AoS 2 - Ossiarch Bonereapers Discussion

[Sleboda]

I don't follow their work. Can you elaborate a bit?

[woolf]

sure so they have a stream on twitch which they also make available as a podcast (available eg on acast, think also on youtube), about monthly they do what they call a "stats show" and in that they go through the current most updated stats they have and discuss trends meta etc. their data is collected continuously from tournaments around the globe by TOs submitting results, this is where the 69% match win rate stat that was referenced is from. but the voice over is quite helpful, they go into a bit more detail, eg apparently petrifex sits at 75% win rate (average of 69 pulled down a bit by other builds that are not as powerful) so clearly the indication is that this subfaction is quite strong

hope that's helpful!

[Obeisance]

That would be either AoS Coach or The Honest Wargamer, I suspect.

[Overread]

So I've just done some basic stats for the difference between spears and swords for both mortek guard and deathriders and I'll post up the results in their own thread for easy reference in a bit. However the conclusion I've drawn from them is quite interesting:

For mortek guard as a unit of pure mortek guard with a leader, after saves are made (no matter the save value) swords will deal a greater number of wounds to a target provided that the same number of models makes it into close combat. The use of spears is thus purely going to be effective if the extra 1 inch range is going to mean more models make it into close combat against a given enemy unit. This means that, in practical terms, larger units will benefit spears and smaller will benefit swords; however if you regularly play against opponents on big open maps where you can wrap 30 or more warriors easily against another and have all reach close combat - then swords would be the way to go. 

The greatblade has almost no impact on the stats at all for swords. It's greater chance to wound basically counteracts its lack of doing double hits on a 6. For spears it will give you a small increase in attacks provided that they made it into combat (ergo they want to be in the front row as the greatblades only have 1 inch range). 

 

 

For Deathriders we see much the same pattern. However if the unit makes a charge in the same turn then the spears equal swords in the number of effective wounds caused (no matter the save). Though I should note that this equal score is the result of rounding the results - the actual numbers give swords a very slight advantage. 

Again this supports the view that larger units of riders will benefit spears, but that smaller ones will benefit swords more so. Furthermore if you do go with spears you want to find the best ways to be charging every turn you can; though even then you're only equalling what swords can achieve.

 

 

It's actually quite a sad comparison really because its mostly showing that swords have the (if you excuse the pun) edge more times than spears and that the only benefit spears have is in reach. 

[StokieRich]

I think what the maths doesn't show you as well is that if something comes in and kills 10-20 mortek, you can still hit back a lot harder with the swords. 

Personally I'll be taking swords in every circumstance (I'm using 2x40 swords atm) which is a shame. 

[Overread]

10 minutes ago, StokieRich said:

I think what the maths doesn't show you as well is that if something comes in and kills 10-20 mortek, you can still hit back a lot harder with the swords. 

Personally I'll be taking swords in every circumstance (I'm using 2x40 swords atm) which is a shame. 

How many casualties you take doesn't actually make any difference because swords or spears has no effect on the mortek saves. So if you had 20 with spears and lost 10 getting to the enemy; you'd also lose 10 if you had swords in the very same position. 

For units of 10 or so the difference is only around 1 wound dealt in favour of swords. Meanwhile for a unit of 40 (again remember this assumes ALL make it into close combat range) then its a favour of 5 additional damage making it through for swords over spears. 

[StokieRich]

1 minute ago, Overread said:

How many casualties you take doesn't actually make any difference because swords or spears has no effect on the mortek saves. So if you had 20 with spears and lost 10 getting to the enemy; you'd also lose 10 if you had swords in the very same position. 

For units of 10 or so the difference is only around 1 wound dealt in favour of swords. Meanwhile for a unit of 40 (again remember this assumes ALL make it into close combat range) then its a favour of 5 additional damage making it through for swords over spears. 

Yea but the only advantage the spears have is they get more attacks in because of the reach. If my opponent kills a decent number, I just take them from the back and so the swords end up with just as many attacks as the spears in some situations. 

I like that I can afford to lose 10-20 of my mortek with absolutely no loss in combat effectiveness, and they're likely to kill whatever just charged in and did that with a huge amount of rend 2 attacks back. 

