2k mixed Stormcast + Sylvaneth

[Lordneylon]

Dear Friends,

I would like to play with a 2k list mixing Stormcasr and Sylvaneth.

Whych are your opinions in bellow 2 lists? Your advice is very welcome.

 

LIST 1: (With this list I can support my units with magic and deploy some Sylvaneth forests with AncientbTreelord ability)

LEADERS

• Lord Celestant On Dracoth (220)
• Lord Relictor (80)
• Treelord Ancient (300) - General
• Branchwych (100)

UNITS

• Liberators x 5 (100)
• Liberators x 5 (100)
• Concussors x 2 (280)
• Dryads x 20 (240)
• Tree-Revenants x 5 (100)
• Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180) - Scythe
• Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180) - Bows?¿?¿?¿
• Household (20)
• Gnarlroot Wargrove (80) 

 

LIST 2:  (This is more an in your face list without too much sinergy)

LEADERS

• Lord Celestant On Dracoth (220) - General
• Spirit of Durthu (400)

UNITS

• Liberators x 5 (100)
• Liberators x 5 (100)
• Liberators x 5 (100)
• Concussors x 2 (280)
• Paladin Retributors x 5 (220)
• Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180) - Scythe
• Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180) - Swords
• Kurnoth Hunters x 3 (180) - Bows?¿?¿
• Free Spirits (40) 

   

Thanks a Lot!!!

Lord Neylon

[Lordneylon]

My comunity is quite friendly and I play in a semicompetitive enviorement!

[Mirage8112]

My only suggestion outright would be to take Greatswords on kurnoth hunters if they are in units of 3. Statistically Greatswords perform better unless the enemy has an armor save of 3 or less.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zen]

25 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

My only suggestion outright would be to take Greatswords on kurnoth hunters if they are in units of 3. Statistically Greatswords perform better unless the enemy has an armor save of 3 or less.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is true if we look at the stats in a vacuum. However, two additional things should be taken into account:

• Lots of units ignore -1 rend - making the -2 rend on the Scythes better
• When using their defensive thicket (re-roll save), the Kurnoth Hunters only get to pile in 1" - potentially making the additional range of the scythes better.

 

Re: the first list: I'm not really sure it's worth it to run Gnarlroot Wargrove when you don't have access to Deepwood spells. Deploying forests with treeman at 4+ means that in average you will get 2-3 forests in an entire game - which isn't too many.

Second list: Looks like a hard-hitting list of mostly elite units. Should be fun to play but will suffer against mortal wounds, of course.

[Nico]

Rend, rend, rend, rend!

[Mirage8112]

Not really. 

11 hours ago, Zen said:

This is true if we look at the stats in a vacuum. However, two additional things should be taken into account:

• Lots of units ignore -1 rend - making the -2 rend on the Scythes better
• When using their defensive thicket (re-roll save), the Kurnoth Hunters only get to pile in 1" - potentially making the additional range of the scythes better.

Not "lots of units"; a handful (at best). The majority of units in AoS do not ignore rend of less than -2. Furthermore, even if the model ignores rend of less than -2, it needs to have an armor save of better than 5+ to make scythes better than greatswords. For example, ripperdactyl riders ignore rend of less than -2, but because their armor save is 5+, great swords and scythes do almost the exact same amount of damage. 

For the majority of cases, greatswords are the better choice if your running hunters in groups of 3, unless the unit is intended to hunt high armor targets exclusively. 

Furthermore, the defensive thicket can't be used if your intending to charge, since its activated at the start of the charge phase, and if activated the model can no longer move. A group of 3 hunters with greatswords puts out nearly as much damage as having an extra model in the unit. Because of that they are more likely to plow through the enemy in a single turn. And if not, they can still root next turn. The enemy will have to pile in to get to them so range is not an issue. 

In groups of 6 however, great swords have a tough time bringing all their models within 1" range. This is why scythes outperform greatswords in groups of 6. 

I've math-hammered the numbers 3 different ways. The outcome is very clear;

Great swords are the best choice in groups of 3.

Scythes in groups of 6. 

Bows in either.  

[Zen]

12 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

Not really. 

Not "lots of units"; a handful (at best). The majority of units in AoS do not ignore rend of less than -2. Furthermore, even if the model ignores rend of less than -2, it needs to have an armor save of better than 5+ to make scythes better than greatswords. For example, ripperdactyl riders ignore rend of less than -2, but because their armor save is 5+, great swords and scythes do almost the exact same amount of damage. 

