Stormcast Eternals 3.0 - There is no "a" in Vindictors

[lare2]

5 hours ago, NauticalSoup said:

Seeing how much more material is packed into the maggotkin book reminds me how garbage it is to have the first book in an edition cycle.

Yeah, I thought that. Their warscrolls as well... lots of neat things. In comparison SCE's seem gutted. 

[Beliman]

5 hours ago, NauticalSoup said:

Seeing how much more material is packed into the maggotkin book reminds me how garbage it is to have the first book in an edition cycle.

Maybe their rules are a bit more lore-friendly but I don't think they pack a lot more than SCE:

Yes, they have more artefacts of power and command traits. Their Allegiance Abilities are 100% more awesome than SCE (imo). They feel that they have better rules overall but they don't have any Prayers, Mount Traits or Unique Enhancements. Their roster is smaller and they don't have all the tools that SCE can have (ex.: 10" movement units or ingame teleports).

I'm not saying that SCE are better, it's just that I don't feel that SCE are far away from Maggotkin.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Beliman

[Marcvs]

8 hours ago, vinnyt said:

Only difference between this and my hypothesized list is that it dropped the aetherwings and judicators in order to run a single unit of 4 dragons and keep battleline. I don't own the codex so am not sure if the Draconis only lets you take 1 unit of battleline dragons, in which case I think this battleline composition is pretty much optimal. If not, it's gonna be interesting to see if the 1x4 ends up being preferred over the 2x2. I personally still like the 2x2 with aetherwings if that's legal. Obviously everything has to be in a 1 drop either way.

It's nice seeing the 4-1 results and I'm sure some 5-0s will be coming once the list gets fine-tuned. 

the "only" difference was that: 1) (most importantly) it was a legal list :D; 2) it had bastian, 3) no incantor, 4) no judicators, 5) no aetherwings 6) 2xunits of liberators more, 7) the SDG were in one unit making the investment in the knight draconis much more worthwile.

Also, it went 4-1, doing a) on points, worse than the all dragons + prime list and b) equal to the 26 other 4 wins results SCE has posted so far.

So, I wouldn't exact call this a vindication of the "you'll be able to see this list everywhere" statement.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

8 hours ago, NauticalSoup said:

Seeing how much more material is packed into the maggotkin book reminds me how garbage it is to have the first book in an edition cycle.

Is it badly edited? Yes. Are maggotkin good? Maybe, maybe not. But just on the sheer number of options they got that neither Warclans or SCE did I'm already feeling so luke warm on the trajectory of 3.0 I may ditch.

Also 6 months into an edition cycle and we get the next battletome release, that's pretty... something.

I honestly think GW just wants Stormcast and Orruks (Ironjaws) to be "starter" armies. Armies that are easy to play, elite, don't have a high cognitive load and have most of their strength on their warscrolls. I think it's by design that they look so simple compared to Nurgle. I don't think it's because they are early books.

Although I will admit that Nurgle would have been the perfect Chaos starter army, so I am surprised that the book contains so much complexity. I'm in the process of starting the army and I am already not looking foreward to keeping track of the wheel, summoning points and disease counters all at once.

[Dogmantra]

34 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I honestly think GW just wants Stormcast and Orruks (Ironjaws) to be "starter" armies. Armies that are easy to play, elite, don't have a high cognitive load and have most of their strength on their warscrolls. I think it's by design that they look so simple compared to Nurgle. I don't think it's because they are early books.

100% this. The simplicity and straightforward nature of Stormcast Eternals is absolutely an intended feature, not a flaw in the rules writing. Games Workshop have imo done a fantastic job of making Stormcasts super accessible from a modelling perspective with kits that go together fairly easily, and are easy to paint to a decent standard with simple techniques, with lots of large flat areas where you can focus on just getting a good even coat, lots of sharp edges to edge highlight, lots of metallics to drybrush, while having enough complexity to them to feel like there's always some extra flourish you could add.

