Jump to content

Drakecast - The Thread


Turragor

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Yondaime said:

Does anyone know the base sizes?

i'd love to try some lists before selling a kidney

I honestly think that even post points hike (months away - I dunno, it depends) most SCE armies will run 4.

I'm buying 6-7 boxes and maybe a big Dragon. Even when 3-4 Drakes are always on the shelf that shelf will be the coolest shelf for miles around.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Turragor said:

I honestly think that even post points hike (months away - I dunno, it depends) most SCE armies will run 4.

I disagree, Drakes don't do enough damage to justify being in every list.

They will be popular because dragons are cool and most people don't care about being competitive. 

Annihilators with Grandhammers are definitely the thing that will be spammed in competitive games. They are high impact, easy to use, and deal absurd amounts of damage. You can run 2x6 Grandhammers + Imperatant + Relictor for 1280 points and cripple an opponent on the first turn.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I disagree, Drakes don't do enough damage to justify being in every list.

They will be popular because dragons are cool and most people don't care about being competitive. 

Annihilators with Grandhammers are definitely the thing that will be spammed in competitive games. They are high impact, easy to use, and deal absurd amounts of damage. You can run 2x6 Grandhammers + Imperatant + Relictor for 1280 points and cripple an opponent on the first turn.

OK I see what you mean, not all SCE armies will find them useful going forward.

But if you are keen on running a drake army archetype for as long as competitively possible - would you always include the drakes (up to a certain points per model ceiling?)

 

Edited by Turragor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Turragor said:

I honestly think that even post points hike (months away - I dunno, it depends) most SCE armies will run 4.

I'm buying 6-7 boxes and maybe a big Dragon. Even when 3-4 Drakes are always on the shelf that shelf will be the coolest shelf for miles around.

Lets say i cant wait another month (preorder this week, another to the release, and another one for the delivery) to test them xD

 

16 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I disagree, Drakes don't do enough damage to justify being in every list.

They will be popular because dragons are cool and most people don't care about being competitive. 

Annihilators with Grandhammers are definitely the thing that will be spammed in competitive games. They are high impact, easy to use, and deal absurd amounts of damage. You can run 2x6 Grandhammers + Imperatant + Relictor for 1280 points and cripple an opponent on the first turn.

Its not about doing damage, its about sending a message

Edited by Yondaime
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Turragor said:

OK I see what you mean, not all SCE armies will find them useful going forward.

But if you are keen on running a drake army archetype for as long as competitively possible - would you always include the drakes (up to a certain points per model ceiling?)

 

You still want cheaper units you can leave behind on objectives and 3+ threats so your opponent doesn't instantly win the game if they neutralize your main threat.

I think Draconis + 1x4 is viable in competitive lists (leaves enough room for more threats) as a fast flying high damage anvil unit, or you can go all-in with 1x6 like the list I posted on the first page.

MSU drakes seems to be inefficient. Even with their great defensive stats they will still die to focused fire. Offensively they are underwhelming, and MSU is inefficient to buff. When you invest so many points in Drakes you need them to stay alive as long as possible; they're not HERO units so they can't use Heroic Recovery or Their Finest Hour, so they require AOD and external Save buffs/healing (Mystic Shield, Lifeswarm, Castellant) and those points start to add up quickly.

edit: Another reason to avoid MSU drakes is because killing a Drake each round is a free VP for your opponent

Edited by PJetski
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I disagree, Drakes don't do enough damage to justify being in every list.

They will be popular because dragons are cool and most people don't care about being competitive. 

Annihilators with Grandhammers are definitely the thing that will be spammed in competitive games. They are high impact, easy to use, and deal absurd amounts of damage. You can run 2x6 Grandhammers + Imperatant + Relictor for 1280 points and cripple an opponent on the first turn.

In a more serius note it can be a niche list that can do really good imho

 

1 drop batallion, first turn you can move and shoot in the hero phase, move and shoot again and charge and do some more than decent damage, also you'll gain a lot of map control, it can be probably one of the most aggressive list in aos ever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, PJetski said:

You still want cheaper units you can leave behind on objectives and 3+ threats so your opponent doesn't instantly win the game if they neutralize your main threat.

I think Draconis + 1x4 is viable in competitive lists (leaves enough room for more threats) as a fast flying high damage anvil unit, or you can go all-in with 1x6 like the list I posted on the first page.

