Satyrical Sophist

What is your fun list Jack? How many points did you go up?

I don't think there is anyway I'd put Nurgle as top tier right now, and the lists that are performing well are mostly very blightlord based, opening up other options is good. Your table there doesn't seem much like there like other meta results based lists I've seen and looks very focused only on 5-0 and 4-1..that's not all GW (and a lot of players) care about. An army that always goes 3-2 won't win any tournaments but isn't ideal to have with a 60% win rate. My understanding is that at least half of the vampire subfactions are doing well, with quite different builds? Seems like vampires might just be overall a bit too good, in which case a 10 to 15% point bump seems reasonable. I hope they don't plummet down the table rankings, but I don't think they will. One problem with spirit gale is just that it effects armies so wildly differently. Some armies are barely effected, other armies are going to be messed up by it. It's also very interactive.

I think some of it is that it can turn limited factions into more indepth factions. Take Gloomspite Gits. If you want to go trog heavy you can, and there are rewards, but if you end up getting bored of just trolls you can branch out, get some squigs, or goblins or spiders. You don't need to start w completely new army. I suspect a lot of primarily trog players wouldn't have started if they knew the army could only ever be trogs.

They've been pretty actively balancing and changing the endless spells. I think they might have just decided that they had enough? I think the incarnate turns out to be too powerful for what they were intending and it made them cautious about new ones.

I might be wrong, but I think one unit of gutrippas, 1 unit of hob grots and a unit of brutes is the cheapest. Works out as 370, or effectively 123.3 per battle line choice. I don't know if the 50 points you save is worth it, but if it was tight.

I think the fancy shield is called a Pavise, which I think is neat. The rule for basing is (as far as I can remember) that it should be the same size as the bases that come in the box. This one is a bit of a cluster frag honestly since they've changed base size with the same models sometimes. Nurgle piper came on a 40 but nurgle base size list says 32. I think the Warden King used be on a 25 and is now on a 32 etc. You should try and do this if you can, since base size can make quite a difference (25s being able to fight in 2 ranks for 1" range, or 3 ranks for 2"), and has a big influence on how much space the unit as a whole takes up, a little under 60% more space for a unit on 32s than 25s. It also makes a massive difference for coherency. Particularly if you are proxying, matching base size is a big one. Those Fusiliers look awesome Myrdin, hope you find out soon! From looking at Fusiliers I think they are on 32s, since they are visually distinct enough from the human characters that I don't think they'll feel the need to put them on 28s. I've not had a go working out from the photographs though.

I thought it was the harbinger thing, the grimhold exile being one of them. The other reason is that FS are one of the 1st edition mini factions, and with FEC getting some kind of update, and rumours of Slyvaneth getting something as well.

I think it's really good that female dwarfs look muscular and burly, I really don't like the world of warcraft approach where the males of a each species look distinct and the female version are just the human female with a slight colour change and maybe horns or cloven feet.

Warcry bands have a reasonably good rate of playability. The true meme might be the pain of removing adorable pets. I fear running the new cities warband because you often will want to pull doggos first. I think a lot of the non chaos warbands are actually pretty playable, and some of the chaos ones are really good, there are just so many that having them all be good is a pipe dream. Thinking about it the only whiff I can think of outside of slaves to darkness is the Tzeench one, which has such strong competition from horrors (for durability) and kairics for cheap battle line.

He's a big ol' boy. The lodestone seems WAY more consistent than I was expecting.

My 2k + of rotated Aelves is dang well gonna be in cities. I have 10 actual black guard, but 30 Phoenix Guard will be joining them. Possibly if they get removed then I'll have old school dark elf Idoneth

I'm trying to decide what to use my unbuilt frostheart phoenix for. Dreadlord on dragon is one possibility.

They come in a bit ahead of Cannon without All out Attack and a bit behind cannon with all out attack when you account for points. I was considering Sevireth in Settler's Gain. He isn't super efficient, but he can do targeted mortal wounds in addition, and move ridiculously fast to threaten objectives.