For the majority of cases, greatswords are the better choice if your running hunters in groups of 3, unless the unit is intended to hunt high armor targets exclusively. 

By all means both weapon options have their merits - but I'm still not entirely sure I'd always run 3 with Swords exclusively and never Scythes. 

Also, not sure I agree that "a handful (at best)" is entirely accurate. Off the top of my head any Sylvaneth commander can (command trait) and nearly all Seraphon units (Saurus guard, Saurus Knights, Ripperdactly Riders, Saurus warriors, even skinks) -1 rend. Having faced a fair few Seraphon players, the -2 rend from the scythes were invaluable even in a group of 3. At 5+ save the difference is negligible (2,7 wounds per hunter for scythes vs 2,4 for swords), but in terrain or with mystic shields etc - the difference becomes noticeable.

Then again, my local scene might contain more Seraphon players than normal.

Having said that I do run 3 swords Hunters myself - I'm just not entirely convinced that scythes always can be blanket disregarded unless run in groups of 6+. But yeah, in most/many cases great swords are better in a group of 3 hunters. If someone were to buy just a single box of hunters, the safer option would be swords (or bows?)

 

12 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

Bows in either.  

Unless you're trying to finish  deployment before your opponent, is there any reason not to run 6 hunters with bows in 2 groups of 3 rather than one group of 6 that I'm missing?

• Pros of running 3 x 2: 
  • One additional Huntsmaster
  • Slightly less susceptible to being affected by battleshock
  • More maneuvrable - can split the unit - can come into play re: Envoys of the Everqueen or teleportation etc.
  • Unit has less footprint, easier to fit an entire unit in terrain for +1 save
  • Can fire 3 at one unit first, then decide whether to fire the remaining 3 at another target or the same
  • If using Alarielle, both units will be healed - healing 2 Hunters at the same time.
• Cons of running 3 x 2:
  • 2 deployments instead of 1.
  • Harder to buff (mystic shield only 1 group etc).

I guess in the end the difference isn't too noticeable, but I know I'd prefer 2 groups of 3.

[Nico]

I thought the key reason for taking the scythes was if your opponent is going to charge you (particularly with a single model, which can hit you on the end of a line of models). If you take the rerollable save, then the 2 inch range on scythes would help in getting an extra model or two into combat over the swords.

[Mirage8112]

10 hours ago, Zen said:

By all means both weapon options have their merits - but I'm still not entirely sure I'd always run 3 with Swords exclusively and never Scythes. 

Also, not sure I agree that "a handful (at best)" is entirely accurate. Off the top of my head any Sylvaneth commander can (command trait) and nearly all Seraphon units (Saurus guard, Saurus Knights, Ripperdactly Riders, Saurus warriors, even skinks) -1 rend. Having faced a fair few Seraphon players, the -2 rend from the scythes were invaluable even in a group of 3. At 5+ save the difference is negligible (2,7 wounds per hunter for scythes vs 2,4 for swords), but in terrain or with mystic shields etc - the difference becomes noticeable.

Then again, my local scene might contain more Seraphon players than normal.

Having said that I do run 3 swords Hunters myself - I'm just not entirely convinced that scythes always can be blanket disregarded unless run in groups of 6+. But yeah, in most/many cases great swords are better in a group of 3 hunters. If someone were to buy just a single box of hunters, the safer option would be swords (or bows?)

Well, I wouldn't say 3 hunters with scythes "never" have a place on the tabletop. 
As I said above, they can be used ing groups of 3 to hunt high armor save targets. But then it really becomes a question of what role do you see your units playing, and what equipment best suits those units for their designated roles. 

This is actually a pretty relevant topic, since the OP is interested in a combined SE and Sylvaneth list. Take the troops choice in the first list for example:

Liberators x 5 

Liberators x 5 

Concussors x 2 

Dryads x 20

Tree-Revenants x 5 

Kurnoth Hunters x 3 Scythe

Kurnoth Hunters x 3 - Bows

By the look of things, The dryads will be best used sitting in a forest surrounding the ancient. This makes them a terrific bodyguard unit/tarpit. Doubly so because it's a "household" unit, and anything short of a frostlord will be stuck in that forest all game since it's won't be able to retreat when it realizes it can't break through the dryads and get to the ancient (with the ancient healing them and activating the forest's attacks)

The two units of liberators don't need the forest to hold the line. Between them and the Relictor for healing, they are your "outside of the forest anvil unit" with the concussors acting as hammers. Two units is plenty of area denial ensuring that you should be able to trap a target or two long enough for the concussors to swing in and pulverize whatever is pinned down. 