[Sleboda]

35 minutes ago, StokieRich said:

I think what the maths doesn't show you as well is that if something comes in and kills 10-20 mortek, you can still hit back a lot harder with the swords. 

Personally I'll be taking swords in every circumstance (I'm using 2x40 swords atm) which is a shame. 

I'm going spears on the first 120 Guard I do and the first 30 Riders, then I'll add a unit of 20 sword Guard and maybe 10 sword riders.

Why?

Two reasons.

1. Spears look cooler and sword damage output is not that much higher to where it makes them a no-brainer.

1. Often overlooked in this game is max output. The spears (and swords on Stalkers vs. Falchion) have the potential to kill more things total in some instances. To put it another way, if you absolutely positively must kill 11 models and your swords cap out at 10, it doesn't matter how much more likely the swords are to kill 10 models, because they can't kill the 11th.

[StokieRich]

Yea that's cool mate I get that. I agree to me also they look better and you're right, if 20 of each are attacking you're only getting approx 3 more wounds through from the blades so it's not as if you're taking a huge hit. 

Max potential output is a fair view as well, personally I'd value the free extra wounds a round more (they get more value out of +1 attack as well) but I can see a solid argument for spears instead!

[Dolomyte]

The Honest Wargamer puts out the stat show, a couple of things about that. It only includes 5 game GTs. They had 2 5 win showings, 1 four win, 7 3 win,, and 1 2 win and 1 1 win. 
 
That sample size is incredibly small. The two events they won were a 24 player and 10 player event,, the 10 player event was Australian masters and they were piloted by one of the best players in the country if not the best and one of the better in the world. 
 

the 24 man was pre faq so could have even had horse shenanigans. That being said the two lower showings of 1 win and 2 win were supposedly non petrifex builds but they don’t track subfaction info so I can’t confirm that or deny it

 

 

[Gwendar]

Hey everyone, got another game today, although it was a short one. Opponent was bit overly aggressive on his first turn and that ended up costing him by getting too close and not charging. I'll definitely say I love Katakros, but running 4 small Heroes is nice too and the increased spells is nice, although I didn't manage to get many off 😅

New model syndrome I guess. Also, the box of Skulls is incredible for people who really hate the OBR heads like myself:

Spoiler

 

 

[Bryan I Guess]

4 hours ago, Gwendar said:

New model syndrome I guess. Also, the box of Skulls is incredible for people who really hate the OBR heads like myself:

  Hide contents

 

 

Great minds think alike!! I switched the stalker heads for horned heads from the skull box is fantastic and I'm going to break off and switch my boneshaper head for the bird skull. Mine is the boneshaper with wings so itll be awesome!!

[Gwendar]

31 minutes ago, Bryan I Guess said:

Mine is the boneshaper with wings so itll be awesome!!

...huh, I think I need to search my bits for some wings now. Anyway, yeah they worked great, wasn't sure of them at first but after some paint I think they'll blend a lot better.

[Bryan I Guess]

Improvements!! 95% credit goes to @Gwendar

[ChrisNoAnts]

Guys, how do you handle your standard bearers in large units?

A 40 piece blob of Mortek Guard can have 4 banner bearers. I think it looks crappy, causes a lot of extra work and (most importantly) does not feel fluffly to me. 

Not building the maximum number of banner bearers is a clear disadvantage though. At one point you might have to remove that one model. 

My playgroup is probably fine with a "pick up the banner if the bearer dies, up to x times whereas x is the number of maximum allowed banner bearers"-houserule, but I also dislike the level of bookkeeping and explaining out of regular playgroup games.

I'm fishing for your opinions here. How will you handle your banner bearers? 

[StokieRich]

2 minutes ago, ChrisNoAnts said:

Guys, how do you handle your standard bearers in large units?

A 40 piece blob of Mortek Guard can have 4 banner bearers. I think it looks crappy, causes a lot of extra work and (most importantly) does not feel fluffly to me. 

Not building the maximum number of banner bearers is a clear disadvantage though. At one point you might have to remove that one model. 

My playgroup is probably fine with a "pick up the banner if the bearer dies, up to x times whereas x is the number of maximum allowed banner bearers"-houserule, but I also dislike the level of bookkeeping and explaining out of regular playgroup games.

I'm fishing for your opinions here. How will you handle your banner bearers? 

