Armies without Summons?

[Dead Scribe]

4 minutes ago, Gecktron said:

You have paid for the model. The unit can never have more models at the end of the battle than you had at the start, you dont add power to a unit you only return it to its starting strength. Models are just a abstract way to display power. Bringing back a model in a unit is functionally the same as healing a monster and bringing it back into a higher wound bracket. 

That can be true for healing wounds in an existing unit.  However there are abilities that let you bring back completely dead units, which is in essence free extra points because the unit has been destroyed, and is then brought back.  That is true regardless of unit type (unit, hero, monster, whatever)

[SwampHeart]

10 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

That can be true for healing wounds in an existing unit.  However there are abilities that let you bring back completely dead units, which is in essence free extra points because the unit has been destroyed, and is then brought back.  That is true regardless of unit type (unit, hero, monster, whatever)

That's unit recursion, not summoning. Summoning adds new points to the table (ala Khorne, Tzeentch, Nurgle, Beastmen), recursion recycles units that were already on the table (GSG, LoN, SCE). They're different mechanics that have a different impact on the game and played around differently. Equating recursion with summoning is incorrect and already puts you in the wrong mind frame to deal with the specific elements you're discussing. It isn't being pedantic to distinguish the two because they are unique concepts. 

[Mutter]

28 minutes ago, Overread said:

Funny thing is that an army of Witches costs about the same as an army of Melusai

Not really.

30 Witch Aelves = 270 points = 105 pounds

10 Melusai = 280 points = 60 pounds

It's not even close. The price for Witch Aelves as battleline is just out of this world.

[Mutter]

*double-post due to interwebs hickup*

[Dead Scribe]

8 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

That's unit recursion, not summoning. Summoning adds new points to the table (ala Khorne, Tzeentch, Nurgle, Beastmen), recursion recycles units that were already on the table (GSG, LoN, SCE). They're different mechanics that have a different impact on the game and played around differently. Equating recursion with summoning is incorrect and already puts you in the wrong mind frame to deal with the specific elements you're discussing. It isn't being pedantic to distinguish the two because they are unique concepts. 

I am looking at the effect.  They may have different names but they do the same thing.

They add a unit that wouldn't normally be on the table and you don't have to pay points for it.

They let you have your units that are destroyed return.  

If your opponent cannot do that, then effectively you are getting free units since they had to destroy that unit, and now have to destroy the unit again and they themselves cannot do that.

It is a force multiplier adding to the effective power of an army by giving what amounts to a free unit.

If an army can recycle a destroyed unit of 20 skeletons and place them back on the table, or if an army can have a wizard summon a unit of 20 skeletons and place them on the table, the end result is the same thing.  A bonus unit of 20 skeletons.

[Overread]

6 minutes ago, Mutter said:

Not really.

30 Witch Aelves = 270 points = 105 pounds

10 Melusai = 280 points = 60 pounds

It's not even close. The price for Witch Aelves as battleline is just out of this world.

Wait you got that right I was going from memory of comparing a standard 3 units of 30 witch aelves against a 3 units of 20 Melusai (those being the two back-bone approaches to those respective forces). Comparing those the prices are similar, but yes you are right that like for like in points the witches are very expensive (made worse now because the battleforce is now sold out on the GW UK site so last chance to grab those kits with the discount) 

[Nos]

46 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

I would say that getting potentially an extra 1000 points in a game is more than just a little bit of an advantage.  I don't think that the units in legion of nagash are costed more than they should be to compensate either.   If anything there are units that are undercost still.

However I don't see them as that big a deal because to shut them down you put models near their summoning points so they can't summon with them.  

If you let them recycle their models, its not just a little bit of an advantage or appearing more powerful.  It *is* more powerful and will often swing a game, and thats on a player for letting them get to do it.

It would be broken if there was no way to counter it, but there is a straight forward way to counter it, which is why it doesn't really get used a ton at the professional levels of play.  At the casual levels of play though it will straight up dominate people until they learn how to play properly.