MSU drakes seems to be inefficient. Even with their great defensive stats they will still die to focused fire. Offensively they are underwhelming, and MSU is inefficient to buff. When you invest so many points in Drakes you need them to stay alive as long as possible; they're not HERO units so they can't use Heroic Recovery or Their Finest Hour, so they require AOD and external Save buffs/healing (Mystic Shield, Lifeswarm, Castellant) and those points start to add up quickly.

edit: Another reason to avoid MSU drakes is because killing a Drake each round is a free VP for your opponent

Just following on from this point, it’s worth noting that 1x4 and, for example, 2x2 is vulnerable to being Belakor’d or Kairos’d.

2x4 however isn’t as vulnerable as the above can only stop one (unless your opponent has both models 🤮).

Which isn’t to say that you want 2x4 but as PJ pointed out you want a 1x4 and something else so your eggs aren’t in one basket.

The counter to this is that it will be much easier to get 2 stormdrakes into a gap than 4 of them.

Scoring wise a unit of 10 vindictors in Stormkeeps should be sufficient. There’s not many battleplans with a back field objective anymore, let alone more than 1. Power in Numbers comes to mind as the major obvious one that punishes a list going heavy on alpha. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, macrake said:

I think people need to get more familiar with the current battleplans. Most of them have 3 central objectives, or 4. From round 3 one is removed. It's really pretty rare that you need something to stay on a "home" objective.

Lets take a serious look at this.  Reviewing just the GHB2021:

1. Marking Territory.  This gives you 4 objectives on the edge of your territory, with victory going to whoever controls all of the objectives starting on turn 3 (notable, whoever loses the roll off gets to remove one of these objectives).  This is a battleplan that gives you a strong incentive to have someone who is good at controlling objectives the ability to sit there - ex. vindictors in a stormkeep.

2. Savage Gains.  You have 4 objectives, one on the edge of each players territory, and 2 in the middle.  You don't really care about controlling "your" objective points wise, because it only gives you 1 point - but you care about preventing your opponent from getting it because it will be worth 4 points to them.  This is a solid example of wanting to have something that will sit back to stay on your "home" objective.

3. First Blood.  Deployment is in the corners, and you have 3 objectives along the diagonal.  Standard score 1, score 2, score more.  No real home objectives that you want to control, but you are likely to want to play it out with a light force on 1 objective and most of your army contesting your opponent on a second.

4. Power Struggle.  You have 2 objectives on the border of each players territory, and 1 in the middle.  You score if you control the objective for 2 consecutive turns.  A solid battleplan where you want something to sit back on your home objectives.

5. Survival of the fittest.  This is first blood, but the territories are slightly bigger and you get "predator" units.  Once again, no real home objectives to sit on, but just like first blood you are likely to want to play it out with a light force on 1 objective and most of your army contesting the second.  That being said, now your territory is touching the objectives, which means that stormkeep rules will always be giving your redeemers the ability to count as 3 on them.

6. Tectonic Interference.  3 objectives in a line on the center, one is worth an extra victory point (also, all are prime objectives so Ghur can't eat them).  Very relevant here - stormkeep rules say anything that is partly or wholly in your territory, which means Stormkeep redeemers will always count for 3 models.  The changing of the "alpha" objective means you are likely to be bouncing between objectives, but as with all of the 3 objective games, you are likely going to end up sitting a small force on one objective and then be fighting your opponent on the second with most of your army.

7. Apex Predators.  Hey look, it is first blood/survival of the fittest again, but once again the deployment has changed, and this time the objectives can only be captured by leaders (either moving on, or killing an opponent's leader in melee to kick them off).  Due to only leaders scoring, this is one where you don't care to have an objective sitter.

8. The Vice.  You get 4 objectives, but they converge on the center.  Here you DEFINITELY want to make sure you have something controlling your home objectives turns 1-3, because starting turn 4 you have only 1 objective you are fighting over.  But, you still have "control 1, control 2, control more" for your victory points, meaning turn 4 and 5 you can only score a maximum of 2 points from strategy, while earlier turns you can potentially score 3 if you can kick your opponents off one of theirs.

9. Tooth and Nail.  You get 4 objectives, with 2 on the border of your deployment.  Also, no reserves, because we hate stormcast.  Standard scoring, but one of the border objectives will be eaten by Ghur on turn 3.  Likely way to play is to have something light that can hold your home objective, while you fight over the border objectives.

