Mark Williams
-
Posts
659 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Mark Williams
-
-
21 minutes ago, Sagittarii Orientalis said:
So I just read the latest designer's commentary for the new Seraphon. The file addressed the much debated issue of 1+ save bastiladon and its interaction with rend characteristic. Below is the full query.
"Q: How does the Rend characteristic of attacks interact with the Bastiladon while it has a 1+ Save characteristic? A: An unmodified save roll of a 1 always fails. When a save roll is modified by the Rend characteristic of an attack, it can never be modified to less than 1. When a model has a Save characteristic of 1+, modified save rolls of 1 are successfully saved. This means, while the Bastiladon has a Save characteristic of 1+, only unmodified save rolls of 1 will inflict damage regardless of the Rend characteristic of the weapon used for the attack."
So even with rend -2 or -3 you cannot modify the save to below 1 as per the commentary. Will it help Stardrake weather high rend attacks which are common nowadays?(KoS, Terrorgheists, Salamanders, etc)
I doubt that it will help due to the fact that it is modifier rather than a base warscroll value. All modifiers are added at the same time, where as the bastilidon creates a situation where you start at 1 and then modify from there.
-
1
-
-
I love the idea of having a pegasus back in the army. I have one of the old Morathi models and would like to use that again.
Looking forward to the next book and hopefully some new models.
-
2 hours ago, Andrethegreat said:
Thanks! for the Information, this changes things, just when I thought I figured out how to make my vanguard army some what competitive, Now this. OK, this is a big set back, Not, sure. what I should do, I'm thinking about just walking away from Stormcast or AOS, As a new player I'm starting feel like I waste my money on a broken army, But still think you all for informing me.
Sorry you're have such a bad time with Stormcast. I admit they are in a bad place.
-
27 minutes ago, PJetski said:
I think 5x Salamanders is maybe the best use of 400 points in any stormcast list.
Ha.... do you think these guys are going to get nerfed at some point?
-
15 minutes ago, Nerdkingdan said:
So reading through this, I see a lot of “they should update stormcast”, why do people think they will do it soon?
There have been no rumor images, no rumblings that make that seem that it is soon. There was an accepted expectation that stormcast would see a new chamber every 12 months, but it didn’t happen. Not saying stormcast won’t see changes soon, just don’t see any evidence. As a new stormcast player all I read is shelve it until the new book, If a new book is soon I should stop building.
.
Although I don't want to sound unappreciative, in hindsight the last book was a huge letdown frankly. I spent a long time dreaming about how the next book might make my army play better, but instead we just got some new and (arguably) semi OP units that then quickly got nerfed in the next points update. The entire book needs a bit of an overhaul at this point. The units need new warscrolls, and someone really smart needs to take another look at synergies and hero roles and points values.
My biggest beef with SCE as an army right now is:
1. Our base infantry has a difficult time hold and taking objectives, because our army is primarily built around defense rather than offence. In keeping with that theme, we need a rule similar to what space marines have, where if our core troops (redeemer units) are near an objective, they automatically have control of it until they are completely dead.
2. Our troop-based shooting units are far too expensive for what they do. Our base archery units need to be reduced in price, but our rules need to be adjusted to keep Anvilstrike from abusing said discount.
3. We need warscroll bonuses for high numbers. 10 liberators should have their saves improved by +1 (does not stack with other abilities), or something along those lines.
It wouldn't take much but just a handful of changes like the above would make the army do a lot better on average. And that is what we need - a base improvement to our army. We don't need wacky force multiplier special rules to try to compensate for our weaknesses. We just need a better base army that helps all players and not just the handful of certain stormhosts who are capitalizing on a couple decent units in the book. A lot of this could be addressed with a GHB 2020 update, without releasing an entirely new book, imo.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:
@Mark Williams I don't particularly care for Anvilstrike either, I just don't think it's that oppressive. We've reached a point where most books can easily produce numerous lists that can stomp Anvilstrike, which is why its tournament performance keeps getting worse.
More importantly though I would be shocked if Anvilstrike wasn't totally removed. The CA working on missile weapons never fit with the lore for the stormhost and encourages a very anomalous playstyle that I doubt GW likes seeing for SCE. Regardless of how much of a powerboost they do or don't get in a theoretical new book, it would be quite a surprise if the list archetype doesn't get deleted wholesale.
Except for a few differences, I feel that we are in agreeance then, and this is all I wanted to say in the first place.