Revenants are awesome chaff and redirectors, with Hunters with bows for support. 

So, we have tar-pit, chaff, hammer and anvil, redirectors, and magic all covered. You have mortal wounds to deal with highly armored elite troops (through magic from the ancient/branchwytch combo, and mortal wounds from the relictor and concussors.) 

So what does that leave? Your "fighting center" (concussors, relictor and liberators) doesn't have to worry too much about being charged, as they have enough staying/killing power to handle most of whatever is thrown at them, and you'll be playing aggressively with them anyway. Your soft "support center" is adequately bunkered, hopefully near the middle of the board, enough to threaten anything too close, but not an easy target by any means. And if there's anything around thats particularly nasty on the charge, you can chaff it with the revenants (and with the waypipes they can nearly cover the whole board.)

3 Hunter with scythes will give you a moderately mobile, high-armor killing unit. Here you have a little redundancy with the concussors. Not necessarily a bad thing. However you don't really have an anvil to go along with it, unless you're palling about with the fighting center. That might create problems with board control and objective grabbing. It also makes them vulnerable to tar-pits, where their high rend attacks are wasted on lower armor-save, high body count units.

3 hunters with great swords will give you a group of moderately mobile, mid-level troop killers. This is one thing that isn't present in the units mentioned above. You don't want your fighting center stuck trying to clear a tarpit/horde/meatsheild off an objective, you want them aggressively taking high-priority targets off the board. Greatswords are ideal for this since they are pretty efficient and reliable with their 4 3+/3+ attacks. Even if the target is in cover they'll still pull a fair amount of models off the table providing the target's armor save isn't better than 3+ (and if it is, it's probably a target for your fighting center with their ability to put out mortal wounds.) 

11 hours ago, Nico said:

I thought the key reason for taking the scythes was if your opponent is going to charge you (particularly with a single model, which can hit you on the end of a line of models). If you take the rerollable save, then the 2 inch range on scythes would help in getting an extra model or two into combat over the swords.

It's unlikely you'll get charged in such a way that the 1" available won't be enough to get you into range if your charged from the front. Charged from side where your models are in a conga line would be a big mistake on your part if anything, you should be running 3 models in a triangle formation to prevent that sort of thing. In a group of 6 it becomes much more tricky to get everybody in, especially if you have to root. That's why scythes are almost mandatory in groups of 6. 

11 hours ago, Zen said:

Unless you're trying to finish  deployment before your opponent, is there any reason not to run 6 hunters with bows in 2 groups of 3 rather than one group of 6 that I'm missing?

• Pros of running 3 x 2: 
  • One additional Huntsmaster
  • Slightly less susceptible to being affected by battleshock
  • More maneuvrable - can split the unit - can come into play re: Envoys of the Everqueen or teleportation etc.
  • Unit has less footprint, easier to fit an entire unit in terrain for +1 save
  • Can fire 3 at one unit first, then decide whether to fire the remaining 3 at another target or the same
  • If using Alarielle, both units will be healed - healing 2 Hunters at the same time.
• Cons of running 3 x 2:
  • 2 deployments instead of 1.
  • Harder to buff (mystic shield only 1 group etc).

I guess in the end the difference isn't too noticeable, but I know I'd prefer 2 groups of 3.

That's a good question and good points. The healing with Alarielle is a big bonus to running 2 groups of 3, and I would lean toward that if she were on the table. Deployment is either or, since even 2 x 3 can still all be part of a battalion (particular the wargroves which allow "any number" of sylvaneth units).  

Really, the only advantage i can see to running 6 is maybe if you had a gryph hound hanging around and wanted to be sure all 6 could fire if your were ambushed. That would be a major deterrent to attempting a sneak attack from the rear (I'm looking at your Shadowstrike Starhost.)

 

[Forgebellows]

I'd take at least 6 hunters with bows, if not 9.