10.  Feral Foray.  You have 6 objectives, 3 in each players territory.  Starting turn 2, you can raid your opponents objectives, score an extra point, and the objective goes away.  VERY strong arguments to having solid objective sitters in this battle plan.

11. Power in Numbers.  This is Feral Foray again, but now we have to decide to burn objectives for points based on how many turns we have held it.  Also, battleline get priority in contesting objectives.  Once again, a very strong argument for having some objective sitters.

12. Veins of Ghur.  You start with 0 objectives, and after deployment you get 1 in on the line in the middle of the board.  Then turn 3, objectives show up in yours and your opponents territory.  You get points for each objective that you control, with points equal to the current battle round.  Here you definitely want something to hold objectives, but at the same time, it either needs to be deployed on the sky and come down, or it needs to be fast enough to get to the objective depending upon where it lands.  So we can say that we don't really want something that does nothing but stands on objectives.

So, lets count.

Battleplans that want you to sit on a "home" objective are: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11.

Battleplans that want you don't want objective sitters are: 3, 5, 7, 12

So, 8 battleplans reward you with having some objective sitters, and 4 don't.  So 2/3rds of the battle plans will reward you for having a good objective holder in the back lines, though to varying degrees.  If you are just playing a pickup game, I would recommend having at least 1 good objective sitter.  If you are playing in a tournament though, you are going to want to look at what battleplans the tournament is running before deciding exactly how to build your force.  If you have Power in Numbers of Feral Foray, you are likely going to want to consider having at least 2 good objective holders.  For the other 6 battleplans that reward holding home objectives, you are likely going to want to have at least 1.  And if your tournament is mostly built around the 4 that don't care to have objective sitters, then you can look to ignore that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my own experience in games and tournaments, I'm convinced a drakespam list with 1 or 2 support heroes will outperform anything else. I wont mind being wrong though, because that means more stuff is viable. That would be great. Excited to get the models and play some tournies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, readercolin said:

Lets take a serious look at this.  Reviewing just the GHB2021:

1. Marking Territory.  This gives you 4 objectives on the edge of your territory, with victory going to whoever controls all of the objectives starting on turn 3 (notable, whoever loses the roll off gets to remove one of these objectives).  This is a battleplan that gives you a strong incentive to have someone who is good at controlling objectives the ability to sit there - ex. vindictors in a stormkeep.

2. Savage Gains.  You have 4 objectives, one on the edge of each players territory, and 2 in the middle.  You don't really care about controlling "your" objective points wise, because it only gives you 1 point - but you care about preventing your opponent from getting it because it will be worth 4 points to them.  This is a solid example of wanting to have something that will sit back to stay on your "home" objective.

3. First Blood.  Deployment is in the corners, and you have 3 objectives along the diagonal.  Standard score 1, score 2, score more.  No real home objectives that you want to control, but you are likely to want to play it out with a light force on 1 objective and most of your army contesting your opponent on a second.

4. Power Struggle.  You have 2 objectives on the border of each players territory, and 1 in the middle.  You score if you control the objective for 2 consecutive turns.  A solid battleplan where you want something to sit back on your home objectives.

5. Survival of the fittest.  This is first blood, but the territories are slightly bigger and you get "predator" units.  Once again, no real home objectives to sit on, but just like first blood you are likely to want to play it out with a light force on 1 objective and most of your army contesting the second.  That being said, now your territory is touching the objectives, which means that stormkeep rules will always be giving your redeemers the ability to count as 3 on them.

6. Tectonic Interference.  3 objectives in a line on the center, one is worth an extra victory point (also, all are prime objectives so Ghur can't eat them).  Very relevant here - stormkeep rules say anything that is partly or wholly in your territory, which means Stormkeep redeemers will always count for 3 models.  The changing of the "alpha" objective means you are likely to be bouncing between objectives, but as with all of the 3 objective games, you are likely going to end up sitting a small force on one objective and then be fighting your opponent on the second with most of your army.

7. Apex Predators.  Hey look, it is first blood/survival of the fittest again, but once again the deployment has changed, and this time the objectives can only be captured by leaders (either moving on, or killing an opponent's leader in melee to kick them off).  Due to only leaders scoring, this is one where you don't care to have an objective sitter.

8. The Vice.  You get 4 objectives, but they converge on the center.  Here you DEFINITELY want to make sure you have something controlling your home objectives turns 1-3, because starting turn 4 you have only 1 objective you are fighting over.  But, you still have "control 1, control 2, control more" for your victory points, meaning turn 4 and 5 you can only score a maximum of 2 points from strategy, while earlier turns you can potentially score 3 if you can kick your opponents off one of theirs.