I think it looks silly having more than one in the unit so I'll keep playing with just one and accept that it's not optimal. 

Having said that, if it gets sniped out you can use one of your "heal 3 dudes" abilities to put it back in the unit. 

[Overread]

I really wish GW would bring back the rule from Old World where basically if your banner or musician was killed another in the unit would just pick it up and keep going. I agree that 4 banners in a unit of 40 warriors looks daft. Personally I model them either 1 per full unit or 1 per half. So for Mortek I've 1 banner every 20 models. 

I can break them down into smaller units if desired and they don't look too bad on the tabletop as a single unit.

 

Considering that most banners and musicians have pretty casual bonuses and that some forces (eg Daughters of Khaine) still have rules which, in theory, lets them take one banner and one instrument for EVERY model in the unit (barring the leader). It would just make a game mechanic far more sensible.

 

Of course it might get a bit fiddly now that some units, such as the Mortek but also the Warbands for Slaves to Darkness, have weapon types in that same position. So any rule would have to very specifically state musician and/or banner bearer. 

[ChrisNoAnts]

I'm coming from a 1000p Meeting Engagement test game with the OBR. The one thing that's in the forefront of my mind right now: Stalkers and / or Petrifex Elite are overtuned. 

Petrifex Elite should not have the incredible -1 Rend CA in addition to the already incredible +1 to save. 

Stalkers should not get -1 Rend AND +1 Damage. It massively outshines the other 3 options. 

I've had a min size Stalker unit deal 20 damage after all saves to a Lord of Affliction and it felt bad. 

[Arcian]

29 minutes ago, ChrisNoAnts said:

I'm coming from a 1000p Meeting Engagement test game with the OBR. The one thing that's in the forefront of my mind right now: Stalkers and / or Petrifex Elite are overtuned. 

Petrifex Elite should not have the incredible -1 Rend CA in addition to the already incredible +1 to save. 

Stalkers should not get -1 Rend AND +1 Damage. It massively outshines the other 3 options. 

I've had a min size Stalker unit deal 20 damage after all saves to a Lord of Affliction and it felt bad. 

It seems to me that the Stalkers are really more like our version of say, Kurnoth Hunters. Instead of being able to deal a ton of mortal wounds and damage, they just have higher rend.

[Scurvydog]

1 hour ago, ChrisNoAnts said:

I'm coming from a 1000p Meeting Engagement test game with the OBR. The one thing that's in the forefront of my mind right now: Stalkers and / or Petrifex Elite are overtuned. 

Petrifex Elite should not have the incredible -1 Rend CA in addition to the already incredible +1 to save. 

Stalkers should not get -1 Rend AND +1 Damage. It massively outshines the other 3 options. 

I've had a min size Stalker unit deal 20 damage after all saves to a Lord of Affliction and it felt bad. 

All this is only a problem as petrifex.

Take stalkers outside petrifex, compare them to a similar big guy unit for 200 points, kurnoth hunters.

against 4+ saves Kurnoth with scythes dish out 7.2 damage and 1,5 mortal wound from stomping, so around 8-9 damage total. 

Stalkers in precision stance is 11.1 damage.

So stalkers deal a bit more damage, they have 1 more move. In any of the other offensive stances they have a pitiful output of 5.9. If they choose reroll saves 4.4...

Kurnoth hunters have 5 wounds each instead of 4. If they do not charge they can reroll saves too with no less damage output, only 1" pile in then, but 2" reach.

In summary, anything but precision stance on Stalkers is grossly overcosted. If they did not have that, there would be 0 reason to ever take them.

Precision stance AND the +1 save and possible +1 rend from Petrifex brings them over the top.

Stalkers in any other legion and precision stance er balanced just fine for their points, if they did less damage, there would be no point to them next to even Morghasts for about the same points and 6.7 damage and 9" fly and either 5+ mortal wound save or 3d6 charges.

Edited December 10, 2019 by Scurvydog

[ChrisNoAnts]

I did a bit of mathhammer to confirm my suspicion that something about the Stalker is off. 

This is based on a single model with 5 attacks (Spirit Blades). It obviously scales with models. 

No other buffs are present. The target got a relevant save of 4+. 

