General Lumineth Realm Lords Rules Discussion

[Icarion]

I just had my teeth kicked in with Lumineth using 3rd edition points and rules against a Hedonites army using slaangor, and Fiends.

But sure, lumineth are cheese.

I disagreed when people were making these arguments against lumineth back in 2nd with no supporting data, and I disagree even more strongly now as we transition into third, where there is pretty much zero play experience from anyone. 

"Sentinels are soooo scary, because of feelings, not because they average 3 mortal wounds a turn if buffed up for 150 points, SOOO Broken"

Maybe Lumineth will end up a true nightmare powerouse in 3rd edition. I could be totally wrong, but unlike many fear mongers on this board, I'm going to wait until there is actual data to back up that assertion.

Until that time, anything else is just anecdotal noise. 

 

Edited June 20, 2021 by Athrawes

[stratigo]

3 hours ago, Athrawes said:

I just had my teeth kicked in with Lumineth using 3rd edition points and rules against a Hedonites army using slaangor, and Fiends.

But sure, lumineth are cheese.

I disagreed when people were making these arguments against lumineth back in 2nd with no supporting data, and I disagree even more strongly now as we transition into third, where there is pretty much zero play experience from anyone. 

"Sentinels are soooo scary, because of feelings, not because they average 3 mortal wounds a turn if buffed up for 150 points, SOOO Broken"

Maybe Lumineth will end up a true nightmare powerouse in 3rd edition. I could be totally wrong, but unlike many fear mongers on this board, I'm going to wait until there is actual data to back up that assertion.

Until that time, anything else is just anecdotal noise. 

 

I mean, being really bad at the game can only be compensated for so much.

[Icarion]

35 minutes ago, stratigo said:

I mean, being really bad at the game can only be compensated for so much.

No data, so personal attacks? 

Cool.

When you use anecdotal information to back up your unsupported claims, it must be taken as gospel. But when I use anecdotal experience to contest your claim, you imply its invalid and choose instead to mock me to discredit it.

I don't play competitively, but I like to win as much as the next guy. However as soon as someone like you stars blathering on about broken this, or cheese that, I can no longer win at this game. If I win game, playing an army that you claim is broken, then I dint win, the autopilot-powerhouse-army won for me.

And If I happen to lose with that army, I REALLY lose, cause' I lost with an army that was supposed to be unbeatable.

You're ruining the game.

Please.

Stop.

Edited June 20, 2021 by Athrawes

[stratigo]

32 minutes ago, Athrawes said:

No data, so personal attacks? 

Cool.

When you use anecdotal information to back up your unsupported claims, it must be taken as gospel. But when I use anecdotal experience to contest your claim, you imply its invalid and choose instead to mock me to discredit it.

I don't play competitively, but I like to win as much as the next guy. However as soon as someone like you stars blathering on about broken this, or cheese that, I can no longer win at this game. If I win game, playing an army that you claim is broken, then I dint win, the autopilot-powerhouse-army won for me.

And If I happen to lose with that army, I REALLY lose, cause' I lost with an army that was supposed to be unbeatable.

You're ruining the game.

Please.

Stop.

I mean when your response to people saying lumineth (or, properly, sentinels) are overpowered is. "Well I played one of the worst armies in the game and lost! So checkmate!" in a very aggressive manner, I mean, no one is going to take you seriously. Anyone can lose a game. Bragging about it seems a little... uh... counterproductive 

 

Also, I am more then happy to throw down with a competitive or a casual list, long as I know the type of game someone is going for. If you break out a mean lumineth list, I don't mind playing with a mean KO list. If you play a softer list taking advantage of lumineth's range and not just hammering its most powerful combos, I don't mind easing off the throttle of my own list building. The only time I'll roll my eyes is if someone is playing a narrative event or saying they're looking for casual games and then throws down a netlist from the most recent tournament. Which is, sadly, not super uncommon. 

[Xil]

There are some lists that are near broken, like Teclis build and the new Roos shenanigans. This might change with v3 or not.

What doesn't change is the huge NPE tacked on LRL. It is never fun to play vs. an army that has every tool there possibly is to mess with someone. Lumineth are no fun to play against for me and anyone else in my rather big gaming group. OP or not, Win or Loss, NPE stays.

[Benkei]

3 hours ago, Athrawes said:

No data, so personal attacks? 

Cool.