9. Tooth and Nail.  You get 4 objectives, with 2 on the border of your deployment.  Also, no reserves, because we hate stormcast.  Standard scoring, but one of the border objectives will be eaten by Ghur on turn 3.  Likely way to play is to have something light that can hold your home objective, while you fight over the border objectives.

10.  Feral Foray.  You have 6 objectives, 3 in each players territory.  Starting turn 2, you can raid your opponents objectives, score an extra point, and the objective goes away.  VERY strong arguments to having solid objective sitters in this battle plan.

11. Power in Numbers.  This is Feral Foray again, but now we have to decide to burn objectives for points based on how many turns we have held it.  Also, battleline get priority in contesting objectives.  Once again, a very strong argument for having some objective sitters.

12. Veins of Ghur.  You start with 0 objectives, and after deployment you get 1 in on the line in the middle of the board.  Then turn 3, objectives show up in yours and your opponents territory.  You get points for each objective that you control, with points equal to the current battle round.  Here you definitely want something to hold objectives, but at the same time, it either needs to be deployed on the sky and come down, or it needs to be fast enough to get to the objective depending upon where it lands.  So we can say that we don't really want something that does nothing but stands on objectives.

So, lets count.

Battleplans that want you to sit on a "home" objective are: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11.

Battleplans that want you don't want objective sitters are: 3, 5, 7, 12

So, 8 battleplans reward you with having some objective sitters, and 4 don't.  So 2/3rds of the battle plans will reward you for having a good objective holder in the back lines, though to varying degrees.  If you are just playing a pickup game, I would recommend having at least 1 good objective sitter.  If you are playing in a tournament though, you are going to want to look at what battleplans the tournament is running before deciding exactly how to build your force.  If you have Power in Numbers of Feral Foray, you are likely going to want to consider having at least 2 good objective holders.  For the other 6 battleplans that reward holding home objectives, you are likely going to want to have at least 1.  And if your tournament is mostly built around the 4 that don't care to have objective sitters, then you can look to ignore that.

Good analysis, worth noting that Stormdrakes themselves count as 5 models each for scoring. But yeah I try to keep 5-10 Vindictors in my lists for this reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit late, but Stormdrake Lances are actually not as bad as some claim. But only IF you talk about min sized units of 2 or especially about a single Stormdrake (who can be a solo champion too for some reason). All that because a champion gets extra attack, and an extra attack with Lance is much more impactful than an extra attack with Blade. I do agree that Blades are still better, buuut if you really need to shatter something on a charge, Lances can be a decent option.

Below are damage for a unit of 2 Stormrakes on a charge without dragon Fang and Talons attacks.

Save   Drakes Swords   Drakes lances
2+ 1.93 3.11
3+ 2.89 4.15
4+ 3.85 5.19
5+ 4.81 6.22
6+ 5.78 6.22
- 5.78 6.22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference in damage for a charging unit (all attacks included) is about 15-20% more than blades. When not charged, it's 15-20% less than blades.

I personally favor the lances, because Drakes are one of (the?) easiest units in the game to charge. A drake list will also have insane alpha, because the entire list will smash on first turn. Maximizing that alpha is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Zeblasky said:

A bit late, but Stormdrake Lances are actually not as bad as some claim. But only IF you talk about min sized units of 2 or especially about a single Stormdrake (who can be a solo champion too for some reason). All that because a champion gets extra attack, and an extra attack with Lance is much more impactful than an extra attack with Blade. I do agree that Blades are still better, buuut if you really need to shatter something on a charge, Lances can be a decent option.

Below are damage for a unit of 2 Stormrakes on a charge without dragon Fang and Talons attacks.

Save   Drakes Swords   Drakes lances
2+ 1.93 3.11
3+ 2.89 4.15
4+ 3.85 5.19
5+ 4.81 6.22
6+ 5.78 6.22
- 5.78 6.22

Save swords    lances    lances charging
2+     1.93        1.04         3.11
3+     2.89       1.56         4.15
4+     3.85       2.07         5.19
5+     4.81        2.59        6.22
6+     5.78       3.11          6.22
-        5.78       3.11          6.22

Here is the same chart with the lances charging vs not charging.