Accessible models ties in well with accessible rules (this doesn't mean they're just aimed at new players, they're aimed at anyone who wants a more straightforward experience). The army is deliberately designed to not require memorisation of several subsystems or tracking many moving parts so you can focus on the tactical movement and operation of your models. It's absolutely okay to not like playing the more straightforward armies, but to suggest it's an issue with the writing is, imo, misunderstanding the point of Stormcast Eternals. If you want a more complex army, GW have shown that they are doing those, with Nurgle having a lot more moving parts, and I expect we'll see a decent mix of straightforward and complex as new tomes are released. Holding out hope that Stormcasts will be one of the armies that gets more complex is probably not the best move, and if straightforward isn't your cup of tea then another army might suit you better.

[Beliman]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I honestly think GW just wants Stormcast and Orruks (Ironjaws) to be "starter" armies.

Completely agree.

SCE (and maybe Orruks) are the Ryu (street fighter), Mario (Smash) or Goku (FighersZ) of Warhammer Age of Sigmar. Easy to learn because their rules/abilities/framerates/interactions/complexity are not that the same as a character/factions/whatever from the last season/end of edition/whatever.

[vinnyt]

2 hours ago, Marcvs said:

the "only" difference was that: 1) (most importantly) it was a legal list :D; 2) it had bastian, 3) no incantor, 4) no judicators, 5) no aetherwings 6) 2xunits of liberators more, 7) the SDG were in one unit making the investment in the knight draconis much more worthwile.

Also, it went 4-1, doing a) on points, worse than the all dragons + prime list and b) equal to the 26 other 4 wins results SCE has posted so far.

So, I wouldn't exact call this a vindication of the "you'll be able to see this list everywhere" statement.

I guess I'm alone in thinking a 4-1 result is pretty darn good? Statement I was responding to was that it was a "terrible list". We'll see how it turns out after the FAQ. 

[lare2]

49 minutes ago, Beliman said:

SCE (and maybe Orruks) are the Ryu

Nice analogy. I was always partial to Ken but back when I played they were virtually identical. This might be why I'm enjoying SCE then. 

[feadair]

3 hours ago, Marcvs said:

Also, it went 4-1, doing a) on points, worse than the all dragons + prime list and b) equal to the 26 other 4 wins results SCE has posted so far.

We probably should not over-analyse the results; it is a dice game after all. Apparently the decisive moment was a lost priority roll in round 3 of the finals. Ouch!

The lesson I take is that Stormdrakes are good in practice, not just on paper, and you can build an all-dragons or a mixed list. Not wishing to buy, paint or transport 9+ Stormdrakes, I am going with a mixed list 😊

Edited December 13, 2021 by feadair

[Marcvs]

1 hour ago, vinnyt said:

I guess I'm alone in thinking a 4-1 result is pretty darn good? Statement I was responding to was that it was a "terrible list". We'll see how it turns out after the FAQ. 

I don't know if it's a terrible list (although I do know it's illegal atm), but my point is that I don't think you can infer that your idea for the list is good or bad from that pretty darn good result. Yes, the list which went 4-1 uses longstrikes, sdg and knight draconis, but it's very different from what you proposed as it uses bastian's redeploy, and the 4-drakes unit which is a real hammer, takes buffs much better, and immediately doulbes the utility from the knight draconis

[Marcvs]

20 minutes ago, feadair said:

We probably should not over-analyse the results; it is a dice game after all. Apparently the decisive moment was a lost priority roll in round 3 of the finals. Ouch!

The lesson I take is that Stormdrakes are good in practice, not just on paper, and you can build an all-dragons or a mixed list. Not wishing to buy, paint or transport 9+ Stormdrakes, I am going with a mixed list 😊

and the 4 SDG list also won one of the games (vs IDK) by 3 points thanks to the difference in grand strategies. So yes, it's a dice game, and single results are anecdotal by definition. Really curious to see how the Stormdrakes will shape SCE lists and the meta -if they aren't changed too much in the FAQ.

[Kugane]

To be fair, as a competitive FAB TCG player with only 5 hours to spare each week, the simplified rules and low model count have been a great way to get back into AOS.

So I hope SC remains a middle tier faction to keep having fun with it when I have time.

