AoS Cities of Sigmar Battletome 2023 Discussion

[JackStreicher]

4 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I got some value out of it once or twice, but I feel it fails a lot more than it succeeds. The timing is just kinda tricky: Since you only roll to consecrate an objective in your own movement phase, it does nothing for you if you get alpha'd. And when I don't get alpha'd, I usually have the Zenestra ward up instead.

I wish the rule was just "6+ ward on objectives you control while Steelhelm warpriests contest them".

that's what it should have been. Currently it adds even more mental load and an uneccessary dice roll.

[Gitzdee]

Hi all, got a question about the steelhelms and fusiliers. Do they got enough heads in the box to make a non helmet unit? I really like the look of this model and would like to build them like this. If not, would marine heads fit? Dont really own any other human heads.

Edited March 3 by Gitzdee

[Ejecutor]

9 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:

Hi all, got a question about the steelhelms and fusiliers. Do they got enough heads in the box to make a nin helmet unit? I really like the look of this model and would like to build them like this. If not, would marine heads fit? Dont really own any other human heads.

If I remember correctly the Steelhelms got exactly 20 heads. 11 with helmets and 9 without, but talking from the top of my head.

Also, someone used Stormcast heads and they fit nicely on Cavaliers, which are big chunkier.

Edited March 3 by Ejecutor

[Gitzdee]

14 hours ago, Ejecutor said:

If I remember correctly the Steelhelms got exactly 20 heads. 11 with helmets and 9 without, but talking from the top of my head.

Also, someone used Stormcast heads and they fit nicely on Cavaliers, which are big chunkier.

Thanks, i am also wondering if the heads are bigger than the boingrot bounder helmets? 

Also want to ask if any of the lore fanatics know what units/races Lethis is known for, anything written about this?

[Asbestress]

4 hours ago, Gitzdee said:

Thanks, i am also wondering if the heads are bigger than the boingrot bounder helmets? 

Also want to ask if any of the lore fanatics know what units/races Lethis is known for, anything written about this?

Lethis is mainly known for ghost hunting/vampire busting, so their "iconic" unit would be lines of Fusiliers banishing undead with silver bullets. They also haven raven priests of Morrda, although apart from the Command Corps priest there's not really a way to depict that sticking to only official minis.

And you can't go wrong with the Steel Rook for that extra raven aesthetic.

[Gitzdee]

22 minutes ago, Asbestress said:

Lethis is mainly known for ghost hunting/vampire busting, so their "iconic" unit would be lines of Fusiliers banishing undead with silver bullets. They also haven raven priests of Morrda, although apart from the Command Corps priest there's not really a way to depict that sticking to only official minis.

And you can't go wrong with the Steel Rook for that extra raven aesthetic.

Yeah really busy trying to find this mini. Think i will run this mini and Krethusa as a raven priest. Dont actually know the Rook could proxy in the CoS tome, dont really like the command corps much besides the surgeon. Dont really see any generic foot hero for CoS at the moment. Maybe a fleetmaster? I do like the fusiliers idea or maybe a second wildercorps hunters unit.

Edited March 4 by Gitzdee

[Asbestress]

9 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:

Yeah really busy trying to find this mini. Think i will run this mini and Krethusa as a raven priest. Dont actually know the Rook could proxy in the CoS tome, dont really like the command corps much besides the surgeon. Dont really see any generic foot hero for CoS at the moment. Maybe a fleetmaster? I do like the fusiliers idea or maybe a second wildercorps hunters unit.

Yeah, Cities doesn't really have human foot heroes at the moment.
Maybe you could use them as Marshal and convert a Relic-Envoy to go with them? Would need to put the Rook on a 32mm instead of the supplied 28mm base though.

[Gitzdee]

1 minute ago, Asbestress said:

Yeah, Cities doesn't really have human foot heroes at the moment.
Maybe you could use them as Marshal and convert a Relic-Envoy to go with them? Would need to put the Rook on a 32mm instead of the supplied 28mm base though.

Could put the raven on a small base as the envoy. 

I do think about getting the mashal and envoy some day. I really like the model.

Other option would be to run him as an aelf maybe?

