Pitched Battle: Escalation vs Skyborn Slayers and Celestant Prime

[Forgebellows]

I was just in a tournament with my stormcast using skyborn slayers for the first time and played escalation in my second game. Nobody was real sure how to deploy my formation and prime so we kinda combined both rules. I divided my army into thirds and deployed as per escalation, however I deployed all skyborn slayer units within 12 inches of the spot I chose on the turn they came on the board. The slayers did not get to come on all together. The prime came on turn three wherever he wanted and had his six attacks.

Anyone with a proper ruling on this? How should this be played with this formation and the prime?

[BaldoBeardo]

You'd have to make it clear the prime was one of your turn 1 'set-ups' - he only gets bonus attacks for each battleround he's set-up but not on the board.

As he is already "set-up" you don't have to bring him down in any particular battleround, so he could come down in the 2nd, 4th, whenever.

The formation I think you played fine, depending on whether you want RAW or RAI.

I think you played RAI, but RAW you could actually pick a different spot each time you used the deep strike - and you could choose to do it in any turn.

So you could use it every turn as you did, or wait until turn 3 and do all units then, as you're setting up units every turn - just nothing the board.

Reasoning; escalation spreads your set-up over 3 turns.

Skyborne Slayers / Celestant Prime have special deployment rules that replace setting up on the battlefield with setting up elsewhere. They are still waiting on "permission" to be set up by the turn count in escalation.

The deep strike simply states in any of your movement phases you can deploy *all* units *currently* set-up elsewhere.

Nothing says this is a once-and-done.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Nico]

Quote

I dont think you see many where you dont always hit on a 6 for example even if it is not in the rules.

Ironically - this normally isn't in the house rules. It's not in SCGT for example. Then again it's pretty superfluous - so rarely do you get -2 to hit on a 5+ to hit model in AoS (Mourngul vs Goblin archers). 

[Andreas]

13 minutes ago, Forgebellows said:

I've listened to all the facehammer episodes since AoS release and I'm not sure if they mentioned it either.

Episode 27, 86 minuter in. But it is one TOs opinion so my vary.

[Forgebellows]

5 minutes ago, Andreas said:

Ok then I am not so sure. Depends on the TO. I think they talked about this on the facehammer podcast and Russ (correct if you see this and i have misunderstod) who is one TO in the uk scene seemed to think that you should not be able to drip feed teleporting units via skyborne slayers. 

I've listened to all the facehammer episodes since AoS release and I'm not sure if they mentioned it either. As stated earlier in this post, the GW FB community guys seem to agree with the formation deployment working as intended within the constraints of the battleplan.

[Andreas]

15 minutes ago, Forgebellows said:

Yeah sure, but my question was based on a tournament setting so I thought it went without saying that this instance is a pitched battle and using the GH. Sorry if I was unclear. Thanks for all the responses.

Ok then I am not so sure. Depends on the TO. I think they talked about this on the facehammer podcast and Russ (correct if you see this and i have misunderstod) who is one TO in the uk scene seemed to think that you should not be able to drip feed teleporting units via skyborne slayers.

Or use it at all I think he said. My points is that may vary.

[Forgebellows]

2 minutes ago, Andreas said:

Well there is always a need for consensus before playing a game. Should we use the Generals Handbook, if so should we play points, if so how many, what battle plan should we play maybe escalation, if so should we be able to deepstrike etc.. But this is good we are not skaven slaves. ? Even tournamens are driven by community consensus, I dont think you see many where you dont always hit on a 6 for example even if it is not in the rules.

Yeah sure, but my question was based on a tournament setting so I thought it went without saying that this instance is a pitched battle and using the GH. Sorry if I was unclear. Thanks for all the responses.

[Andreas]

2 hours ago, Forgebellows said:

Unfortunately, I think there is no need for a consensus. Taking another look at the rules for the battleplan and formation while keeping the above answer to my questions in mind, the rules seem pretty straight forward as written.

Well there is always a need for consensus before playing a game. Should we use the Generals Handbook, if so should we play points, if so how many, what battle plan should we play maybe escalation, if so should we be able to deepstrike etc.. But this is good we are not skaven slaves. ? Even tournamens are driven by community consensus, I dont think you see many where you dont always hit on a 6 for example even if it is not in the rules.

[BaldoBeardo]

I don't follow. The special rule is to the effect of "instead of deploying them normally" so it seems to sidestep the battleplan's rules. This is a bad outcome balance-wise.

Almost - the wording on the battalion is "instead of setting up a unit...on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and say it is set-up in the celestial realm."