[NauticalSoup]

7 hours ago, Beliman said:

Maybe their rules are a bit more lore-friendly but I don't think they pack a lot more than SCE:

Yes, they have more artefacts of power and command traits. Their Allegiance Abilities are 100% more awesome than SCE (imo). They feel that they have better rules overall but they don't have any Prayers, Mount Traits or Unique Enhancements. Their roster is smaller and they don't have all the tools that SCE can have (ex.: 10" movement units or ingame teleports).

I'm not saying that SCE are better, it's just that I don't feel that SCE are far away from Maggotkin.

I assume it wasn't a deliberate omission to leave out their 4 Grand Strats and 6 Battle Tactics, the latter of which in particular matter significantly more than most of the content in our book and which I expect to see in every future tome which will drastically affect the effectiveness of our faction outside of casual play.

We have tons of junk, and most of it is junk, because SCE is a bloated warscroll saturated faction without interesting mechanics.

Edit: Which is fine - SCE can be the basic faction, but Orruk Warclans definitely had a lot more going on and I will die salty they felt it necessary to totally kneecap Bonesplittaz on the eve of their ascendancy.

Edited December 13, 2021 by NauticalSoup

[Beliman]

28 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

I assume it wasn't a deliberate omission to leave out their 4 Grand Strats and 6 Battle Tactics

If I'm honest, I didn't even read Nurgles strats and tactics. It seems that they are easier to accomplish.

I didn't want to split mortals and demons for nurgle abilities or count how many allies are allowed for both armies too.

I think both armies are close in power level but I feel that Nurgle abilities are more fun (a lot to track btw...) and better designed to match their background.

[feadair]

The two top-performing SCE lists from Blackout (48 players) are below. They came third and sixth. I believe both went 4-1:

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Hammers of Sigmar - Grand Strategy: Beast Master
- Triumphs: Inspired
Leaders
Celestant-Prime, Hammer of Sigmar (325)*
Knight-Draconis (300)*
- General
- Command Trait: Shock and Awe
- Artefact: Luckstone
- Mount Trait: Thunderous Presence
Battleline
2 x Stormdrake Guard (340)* - Drakerider's Lance
2 x Stormdrake Guard (340)* - Drakerider's Lance
2 x Stormdrake Guard (340)* - Drakerider's Lance
2 x Stormdrake Guard (340)* - Drakerider's Lance
Core Battalions *Battle Regiment
Total: 1985 / 2000
 

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Hammers of Sigmar - Grand Strategy: Hold the Line
- Triumphs: Inspired
Leaders
Knight-Draconis (300)*
- General
- Command Trait: Heroic Stature
- Artefact: Amulet of Destiny (Universal Artefact)
- Mount Trait: Celestial Instincts
Lord-Commander Bastian Carthalos (300)*
Battleline
4 x Stormdrake Guard (680)*
- Drakerider's Warblade
- Reinforced x 1
5 x Liberators (115)*
- Heavens-wrought Weapon and Shield
5 x Liberators (115)*
- Heavens-wrought Weapon and Shield
Units
6 x Vanguard-Raptors with Longstrike Crossbows (480)*
- Reinforced x 1
Core Battalions *Battle Regiment
Additional Enhancements
Holy Command: Thunderbolt Volley
Total: 1990 / 2000

Edited December 14, 2021 by feadair

[feadair]

Additionally, a Hammers of Sigmar list went 4-1 and came sixth in the 44 player Everwinter GT. Unfortunately, BCP no longer allows you to view lists without a subscription, so I do not have it. (More generally, this is a major bummer for anyone who enjoys looking at AoS lists and will impair the spread of information.)

Edited December 14, 2021 by feadair

[Skreech Verminking]

18 hours ago, vinnyt said:

I guess I'm alone in thinking a 4-1 result is pretty darn good? Statement I was responding to was that it was a "terrible list". We'll see how it turns out after the FAQ. 

Any skaven player would wish to just be able to get such an amazing result.

But currently that is pretty hard to get with a skaven army.

so yes even if you are playing stormcast, that isn’t a bad result at all.

 

Edited December 14, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[frostfire]

Is it true that we cannot use Errant-Questor since he has not been included in the pitched battle profile yet?