When you use anecdotal information to back up your unsupported claims, it must be taken as gospel. But when I use anecdotal experience to contest your claim, you imply its invalid and choose instead to mock me to discredit it.

I don't play competitively, but I like to win as much as the next guy. However as soon as someone like you stars blathering on about broken this, or cheese that, I can no longer win at this game. If I win game, playing an army that you claim is broken, then I dint win, the autopilot-powerhouse-army won for me.

And If I happen to lose with that army, I REALLY lose, cause' I lost with an army that was supposed to be unbeatable.

You're ruining the game.

Please.

Stop.

Where is YOUR data? I mean, he has data about you probably being bad (or not necessarily bad, just the other guy was better or there was some extreme bad/good luck involved) when you say you got destroyed against Slaangors

Edited June 21, 2021 by Benkei

[Icarion]

43 minutes ago, Benkei said:

Where is YOUR data? I mean, he has data about you probably being bad (or not necessarily bad, just the other guy was better or there was some extreme bad/good luck involved) when you say you got destroyed against Slaangors

Here you go.

Others have posted similar date collected by lovely people like AOS Shorts. This is just January to June of this year, but if you look at his full spreadsheet of tournament results, it looks pretty similar. Only 2 lumineth lists placing first, and a handful of top 5 finishes over the course of a year.

Hardly looks like an army breaking the meta.

But go on @Benkei insult me more, and discredit my anecdotal experience that lumineth are not all powerful, by putting it down to me being bad.

That's why I *GASP* called it anecdotal, and not hard data, which is however plentiful if you bother to look for it (see attached image).

All you people seem to have is anecdotal evidence that lumineth are game breaking, despite others in this thread providing hard data from tournaments to the contrary, you ignore it and continue on or change your focus to "well they are still NPE."

Finally when someone you disagree with provides their own anecdotal experiences to counter your claims, you mock and belittle them, and shout for them to provide data.

Honestly a moderator needs to lock this down, or at least retitle it the "Lumineth Bashing Thread"

 

Edited June 21, 2021 by Athrawes

[Saturmorn Carvilli]

44 minutes ago, Athrawes said:

Honestly a moderator needs to lock this down, or at least retitle it the "Lumineth Bashing Thread"

Well, I created the thread to pull off-topic posts from the very, very bloated Rumor Thread.  At the same time, I did want to hear about other people's thoughts on the matter, good or ill, experienced or feelings.  Basically the same kind of stuff in the posts that rejuvenated the thread and I responded to.

Which through some least recent posts I discovered a few things.  Firstly, that Sentinels aren't overpowered... at least not on their own they're not.  I broke down exactly what Sentinels did on paper and added what they did in the few games I played. That immediately was moved to Sentinels+Teclis+Umbral Spellport.  Which was a long ways from the meager 20 aelf archers I use in my Ymetrica Alarith army.

Which after looking at the combination, yeah; it could be overbearing in a casual (the level I tend to play) not particularly serious competitive scene.  I would offer that is true for a number of factions in any Games Workshop past, present and likely future. If a group wants to play 'casual' with GW games that's always going to be a thing.  It's up to the players that fortune currently favors to tone their lists down so the factions on the bottom of the current power cycle have room to not build the most optimized possible army they can to keep up.  This really shouldn't be that new of information for anyone in the GW walled garden after about half-a-year.

If we are talking competitive, optimize your army list as much as possible. As mentioned, demonstrated and from what I have glanced at Lumineth haven't been taking that scene by storm like Iron Hands space marines did late 2019 or even Dark Eldar have been prior to the most currently rules change (which is too new to know the effect yet).

It really seems to me those calling Lumineth (especially Sentinels) overpowered haven't really had tournament data to support to any great extent (at least I haven't seen it).  Forgive me if I am wrong here, but I feel that some are trying for Sentinels (or whatever Lumineth combo) are OP for casual or new player games.  Don't get me wrong, I am aware there are gradations between LVO and not keeping score beer & pretzels. However, doesn't it feel like stuffing 10lbs of stuff into a 5lb bag sometimes?