Legion of Nagash are repeatedly placing in the very top places of the very top tournaments though suggesting it’s not just about people not knowing how to shut down gravesites

[Dead Scribe]

Correct.  The summoning aspect of Legion of Nagash is not what makes them a powerful and obvious choice for professional level AOS.  It is an aspect that will dominate the casual and semi-pros, but at the upper levels its not really anything more than a useful tool that may help but not overwhelm other professional level players (mainly because those players know how to shut down the summoning by blocking grave sites or character sniping)

Picking that topic apart would be something useful in the undead forums (why legion of nagash dominates at the professional levels, what makes professional players choose that army, what you could do to try and combat it)

[SwampHeart]

32 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

I am looking at the effect.  They may have different names but they do the same thing.

They add a unit that wouldn't normally be on the table and you don't have to pay points for it.

They let you have your units that are destroyed return.  

If your opponent cannot do that, then effectively you are getting free units since they had to destroy that unit, and now have to destroy the unit again and they themselves cannot do that.

It is a force multiplier adding to the effective power of an army by giving what amounts to a free unit.

If an army can recycle a destroyed unit of 20 skeletons and place them back on the table, or if an army can have a wizard summon a unit of 20 skeletons and place them on the table, the end result is the same thing.  A bonus unit of 20 skeletons.

I would think you of all people, as a hyper competitive top tier gamer, would be aware of just how different the game play is around playing against a recursion army versus a summoning army. The way they impact the game, the conditions of their application, the types of units involved, all of those are very different in a recursion army vs. a summoning army. 

So yes both represent a force multiplier but the way they impact the game is very different. The way you play with and against armies that use both tactics is very different. Also to the point of the thread - summoning armies aren't actually doing all that well (from a stats point of view), but recursion armies are doing very well. So the question to ask is what makes their specific recursion so good? I doubt that, if you take a deep dive into those specific armies, you'll find its actually their ability to recycle units driving their success. LoN without the ability to return units are still a very good army, Hammer of Sigmar without that ability are still a very good army. 

 

[prochuvi]

29 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

That's unit recursion, not summoning. Summoning adds new points to the table (ala Khorne, Tzeentch, Nurgle, Beastmen), recursion recycles units that were already on the table (GSG, LoN, SCE). They're different mechanics that have a different impact on the game and played around differently. Equating recursion with summoning is incorrect and already puts you in the wrong mind frame to deal with the specific elements you're discussing. It isn't being pedantic to distinguish the two because they are unique concepts. 

Sorry but that is 100% false and lie.

 

Lon could bring back a full destroyed units last edition  free?

NO

Why?because it is sumon and you had to pay for it

 

It is stupid argue that free sumon is overpower and need be gone or nerfed.

Fyreslayers,kharadron,ironjawz or the beastclaws were all top 10 armys last edition but are middle-botton armys now due to free sumon

Others good examples are armys that were garbage last edition but without new tomes have skyrocket to the top only due to free sumon:

Lon last months of aos1 with the new tome was garbagge and middle or lower tier with the same tome and units that now is the top

Silvaneths last months of aos1 after the nerf of kurnoths were also middle tier but now they are top army due to bring as 1000 free points with alariele,branchwraith and forests

Slanesh was a useless army at the botton,now they havent tome yet and they have gone to top 15 only for free sumon

 

People saying that free sumon isnt broken and havent changued nothing are blind.

 

Can be countered as lon,but you must spend units doing nothing in the table and that are less points that i am playing only due to free sumon

[SwampHeart]

9 minutes ago, prochuvi said:

*Snip*

So first lets address your main point - being that free summoning is bad for the game. I didn't say it was it was not - my response was specifically to a different user regarding the difference in two mechanics. So no, nothing I said was a lie or false - there is a categorical difference between the mechanic of summoning and the mechanic of recursion. They affect the game differently and are even more distinct when viewed through the lens of their specific armies. So I'd appreciate not being called a liar (especially when I wasn't directly engaging with your point).

As to the remainder of your post - army tiering changes. There are many reasons those books fell in power - armies with the ability to recycle or add new units is one of them, as are changes to missions (and specific mission prevalence), ready access to battalions, access to the types of casters who do well in the realms (usually single large model casters), access to the types of characters to take strong advantage of realm artifacts, etc.  Can I understand why someone wouldn't like facing a summoning or recursion army? Certainly. However I also choose to engage in that debate hopefully more constructive language than accusing people who disagree with me of being blind, or of having a stupid argument. 

