Jump to content

What to do Against Sylvaneth that just won't come out of the woods


stekr

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think sylvaneth are fine lore wise and the representation of their lore on the battlefield.

It's fluffy that wildwoods appear or are part of the battle when fighting sylvaneth.

It's a good mechanic that your army underperforms while out of the woods (as they are tree people) but perform really well when on their home turf.

But the thing is, some mechanics are just painfull to play and to watch. My main concern is - and i played several times against a very good sylvaneth player who knows all the tricks - that the base itself has to much going and has to much vertical space when trying to move through it. I think most issues would disappear if we would treat the whole citadel wood base as one flat marker, like just remove the trees when playing in the wood and put them back on when theres space to do that. It's really painful to move through woods, either because of dying while charging or running or because of the very limited spaces between the trees. Keep all rules but make the base just a marker that means "wholly whitin 1" of the wood marker apply those rules:".

Second thing is to balance out when sylvaneth are able to place that wood markers. Right now Sylvaneth rely extremly on the first turn. It's just plain boring to have no other option and playing the same whole game over and over again. In our group it's pretty much "you either have a one drop as well and win the 50/50 to have a great shot at winning as you can spread out and block forrest placement or you have no mega battalion or loose the 50/50 and it's near impossible to win the objectives". Maybe allow them to deploy more then one forest but remove the acorn or the spell as it was pretty much auto include anyways afaik.  Or prohibit the placement of scenery warscrolls as a whole on objectives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say one more thing in defense of my position. First of all let me also say that I like Sylvanneth, sweet faction with very cool/models and themes. Its cool manipulating the board like that. I have no animosity towards you guys and wish you many awesome models in your future. 

What i think makes for a good tactical game is choice. I think the way the Wyldwoods work now or can work, removes choice. You don't have to think tactically when in turn one you can have your 1-drop list and then populate the board with 4 Wyldwoods consisting of 3 citadel woods apiece. 12 pieces of terrain that block line of sight, kill things that move or go to fight in it, punish spell casting and offer you teleporting and summoning abilities. That's just turn 1, only getting worse after that. It literally comes to the point where the opponent is punished for playing the game at all. That's not good for a game. I hope it changes in some way that is even handed and your faction is fairly compensated for the changes.

When a player can spam so much of something they don't need to make tactical choices and when other players have no choice but to be penalized for any gameplay action, those are not good or healthy for a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

You don't have to think tactically when in turn one you can have your 1-drop list and then populate the board with 4 Wyldwoods consisting of 3 citadel woods apiece

From what I have read and gather from conversations I've had, making a highly tactical game is not a design point for AOS.  It is more a strategic game where you build a strategy and then execute the strategy with a simplistic list of tactics.  That is I believe a strong point of AOS, because requiring strong tactics is something that many people are not good at, and would make the game not fun.

Thats not saying no tactics in the game, thats saying the game is intentionally built so that one does not need to be highly tactical to do well.  They instead need to understand a strategy and execute that strategy (the overall plan) accomplished by proper list building and understanding how those work within the mechanics of the game (so one drop lists to get first  turn is an overall strategy, if you don't get first turn and can't deploy woods, many people feel cheated, it does not matter if this is not a tactical decision, the overall effect is the strategy of sylvaneth is to deploy massive woods to gain all your benefits and bonuses and to make sure you only have a one drop list to do so)

When a player can spam so much of something they don't need to make tactical choices and when other players have no choice but to be penalized for any gameplay action, those are not good or healthy for a game.

This would only be true for people looking for a highly tactical game.  For people looking for a strategic list building game where you execute an overall strategy, how they have designed it is fun and desired.   Other games provide more of a tactical chess game and have a target audience for that design.  I have also noticed that few people play those games, so I think GW is on to something with the tactics-lite but strategic approach of AOS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Black Blade said:

[...] and then populate the board with 4 Wyldwoods consisting of 3 citadel woods apiece. 12 pieces of terrain that block line of sight [...]

I'm almost exclusively playing Sylvaneth. There was never ever a situation when I could drop three Sylvaneth Wyldwoods each consisting of 3 Citadel Woods. I almost always manage to drop one SW with 3 bases at the beginning and simply there is no more room for any other 3 Cit.Wood.Wyldwood. Then during the game I will drop like two Sylvaneth Wyldwoods consisting of two Citadel Woods, sometimes less, never more. Usually single drops of single Citadel Woods where there is space. Question to people who complain about the amount of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods: are you playing WITHOUT ANY SCENERY? I'm serious because after we put scenery, deploy our armies there is no room, it's not even possible for me to place 3 three piece each sylvaneth wyldwoods. Simply no room. You either play without scenery and terrain or you and your opponent compress your armies so much that the board is empty. Watch any miniwargaming.com or Guerrilla Miniature Games - at the start of any of their games do you see place for 12 citadel wyldwoods? Use the rules in the original core book how to deploy terrain/scenery. Divide the gaming area into 6-8 squares and roll two dice for each square. results: 2 - no terrain, 3-7 - 1 terrain, 8-11 - 2 terrain, 12 - 3 terrain  - something like that. I don't get it how you or your opponent deploys 12 Sylvaneth Wyldwoods. It's impossible if terrain is present o armies are deployed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is also one thing to consider that even our sylvaneth player gets cranky about.  If you have a lot of terrain on the table he won't play because he has no room to put his woods down so arguments can happen about how much terrain is appropriate.