[Ejecutor]

7 minutes ago, Asbestress said:

Yeah, Cities doesn't really have human foot heroes at the moment.
Maybe you could use them as Marshal and convert a Relic-Envoy to go with them? Would need to put the Rook on a 32mm instead of the supplied 28mm base though.

Nvm, just read the first line

Edited March 4 by Ejecutor

[Thugmullet]

On 2/22/2024 at 10:23 PM, The Lost Sigmarite said:

Just a quick question : what’s your opinion on running units of

There great in 10.

But I think we have better options for bigger blocks for the cost.

As Neil H said but.. Great screening unit. Great unit in 10

[Thugmullet]

Played my first game last night with the fusiliers without blazing weapons mortals. Used a unit of 20. Played against Nurgle. Tough match up. I'll play them again, one games not anough but my initial takeaway is that there not worth there points anymore. Here's my logic. They really want 2 heroes in surport. You need one order for movement.. If you don't, then there not getting there fortified position and so there not getting there 2 shots. But you really also want the second hero to have counterfire ready to go. Counterfire is a very strong deterant for enemy shooting, I think it's strong and it's real protection for the other units around them. They also need a screen. So now we're up to 600+ points invested in 40 shots 4+ 4+ - 1 1 damage. But there actually more expensive than this. Because you absolutily need the comand trait for +1 +1..the points investment is just too big without it. That means your general has to be one of those 2 little heroes. That's an opurtunity cost of not being able to use another command trait on something else. That's a pretty easily killed general, You also really need to go Greywater because this unit really needs to do something every turn with its cost. So that's an extra command point every turn. And that's another opurtunity cost there, a big one actuly. I ran mysthavn last night. The abiility to move out of phase is strong. Espiesially for getting your hammers into position with out triggering redoply etc.. Great stuff. The result but, I was made to go second (I'm 2 drops) and I played that game with 1 command point per turn because one had to go to that shooting unit every time it shoots. I was starved the whole game. Hammers had to go in without all out attack, defences had to be done without all out defence, units with low bravery had to take rolls on runming away, run rolls that had to get me somewhere important had to be rolled. Just starved for points in every turn of every battleround.

Now, if that fusiliers unit did those extra mortals, it might be worth it because there roll is removing or at least profiling an important enemy unit per turn. They should be scary. But with out the mortals. Bloody pathetic. - 1 rend.. Who cares, every target just all out defenced. I don't think the unit did more than 6 points of damage in any turn. Yes it was nurgle, yes they have wards. But that's my point, this is a 600 point unit. It should be killing or profiling monsters at this cost. It was also one of the only sources of mortals in the army. This unit could not even kill an 8 wound, 200 point character with a 4+ save and 5+ ward. It did 6 wounds. Sorry about the long rant, I admit I'm salty about this. But I just don't understand why GW comes down on cities like this I really don't. Iv played them from day 1 of there first book. Iv played them a lot. I'm left with an army of 1 wound, low bravery, no mortal wound protected no mortal wound producing units that will find a hard counter (more than 1 for sure) in every tourniment played. I actually preferred the old book rules. We don't even have co alition units now to plug the gaps.

There's some other build options, I can see that, but there's really no other sources of reliable mortals that can put out to the spot I want them when I want them. I'm not interested in running 10 chariots or 6 Steamtank or these types of spam lists. There's nothing wrong with them, but I just dropped hundreds of dollars on new units already. I'm not spending hundreds more to have them change a warscroll and end up with 5+ of the same unit gathering dust in the cupboard. I think cities are going to be in a rough spot competitively going forwards.

Again, thanks for listening to this rant.  I just gotta get the salt out. I feel better all ready.

I know cities will be a fun army to play as usual, and fun to play against as well. I'm just disapointed, I thought for the first time we might have a shot of having a truly competitive book with multiple builds.. But I just suspect now we're back to we're we were.. Bottom middle. And we're also going to be one of the last books for AOS 4..power creep will not be fun for us.

[JackStreicher]

Speaking of 

 

is that model already abailable?