-
2 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:
@Mark Williams Indeed, your point seems to just be you don't like how Anvilstrike plays because it encourages a kind of counterplay you find dull. Seems kind of inane, really. You could levy an identical criticism against a huge proportion of strong armies. In fact I might even say armies that allow for 'interesting' counterplay are probably in the minority, because that would point to a serious and exploitable vulnerability.
It isn’t just that the counterplay is dull, it’s that it’s extremely rare and is only available to a handful of armies. There’s a lot of armies whose entire book doesn’t really have a workaround to deal with them. And my point is that I feel this is poor game design as it takes the strategy and gameplay out of the game. It makes for bad game experiences. And on top of all of that it’s more or less one of the FEW viable options to build a competitive list.
If GW’s eventual plan is to make all armies have unit options to potentially neutralise that sort of threat, then I think it’s fine to leave it in the book. It looks like that may be what they are doing.
But as I’ve said, my hope is that the next book moves away from encouraging anvilstrike armies. I’d rather see a more balanced and varied set of options for building competitive SCE lists.
-
15 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:
@Mark Williams Pretty sure it's only doing well if you compare it to other SCE lists which are mostly ineffective garbage.
Anvilstrike isn't podium material anymore, not by a long-shot.
The ability to podium isn’t the point.
-
45 minutes ago, firtahl said:
So on the bright side, we can now ally in Lord Kroak for 3 rolls giving a command points for each +4. That will make a big difference for me since I always feel starved for command points (even without playing shootcast). On top of that, he casts 4 spells and puts out the mortal W's, especially if you can get him close to the front lines. That plus his +4 FNP means he can be up close without getting auto killed. Something to tide SC over while we wait for a more modern set of WS's.
Even if Kroak isnt your jam, we can still take 4-5 units of slamanders which are out of control for sure. Id wait on that till after the faq, i cant image they survive as-is with that point cost.
Do we know how much he will cost yet?
-
55 minutes ago, schwabbele said:
You make so many wrong assumptions here, it is kinda obvious that you just try to justify your line of thinking . /done
If I was so wrong, Anvilstrike wouldn't be the best list going for SCE right now in the first place. There's a reason it's doing so well. The entire gameplay for opponents is trying to find a way to approach areas of the board where they won't get shot off in a single turn. You can only do that by either staying out of their range, staying out of their LOS while still grabbing an objective that is often in a central location, having so many bodies or resilience that you can weather their shooting, or killing them. Staying out of their range and staying out of LOS for the entire game is an automatic loss, so your only option is to either have enough bodies/toughness to withstand the damage for a few turns or having something in your list that can take them out reliably and fairly quickly (ie shoot them from out of their range or be able to cross the board and weave through any blockers and assault them and kill them in one turn). Very few armies can do this, and for all other's it's basically just a dull game experience. You put models down, you take models off, pack up and go home. I'm definitely not the only person who understands this. I've talked to way too many people who have expressed the same opinion to be accused of just making it all up.
-
7 hours ago, schwabbele said:
He didn't write that. Smart deployment != refusing to play.
Deploying outside of range of the raptors and then trying to create a situation where you can approach objectives and remain 24" away for the remainder of the game doesn't work. In affect, not engaging the raptors at their range is planning to just not attempt to win - ie refusing to play. Telling people, "Hey if you don't want to get shot just stay out of their range." is like telling someone, "Hey if you don't want to get wet just don't walk in the rain." It's fine advice until you have to actually go somewhere, then it's just nonsensical.
-
5 hours ago, Sagittarii Orientalis said:
I am afraid I do not follow you.
There are plenty of counterplay against Anvilstrike lists. Don't deploy valuable units within 24" of longstrikes so that their double shoot command ability cannot be used on crucial units.
Put the heroes within 3" of friendly units. Or even better, deploy terrain peaces cleverly and hide your important heroes for buffs.
Use numerical superiority to flood the SCE, which most of the factions can easily do. Aetherwings can be disposed of with even minimum shooting and magic. Or use double move abilities like Bladeds of Khorne and Orruk Warclans.
And surprise! You can actually beat the dreaded anvilstrike by using your own shooting! Raptors are surprisingly fragile for their points. OBR catapults, skaven artillery of any kind, CoS crossbowmen/handgunners/hurricanum, bonesplitterz, bastiladons/stegadons, etc.
The list goes on and on. And most of aforementioned factions actually have enough number of wounds to weather SCE shooting and counterattack with their own shooting. Running an Anvilstrike means bearing all these counterplay in mind, and that is far from "non-interactive" and effortless point and click play.
And if someone still firmly believes that Anvilstrikes are too strong, they need to remember how much a big unit of raptors cost: 510pts for 18 wounds 4+ save unit with 9 models. That is over a quarter of an entire army. Of course they should be powerful when used correctly.