[Eevika]

Free summoning and the addition of a ton of recursion is really annoying and makes it near impossible to play low model count armies. Just last weekend I was playing a Troggoth list against Slaneesh and after destroying like half his army and leading the game in points for the first 2 battlerounds he suddenly summons and bunch of units all around the board taking most objectives and killing a full unit of 6 troggoths with a summoned unit of deamonettes. It was a true feels bad man. 

[Mutton]

The problem comes from armies with summoning vs. normal armies. Meta or not, almost every game of summoning vs. non-summoning goes like this: A close, fun game for 3 battle rounds, and then entire new units are brought to the board and the game is over.

The fact is some summoning mechanics are fairer than others. BoC have a solid summoning mechanic that never feels overbearing or too powerful. Factions like Slaanesh or Seraphon are just unfun to play against (try playing a hero objective game, only to have 6  new heroes summoned against you halfway through).

Again, not talking about meta. Not everything is about the meta. Considerations should be made for armies that simply aren't fun to play against in casual environments. MOST people in the hobby are playing casually.

[Dead Scribe]

Yeah.  Thats why I say to truly enjoy AOS you have to go into it with eyes wide open and realize the game was never designed to be fair or really close to balanced.  Its either play a list that can do the dirty things or don't play a list that can do the dirty things and be ok with losing all the time (or try to filter out your opponents that are playing armies you know will squash you because of your army selection, which causes bad feelings)

[Lucky Snake Eyes]

5 hours ago, Damian said:

Are there any armies without summoning abilities? and how do they compete against armies like LoN what can summon up whole units onto the Battlefield? (My friends death armies are stupidly powerful, so much so that several people refuse to play against them.

Since the new Meta is all about the Summons, just looking for the armies to avoid that have no summoning.

LoN can't "summon" like other armies can, we can't add new units to our armies unlike seraphon and chaos. We can revive full units with a command ability or the legions of sacrament allegiance ability tho. As for them seeming powerful, well they kinda are not gonna lie. The key to beating them is to kill their heroes as the entirety of the armies mechanics rely on them. Usually shooting will do the trick, celestar ballistas have been the bane of my army. Otherwise most armies actually don't have summoning outside of chaos, seraphon and sylvaneth.

[Turgol]

In all GW games there is a similar cycle of meta that competitive players have to get used to. It has never been about chess like balanced competition. It is about playing the meta and adapting to the cycle.

That being said, that ranking with 13 summoning armies on the tip 15 is cheesy. Comparing SCE summoning (or recycling) abilities to reliable LoN recycle, never mind the likes of Slaanesh, is ridicoulous. SCE (or Deepkin or DoK) are strong because of other factors, so you are stretching the argument.

[Lucky Snake Eyes]

9 minutes ago, Turgol said:

In all GW games there is a similar cycle of meta that competitive players have to get used to. It has never been about chess like balanced competition. It is about playing the meta and adapting to the cycle.

That being said, that ranking with 13 summoning armies on the tip 15 is cheesy. Comparing SCE summoning (or recycling) abilities to reliable LoN recycle, never mind the likes of Slaanesh, is ridicoulous. SCE (or Deepkin or DoK) are strong because of other factors, so you are stretching the argument.

As someone who has been playing 40k for almost 4 years now it's crazy to see how much a meta can shift and how quickly competitive players will drop their armies for meta lists. 

And yeah I feel it's an unfair comparison to lump armies with recycling mechanics like LoN or to a lesser degree stormcasts with armies with the ability to add new units like chaos. Yeah LoN has reliable recycling but unlike chaos or some other armies we can only recycle certain units and can't recycle heroes.

[SwampHeart]

23 minutes ago, Mutton said:

Meta or not, almost every game of summoning vs. non-summoning goes like this: A close, fun game for 3 battle rounds, and then entire new units are brought to the board and the game is over.

That's super dependent on the armies in question. I've seen plenty of non summoning armies such as IDK and DoK push through that 3rd battle round with no issue. I think a lot of the disparity is in having a modern battle tome or not. 

[Lucky Snake Eyes]

7 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

That's super dependent on the armies in question. I've seen plenty of non summoning armies such as IDK and DoK push through that 3rd battle round with no issue. I think a lot of the disparity is in having a modern battle tome or not. 