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

27 minutes ago, Thugmullet said:

Played my first game last night with the fusiliers without blazing weapons mortals. Used a unit of 20. Played against Nurgle. Tough match up. I'll play them again, one games not anough but my initial takeaway is that there not worth there points anymore. Here's my logic. They really want 2 heroes in surport. You need one order for movement.. If you don't, then there not getting there fortified position and so there not getting there 2 shots. But you really also want the second hero to have counterfire ready to go. Counterfire is a very strong deterant for enemy shooting, I think it's strong and it's real protection for the other units around them. They also need a screen. So now we're up to 600+ points invested in 40 shots 4+ 4+ - 1 1 damage. But there actually more expensive than this. Because you absolutily need the comand trait for +1 +1..the points investment is just too big without it. That means your general has to be one of those 2 little heroes. That's an opurtunity cost of not being able to use another command trait on something else. That's a pretty easily killed general, You also really need to go Greywater because this unit really needs to do something every turn with its cost. So that's an extra command point every turn. And that's another opurtunity cost there, a big one actuly. I ran mysthavn last night. The abiility to move out of phase is strong. Espiesially for getting your hammers into position with out triggering redoply etc.. Great stuff. The result but, I was made to go second (I'm 2 drops) and I played that game with 1 command point per turn because one had to go to that shooting unit every time it shoots. I was starved the whole game. Hammers had to go in without all out attack, defences had to be done without all out defence, units with low bravery had to take rolls on runming away, run rolls that had to get me somewhere important had to be rolled. Just starved for points in every turn of every battleround.

I agree with a lot here, but I think you are overstating the case just a little bit. In my experience playing Fusiliers, it is true that they want two heroes around them for Advance and Counter Fire. That has never been a huge problem for me, though: One of the heroes was typically Zenestra (who is able to give a bunch of units an order all at once with her long base) and the other (until now) was the Alchemite that I brought to buff them, anyway. And usually, past turn 1, they didn't actually need Advance all that much, because they were already in position in the middle of the board. So, in my mind, they don't need two dedicated heroes just babysitting them the whole game. They need one, and another one that can occasionally help out. Or you can run the Ven Densts for double orders at 160 points if you prefer that. Doralia is even a ranged attacker.

As the Fusiliers currently are, I don't think they need a lot of support, actually. But they do need the Master of Ballistics command trait to do any work at all. If you are worried about command points, it can go on a Freeguild Marshall. And then, I think, that's all you need. Your subfaction choice is still free that way, and you paid "only" 340+90=430 points for it. Definitely don't think that Greywater is needed (I think it's actually a trap choice). You can save on command points in other places during list building, too, such as by bringing a Hurricanum to give your hammers +1 to hit instead of using All-Out Attack for that purpose.

But the question is: Are Fusiliers currently worth an investment of 340 points + a hero + a command trait. I think even at that point, it's not clear. They are the best ranged human ranged attack option: 42 shot of 3/3/-1/1 is not bad. But the nerf left them a lot weaker off-turn. Their Counter Fire is no longer very scary. Their Unleash Hell is kind of a joke now. Those used to be very strong points before that, IMO, made them worth building around. Also, the command trait is actually a significant opportunity cost, because it dictates your general. That limits your ability to unlock battleline a lot, which means you have to run at least one Steelhelm unit, plus another or a Wildercorps most likely. Personally, that is actually the big thing pushing me away from Fusiliers when I try to build new lists. I find it hard to have them and still cover battleline efficiently at the same time.

As it stands, I suspect Fusiliers are not competitively viable. They definitely need a points drop back to at least 150 points, like they originally were. 170 is too high for them, given their current buff potential. I don't think we will see this drop before 4th edition, though. I have not yet played with Fusiliers under the new rules, but will play a game with a list that was originally built around the Alchemite/Fusilier combo in two weeks. My list is currently pretty janky, since it runs Master of Ballistics on the Alchemite, who now no longer has a reason to be close to the Fusiliers at all. I am still trying to work out what their new role will be. They should still be able to hit a unit pretty hard on-turn, with the Master of Ballistics buff. I still have Pall of Doom, so that gets around All-Out Defense and has the potential to force a big Battleshock loss. Other than that, I will try to see if they can do work with Suppressing Fire, but that order has been pretty difficult for me to make use of so far.

