting than liberators. I think liberators seem a little like an artefact from AoS 1.0 when SCE were a totally bland vanilla force. Now we've got some great backstories and characters it would be nice to revisit liberators and add a couple of interesting rules to make them synergise more with the rest of the force.

 

[Vakarian]

Just now, Nos said:

Having a unit who blunts the deadliness of expensive units by making them waste  their potential is precisldy why  I like Liberators.

Not everything is meant to kill everything.

That's a good point, too. Why do so many people feel Liberators are still underwhelming in that role though? 

My guess is Sequitors still do it better - full rerolls instead of reroll 1's. 

The points drop for Liberators might help reinforce their purpose as a shield rather than a hammer unit. Maybe some other tweaks could be made. I don't think Liberators are bad - just that Sequitors can usually do their role better while also hitting harder. Would be nice to have more distinction between the two units. 

[hughwyeth]

9 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

The problem with "mathhammer" is that it only gives you a comparison point. It can't say a unit is "perfect." What's the standard? 

Actually the n1 problem with mathhammer is it can't take into account anything other than a perfect combat phase- an entirely intact unit vs an entirely intact unit. It can't take into account distances across the table, movement, buffing ranges, spells, allegiance abilities, command abilities- basically everything that makes the game what it is. All you're saying with it is "this stat line is better than this one per point". which really says nothing at all of value about a unit's role in an army.

[Vakarian]

That's also true. Mathhammer can give you functional information in a vacuum but it's not a tell-all.

[Turragor]

33 minutes ago, Bradipo322 said:

You totally miss my point.

All I said was that having a lot of choices does not make an allegiance strong.

If that was meant to be your original point I guess I did miss it.

 

[Nos]

51 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

That's a good point, too. Why do so many people feel Liberators are still underwhelming in that role though? 

My guess is Sequitors still do it better - full rerolls instead of reroll 1's. 

The points drop for Liberators might help reinforce their purpose as a shield rather than a hammer unit. Maybe some other tweaks could be made. I don't think Liberators are bad - just that Sequitors can usually do their role better while also hitting harder. Would be nice to have more distinction between the two units. 

This is a good example where Mathamner fails.

Straight comparison it’s obvious, Sequitors are better all round for only 20 points more, bargain!

But-what if you literally just want a shield or screen to occupy an enemy. Killing power is moot. Liberators do that well. You don’t need to pay 20 points more for that.

But it’s only 20 points! Sure- but in an army that suffers from lack of wounds and bodies on the table, and in which the cheapest unit of worth is 100 points, then those 40/60/80 points extra for Sequitors to provide that shield wall purpose that Liberators provide quickly becomes prohibitive to other stuff that allows you to maximise offensive potential elsewhere. It’s not a points for points comparison because 20/40 points spent unecessarily is far more expensive relative to the difference it can make. That’s before taking into account wether you want to take an LA as a general or if you’re just doing it to “save” on battle line cost for Sequitors.

Sequitors are far better all-rounders than Liberators but if you want to specialise and have a primarily defensive battle line to camp things their economy allows you to put points into your armies focus elsewhere. 

However this suggests a level of thought around how the game is played that frankly seems absent from a lot of people’s experience or at least their discussion of it in which people apparently just run stuff into other stuff and try and kill it fast as possible.

[Vakarian]

@Nos that was a great analysis, thank you!

As someone who's still learning this game, finding usefulness for units I haven't used  yet is part of the joy of diving deeper into the faction. 

That said, I'd still like to see something that emphasized Liberators' role as an anvil a bit better on their scroll. 

[Nos]

10 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

@Nos that was a great analysis, thank you!

As someone who's still learning this game, finding usefulness for units I haven't used  yet is part of the joy of diving deeper into the faction. 

That said, I'd still like to see something that emphasized Liberators' role as an anvil a bit better on their scroll. 

I think Lay Low the Tyrants was what got me thinking about them in the way I do. The mental image of them looking for the toughest engagements possible.  I set them up as a roadblock against some Kurnoth Hunters the first game I played them because of that rule and while they only chipped away at them (still did enough wounds to mean a stray MW or Judicator could reduce them by a third) their stopping power was undeniable. Liberators lost 3 and one wound in the combat phase but he lost one hunter and a turn in which his elites basically didn’t do anything of consequence.

They also don’t really need great weapons or at least they don’t suffer from not taking them, for the purpose of what they’re intended . Not taking Great weapons on Sequitors is a waste but if you take them and get shot at or charged half your Sequitor unit is less effective defensively.

Although LLTT is also a bit weird as a concept as it sort of implies Liberators don’t really try their hardest against rank and file types...

[Black Blade]

8 hours ago, Sedraxis said:

Once again I see the argument of: "our best units aren't OP because other factions have OP units. Meanwhile, they're still better then almost any other unit and most people have a horrible time playing against Sequitors, Evocators and Ballistas which seem to make up 90% of all " good" stormcast lists.

Since internal balance is the issue, upping the points on those units is a clear solution, just as upping points is the way to solve DoK (Wytches and Queens) and LoN (Grimgast Reapers, altho i'd also love to see them lose the summonable keyword).

Too often we see people complain that everything else is undercosted while 90% of all models in AoS are still balanced around Liberators and Chaos Warriors, which still holds up. There are clear outliers causing problems and bringing those back down will solve all internal balance issues.

And you better believe that LoN and DoK suffer from the same internal balance problem when Reapers and Wytches are better then any other setup, so the only variety becomes which heroes you put next to them.

You are missing my point. You have latched onto me claiming not enough of our units are OP. I'm talking about GW power-creeping the game in general and I don't really care if they power creep old Stormcast units. Skaven, GG, and FEC are going to have ways of matching a lot of the most powerful units in the game or coming close to it. I'm making the point that what is considered baseline power level is going up and thats good for the game as a whole. 

I don't know why every time I make a SC post talking about underperforming units people love to come in and say Liberators should suck "cause starter army" and that the game is not at a static power level. Liberators and a lot of those 90% units you are talking about were made in a time when GW wasn't making a competitive game. Things are changing, powers are rising across all the armies they have been updating, the game is getting more dynamic and yes the old units made for a non competitive game need to be power-crept.