We typically follow tournament standard where there is a lot of open space though so he is able to deploy his woods (he just has had games where he doesn't get a lot of his woods but still does well which is why I don't think they are absolutely important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. By mid summer,  I suspect most armies will have a faction specific piece of chunky terrain.

2. Everyone should play the "Use the rules in the original core book how to deploy terrain/scenery" like @Aryann said.

3. Add new rule in Generals Handbook 2019 that states "scenery must be at least 1 inch from an objective".    I think this is required right now - Look at the Gitz Loonshrine. Try placing that over an objective. You can more or less completely block off an objective in your own territory.

 

I think those three things combined alleviates most people's issue with Sylvaneth whilst still keeping them playable.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Aryann said:

I'm almost exclusively playing Sylvaneth. There was never ever a situation when I could drop three Sylvaneth Wyldwoods each consisting of 3 Citadel Woods. I almost always manage to drop one SW with 3 bases at the beginning and simply there is no more room for any other 3 Cit.Wood.Wyldwood. Then during the game I will drop like two Sylvaneth Wyldwoods consisting of two Citadel Woods, sometimes less, never more. Usually single drops of single Citadel Woods where there is space. Question to people who complain about the amount of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods: are you playing WITHOUT ANY SCENERY? I'm serious because after we put scenery, deploy our armies there is no room, it's not even possible for me to place 3 three piece each sylvaneth wyldwoods. Simply no room. You either play without scenery and terrain or you and your opponent compress your armies so much that the board is empty. Watch any miniwargaming.com or Guerrilla Miniature Games - at the start of any of their games do you see place for 12 citadel wyldwoods? Use the rules in the original core book how to deploy terrain/scenery. Divide the gaming area into 6-8 squares and roll two dice for each square. results: 2 - no terrain, 3-7 - 1 terrain, 8-11 - 2 terrain, 12 - 3 terrain  - something like that. I don't get it how you or your opponent deploys 12 Sylvaneth Wyldwoods. It's impossible if terrain is present o armies are deployed.

This is right. For those stating that there are going to be 12 bases of woods after turn 1 are really only thinking in theoretical terms and not actual game play. This will almost never happen. The foot print for a full 3 woods is much too large. Most placements are going to be 1-2 bases. 

Woods do not take way choice. You can say they make your choices harder, sure.  I have played against plenty of opponents that have made the right tactical choices and calculated risks playing around woods that have worked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Easytyger said:

This is right. For those stating that there are going to be 12 bases of woods after turn 1 are really only thinking in theoretical terms and not actual game play. This will almost never happen. The foot print for a full 3 woods is much too large. Most placements are going to be 1-2 bases. 

Woods do not take way choice. You can say they make your choices harder, sure.  I have played against plenty of opponents that have made the right tactical choices and calculated risks playing around woods that have worked. 

Yea, how to deal with woods is the tactical choices rather than just saying they take it away.

Also, as others have said, there should be now way to place 12 woods on the board, especially since they all need to be placed within 1" of each other and thus cant be deployed as a line but rather need to be clumped up.

I often find even for the allegiance abilities woods I can only place down two bases where I actually want them. If you're having these problems then you need to seriously look into placing more terrain down in your games.

Personally I think peoples issues with woods is born more out of the lack of true terrain rules in the game as opposed to the woods themselves being an issue. People have gotten used to terrain being a benign thing that blocks your movement and sight maybe but otherwise can be ignored. If more terrain had interesting rules that brought more questions about how to play around it is feel like the woods would just be seen as one more thing to deal with.

In that line of thought, I wouldn't be surprised if complaints about woods die down as others terrain with powerful rules becomes the standard. Having to think about things like a -1 save from a herdstone that increases in range is a pretty big deal too after all but I hear no complaints about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2019 at 3:25 AM, Aryann said:

Compare Sylvaneth shooting to Tzeentch, summoning to FEC or Death. Different league. If people want to restrict wyldwoods to 1 citadel wood then i postulate that Tzeentch may only choose 1 unit to shoot in the shooting phase and FEC only to summon one unit per round. It makes that much sense. Really, leave it or rebalancing Sylvaneth around Wyldwoods will destroy this army. Want to rebalance something? Boost Ironjawz, Kharadrons and BCR, nerf DoK and LoN - that's what tournament results tell us. Don't fix things that work well, like Sylvaneth. Well designed and well balanced army. 