If you think that you can consistently get the charges off, then yes, Stormdrake Guard are better with lances than with shields.  However, you pretty quickly run into a problem.

Once you include the mounts in as well, a squad of 2 stomdrake guard with swords is going to deal just short of 13 damage before saves.  Lances on the charge, just over 13 damage.  To a 4+ save, the swords can expect just under 10 damage, while the lances can expect just over 11.  Once the lances stop charging though, they are looking at just over 10 damage and then to 8 damage expected.  Here is the chart with the mounts added:

Save swords    lances    lances charging
2+    5.48         4.59        6.67
3+    7.63         6.3           8.89
4+    9.78         8             11.11
5+    11.93        9.7          13.33
6+    12.89       10.22      13.33
-       12.89       10.22      13.33

This is barely enough damage to go through a cheap screen.  Any semi-reasonable anvil is going to stop them cold, and then you are going to be stuck in combat for the rest of the game because you can't fight your way out of the chaff that your opponent throws at you.

Yes, if you look at the lances in a vacuum, and you assume that you can always get the charge off, they do look rather good.  The problem that we keep coming back to though is that when you look at the unit as a whole, you quickly see that most competent opponents are going to be able to bog you down, and that all this talk about getting a great turn 1 charge off fails to mention that your total damage is... not all that impressive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, readercolin said:

Save swords    lances    lances charging
2+     1.93        1.04         3.11
3+     2.89       1.56         4.15
4+     3.85       2.07         5.19
5+     4.81        2.59        6.22
6+     5.78       3.11          6.22
-        5.78       3.11          6.22

Here is the same chart with the lances charging vs not charging.

If you think that you can consistently get the charges off, then yes, Stormdrake Guard are better with lances than with shields.  However, you pretty quickly run into a problem.

Once you include the mounts in as well, a squad of 2 stomdrake guard with swords is going to deal just short of 13 damage before saves.  Lances on the charge, just over 13 damage.  To a 4+ save, the swords can expect just under 10 damage, while the lances can expect just over 11.  Once the lances stop charging though, they are looking at just over 10 damage and then to 8 damage expected.  Here is the chart with the mounts added:

Save swords    lances    lances charging
2+    5.48         4.59        6.67
3+    7.63         6.3           8.89
4+    9.78         8             11.11
5+    11.93        9.7          13.33
6+    12.89       10.22      13.33
-       12.89       10.22      13.33

This is barely enough damage to go through a cheap screen.  Any semi-reasonable anvil is going to stop them cold, and then you are going to be stuck in combat for the rest of the game because you can't fight your way out of the chaff that your opponent throws at you.

Yes, if you look at the lances in a vacuum, and you assume that you can always get the charge off, they do look rather good.  The problem that we keep coming back to though is that when you look at the unit as a whole, you quickly see that most competent opponents are going to be able to bog you down, and that all this talk about getting a great turn 1 charge off fails to mention that your total damage is... not all that impressive.

Could you point me to these other mysterious units that you think do impressive damage? Grandhammers with an imperatant required for 15% more dmg for one turn, with a 25% fail chance? Fulminators that do the same dmg as SDG if you include shooting, but require a translocation and then drop to half dmg when not charged?

(Lets also pretend that SDG dont do the million other things they do)

Outside of one or two support heroes and maybe 6 raptors for the doubletap, please tell me what you think is worth more than 2x or 4x SDG. I'm genuinely curious.

Edited by macrake
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, readercolin said:

and that all this talk about getting a great turn 1 charge off fails to mention that your total damage is... not all that impressive.

Knight Draconis

4x SDG, 2x SDG, 1x SDG

Lord relictor

6x Longstrikes

5x liberators.

Lets go through this lists potential turn 1 alpha. No draconis double shoot. against a 3+ save. No buffs.

For shooting we get: 21 from the longstrikes, 13 from the SDG. 34 wounds shooting. No buffs. Against a 3+.

Melee: 7 SDG about 34 to a 3+.

68 wounds alpha to a 3+ before any potential buffs.

If the opponent doesn't deploy over 24" away, go ahead and add 10 MW from draconis ability and his own shooting, and another 7 from his melee.

You don't think this is impressive turn one alpha? That's a dead gargant for sure, maybe another with some all out attack.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, macrake said:

Could you point me to these other mysterious units that you think do impressive damage? Grandhammers with an imperatant required for 15% more dmg for one turn, with a 25% fail chance? Fulminators that do the same dmg as SDG if you include shooting, but require a translocation and then drop to half dmg when not charged?

