3.0 Actual Games Conversation

[Ragest]

52 minutes ago, Liquidsteel said:

On the subject of Lumineth, the triple/quadruple fox with Sevireth, Wind Mage plus 30 sentinels is quickly gaining popularity within my circle and people are furiously building them. If people hated playing regular Lumineth, wait til you start facing off against this, foxes box you in turn 1 so you can't move whilst shooting off your key untits, then move away in your shooting phase so you can't charge. The Sentinels shoot your shooting/ranged (if you have any) and that's the game, unless you can teleport out and/or have reserves/summoning in order to escape.

 

The last sentence is the problem with the list, if you get outshoot (stalkers) attacked with magic (seraphon/tzeentch) or the opponent can go away the cages (kharadron) the list is just useless.

 

 

[Liquidsteel]

4 minutes ago, Ragest said:

The last sentence is the problem with the list, if you get outshoot (stalkers) attacked with magic (seraphon/tzeentch) or the opponent can go away the cages (kharadron) the list is just useless.

 

 

Yes of course, though depending how much shooting you have, the list is 1 drop so unless you go first, your shooting gets shot off turn 1.

I didn't say it's unbeatable, it's just going to be the worst experience you ever had if you don't have the tools OR if you can't go first and lose your tools turn 1.

[stratigo]

5 hours ago, Liquidsteel said:

On the subject of Lumineth, the triple/quadruple fox with Sevireth, Wind Mage plus 30 sentinels is quickly gaining popularity within my circle and people are furiously building them. If people hated playing regular Lumineth, wait til you start facing off against this, foxes box you in turn 1 so you can't move whilst shooting off your key untits, then move away in your shooting phase so you can't charge. The Sentinels shoot your shooting/ranged (if you have any) and that's the game, unless you can teleport out and/or have reserves/summoning in order to escape.

 

Luckily a lot of AoS is dictated by either teleports or mega speed. Like, warclans will literally be right in the foxes' face no matter how much they run 

[Enoby]

55 minutes ago, stratigo said:

Luckily a lot of AoS is dictated by either teleports or mega speed. Like, warclans will literally be right in the foxes' face no matter how much they run 

I might be misremembering, but doesn't the fox get to move after the orks teleport? 

[Marcvs]

Just now, Enoby said:

I might be misremembering, but doesn't the fox get to move after the orks teleport? 

They get to move in your shooting phase so unless you can charge in the hero phase or charge 3d6 it's almost impossible to engage them in combat if they don't want to

[yukishiro1]

Most factions with teleports (not all, obviously) have them tied to a hero that can be insta-gibbed T1 by that list. So that doesn't really help. 

The foxes are just bad design, making something so squishy to ranged attacks but so immune to melee is a bizarre choice in a game that was already dominated by shooting. It's classic LRL, it's not particularly powerful against the strongest factions, but it's NPE to high heaven against the less strong ones. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Ragest]

The problem is not just 1 fox, is easy ignorable because they do 0 damage, the problem is to place 3 in the middle of the map pinning you down.

[yukishiro1]

Yeah, that's true enough. They probably should have limited it to one Fox moving in each shooting phase, not all of them. That would have naturally limited your ability to stack them. 

[yukishiro1]

That very much did read like an actual game post to me - he even referenced how popular it was becoming in his gaming group, then described in detail what happens when you face it. I think you are being overly sensitive here. 

[Kadeton]

I played a game the other day, more of a casual "learn a new army" type game than a serious competitive one. I wanted to get my Cursed City vampires on the table, so it was a real bitzer army (I couldn't even run them as Vrykos since I didn't have enough Battleline unless I chose another faction for a conditional).

That aside, I played against Sons of Behemat (Taker Tribe) and we rolled up Power In Numbers as the battleplan, and boy... I can't really see how the Sons are much short of unbeatable in that mission. Even the mega-gargants count as Battleline (and count as, like, 40 models?) so taking objectives off them is all but impossible, especially since you have to hold them off for two turns to score, and they can kick objectives across the board to continue advancing and killing while still holding them. A mega-gargant with the 5+ ward artefact is just incredibly hard to bring down.