What I mean by that is, would be Lumineth players aren't exactly going to stumble upon the more powerful combinations right away.  And when players do, those elements that make those Lumineth lists are pretty easy to spot. If we all (mostly all) agree that GW does a poor job at balancing their games.  Why would it be a faux pas to inform your opponent that using that, let's say netlist for lack of a better term, doesn't look like it is going to be a lot of fun.  Or even better after experiencing it, even for just a couple turns in a test game, asking one's opponent maybe not cast Power of Hysh AND Lambent Light on your big group of Sentinels since that's a little more optimized than the other army was built/faction can currently handle.   I mean if players are playing in a truly casual environment that should be a possibility  ( I do understand the inherent difficulty of asking your opponent to tone down their list too).  Certainly better than complaining online when (as I understand it) hasn't shown the faction to be competitively overbearing yet.  Isn't playing highly optimized, competitive games sort of negative play experiences by their very nature with GW games?

Again gradations, GW should balance their games better and a bunch of woulda, shoulda, couldas.  I do understand.  I got ripped apart yet again in 40k this weekend in a Black Legion (me) vs. Thousand Sons game.  I think I caused 1-2 damage all game long with any weapon with Damage 1 and was torn apart my MW (1 wound space marines aren't fun then).  Despite my inability to figure a counter to Thousand Sons, they aren't OP.  I am pretty sure they are in the same power band as generic Chaos Space Marines.  I just really struggle facing them. I always do against high spell casting anything.

I also want to mention, I am really trying here to understand the problem/perception with Lumineth.  Before lock-downs and 40k 9th ed, I was playing a Primaris space marine army.  I definitely could see where it was OP with the second 8th ed codex.  I didn't (and still don't) use chapter supplement stuff and made sure my army lists were  at least 10-15% under the agreed point to try and have fairer games.  However, I had also been playing a pure Primaris army when Primaris weren't very good, and they didn't really have the data sheets (Shadowspear stuff and earlier) to support a decent army list yet.  Which meant I had to be excellent at what did have (it helped Primaris are easy to play).  So when I did have a good army, I had seriously tone it down as I really understood how to play my army before the 'broken' codex.

Even now, there are internet parrots claiming all space marines are broken OP (and were through all of 8th ed), when really only Blood Angels and Dark Angels are mostly currently holding onto top tier status as I remember the tournament data correctly.  I don't want to go through a couple of years people thinking my Lumineth army is broken OP (like I did with my marines) because they read online in a bunch of places they were even when either time and/or substantial competitive game data says otherwise.  And the general fan hate sets in on the faction as a whole.

I have found this thread illuminating (pun intended).  I don't always agree with 'Con' side of where Lumineth stand in power, but I can say I do better understand why it is being said better than I did.  By that same coin, I don't expect any to be converted by on the 'Pro' side.  Though, I hope the details of that perspective is at least considered.

[RuneBrush]

+++ MOD HAT +++

Not impressed with the tone in this topic .  Please don't be rude to each other - most of you have been here long enough to know that now.

[Sonnenspeer]

1 hour ago, Saturmorn Carvilli said:

Well, I created the thread to pull off-topic posts from the very, very bloated Rumor Thread.  At the same time, I did want to hear about other people's thoughts...

Thank you for this post! I think it pretty accurate describes the Lumineth situation.

For me who invests a lot of money and time to create a nice Army, it is really hard to cope with all the hating.

[Mcthew]

I think this was the right thread to have as mostly its been constructive.

Unfortunately you will always get players complaining if one faction is stronger than the other, even if only slightly, and not be able to bring a credible argument to say why.

You'll also get very defensive players who have invested hundreds of pounds in LRL who don't want any of their fun nerfed, and if LRL are under a negative spotlight their fear is it will (because GW does listen). They also won't be able to construct a credible argument against because they ignore the bits that are broken.

But what the thread does raise are good points about rules and presentation, and that attracts LRL players and other players to have a healthy debate on why LRL have attracted negativity and why some it is justified, and why some of it is not.

My take is that LRL are not a broken faction, but some rules and models are.

Sentinels for me were always a problem if they can dish out MWs to units they can't even see. Having cruise missiles on the table is not great for the game, in my opinion. Not even god-wizards can hit someone hidden behind a mountain, so why can elf archers? And they can still be viable battleline so reinforced easily, so sentinel blobs are viable in AoS 3.0 (even if it isn't a great tactic).

Teclis was another model with so many auto/semi auto capabilities that most bat reps showed him OP in AoS 2.0. In 3.0 he now avoids miscasts, can regen in heroic actions phase, and has monster abilities. His points increase is measly for all of that compared to say a KoS.