[Ejecutor]

5 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Speaking of 

 

is that model already abailable?

Yes. It is available at Warhammer World.

[Satyrical Sophist]

2 hours ago, Thugmullet said:

I'm not spending hundreds more to have them change a warscroll and end up with 5+ of the same unit gathering dust in the cupboard. I think cities are going to be in a rough spot competitively going forwards.

Again, thanks for listening to this rant.  I just gotta get the salt out. I feel better all ready.

I know cities will be a fun army to play as usual, and fun to play against as well. I'm just disapointed, I thought for the first time we might have a shot of having a truly competitive book with multiple builds.. But I just suspect now we're back to we're we were.. Bottom middle. And we're also going to be one of the last books for AOS 4..power creep will not be fun for us.

You kind of need to be super careful any time a shooting option is the “best”. There is just much less counter play to it, so GW is much more likely to err on the side of nerfs. I do really understand your frustration, but I’m not super surprised that they changed flaming weapons. It’s  just such a massive buff that still requires a cast to go off, so correctly balanced it’s either gonna be way too strong when it resolves or really disappointing when it doesn’t. They definitely should have reverted the points nerf though.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

2 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

You kind of need to be super careful any time a shooting option is the “best”. There is just much less counter play to it, so GW is much more likely to err on the side of nerfs. I do really understand your frustration, but I’m not super surprised that they changed flaming weapons. It’s  just such a massive buff that still requires a cast to go off, so correctly balanced it’s either gonna be way too strong when it resolves or really disappointing when it doesn’t. They definitely should have reverted the points nerf though.

I don't think anyone is surprised by the nerf, but given that the Castellite/Gunpowder units are a big draw in the new Cities range, it sucks that they are currently all kind of not worth seriously considering. I think it's valid to feel disappointed with GW for putting so little care into writing the Cities battletome that one of popular archetypes in it already had to be invalidated. It's also worth pointing out that the Fusilier nerf was not "they are more expensive now so their output might no longer be cost efficient" but "the interaction that made them good has been removed".

I agree with limiting the Alchemite spell to melee. I think overall that makes the book's design better. But ideally the version of the rule that made it apply to ranged weapons should have never even made it to print. We have known since Sentinels at least that ranged mortals on the hit roll are problematic. Right now we are in the bad situations that people have built and painted lists that just no longer work, and that situation could have been avoided.

 

 

[Satyrical Sophist]

25 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I don't think anyone is surprised by the nerf, but given that the Castellite/Gunpowder units are a big draw in the new Cities range, it sucks that they are currently all kind of not worth seriously considering. I think it's valid to feel disappointed with GW for putting so little care into writing the Cities battletome that one of popular archetypes in it already had to be invalidated. It's also worth pointing out that the Fusilier nerf was not "they are more expensive now so their output might no longer be cost efficient" but "the interaction that made them good has been removed".

I agree with limiting the Alchemite spell to melee. I think overall that makes the book's design better. But ideally the version of the rule that made it apply to ranged weapons should have never even made it to print. We have known since Sentinels at least that ranged mortals on the hit roll are problematic. Right now we are in the bad situations that people have built and painted lists that just no longer work, and that situation could have been avoided.

 

 

Oh its absolutely a foul up by GW on that front. 

 

Looking again at the ranged options for CoS you REALLY need to be working the command trait into Fusiliers to be worth it. I'm going to be normalising points for comparison here, so when I compare Fusiliers to Iron Drakes I'm assuming a theoretical 100 points of each.

Fusiliers shooting without moving and no buffs is fractionally worse than MOVING Irondrakes.

They are also outperformed by grape shooting Cannons at all points, Scourge Runner Chariots at all points. Outperformed by overloading steam tank commanders and about the same as overloading steam tanks (Better against high armour saves, worse against lower). 

 

Letting them have the command trait boosts output by 78% though. In contrast without the command trait AoA is boosting them by 33%. 

Scourge Runners are the only thing that gets an equivalent boost, getting an average of 75% or so boost from an all out attack from a fleet master. 