Right in the wallet

Would you mind spending a little bit longer formatting your messages, it is pretty hard to read and parse. I understand that english isn't your first language, but all the sentences are blurring together. I'm just talking about a book I'm quite enthusiastic about that looks like a lot of fun to play. This forum isn't relentlessly competitively focused, a fact I'm pretty happy with. I think there is a middle ground between tournament grinding meta seeking and wanting to play well. If a very new person was getting into AoS and wanted to start CoS I would recommend the following. The newer units are likely to be around long term. Older units might stay, they might not stay. If you enjoy the look and want to paint older units, go ahead but be aware that they might not be around in 3 years. It helps if you give some thought to where you might play the units if they rotate out. For example, Dawn Riders in Lumineth are the same base size as Drakespawn Knights, and both are Aelf Cavalry. There are a number of places for the Dark/High Elves to go, even if another faction isn't released. Some units are going to be harder to place though. I think Drake Spawn Chariots could be rebased on 90 by 52 ovals to be used as Sharks in Deepkin. Getting into an army takes a long time, and metas can change famously fast. I'd be more careful about buying a lot of copies of an Old World unit more than getting a huge number of Fusiliers say, but I'd still be cautious about getting 10 units of Fusiliers. Some units are better overall than others. If you want to play competitively you probably want to focus primarily on the better units. Some of the better units are only better due to finite buffs though. For shooting I think the first Fusilier unit buffed by a Warforger is the best choice. After that point though if you want additional shooting (You might, you might not) then I think you are better off using a different shooting choice. Potentially that is Iron Drakes, potentially Scourge Runners. Probably not currently cannons. Some of the less good units may be better in some different situations. If you have a sorceress then Dreadspears suddenly have an upside over Corsairs. There are definitely some units that I'd struggle to see the point in using, because the alternative is TOO similiar, but better. Examples of that would be I'd struggle to ever want to run a Sorceress on Black Dragon over a Dreadlord. Similarly I don't see myself ever wanting Bleak Swords over Dreadspears. Same for Battlemage on Griffon over the Marshal version. Maybe I should look more into some of these, but from what I've seen I'd struggle to justify them.

Unfortunately I think there is a good chance none of that is errata. I've had a look through the book and every time you see Hammerer's appear in the art they don't have a command squad. I think this might be a deliberate choice they made. If thats the case its a shame, but there is a sort of thematic sense to it. I don't think the shield has rules, might just be a look thing. As for the iron drakes defence against shooting, I think that is also an intended removal, they already have 2 different unit rules, and they've been cutting down on them. As I said, I think black guard are probably better. They are more locked into a buffing piece than the ironbreakers though. Iron breakers can be buffed by a rune lord directly, but you could have that runelord buffing Iron Drakes instead, or buffing hammerers and hanging back close enough to the Iron breakers to still order them. The opponent doesn't know whether the runelords order is going to be shieldwall or counter charge. There are definite builds with the warden king working with hammerers as well, where he is there and can potentially order. I do agree that the cogsmith is fully underwhelming, he should definitely be cheaper, acting as a budget dwarf hero. I think you need to stop looking at things in such a simplified top trumps, it achieves nothing and only really makes people who like the non optimal option feel bad.

Yeah, you are going to want screening units for them, which does add to the cost. One of the reasons I like corsairs is as a screen that can inflict some mortal wounds on the enemy as they go down, while also being a target to buff up with ten blades if you get an opportunity. Ironbreakers are behind black guard in my own personal rankings, but a 3 up save shouldn't be underestimated, particularly since you can AoD and Mystic shield on top of it. 3+ being able to get to 2+ can be pretty nuts. You do have access to the -1 to be wounded prayer as well. The sorceress can also do a -1 to wound, but that works on enemy units, rather than your own and is considerably more enemy dependant. I think direct comparisons can be a bit wrong here. Even if black guard are OVERALL better they have advantages and disadvantages and also lock you into a sorceress (who I think is a fantastic unit, don't get me wrong) if you want the ward save.

A trio of scourgerunner chariots is actually more damage than you might think with fleetmaster buff. This is the output for a unit of three with AoA from a fleetmaster, which is pretty close on a points base to the flaming fusiliers. I've not factored in the fleetmaster in the points efficiency though, because I think you have him primarily for Corsairs, which the scourgerunner buff being incidental. 0+ 2.74, 1+ 4.59, 2+ 6.44, 3+ 9.19, 4+ 11.93, 5+ 14.67, 6+ 15.56, 7+ 16.44. If it happens to be vs a monster it jumps. 0+ 3.67, 1+ 6.44, 2+ 9.22, 3+ 12.89, 4+ 16.56, 5+ 20.22, 6+ 21.11, 7+ 22.00.