Escalation says you only get to set-up X units per turn, meaning you can only add X units to your 'deep strike' force every turn.

So each turn, the Stormcast player has the option of deep-striking with the X units he already has, or waiting to add Y units this turn and doing an X+Y strike next turn.

It will still take the SC player 3 turns to get access to their full force.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Nico]

I don't follow. The special rule is to the effect of "instead of deploying them normally" so it seems to sidestep the battleplan's rules. This is a bad outcome balance-wise.

[Forgebellows]

3 hours ago, Andreas said:

It is not just regarding this formation but in general. I think we would be better off just using the battleplan deployment rule for this battleplan. I hope that will be the community concensus.

And I run two armies, an ambushing brayherd and a tunneling fyreslayers force. ?

Unfortunately, I think there is no need for a consensus. Taking another look at the rules for the battleplan and formation while keeping the above answer to my questions in mind, the rules seem pretty straight forward as written.

[Andreas]

5 minutes ago, Forgebellows said:

The formation actually has 4 battleline units in it, so it's not exactly circumventing their use. It merely allows the formation to deep strike the way they were intended.

It is not just regarding this formation but in general. I think we would be better off just using the battleplan deployment rule for this battleplan. I hope that will be the community concensus.

And I run two armies, an ambushing brayherd and a tunneling fyreslayers force. ?

[Forgebellows]

7 hours ago, Andreas said:

The different battleplans are there (other than to create variety) to promote different aspects of a balanced list. This one is there (i think) to encurage people to use battleline units that can actualy do something, not min units of the cheapest warscroll.

In the spirit of this I hope we as a community promote this by not letting people circumvent this, (at the cost of making some formations usless). This battleplan should be hard for the 15 retributor lists but good for the good sized liberator/judicator units lists. This I think create balance and more balanced lists.

Just my thoughts, ie let the battleplan deployment rules take precedence in this battleplan.

The formation actually has 4 battleline units in it, so it's not exactly circumventing their use. It merely allows the formation to deep strike the way they were intended.

[Forgebellows]

10 hours ago, BaldoBeardo said:

 

 

You'd have to make it clear the prime was one of your turn 1 'set-ups' - he only gets bonus attacks for each battleround he's set-up but not on the board.

 

As he is already "set-up" you don't have to bring him down in any particular battleround, so he could come down in the 2nd, 4th, whenever.

 

 

The formation I think you played fine, depending on whether you want RAW or RAI.

 

 

I think you played RAI, but RAW you could actually pick a different spot each time you used the deep strike - and you could choose to do it in any turn.

 

So you could use it every turn as you did, or wait until turn 3 and do all units then, as you're setting up units every turn - just nothing the board.

Reasoning; escalation spreads your set-up over 3 turns.

Skyborne Slayers / Celestant Prime have special deployment rules that replace setting up on the battlefield with setting up elsewhere. They are still waiting on "permission" to be set up by the turn count in escalation.

The deep strike simply states in any of your movement phases you can deploy *all* units *currently* set-up elsewhere.

Nothing says this is a once-and-done.

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Great answer man. I really appreciate you taking the time to clear this up for me. Now it all makes sense and the way you explained it is logical. Thanks a lot.

[Nico]

Yes - that's probably why they've ruled it that way.

[Nico]

Good idea.

[Andreas]

The different battleplans are there (other than to create variety) to promote different aspects of a balanced list. This one is there (i think) to encurage people to use battleline units that can actualy do something, not min units of the cheapest warscroll.

In the spirit of this I hope we as a community promote this by not letting people circumvent this, (at the cost of making some formations usless). This battleplan should be hard for the 15 retributor lists but good for the good sized liberator/judicator units lists. This I think create balance and more balanced lists.

Just my thoughts, ie let the battleplan deployment rules take precedence in this battleplan.

[Nico]

Yes - that's probably why they've ruled it that way.

[BaldoBeardo]

It also doesn't make sense - escalation says when you can set up a unit, and most (not all) special deployment rules state something along the lines of "Instead of setting up this unit on the battlefield, you can..", so there's no conflict.

Ah well.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Nico]

GW FB said that all units with special deployment rules could be kept off the table and outside the calculation of the waves; and then deployed as per the special rules. This is controversial as it makes these special rules really good - particularly Skyborne Slayers and Sylvaneth. On the other hand, if you're not playing with a sideboard, then it's going to be autoloss for some lists if you cannot use these formations effectively - 15 movement 4 Paladins getting dropped on turn two without deep striking.

I think the hybrid approach was a good try, but it's too messy/ad hoc to be a permanent answer.