With the command trait (assuming all out attack command on both) then Fusiliers outperform moving Irondrakes (still significantly behind stationary iron drakes), ahead of the cannon (though only slightly if the cannon gets the command trait on its grapeshot), a little bit ahead of non fleet master boosted chariots and a bit ahead of both steam tanks. 

 

On a side note, for the cannon. With no buffs, you are best shooting the armour piercing shell at anything with a 3+ or better. At 4+ if grapeshot is in range, that becomes the best option if its in range, otherwise still the shell. For anything 5+ or worse you are best firing grapeshot or cannon if not in range for grapeshot. For all out attack, Shell until armour 5+ then grapeshot /cannon (grapeshot for preference). If you happen to have the command trait, grapeshot is better against 4+ as well.  

 

I think you currently need some pretty significant reasons to build into fusiliers. I own 20, and I'll get them painted but I do really think they need help.  At the moment I feel like another shooting option is often going to be better. For human synergies I feel like steam tank commanders are still very tempting. The wording on overload is actually until your next hero phase, so returning fire with them is still boosted, and though its not super efficient, they should have a reasonable chance of forcing suppression if you need it for a battle tactic, or multi charge.

For just ranged shenanigans I'd be more tempted by iron drakes and chariots. If you can work around the issues both have really good points. If you can get Iron Drakes in position they are pretty no fuss. Scourge runner chariots definitely have a cost issue, as well as a base size issue. Weirdly both options just randomly hit monsters harder as well.

 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

 

1 hour ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

Looking again at the ranged options for CoS you REALLY need to be working the command trait into Fusiliers to be worth it. I'm going to be normalising points for comparison here, so when I compare Fusiliers to Iron Drakes I'm assuming a theoretical 100 points of each.

Fusiliers shooting without moving and no buffs is fractionally worse than MOVING Irondrakes.

The math has certainly shifted in that regard. My rule of thumb that I use to quickly get an idea of how good a unit is, is that a 3+/3+ profile is about twice as good as 4+/4+ (in reality, it is slightly worse than that, but it's a good mental shortcut). Irondrakes at 1 3+/3+/-1/1 vs Fusiliers 2 4+/4+/-1/1 is about equal according to that. But currently, with the Fusiliers having a lower ceiling for buffs, maybe Irondrakes are actually starting to look more attractive. Although I have to say: I though Irondrakes were previously just overall not worth bringing, I don't know if it helps they are now relatively better compared to other units in the faction.

 

1 hour ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

Cannons

Currently, two cannons + Lord Ordinator looks pretty attractive compared to 20 Fusiliers + Master of Ballistics. But I would not buy into that list for the time being, with 4th ed being so close.

 

1 hour ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

think you currently need some pretty significant reasons to build into fusiliers. I own 20, and I'll get them painted but I do really think they need help.  At the moment I feel like another shooting option is often going to be better.

Agreed, and I would go further: I think Fusiliers currently don't have a role in Cities. Objectively, I don't think there is reason to run them.

 

1 hour ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

For human synergies I feel like steam tank commanders are still very tempting. The wording on overload is actually until your next hero phase, so returning fire with them is still boosted, and though its not super efficient, they should have a reasonable chance of forcing suppression if you need it for a battle tactic, or multi charge.

The Steam Tank Commander is just overall a really good and fun to play unit. It makes good use of nearly all the different orders and can self-buff with them. 100% still worth bringing even at 290. Its shooting may not look all that impressive, but is still fairly scary in actual play. If you run the Tank Commander with Hurricanum support (which I have found to combo very nicely), they will actually Return Fire at +1 to hit, which is unlikely for most other shooting units. And you can Return Fire on an opponent's Unleash Hell, which is not super reliable or practical, but very satisfying when you pull it off.

I really like two Steam Tanks Commanders + Hurricanum. That combo has won me several games so far and always felt strong. I think a natural match for the list, after adding good stuff like the Command Corps, would be to fill it with other high mobility units. 300 points of Cavaliers+Marshall certainly seem more attractive right now than 340 points of Fusiliers, that's for sure.

[Gitzdee]

Nvm.

Edited March 5 by Gitzdee

[Morathi is my Goddess]

If you're only going to run 20 fusiliers just ally in 20 idoneth reavers. Better mobility, dont need a command trait or hero investments. I dont think fusiliers do enough dmg to consider return fire as a good benefit.