Which order are you calling the Castelite one? Do you mean Advance in formation? Because plus 3 move is very useful even not getting the fortify part at the end, I think the movement boost might be even more important if you want to run a heavy dwarf base, since jumping to 7 movement is really important to them. I might be wrong, but I think if you want to have a second castle then Iron Drakes seem like a better choice than Fusiliers, they marginally underperform non flaming weapons command trait Fusiliers when moving and massively over perform when staying still. Since you can only have one flaming weapons cast a turn, it feels like any shooting you want separate should probably be either Iron Drakes, or possibly scourgerunner chariots. Speaking of other shooting units, the Steam Tank Commander's output isn't actually too bad, and with overload and AoA expects to do a total of 5.6 sounds to. 3+, 7.8 to a 4+, 9.9 to a 5+ and 12 .1 go a 6+, which seems like it has a very good chance of triggering suppressing fire. I'm hoping for something like this

I'm not really sure why I'm replying since I don't think you are doing any of this in good faith and have a history of getting rules wrong and cherry picking points, but I'll give it a try! Anyone here play Slaanesh? I don't think the blissbarb build gets depravity so high normally, they don't have much of a way to trigger euphoric killers unless you let them. I've generally seen lists running the Masque, or the close combat mounted guys for early points) That said, allowing it, Iron Drakes shooting Blissbarbs with a 5++ do the same expected damage to Blissbarbs after the ward as the Blissbarbs do back. Fusiliers do less total damage than Iron Drakes to Blissbarbs (4.38 rather than 5), but take considerably less back (3.05 to 4.19 depending on how generous you are with letting Blissbarbs not bother with the rend debuffs they can't use). As I said though, I think Blissbarbs are probably too good and I hope they get a nerf in the next points change, along with other slaanesh units getting a buff. I think the game is better when spamming all one unit is not the right call.

I'm relatively hopeful that they'll be something they can be used as in other armies. Probably lumineth, but deepkin are a possibility as well, even assuming no Malerion faction. I'm not sure I'm taking the lack of art as proof though, if they were making new city dwarfs and elves I don't know if they'd spoil how they looked this early. It's possible that if won't work out, but who knows? It does feel like another wave is coming. I'm hoping that it's humans first, then second wave finishing off humans and adding some of other species. I do want city ogor as well. You're welcome I guess! I have read the table thanks yeah. I don't think GW are likely to read it the same as you will though. As I said, I think Iron Drakes suffer from movement issues, it's definitely their weakspot, and might make them not worth using. What I was surprised by was how comparable to fusiliers without flaming weapons they were when they move, and when they remain stationary they are pretty close to fully buffed Fusiliers. If you figure they are going to have to move around 1.5 turns that's pretty close to the chance of flaming weapons failing. They are doing that with no support, so if you aren't wanting to go all in on building your castle, dwarfs might actually be an ok idea, Hammerers end up working quite well as a hammer. Appropriately enough I suppose. I'm not too concerned with them being out performed by blissbarb, especially given those numbers are achieved with pretty much the optimum damage using a total of 1490 for one, and 1620 for the other. That's even before you factor in widespread speculation that Blissbarbs are going to be nerfed. There are definite points in cities favour, a 4+ save is a lot more durable than a 6+, particularly if it's either unrendable at range (fusiliers) or the unit can get a 5+ Ward in combat (Iron Drakes).

The FAQ team are for frequently asked questions, not "I want this unit to be better". Iron drakes currently are surprisingly effective. They are just a massive pain in the butt to get into range. I just wish they had the castellite keyword, or were eligible to use suppressing fire with. It feels like if they could use the orders more they wouldn't need much else. I wish the Advance in Position order worked with them, or at least Misthaven/Living City. I do wonder whether early drafts might have been too easy to abuse, and these are the "Safe" Iron Drakes. Moving Irondrakes aren't as far below non flaming weapons Fusiliers than I expected. Damage numbers in the table below have been standardised to 100 points of unit. Assuming 10 Iron drakes, 20 Fusiliers, 20 Fusiliers with a Warforger, 10 Blissbarbs, 88 Blissbarbs and 5 Seekers and assuming pretenders for triple AoA. If you had Irondrakes at 110 points they would be far and away the most efficient unit in the army. Not included in the table below are scourgerunner chariots, they are surprisingly efficient, a unit of 3 with a fleetmaster to all out attack for the bonus shooting is pretty close to fully buffed up Fusiliers, and actually beats everything here against vs monsters. Save AoA Irondrakes Moved AoA Irondrakes Stationary AoA Fusiliers Flaming Weapons AoA CT Fusiliers AoA Blissbarbs 88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers for Rend 88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers and Shardspeaker for Rend AoA Irondrakes Moved at 110 points AoA Irondrakes Stationary at 110 Points 0+ 0.64 1.27 0.78 2.59 1.22 1.04 1.85 0.93 1.85 1+ 0.75 1.50 0.78 2.59 1.22 2.01 2.81 1.09 2.19 2+ 1.39 2.78 1.56 3.39 2.43 3.05 3.77 2.02 4.04 3+ 2.03 4.05 2.33 4.19 3.65 4.10 4.73 2.95 5.89 4+ 2.66 5.32 3.11 4.99 4.86 5.14 5.69 3.87 7.74 5+ 3.30 6.60 3.89 5.78 6.08 6.18 5.75 4.80 9.60 6+ 3.82 7.64 4.67 6.58 7.29 6.26 5.75 5.56 11.11 7+ 3.82 7.64 4.67 6.58 7.29 6.26 5.75 5.56 11.11