But... LRL do have some of the coolest minis in AoS in their 2nd wave, I still love the shining company mechanic (best new idea in the game IMO), and the first battletome was a lovely thing. Not so bothered about the recent lore though (flying mountains in Teclis was so baaaad). But overall, not broken. Just needs a few tweaks to make them a better faction.

Other factions need similar changes. I'm a KO player and I think we need a melee-only battleline. I also think FlyHigh needs changing.

But then I fall into the camp of being an open minded player and open to changes that make the game better, than taking unfair advantage of GW's occasional poor rules writing.

Not everyone will, alas. But this is a good thread all the same👍

Edited June 21, 2021 by Mcthew

[LuminethMage]

5 hours ago, Benkei said:

Where is YOUR data? I mean, he has data about you probably being bad (or not necessarily bad, just the other guy was better or there was some extreme bad/good luck involved) when you say you got destroyed against Slaangors

Just to add to Athrawes data, here are win-rates taken from tournaments: 

https://aoslistbot.herokuapp.com/sotm/

There are other similar ones (THW does them, as does DKHM), which all show largely the same. LRL have been one of the more balanced armies which ever since they have come out had a win-rate of ca. 50%. This kind of data is never 100% correct, but however you look at it - it's difficult to say LRL are OP.

And I understand the argument that tournaments and normal games aren't the same, but we do not have any good data about the latter - so it's all in the "I feel" area. For example if you look at battle reports of normal games at home and clubs on Facebook or Discord LRL channels - by no means is everyone winning all the time. Nor are we all playing with Teclis and/or 60+ Sentinels. But - that's just my impression from the channels I'm in. If you are in a different Facebook group, you might have different impression. 

I also understand that for some armies LRL are difficult. For example we had CoS players posting here. I also play against CoS (Dark Elf heavy lists) and that is an uphill battle for them against LRL. But this doesn't mean LRL are OP. If you look at the data above - it's more about CoS being not very competitive right now (and they were also considered OP when they came out by many). If you've played with your friends which have Nighthaunt, Stormcast and Skaven armies - and a friend jumps into LRL, then LRL might look OP to all of you. But it'd look quite different to a group where people are into DoK, KO and Seraphon. 

----

This is more in general

I know there is a lot of talk about Sentinels (and maybe they get a FAQ that they can't ignore line-of-sight anymore, I personally wouldn't care). But, I think people often overstate their value. Their threat range is really the only good thing about them, and they now cost 1/3rd more than Handgunners for example. They are good, but they aren't a unit which auto-wins you games. It's mainly the combo with Teclis, Spell Portal and Lambent Light, which together now is 740 + 70 + 300 points. Over half you army (because you need at least 20 Sentinels - otherwise that combo still does just around 6, 7 MW per turn). There are a lot of things in the game for over 1,000 points that can do similar things. That's more than 2 Ironclads, more than 2 Frostlords on Stonehorns etc (which both can attack you T1 in most cases) and so on. Of course Teclis does more than just provide Lambent Light, so it's not a 100% accurate comparison, but it's still a big investment - which then makes up a big part of your total damage output. 

But I can understand that people don't like getting shot off the table. I just don't think it's specific to LRL, and you could complain about so many units in the game if that's the problem. 

I think the question above - why should Sentinels be able to do this is valid - but my answer would be - because it's cool. Because we want people do all kind of cool stuff. Why should Nighthaunt have charge that causes MW? How can ghosts impact anything? Why should eels be able to attack first in 3rd BR? Because it makes them special and hopefully fun to play. I prefer a Sentinel-like unit over a Slaangor-like unit every time. And I'd be also in favor or changing Sentinels if indeed Lumineth would be OP because of them, and hope they find something else that's pretty cool. 

Sometimes these abilities are OP, and then are dialed back, sometimes they are dialed back too much, sometimes nothing happens. I don't really think people who do not play LRL should have a say about Teclis auto-cast ability. It's something which makes him stand out, and fun to play. It's great if god characters have abilities only they have. Of course they have to look into it in case a unit makes the faction OP - that's why we should look at the numbers. It shouldn't be changed just because some people think it's not fun. Of course it's better if they find cool abilities which aren't OP and most people on the other side also find ok/fun. But it's not always necessary to make everyone happy. All armies should have abilities which makes them feel strong/unique at some point, even if they aren't always great to play against. 