I feel like my Beastclaws could probably have beaten them, but that's mainly because they work in a very similar way and also hit hard enough to kill giants. The Vampires... it feels like they're always really going to struggle in that matchup.

[RuneBrush]

+++ MOD HAT +++

Just tidied a few posts up (sorry if yours was one of them) as things were getting somewhat unpleasant.

Please can we keep this thread on the topic of "Actual Games Played", it's fine to have a bit of discussion but there are plenty of other threads talking about specific mechanics and their impact on the game as an overall entity.  We're focusing about the games you folks have played and how you found the new rules.

Also as a reminder, please do not take it upon yourself to call people out - use the report function.  Equally if you're about to post something that is unpleasant or rude, just don't.

[JackStreicher]

5 hours ago, Kadeton said:

I played a game the other day, more of a casual "learn a new army" type game than a serious competitive one. I wanted to get my Cursed City vampires on the table, so it was a real bitzer army (I couldn't even run them as Vrykos since I didn't have enough Battleline unless I chose another faction for a conditional).

That aside, I played against Sons of Behemat (Taker Tribe) and we rolled up Power In Numbers as the battleplan, and boy... I can't really see how the Sons are much short of unbeatable in that mission. Even the mega-gargants count as Battleline (and count as, like, 40 models?) so taking objectives off them is all but impossible, especially since you have to hold them off for two turns to score, and they can kick objectives across the board to continue advancing and killing while still holding them. A mega-gargant with the 5+ ward artefact is just incredibly hard to bring down.

I feel like my Beastclaws could probably have beaten them, but that's mainly because they work in a very similar way and also hit hard enough to kill giants. The Vampires... it feels like they're always really going to struggle in that matchup.

I can agree as I played against the taker tribe as well. We lack the damage. You either nuke them with buffed up Grave Guards or you try to slow them down with cheap bodies. A vampire on dragon can tank one for 1-3 battle rounds as well.

 

Edit: At the end of turn 5 I was still chewing through the second mega with the rest of my army and I didn’t kill him (1 wound left)

they‘re incredibly though and the fact that they simply hold any objective they‘re close to is problematic imo

Edited July 24, 2021 by JackStreicher

[Ragest]

I'm still having success with sylvaneth (won vs stormcast with gotrek and slaneesh) and dok (won vs LoCA and tankrusha with kragnos).

Still having troubles vs seraphon (kroak now deals way more than half the damage of the army) and i need to try both vs ogors and gargants.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Ragest

[baiardo]

Playing against tzeentch summon guild + archaon + belakor + horror is really unpleasant, no matter what I play, archaon will have unconditional support to kill everyone on the table.

Archaon could be ok in StD but in tzeench is a problem because I simply can’t win a game.

 

Edited July 24, 2021 by baiardo

[yukishiro1]

They shoulda been brave enough to stop letting you take Archaon in other factions except as an ally (that takes up your whole ally allocation but can be taken even though he's more than 400 points); he shouldn't be able to benefit from the allegiance abilities. It makes it too difficult to balance him. 

And yeah, my experiences against pinks have been just downright sill, even sillier than they used to be. They desperately need a fix to the way rally works, it's downright absurd the way it works right now (as well as being incredibly clunky). My suggestion would be that rally can only bring back models of the weakest sort currently in the unit - once you have any blues, you can only rally back blues, once you have brims, only brims. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Enoby]

1 minute ago, baiardo said:

Playing against tzeentch summon guild + archaon + belakor + horror is really unpleasant, nurgle/sce/obr/ no matter what I play, archaon will have unconditional support to kill everyone on the table.

Archaon could be ok in StD but in tzeench is a cancer.

 

I do think Archaon really needs to be pointed per army he's available in. In fact, I'd go as far to say it's a large design mistake to not - it's known they point models in relation to allegiance ability, so the fact Archaon is the same cost in Tzeentch and Slaves to Darkness (and other gods) makes no sense from a balance perspective when he benefits very differently from each one.

More than that, it would be very unfair if Archaon increased in points by a large amount because of the interaction with Tzeentch - fine for Tzeentch, but unfair to the other armies that can use him but not abuse him. 