(Lets also pretend that SDG dont do the million other things they do)

Outside of one or two support heroes and maybe 6 raptors for the doubletap, please tell me what you think is worth more than 2x or 4x SDG. I'm genuinely curious.

I was just about to write the same response. I personally still agree that Blades are generally better and more reliable if you can't get a charge every turn, but to call Stormdrakes damage lacking...

First of all, we were talking about combat damage only (and even it alone was quite impressive). We also have 1.83 MW on average from every Stormdrake model that shoots. Then you can reasonably add up 1-3 extra wounds removed with a single non negatable dice roll per every stormdrake unit (go on and make that Blood Knight fly). Oh, and you also potentially can use all of the Monstrous rampages every combat phase with 2x2 of them as well, which can indirectly cause or save you some wounds as well. Together that's A LOT of damage from a unit that costs just 285 points. My poor Black Dragon is literally green with jealousy (yea, he is painted as a Forest Dragon x) ). If they were a hero and could take Amulet of Destiny, they would be incredibly broken.

I am not that versed in SCE units current balance and prowess, and there for sure may be some units that are more point efficient damage and/or tankiness. But that still does not make Stormdrakes damage less impressive if you compare them across all the other faction units in the game.

Edited by Zeblasky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, macrake said:

Knight Draconis

4x SDG, 2x SDG, 1x SDG

Lord relictor

6x Longstrikes

5x liberators.

Lets go through this lists potential turn 1 alpha. No draconis double shoot. against a 3+ save. No buffs.

For shooting we get: 21 from the longstrikes, 13 from the SDG. 34 wounds shooting. No buffs. Against a 3+.

Melee: 7 SDG about 34 to a 3+.

68 wounds alpha to a 3+ before any potential buffs.

If the opponent doesn't deploy over 24" away, go ahead and add 10 MW from draconis ability and his own shooting, and another 7 from his melee.

You don't think this is impressive turn one alpha? That's a dead gargant for sure, maybe another with some all out attack.

Ok, so let me get this straight.

6 longstrikes cost 480 points.  All that SDG and Knight Draconis that you are running costs 1255 - basically 2.5 times the points for them as for the longstrikes.  And I am supposed to be impressed by the alpha of the SDG when said longstrikes are doing 1/3 the total damage of all the guard combined?  Which part of this list is responsible for your alpha again?

Does your list pass the DPS check that is megagargants?  Yes, you do - you might be able to make this a 4-1 or 5-0 list until people adjust.  You have successfully created 3.0's Gav-bomb - the list that can go out and run over unprepared lists, and then falls apart when people realize the importance of screens again.  You can even fit it all into the Battle Regiment, so you can get it all as a one drop.

It seems though that you forgot some of the important parts of "Melee alpha strike".  Specifically, it works when you have "Fights First".  There is a BIG reason why the meta was all about the "Activation Wars" back 2-3 years ago when melee alpha striking armies were a thing in 2.0.  This means that you are going to go in, fight with your block of 4 knights (unless of course your opponent has "fights first"), and then you are going to lose your squad of 2 knights, or your 1 solo unless they are stuck on one of your opponents screening units.

But once again, we are coming back to Lances vs Swords, which is where this whole discussion started.  If we say that you manage to attack with all of your Stormdrake Guard without losing any models, lances are going to deal a grand total of 4 more damage to a 3+ or 4+ save.  Once you get countercharged though, swords is going to be doing 5 more damage to a 3+ save, or 6 more damage to a 4+ save.  Or you know, you ran into pinks, in which case lances do 2 more damage than swords when charging and 9 less off the charge.

Now, lets look at the other options for Stormcast outside of the Stormdrake Alpha list.

First things first, Longstrikes + Relictor is probably going to be a stormcast staple.  Longstrikes ability to snipe important enemy support units, punch through screens, and maneuver around with translocation is going to be an important part of many lists.  For ease of comparison, we can just look at your 68 damage number and your 21 damage from longstrikes, and call the stormdrake part 47 damage.