I've seen a lot of games end with the non summoning army win by sniping most of the heroes by round 2 and watching their opponent weep.

[Dead Scribe]

Partially.  But even modern battle tomes like khorne require a certain build to not get squashed.  

it's crazy to see how much a meta can shift and how quickly competitive players will drop their armies for meta lists. 

Been that way forever with magic the gathering so this does not bother me for AOS either.  Yes you have to constantly change out armies if you want to stay viable but thats part of the game.

[Requizen]

Pretty much every Summoning ability has a counter. Generally it's "kill Heroes", and once you get good at recognizing and acting on those counters, you learn to play around it.

Seraphon: As soon as the Slann dies, summoning is done. I guess Astrolith Bearers can gain some summoning points, but not really.

Legions of Nagash: Kill the General. Nagash himself makes this a problem, but any other General is at least somewhat killable and once gone, that's it. Additionally, killing other Heroes limits their ability to return models to units.

Nurgle: Kill the Heroes and stand by trees. Also, once you get in their territory you slow down their point generation.

Tzeentch: Kill Wizards, which you're going to be doing anyways.

Gitz: DON'T KILL the Grots. If you leave them with 5 Grots remaining, the unit can't come back and has no impact on the game.

Beasts: Kill any Hero next to the Herdstone. They don't gain points without it (I guess Allherd still could but not enough).

Khorne: Like Gitz, leave units alive with just a couple models. Also, kill Heroes since the GHB summoning ability requires you to drop by them.

Slaanesh: Don't let the Heroes get into combat. Or if they do, kill them quickly before they can rack up points.

I think that's it with summoning. SCE can summon - with one specific Stormhost, if a unit dies and you have a CP and then roll a 5+. So you can't stop it... but we're not talking any sort of certainty of it happening. 

Even if you can't kill the Heroes quickly and easily, you can still mitigate Summoning by learning how to zone. Most summoned units have to be set up wholly near a Hero or Terrain piece, generally 9" away from enemies (Gitz being an exception). One of the most important skills to learn in AoS is how to use and abuse those 9" summoning bubbles, so the opponent cannot get the new units anywhere easily. Summoning 20 Plaguebearers turn 5 doesn't mean anything if they're not on an Objective. Getting a Bloodthirster in is pretty pointless if the only thing it can charge is 10 Clanrats. 

Summoning is a very strong tool, and does probably need a second pass with the balance team (specifically Legions of Nagash), but it's not broken and doesn't make the game unplayable. Once you figure out how to play around it, it's just another ability like any Allegiance has, just with a different impact.

[SwampHeart]

13 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Partially.  But even modern battle tomes like khorne require a certain build to not get squashed.  

I'd argue Khorne isn't actually a modern battle tome at this point (but will be again soon). But many many armies only have one or two viable builds for tournament play, that's been a hallmark of GW games for years. Its rare to find a book with more than a handful of competitively viable builds - at a tournament level books get quickly distilled to their most potent ingredients and that becomes to the primary brew of choice. 

[Dead Scribe]

Its rare to find a book with more than a handful of competitively viable builds - at a tournament level books get quickly distilled to their most potent ingredients and that becomes to the primary brew of choice. 

Absolutely, and that right there is the key ingredient to successful competitive play.  Being able to recognize what those builds are and adapt to play those fairly regularly (min once a year, though i often change out twice a year depending on new books that drop and how powerful they are for their points cost).

 

[Lucky Snake Eyes]

34 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Partially.  But even modern battle tomes like khorne require a certain build to not get squashed.  

 

 

Been that way forever with magic the gathering so this does not bother me for AOS either.  Yes you have to constantly change out armies if you want to stay viable but thats part of the game.

I just can't get behind the idea of changing armies so quickly, partially because I'm still in college so the money is barely there to support my current armies, never mind starting new meta armies, but also because I start armies because I'm a lore nerd and latch onto cool army concepts. I suppose I was just fortunate that I liked Vampire counts back in WFB and picked up LoN.

[Dead Scribe]

That is one of the issues with tabletop gaming like this.  If you don't keep up and rotate your army you will never stay viable.  If you are poor, that will pose a challenge to staying viable.

Not that I'm rich.  I sell my armies on ebay or the local buy sell group and that funds a lot of my hobby.