No one is arguing that Sylvaneth need nerfed, its just the way Wyldwoods work that people have a problem with. Even if you win vs someone spamming the woods its not a fun game and you feel like you just worked a shift instead of participated in a recreational hobby.  

No one here is arguing that the woods should be nerfed to undermine the whole faction. Almost everyone has suggested they get buffs/boosts to compensate and make them stronger overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one of the biggest problems with sylvaneth is just how cluncky the woods are. To place. To play on, heck even to carry they are a huge pain. While certainly strong, I'm not sure even sylvaneth players actually like them that much. 

 

I really hope they replace them with something more like the gnarlmaw with an aoe affect. Summoning single trees is way easier to do and might make for a more changing field. It's also getting harder with everyone else having terain since most armies are less dependent on their terrain. So it's better to block with yours than to actually use their own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played vs a Sylvaneth player a few weeks ago at a tournament and he did end up with I think 9 woods by the end.  It was ridiculously effective blocking my LOS into the woods and causing mortal wound ****** all over the place for me.   It was really tough to deal with especially because apparently one cannot move through the actual trees on the Citadel Woods models, they're impassible?  I always thought it was just supposed to all passable terrain (albeit deadly) and the trees just created a good visual.  Or did I get hoodwinked on that?

The terrain stuff coming out for all the armies should come in line.  I think the Sylvaneth will be getting a revamped tome sooner or later to bring the woods into line with other armies.  Maybe they'll be able to do the 3 initial woods like the Skaven, and perhaps sprout some more upon the corpses of their enemies.  But each wood should be just a single wood, not 3 friggin woods!  To whoever said it's not fair to the Sylvaneth who made and painted 12 woods, it's not fair that DeathRunners aren't in the Skaven Tome, and Juggernaut and Biker Lords aren't in the Chaos Marines Codex either :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complaining about number of the woods or the space they take is like complaining that goblins or skeletons come in large numbers. Or that they cause mortal wounds. Seriously? I complain that Tzeentch and Skyre do a lot of mortal wounds and they even do that from a distance! Should we change that? No, that's the theme of those armies. Seriously the game has more requiring attention problems than changing Sylvaneth playstyle. Play with more terrain and less SW you will see. I like the idea of AOE single woods because to be honest it is hard to transport all the woods each time. Just don't nerf that mechanic. It will turn Sylvaneth useless. It's their own, cool theme, well balanced as it is. 

Edit: also, letting your Sylvaneth opponent to drop many woods is a fault in your strategy. Due to how big the woods are and how restrictive it is to place them it's easy to block them by just relocating your troops or playing them more sparse. It's something you need to keep in mind, just as if you need to remember about all Nighthaunt to have flying and ethereal or Idoneth to strike first on the 3rd round. Just part of strategy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aryann said:

Complaining about number of the woods or the space they take is like complaining that goblins or skeletons come in large numbers. Or that they cause mortal wounds. Seriously? I complain that Tzeentch and Skyre do a lot of mortal wounds and they even do that from a distance! Should we change that? No, that's the theme of those armies. Seriously the game has more requiring attention problems than changing Sylvaneth playstyle. Play with more terrain and less SW you will see. I like the idea of AOE single woods because to be honest it is hard to transport all the woods each time. Just don't nerf that mechanic. It will turn Sylvaneth useless. It's their own, cool theme, well balanced as it is. 

 Edit: also, letting your Sylvaneth opponent to drop many woods is a fault in your strategy. Due to how big the woods are and how restrictive it is to place them it's easy to block them by just relocating your troops or playing them more sparse. It's something you need to keep in mind, just as if you need to remember about all Nighthaunt to have flying and ethereal or Idoneth to strike first on the 3rd round. Just part of strategy. 

Agreed to an extent. With the incredible battalions Sylvaneth have, there are limits to how much of this can be done. Not to mention, it being part of the strategy doesn't mean it is enjoyable - the woods themselves are a nightmare unless you take the trees off the bases which looks very ugly. 

Sylvaneth are my favourite army and the way the trees grow and make a horrible, cloying, painful environment on the battlefield is really well designed. Just change the model for the Wyldwood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, The World Tree said:

Agreed to an extent. With the incredible battalions Sylvaneth have, there are limits to how much of this can be done.