If you fully * out a word people are going to assume the worst, particularly when a different, harsher word also fits. Something like sc*wed is clear. Otherwise you risk people assuming the word starts with F. I apologise if it seemed like escalating, was attempting to explain why I thought it was aggressive. I know the first table did not account for points. Every other table has. Specifically comparing fusiliers with AoA, command trait and flaming weapons to Blissbarbs with AoA then once you factor in the fact that Fusiliers are 21% more expensive then Blissbarbs are more efficient when shooting targets with 4+ or worse saves. Fusiliers are more efficient Vs 3+ and better. Blissbarbs honestly seem really amazing. I don't think anyone is trying to say that Fusiliers are too good. I think they are a good unit in cities of sigmar, and interact really well with orders. I don't know what agenda you think people have. I'm just trying to work out how different units interact, and what we can expect them to do. The comparison to Blissbarbs came about because people were disappointed in the damage output of Fusiliers and having a successful shooting unit compare to is a useful thing. One thing I've found looking at the numbers is that if you have a fully buffed up fusilier unit rerolling hits then you are usually better off fishing for 6s unless the target has a 5+ or worse save. That's not a thing I would have known without actually checking it. I really don't want you to "just not say anything" . Can you tell me what I have done wrong in this tables that I've been posting? I might have, I realised when I was looking at drake spawn knights that I had the wrong number of mount attacks at first and corrected them. First table I included is taking the expected damage for each unit, then dividing by the number of points, then multiplying to get what a theoretical 100 points of that unit would be. So 5.1 buffed Fusiliers Vs 5.56 AoA Blissbarbs and so on. That's the one with Fusiliers getting 3.39 expected to a 2+ and 6.58 expected to no armour save. Blissbarbs are 2.37 to a 2+ save 7.12 to no armour save. The second table I included looks at how many points of each unit is needed to do 1 damage to a target. Both factor in the different points cost for the unit. What would you like me to do? I keep explaining how I am factoring in points and you don't seem to be reading it. I might be factoring them in wrong, but if I am I don't understand how.

That's a quote from your original response, you have since edited. Generally when people use asterisks they are trying to evade the censors and the starred out word is a curse word. if I understand what you were trying to type that's a very rude way of putting an already very impolite accusation. I'm going to be short on this, and not go into quote storm. The numbers Neil Arthur Hotep quoted originally do include all the buffs he noticed, it's not comparing buffed to unbuffed units. He listed the buffs he included which include hero buffs and spells. He may not have included every buff possible (specifically he missed blissbarb seekers conditional improvement to rend), but he listed which buffs he included and I think got most of them. He included the points of the buffing units in the cost. That's why fusiliers are down as 390 points for 20, and blissbarbs are down as 320. What he didn't do is factor the cost into that, which is a perfectly legitimate thing to quote, since it's what you expect that unit to do in damage. I took his numbers and factored in the cost. I actually did it two ways..the first way is that I took the damage numbers for fusiliers and divided by the cost of the unit of fusiliers, then multiplied by 100 to get a uniform view of what 100 points of unit can expect to do. It's a slightly arbitrary point value to set to, but I think it works quite well as a comparison. The other way I factored in the cost was working out how many points worth of fusiliers or blissbarbs it would take to do one point of damage, which JackS wanted to see. That also factors in the cost so 390 points of Fusiliers expects to do 13.22 damage to a 2+ save, so 390 points divided by 13.22 damage gets you an expected 29.05 points of Fusiliers to expect to do 1 damage to a 2+ save. I did a full set of tables for each of the lists options. Thanks Myrdin! I do know about Wahpedia, and did check the exact wording but since I don't play Skaven it's a lot more reliable to ask somehow who plays the faction for which buffs to apply and I can check for exact wording when I know what to look for. Even something like "Lore spell and battle trait buff" is enough to make it so I don't miss something. I'll have a look at numbers in the morning, if I get too excelly/Google sheets late at night I end up too awake to get to sleep!

I can include Rattling Guns if you'd like! What buffs would you like on them that aren't on the warscroll, I don't have the Skaven book.