Speaking competitively not thematically.

 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 hours ago, Morathi is my Goddess said:

If you're only going to run 20 fusiliers just ally in 20 idoneth reavers. Better mobility, dont need a command trait or hero investments. I dont think fusiliers do enough dmg to consider return fire as a good benefit.

Speaking competitively not thematically.

 

This really shows how out of whack the points are. Cities get basically two allegiance abilities: Orders and their subfaction bonus. The subfaction bonus typically does not help Fusiliers. So the only reason to bring them over an ally is access to Orders. If we have allies that can do more damage for fewer points and Orders are not enough to tip the scales, then Fusiliers are really in trouble.

Fusiliers are cool, though. I hope they rework their role somewhat in the next edition. Personally, I feel like they should be a unit that can be run as MSU and is good at receiving a charge (+1 rend on unleash hell or something). Before the battlescroll, they were functionally an artillery piece, which does not match the way the models look, IMO. Especially since cannons exist. Right now they are kind of without a role.

[Morathi is my Goddess]

Yeah cool idea, I hope so too! And if not I'll just take some time painting mine and they'll at least look good in the cabinet 🥲

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

39 minutes ago, Morathi is my Goddess said:

Yeah cool idea, I hope so too! And if not I'll just take some time painting mine and they'll at least look good in the cabinet 🥲

For me it's an excuse to finally build and paint the cavaliers and marshall I previously could not fit into my list. And to maybe try out a Gyrocopter on the table. 4th ed is bound to shake up everything anyway, maybe Fusiliers will be good again in 6 months.

EDIT: Eyeing up this list right now:

Allegiance: Cities of Sigmar
- City: Misthavn
- Grand Strategy:
- Triumphs:

Leaders
Alchemite Warforger (100)
Steam Tank Commander (290)
- Artefact: Glimmering
Steam Tank Commander (290)
- Artefact: Mastro Vivetti's Magnificent Macroscope
Pontifex Zenestra, Matriarch of the Great Wheel (180)
Battlemage on Celestial Hurricanum (260)
Freeguild Cavalier-Marshal (120)
- General
- Command Trait: Divine Champion
- Universal Prayer Scripture: Curse

Battleline
10 x Freeguild Steelhelms (100)
10 x Freeguild Steelhelms (100)
5 x Freeguild Cavaliers (180)
5 x Freeguild Cavaliers (180)

Units
6 x Freeguild Command Corps (200)

Total: 2000 / 2000
Reinforced Units: 0 / 4
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 115
Drops: 11

Edited March 6 by Neil Arthur Hotep

[JackStreicher]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

This really shows how out of whack the points are. Cities get basically two allegiance abilities: Orders and their subfaction bonus. The subfaction bonus typically does not help Fusiliers. So the only reason to bring them over an ally is access to Orders. If we have allies that can do more damage for fewer points and Orders are not enough to tip the scales, then Fusiliers are really in trouble.

Fusiliers are cool, though. I hope they rework their role somewhat in the next edition. Personally, I feel like they should be a unit that can be run as MSU and is good at receiving a charge (+1 rend on unleash hell or something). Before the battlescroll, they were functionally an artillery piece, which does not match the way the models look, IMO. Especially since cannons exist. Right now they are kind of without a role.

Cool idea! Their role could be to blunt a charge (those guys wear quite dome armour for mere Musketeers) and maybe a rule that allows stand + counter charge for a nearby unit. Or simply to always get to apply suppressive fire with stand & shoot

Edited March 6 by JackStreicher

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

55 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Or simply to always get to apply suppressive fire with stand & shoot

That's also something I would like. My problem with using suppressive fire so far has been that you can only trigger the order in your own shooting phase. Which means that to use it, you need to shoot but not kill a unit, beat its bravery, and then get it involved in melee and then have another one of your units in melee. All only on your own turn. Which is actually kind of hard to do.

If you could suppressive fire off of Unleash Hell (or any shooting attack) it would actually be super nice. Get charged, make them strike last, get in a hit with your Blazing Weapons bayonets. Seems like a fun interaction.