Next up, lets take a look at Annihilators w/ Grandhammers.  A Lord-Imperitant is letting them come down at 7", and they get re-rollable charges on the turn they come down, for a reasonably reliable charge.  They are also going to be doing mortal wounds on the charge (if we call it 7", we can get an average 3.5 mortals on the charge, with the possibility for more).  They are also going to be doing mortals in an AOE on setup, though that will be much more effective against some opponents than others.  Finally, if we take a squad of 6 of them, we can expect 21 damage to a 3+ save, which is a mere 5 less than 7 stormdrake guard can manage to a 3+ in melee, while being only a single activation, so you have no risk of losing one.  Yes, you can get all 6 in on a target with current coherency rules, and I suspect it will be easier to do that than to try to get all 7 stormdrakes in on one target. All of this while costing only 480 points, which is leaving you over 750 points for other units... like maybe another squad of annihilators for the next turn.  Or you can go MSU with a few squads to maximize the mortals on entry.

For the next unit, Fulminators.  A squad of 4 Fulminators on the charge can expect to do ~25 damage to a 3+ save, which is 5 less damage than 7 stormdrakes with lances will do if they all get to activate on their charge.  For delivery, they are best served with a combination of a Lord-Relictor translocating them, at least until Translocate gets an FAQ about no moving after teleports (and after that FAQ, you can buff them with a Ghur Battlemage for +2 to run/charge).  A squad of 4 of them is also only 460 points, leaving you quite a few points that you can be putting into other units.  Here the difference between Charge vs No Charge is significantly more noticable though, as the best non-charging Guard unit is Concussors who will only do an average of 16 damage, or about half what Stormdrakes would do.  A squad of 4 fulminators can also only expect to do an average of 4 mortal wounds with their breath attacks, which is noticeably less than the 10 available from 7 stormdrakes.  Also, no worries about distance for this one to work due to translocation.

Combine this together, and we can get a force that looks like this:

Lord-Relictor (translocation)
Lord-Imperitant
4 Fulminators
6 Annihilators with Grandhammers
6 Vanguard Raptors with Longstrikes
2x 5 Liberators or Vindictors

This army has to go with either Hammers of Sigmar or Knights-Excelsior for battleline purposes.  But you can have your double-tapping raptors just like your list, translocate the Fulminators, and Scions in the Annihilators.  In combat to a 3+ save, you can expect 46 damage from those 2 squads, alongside 4 mortal wounds from the Fulminators shooting, 3.5 mortals for the Annihilators charge, a variable number from the Annihilators landing, and 21 damage from your Vanguard Raptors shooting.  This brings us up to a 75+ damage alpha strike, and it doesn't matter where your opponent deploys because you can hit them there.  It also fits into the one drop battalion, just like the Stormdrake list, to let you dictate engagements.  It is also noticeably less likely to receive a points nerf than the stormdrake list.

Moving away from Alpha Strike lists, you can also make quite reasonable forces with lots of units of Paladins in Knights Excelsior, especially when accompanied by Yndrasta to give them some more sustainability.  There is already a list out there that is doing fairly well with Annihilator spam, and just dropping a bunch down and letting the mortal wounds happen, and nothing has really changed to make that list worse.  Just rocking Dracothian Guard can also do quite well, as 3 squads of 4 concussors can expect to deal an average of 50 damage per combat round to a 3+ save (20 more than Stormdrake Guard w/ lances on the charge) while costing about the same as the Stormdrake Guard group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, so you actually went with my example and take fulminators and grandhammers. I wont bother with your "opponent will just screen you out" argument. Just isn't happening with that much shooting. Maybe castling with pinks, but then you just shoot their heroes and block them in.

So you think 75+ MAYBE alpha is better than 68+ for sure alpha? Yes, your list is very much a maybe. If you're using translocate for fulminators, you're not using it for raptors, which means you probably wont get to double tap them. Also, grandhammers will fail 1 in 4 games.

Even if it all happens. You get 7 more on your alpha. And then way less damage next turn, if somehow your glass cannon annihilators even survive.

Yes, we have units that in theory can outdamage SDG, but in practice, they're not even close to worth what you lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, macrake said:

Oh, so you actually went with my example and take fulminators and grandhammers. I wont bother with your "opponent will just screen you out" argument. Just isn't happening with that much shooting. Maybe castling with pinks, but then you just shoot their heroes and block them in.

So you think 75+ MAYBE alpha is better than 68+ for sure alpha? Yes, your list is very much a maybe. If you're using translocate for fulminators, you're not using it for raptors, which means you probably wont get to double tap them. Also, grandhammers will fail 1 in 4 games.

Even if it all happens. You get 7 more on your alpha. And then way less damage next turn, if somehow your glass cannon annihilators even survive.