• Both reroll modes yield 1.98 wounds
• The rend/damage mode yields 1.85 wounds while only computing for the extra rend

These numbers are pretty much equivalent and would allow for actual choice, depending on the situation, however:

• The actual rend/damage mode yields 3.7 wounds, vastly outperforming the other offensive modes. 

Note that on weaker saves where the extra rend does not matter, the picture does not change. If the target had a 5+ save it looks like this:

• Reroll mode: 2.47 wounds
• Rend / damage mode: 4.44 wounds

tl;dr: 

• It is almost always wrong to go for the reroll mode (outside of going for defense)
• It is always wrong (math not shown here, but I did it and it checks out) to go for the Falchions

This feels like a huge oversight / bad game design. It feels like the +1 damage slipped in somewhere, it does not makes sense as a rule choice.  Also, after doing that math I'd wager that these guys are something like an AoS-wide Top 5 raw damage unit, if not better. It's a 200 points unit that can butcher pretty much everything in the game except the biggest monsters and heroes. They are boxing far above their point-weight while being tanky and versatile at the same time. 

 

@ScurvydogYou might be right that without the rend/damage mode, they would just not be a valid option. But I stand by opinion that the choices they offer are garbage and that they output is incredibly high. 

Edited December 10, 2019 by ChrisNoAnts

[Scurvydog]

7 minutes ago, ChrisNoAnts said:

I did a bit of mathhammer to confirm my suspicion that something about the Stalker is off. 

This is based on a single model with 5 attacks (Spirit Blades). It obviously scales with models. 

No other buffs are present. The target got a relevant save of 4+. 

• Both reroll modes yield 1.98 wounds
• The rend/damage mode yields 1.85 wounds while only computing for the extra rend

These numbers are pretty much equivalent and would allow for actual choice, depending on the situation, however:

• The actual rend/damage mode yields 3.7 wounds, vastly outperforming the other offensive modes. 

Note that on weaker saves where the extra rend does not matter, the picture does not change. If the target had a 5+ save it looks like this:

• Reroll mode: 2.47 wounds
• Rend / damage mode: 4.44 wounds

tl;dr: 

• It is almost always wrong to go for the reroll mode (outside of going for defense)
• It is always wrong (math not shown here, but I did it and it checks out) to go for the Falchions

This feels like a huge oversight / bad game design. It feels like the +1 damage slipped in somewhere, it does not makes sense as a rule choice.  Also, after doing that math I'd wager that these guys are something like an AoS-wide Top 5 raw damage unit, if not better. It's a 200 points unit that can butcher pretty much everything in the game except the biggest monsters and heroes. They are boxing far above their point-weight while being tanky and versatile at the same time. 

Again like I just stated before. The two reroll stances brings their output into the pitiful range below 6 average damage, which is a good deal worse than even the universally scorned morghasts. 

Consider this, for all the reroll stances they will do LESS damage on average than Immortis guard and Morghasts who compete for the same spot in the army for the same point cost.

So they are terrible outside precision and would never be used.

If precision was only +1 rend, it would be even worse than rerolls.

If precision was only +1 damage they would be at 8.9 now THIS seems to be the only happy middle ground to justify their place. They NEED a higher output to be picked instead of Morghasts for Immortis for the same points, and this would be roughly 2 more damage than the 2 other options, who instead have better mobility and/or defense.

Now it still does not fix them, their output is worse than 10 mortek guard if they reroll soves. Their reroll stances are pointless and worse than any other option in the army for those points. This unit is terribly balanced and needs a warscroll change to work, as the 4 stance gimmick is pointless right now, and would still be with any nerfs, as nobody would ever take them.

Edited December 10, 2019 by Scurvydog

[PortableMango]

I love you guys. I'm like the 2 yo brother just happily playing with my models, while the big brothers get down into the nitty gritty stuff.

[Sception]

Finished my Soulmason

Spoiler

For now at least.  May go back in the future to edge highlight the dark bone, maybe add glowy bits in the recesses, but that can wait.  I'm happy enough with where it is for now.

[chosen_of_khaine]

Maybe I missed something, but has it been clarified when exactly "during a combat phase" CAs can be used? IE, can I wait until after wound rolls to activate the Petrifex CA "Bludgeon"? (If I wanted to be particularly gamey)