[Marcvs]

3 hours ago, feadair said:

Additionally, a Hammers of Sigmar list went 4-1 and came sixth in the 44 player Everwinter GT. Unfortunately, BCP no longer allows you to view lists without a subscription, so I do not have it. (More generally, this is a major bummer for anyone who enjoys looking at AoS lists and will impair the spread of information.)

Scions Hammers with Aventis, relictor (high priest), knight judicator, 6+3 longstrikes, 2+2 fulminators, 5 liberators (just heard on the honest Wargamer)

[NauticalSoup]

8 hours ago, frostfire said:

Is it true that we cannot use Errant-Questor since he has not been included in the pitched battle profile yet?

He certainly doesn't appear to have one. 

[Charleston]

I have to admit that the current position of Vanquishers and Vigilors bugs me.

Vanquishers are simply outperformed by Vindictors. Offensively Vindictors bring MW which are needed in current meta, while Vanquishers perform good at blending all that hordes that see little to no play. Defensively Vanquishers seem like a nice unit for an anvil due to rally on 5+, but this is simply outperformed by the 3+ save of the Vindictors, who can receive all other regeneration-buffs that you could apply on Vanquishers. The only option for them to see more play is either a shift to a heavy horde focused meta or a nerf to Vindictors (which propably would rather cement Liberators even more as go to due to their ok defense and solid output at a low price point...damn, thoose Vanquishers are doomed.)

Vindictors seem like a really really solid Warscroll, but not worth the 195 pts. While they offer a good buff and a solid meele/ranged power, All out Attack is a more flexible substitute to their +1-to-hit-buff. Also in the current editions context 2x 3+/3+ -1 1 is not a ranged profile worth that 195 pts simply because of save stacking with AOD/BestDayEver/Mystic Shield. I think they would be more than reasonable at 165pts, 175 if save stacking would not be a thing. 

[OkayestDM]

2 hours ago, Charleston said:

I have to admit that the current position of Vanquishers and Vigilors bugs me.

Vanquishers are simply outperformed by Vindictors. Offensively Vindictors bring MW which are needed in current meta, while Vanquishers perform good at blending all that hordes that see little to no play. Defensively Vanquishers seem like a nice unit for an anvil due to rally on 5+, but this is simply outperformed by the 3+ save of the Vindictors, who can receive all other regeneration-buffs that you could apply on Vanquishers. The only option for them to see more play is either a shift to a heavy horde focused meta or a nerf to Vindictors (which propably would rather cement Liberators even more as go to due to their ok defense and solid output at a low price point...damn, thoose Vanquishers are doomed.)

Vindictors seem like a really really solid Warscroll, but not worth the 195 pts. While they offer a good buff and a solid meele/ranged power, All out Attack is a more flexible substitute to their +1-to-hit-buff. Also in the current editions context 2x 3+/3+ -1 1 is not a ranged profile worth that 195 pts simply because of save stacking with AOD/BestDayEver/Mystic Shield. I think they would be more than reasonable at 165pts, 175 if save stacking would not be a thing. 

Vigilors are such an interesting unit, but I agree that they aren't worth the price you pay for them, given how their power and utility is split. Still they are a very functional unit, they just need a points adjustment to make them worth taking.

Vanquishers on the other hand need a total overhaul. The intended design is interesting, but in practice it doesn't work and isn't worth investing in (which is a crying shame, because the models are fantastic and it would be really great to have a dedicated killy battleline unit.)

My current favorite idea for a rewrite is to remove the adjustable attacks profile entirely and have them put at a flat 3 attacks with 2" range. This makes them decent in combat and encourages you to bring them in units of 10, which further increases their deadliness and synergies with their 5+ rally rule.

[lare2]

I hear tell Stormdrake Guard are gonna get a points increase again to 370. No idea if true or not mind. 

[OkayestDM]

1 hour ago, lare2 said:

I hear tell Stormdrake Guard are gonna get a points increase again to 370. No idea if true or not mind. 

I'm skeptical of this, largely because the hike to 340 was already a massive points change, and GW typically prefers to make more gradual adjustments. 

 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

10 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:

I'm skeptical of this, largely because the hike to 340 was already a massive points change, and GW typically prefers to make more gradual adjustments. 

 

Would also be weird to up the points again last minute after they already announced the lower 340 points value on warcom.