And extremely costy. Not only cost heavy but also popular Gnarlwood forces you to take very fragile (and useless against many armies) 2 units of Tree-Revenants. That's 230+2x80 points if I remember correctly. A lot. Really lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Aryann said:

And extremely costy. Not only cost heavy but also popular Gnarlwood forces you to take very fragile (and useless against many armies) 2 units of Tree-Revenants. That's 230+2x80 points if I remember correctly. A lot. Really lot. 

How is 230 points for 2 battalions, artifacts and cp's "a lot"? The bonus they get from those battalions are also among the best out there.

Tree revenants might not be the greatest unit, but they only cost 80 points and do fine as area denial/objective campers.

Any other army would kill for those options. I'm not saying they need to nerf everything about Sylvaneth, but don't pretend that their strengths aren't incredibly strong. There is a reason they are still kicking ass on all levels of play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sylvaneth rarely gets into top 10 at tournaments. They have their strengths and weaknesses. Overall, well balanced. 390 points (Gnarlwood + household + 2x Tree-Revenants) is a lot. It's almost Durthu or 2x Kurnoth Hunters. That's why this battalion’s effect is good. 

Before making small tweaks to armies like Sylvaneth I expect GW to fix some obvious mistake in balance like overpowered DoK with ridiculously powerful allegiance abilities and cheap heroes and to fix armies that long seem to be unplayable both by communities voice and tournaments' results (Ironjawz, Kharadron Overlords, StD) 

Edit: Shouldn't this thread be moved to Sylvaneth Discussion in the Order forum? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Aryann said:

Edit: Shouldn't this thread be moved to Sylvaneth Discussion in the Order forum? 

At the moment, I'm going to say no as it has info in for a lot of people who may not go in there looking for advice.

However, it would be nice if we went back to how to deal with Sylvaneth who won't stop camping in the woods ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gaz Taylor said:

At the moment, I'm going to say no as it has info in for a lot of people who may not go in there looking for advice.

However, it would be nice if we went back to how to deal with Sylvaneth who won't stop camping in the woods ;) 

Good point, my advice as a SC player: you have three options.

1. Hit them with an endless spell(s)

2. Deal mortal wounds with non line of sight spells

3. [The most likely option] charge them and pray. The way they can spawn woods over the game you just have to accept you are always going to be playing them on their turf. No way around it just charge them after hopefully buffing a combat unit and pray the dice gods are kind to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy I played dropped all his woods turn 1 and before the game.  Some battalion and powers of the tree people combo deal.  So I could not position myself to block them in that mission, as the player zones were quite narrow, in from the sides of the table as well as from the center.

And it's true, Chaos players are often jealous of the Aelvish boogie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see any thing wrong with the woods as Nurgle have FECULENT GNARLMAW, skaven Gnawholes and death with the grave shenanigans. I think it fits with their narrative. Maybe limiting the size of the woods would be better after say the first one you put on the table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2019 at 7:53 AM, Aryann said:

Edit: also, letting your Sylvaneth opponent to drop many woods is a fault in your strategy. Due to how big the woods are and how restrictive it is to place them it's easy to block them by just relocating your troops or playing them more sparse. It's something you need to keep in mind, just as if you need to remember about all Nighthaunt to have flying and ethereal or Idoneth to strike first on the 3rd round. Just part of strategy. 

Well, essentially you advice to:
Buy/build terrain for your local club/store! Not every place has enough terrain to mess up sylvaneth before they mess up the table
Play 1 drop armies! Because if you don't sylvaneth will mess up the table
Pray to your gods that you'll win set-up roll-off with your 1 drop army! Because otherwise, yeah, you know what'll happen.

I'll write up something smart later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XReN said:

Well, essentially you advice to:
Buy/build terrain for your local club/store! Not every place has enough terrain to mess up sylvaneth before they mess up the table
 Play 1 drop armies! Because if you don't sylvaneth will mess up the table
 Pray to your gods that you'll win set-up roll-off with your 1 drop army! Because otherwise, yeah, you know what'll happen.

I'll write up something smart later.

The core rules do state a recommended terrain setup.  If your local club/store has no scenery to use then that really sucks, especially if they are advertising the space is for AOS play.   An empty table is not good for playing AOS.

Compare to Kill Team. You wouldn't play Kill Team without scenery. Imagine how Harlequins and Tau would play.  Big advantage Kill Team has is that there is plenty of decent scenery and it comes with the boxes, so by default most people have some. AOS traditionally just has lacklustre ruins. This is a big failing on GWs part. But, I do see that if GW just introduced more boxes of scenery then it isn't going to make people buy them. Hence, this is why all the armies are getting their own pieces with special rules.

Bring back the old large Warhammer Fantasy cardboard castle from the 90s!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

If your local club/store has no scenery to use then that really sucks, especially if they are advertising the space is for AOS play.   An empty table is not good for playing AOS.

Thankfully my local clubs have enough terrain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...