Yes, we have units that in theory can outdamage SDG, but in practice, they're not even close to worth what you lose.

Wow... once again we get back to reading comprehension.

In no way did I say that my list was better because I get 7 more on my alpha.  I proposed a list that can also alpha strike if you want.  But you completely missed out on my primary point.

 

YOU ARE "ALPHA" STRIKING WITH NO WAY OF FIGHTING FIRST

 

You are going to charge your stormdrakes in, fight some, and get models picked off before you are done fighting with all your stormdrakes.  This is what happens when you charge your army smack dab into the middle of your opponents.  I know, I know, we are all very surprised that this happens.

A squad of fulminators can charge, do their damage, and be done.  All 37 of their potential charge damage (25 to a 3+ save) is done before your opponent has a chance to respond.  4 Stormdrake Guard are going to do 22 damage (15 to a 3+ save), and then your opponent gets to go.  10 damage to a 3+ save is QUITE significant.  If you need something dead, the fulminators have accomplished it before your opponent gets the chance to react or fight back.

A squad of Annihilators are going to drop down, charge, get their mortals in, and then fight before the opponent has a chance to react.  31 damage (21 to a 3+ save) done before your opponent has a chance to react.  In this case, only 6 more than the squad of stormdrakes can manage, but still the difference between killing Archaeon and wounding him.

The proper way to play is to pick off your opponents support pieces with the longstrikes, then time things appropriately to charge either of your hammers in on one turn, and have the other unit to destroy something the next turn.  This is how you win a game on objectives and not flub your alpha strike and lose because of it.

Now, can your list win games?  Yes.  It is probably a great starting point for anyone who wants to get into stormdrake guard.  Are you going to win games due to your alpha striking potential?  Only until people learn how your army works and how to react to it.  Alpha striking doesn't win you games.  Objectives and Battle Tactics do.  Being able to eliminate key units from the opponents army will score you battle tactics and win you games, and a squad of fulminators or annihilators can do that more reliably without having to throw half your army into the middle of theirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, readercolin said:

YOU ARE "ALPHA" STRIKING WITH NO WAY OF FIGHTING FIRST

If you want to seriously discuss lists, just drop the dumb strawmans and assume other people aren't morons.

The 4x sdg fight first. The other drakes don't charge anything risky.

12 minutes ago, readercolin said:

A squad of fulminators can charge, do their damage, and be done.  All 37 of their potential charge damage (25 to a 3+ save) is done before your opponent has a chance to respond.  4 Stormdrake Guard are going to do 22 damage (15 to a 3+ save), and then your opponent gets to go.  10 damage to a 3+ save is QUITE significant.  If you need something dead, the fulminators have accomplished it before your opponent gets the chance to react or fight back.

Just wrong math. 4 fulminators do 21 melee to a 3+ with 4 mw shooting. 4x drakes do 17 melee to a 3+ with 8 mw shooting. So yeah, 25 from fulmis. Not bad. Drakes also do 25, monstrous stomp and eat a model.

So yeah. And again, drakes don't drop to half dmg next turn, much more tanky, better at holding objectives. You can say that fulminators are cheaper, but they require the relictors translocation, so are they really cheaper?

25 minutes ago, readercolin said:

A squad of Annihilators are going to drop down, charge, get their mortals in, and then fight before the opponent has a chance to react.  31 damage (21 to a 3+ save) done before your opponent has a chance to react.  In this case, only 6 more than the squad of stormdrakes can manage, but still the difference between killing Archaeon and wounding him.

So your 6 grandhammers will do about 21 to a 3+, with about 6 more mw. Sooo.. 1 more dmg than 4 sdg. And again, Grandhammers are less than half as tanky as SDG. zero mobilty, require a lord imperatant. fails their charge 1/4 times. Dont count as 5 models.

30 minutes ago, readercolin said:

Alpha striking doesn't win you games.  Objectives and Battle Tactics do.  Being able to eliminate key units from the opponents army will score you battle tactics and win you games, and a squad of fulminators or annihilators can do that more reliably without having to throw half your army into the middle of theirs.

Uhm, so Alpha striking doesn't win games. But eliminating key targets do. Can you decide what you want to argue? Funnily, SDG are far better at getting objectives and battle tactics done than Grandhammers/fulminators. That Grandhammers or fulminators are more reliable is just wrong in so many ways. That last bit about throwing half my into... what are you even talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...