All this teeth gnashing about LRL is pretty specific to this forum - many other places have moved on. Not that it's totally absent, but it's just not that big of an issue anymore. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2021 by LuminethMage

[whispersofblood]

This isn't new, some sets of people just don't like the idea of a faction like LRL or HE existing. It grates on their nerves makes them uncomfortable. HE were terrible in 6th and like 4/5 years of 7th edition and people still hated them for some vague idea of being overpowered in 5th edition. It is literally the perfect example of bias and prejudice, when confronted with a reasonable example of said subject, you immediately perceive it as the most offensive and threatening form of that thing.

People have really no clue as to what sorts of horror lists are coming for them in early 3.0 if they think Teclis+Spell Portal and 60 sentinels is actually all that scary. It is interesting that some of the loudest voices on the forum is response to 3.0 and the points or "balance" are absent or not producing any substance when I read through or post in the factions they say they are repping.🤫 

There is some horrifying army lists about to be released into the meta, you lot best get your pampers ready.

[Mcthew]

7 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

This isn't new, some sets of people just don't like the idea of a faction like LRL or HE existing. It grates on their nerves makes them uncomfortable. HE were terrible in 6th and like 4/5 years of 7th edition and people still hated them for some vague idea of being overpowered in 5th edition. It is literally the perfect example of bias and prejudice, when confronted with a reasonable example of said subject, you immediately perceive it as the most offensive and threatening form of that thing.

People have really no clue as to what sorts of horror lists are coming for them in early 3.0 if they think Teclis+Spell Portal and 60 sentinels is actually all that scary. It is interesting that some of the loudest voices on the forum is response to 3.0 and the points or "balance" are absent or not producing any substance when I read through or post in the factions they say they are repping.🤫 

There is some horrifying army lists about to be released into the meta, you lot best get your pampers ready.

I can't think of any earth shattering combos (although I can think of handgunners needing a rewrite so they can't shoot twice when charged, and SCE Anvils command ability), so please give us some examples of 'horrifying army lists'?

Edited June 21, 2021 by Mcthew

[whispersofblood]

Just now, Mcthew said:

I can't think of any earth shattering combos (although I can think of handgunners needing a rewrite so they can't shoot twice when charged, and SCE Anvils command ability), so please give us some examples?

I don't want to be the one to spoil people's list writing fun, but...

IJ are going to be beastly. The changes to Pile-ins are a MASSIVE boon to the Mawcrusher, and Rogue Idol. IJ's natural counters have been slapped down in many of the specific ways that IJ struggled with them. AND, active scoring heavily plays into the playstyle IJ incentivize.

Watch out for S2D, they are multivariate buff stacker with basically access to all the keywords in the game, AND they can shop around for the best price.

HoS are my sleeper pick, they are not nearly as bad as people think and they are going to slap people who aren't paying attention as they have deep pockets and access to again all the right keywords. They don't have the DPS problem that Khorne has, however, the vast majority of the daemons are trash though 😄

Its interesting that @Athrawes had issues in the LRL - HoS match up because I actually see them very similarly. LRL are priced more attractively as a whole. But, the best versions of both books are very comparable and competitively when we start getting data from events, I wouldn't be surprised to see HoS having a winrate not far off LRL. LRL will probably have better results because more competitively minded players will look at them. HoS is going to suffer from a terrible reputation.

DoT are going to slow burn because most of the people who play them are basically going to have to buy/build/paint a brand new about 50% of their lists in my estimation. But, there is I think 2 very strong potentially overpowered builds that jump out at me.

Fyreslayers... I can't stand that they are still going to be a thing...

 

[Mcthew]

2 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

Fyreslayers... I can't stand that they are still going to be a thing...

Why?

[Mcthew]

3 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

Watch out for S2D, they are multivariate buff stacker with basically access to all the keywords in the game, AND they can shop around for the best price.

How?

[Mcthew]

4 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

HoS are my sleeper pick, they are not nearly as bad as people think and they are going to slap people who aren't paying attention as they have deep pockets and access to again all the right keywords.