In fact, I'd go as fair to say that all Slaves to Darkness/Beasts of Chaos units should have individual points based on the army they end up in. Would it take more time? Undoubtedly yes. But I don't believe GW can balance that many units over that many totally different allegiance abilities covered by the same points cost.

[baiardo]

15 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I do think Archaon really needs to be pointed per army he's available in. In fact, I'd go as far to say it's a large design mistake to not - it's known they point models in relation to allegiance ability, so the fact Archaon is the same cost in Tzeentch and Slaves to Darkness (and other gods) makes no sense from a balance perspective when he benefits very differently from each one.

More than that, it would be very unfair if Archaon increased in points by a large amount because of the interaction with Tzeentch - fine for Tzeentch, but unfair to the other armies that can use him but not abuse him. 

In fact, I'd go as fair to say that all Slaves to Darkness/Beasts of Chaos units should have individual points based on the army they end up in. Would it take more time? Undoubtedly yes. But I don't believe GW can balance that many units over that many totally different allegiance abilities covered by the same points cost.

Could be a good solution, for my personal experience I would forbid to archaon to be played in tzeentch, even at 970pt. the problem remain.

The list above lose more likely to a mirror match than against others factions of this game.

[Ragest]

Kairos archaon should be banned from tournaments.

[NinthMusketeer]

Maybe get to the root of the problem and nerf Tzeentch allegiance abilities, but I am honest when I say I can understand people just assuming that is impossible for the foreseeable future.

Edited July 25, 2021 by NinthMusketeer

[OkayestDM]

27 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

. . . for the foreseeable future.

A surprisingly apt expression when discussing Tzeentch . . .

[Ragest]

More trainings today with DoK

Won in 3 turns vs Gargants (the map was in my favour) and won in 1 turn vs 60 Sentinels list, wich is garbage imo.

[Icarion]

12 minutes ago, Ragest said:

More trainings today with DoK

Won in 3 turns vs Gargants (the map was in my favour) and won in 1 turn vs 60 Sentinels list, wich is garbage imo.

What did the lists look like for both sides? And what were the missions?

[Liquidsteel]

Nice win today as Vyrkos vs Slaanesh.

The Vice is a really great mission.

I maintain my stance that save stacking on 3+ save monster heroes is bad. My opponent threw two rounds of shooting, spellcasting and combat with a unit of fiends (monster hunters) and my VLoZD just tanked it all then healed back up. 

If your army doesn't do mortals or lacks access to consistent -2 rend you really can't deal with them. 

Elite units and heroes need to be seeing -2/-3 rend on their profiles for sure. It would help bridge the gap between them and armies that get to do outrage amounts of mortals. 

[mojojojo101]

1 hour ago, Liquidsteel said:

Nice win today as Vyrkos vs Slaanesh.

The Vice is a really great mission.

I maintain my stance that save stacking on 3+ save monster heroes is bad. My opponent threw two rounds of shooting, spellcasting and combat with a unit of fiends (monster hunters) and my VLoZD just tanked it all then healed back up. 

If your army doesn't do mortals or lacks access to consistent -2 rend you really can't deal with them. 

Elite units and heroes need to be seeing -2/-3 rend on their profiles for sure. It would help bridge the gap between them and armies that get to do outrage amounts of mortals. 

I wouldn't be dissapointed to see save stacking taken away or at least toned down significantly either when we get an FAQ in a couple of weeks or in 6 months/a year when we have more time to digest it.

Just sprinkling loads of -2 and -3 rend everywhere to make up for a problematic core rule seems like a problematic way to address the problem that will certainly cause even more problems later.

[Liquidsteel]

31 minutes ago, mojojojo101 said:

I wouldn't be dissapointed to see save stacking taken away or at least toned down significantly either when we get an FAQ in a couple of weeks or in 6 months/a year when we have more time to digest it.

Just sprinkling loads of -2 and -3 rend everywhere to make up for a problematic core rule seems like a problematic way to address the problem that will certainly cause even more problems later.

Sure, though I didn't mean everywhere.

Limited to elite units and heroes.