I agree that HoS are still strong just not as strong. Still reckon they will do well though despite points increases. Although it's gonna hit some lists hard.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

43 minutes ago, LuminethMage said:

Just to add to Athrawes data, here are win-rates taken from tournaments: 

https://aoslistbot.herokuapp.com/sotm/

Without making any statement on Lumineth being overpowered or not... Actually, no, I will make a short statement: Lumineth are probably no overpowered mechanically, but they break some basic rules of the game in a way that is not very enjoyable to play against. Still, even recognizing this, they receive an amount of negative reactions that I would personally say is unreasonable.

Anyway, back to what I wanted to say: You should probably stop sharing this particular piece of data. It's just too iffy, even at a glance. Between Slaanesh and Khorne holding the top spots, Maggotkin being A-tier without any tournament wins and Grand Host of Nagash being on the list when it does not even exist anymore, this table really invites you to question the validity of the ranking it gives. It just provokes a reaction of "Well, I know Khorne and Slaanesh are in the wrong place, so why should I care where Lumineth are on this list?"

[whispersofblood]

18 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Without making any statement on Lumineth being overpowered or not... Actually, no, I will make a short statement: Lumineth are probably no overpowered mechanically, but they break some basic rules of the game in a way that is not very enjoyable to play against. Still, even recognizing this, they receive an amount of negative reactions that I would personally say is unreasonable.

Anyway, back to what I wanted to say: You should probably stop sharing this particular piece of data. It's just too iffy, even at a glance. Between Slaanesh and Khorne holding the top spots, Maggotkin being A-tier without any tournament wins and Grand Host of Nagash being on the list when it does not even exist anymore, this table really invites you to question the validity of the ranking it gives. It just provokes a reaction of "Well, I know Khorne and Slaanesh are in the wrong place, so why should I care where Lumineth are on this list?"

I think this reasoning fails to distinguish between list strength and book strength. The HoS book is bad, but it has fairly good list strength in actuality, it just isn't the stuff people usually look for, and isn't about just getting your buffed up pieces into their unbuffed soft bits.

Quote

I agree that HoS are still strong just not as strong. Still reckon they will do well though despite points increases. Although it's gonna hit some lists hard.

@Mcthew That's all changes. Lists are the most specific and inflexible expression of a book. That being so any changes in a meta will change a list. If the way you win the game changes that's a pretty massive change.

Edited June 21, 2021 by whispersofblood

[whispersofblood]

38 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

Why?

This really isn't the thread to get into the guts of factions, but the reason 20 HGB were so good is because most units couldn't deal with 10. So while the change makes it "harder" for FS to apply their advantage, it also gives them the room to shore up areas that they are also good at, just not as dominant in. Also 10 HGB are still a dominant unit relative to AoS 3.0 though they wouldn't be necessarily dominate in the duration of AoS 2. They also have A LOT of rules that aren't used and again almost all the keywords a faction might want. 

37 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

How?

Most of the factions buffs are either no roll, or uncontested rolls. So they basically do and have the buffs they want. All their elites are reasonably priced, they have a lot of wounds, and what they lacked in speed the changes to board size means they can get into advantageous positions easier. They will have to deal with getting outmanoeuvred. Finally they are covered in MW saves. 

[NinthMusketeer]

Tournament play is not representative of most players' experience. And remember; balanced armies don't win tournaments. Once in a while there will be some outlier sure, but anything that shows in the top 25% with any regularity will by necessity be something that absolutely crushes people on the casual level.

What needs to be called out when both sides are talking is not LRL as a whole but rather the specific units being used. THAT would be far more luminating.

 

I was going to write something out but the forum auto-filled it with the last post I made and heck, it is just as relevant now. So here we go, again...

[whispersofblood]

20 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Tournament play is not representative of most players' experience. And remember; balanced armies don't win tournaments. Once in a while there will be some outlier sure, but anything that shows in the top 25% with any regularity will by necessity be something that absolutely crushes people on the casual level.

What needs to be called out when both sides are talking is not LRL as a whole but rather the specific units being used. THAT would be far more luminating.

 

I was going to write something out but the forum auto-filled it with the last post I made and heck, it is just as relevant now. So here we go, again...

What do you mean when you say balanced lists?

[NinthMusketeer]

Can you elaborate? I'm not quite sure what you are asking.

[stratigo]

I mean, LRL get the charmed position of having enough mortal wounds to matter in a meta that's going to have plus three to save on bas 3 plus save monsters that can also heal. General Cabbages and archaon are going to be pretty much unkillable without mortal wounds.