Or are these people implying that SCE unit should never be powerful no matter how expensive and fragile that would be? Then my only answer is: Git Gud.
Hiding is not a counter play. You cannot win by refusing to play. Every mission is an automatic loss if you run away. There are very few armies that can deploy outside of range of the raptors, and then generate a counter play within the span of a single turn. But I will of course admit there are always occasional exceptions.
I concede that terrain could theoretically be used as a counter play, except that every tournament that I’ve been to for the past 3 years doesn’t have such mythical terrain, and it’s been preset before the game starts in any case. The best I’ve ever seen is maybe a fairly large tower in the center of the board, but realistically you would need several buildings in a central position on the table for that to be a viable discussion point. In short I don’t really even recognize this as a valid point.
As to the remainder of your points, you’re just pointing out examples where anvilstrike doesn’t automatically win, therefore there’s no problem. However, by that logic, any army that doesn’t have basically a 90% win rate can never, ever be criticized. Which imo is clearly a logical fallacy, because it’s a preamble to just shutting any discussion down whatsoever.
Anyway, my issue with anvilstrike has nothing to do with it’s win rate, it’s how it plays. It seeks to create “no win” scenarios as efficiently as possible, with virtually no room to let the dice decide. It creates an unfun atmosphere where people walk away with poor experiences and bad impressions of the army. I am not saying that other armies do not also do this, I’m just saying that the existence of other “bad” armies doesn’t magically make it okay. Also, I’m not saying GW agrees with me, as it seems every new army that comes out just ramps up the power creep.
But, as I said, I don’t think this sort of design is good for us, and I HOPE that GW will make a better book when we get a new one, instead of doubling down on poor design choices.
-
I love it. Great work!
-
While I agree that stormcast is in a bad place, anything that shuts down or counters anvilstrike is a good thing imo. The anvilstrike’s core strategy involves essentially removing any interactive play from opponents and creating an experience where your opponent just systematically removes their units one by one with very little engagement. I sincerely believe GW can’t be happy with that sort of gameplay persisting indefinitely in the game, and remaining a dominant strategy of sce armies. I don’t see anvilstrike living past the next book in its current form personally. I realise this post is going to get downvoted, but I seriously think anvilstrike lists are boring and one note for both you and your opponents, and bad for the game and the army.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, PiotrW said:
Hey guys, quick question!
Larissa Shadowstalker. Is she worth getting? Is she even legal? She's not on any GHB list or in the Warscroll Builder... So, can you use her special rules in Matched Play? What is her point cost, if so?
I would take her in small narrative games or in campaign games like Path to Glory (1k or less). For competitive Matched play, no probably not.
-
1 hour ago, ZLee Syn said:
Well, i know the orb. I ment the wording on tyrant or bloodspiller or what it is. I dont even know what faction is that from (ogers?)
Haha, sorry, I honestly don't have a clue what unit they are talking about.
-
1 hour ago, ZLee Syn said:
Can you provide vording of that ability? I dont know what you are exactly refering too.
QuoteOrb of Enchantment: To glance into the swirling
depths of this crystal orb is to become hypnotised by
alluring visions and half-glimpsed futures.Once per battle, at the start of the combat phase, you
can pick an enemy HERO within 3" of the bearer. In
that combat phase, that enemy hero may not pile in,
attack or use abilities. -
From the core rules FAQ:
QuoteQ: The core/matched play rules say that allies cannot use or benefit from allegiance abilities. There seems to be quite a number of situations where the question of what ‘benefit from’ means. Could you explain please?
A: Certainly. It means that battle traits do not apply to and cannot be used by allied units. In addition, it means that allied units cannot receive allegiance abilities that you choose (or roll for) for certain types of unit in your army, such as command traits, artefacts of power or spells from spell lores. Note that, in the second case, allied units can be affected by such allegiance abilities when they are used (or would otherwise take effect) during the battle, as long as no other restrictions apply. For example, you could not choose an allied Wizard to know a spell from a spell lore, but an allied unit could be affected by the spell if it was cast. In addition, any scenery rules for faction-specific terrain features apply to allied units during the battle.
My interpretation of this rule means that Scions of the Storm applies to Stormcast Eternals units only. If Allies could be used to put more SCE units in the sky, that would fall under the blanket of allies "benefitting" from an allegience ability, albeit indirectly, but still.
I've never played it any other way.
I also interpret the Scions of the Storm wording to basically preface that everything it's talking about applies to Stormcast Eternals units only. So when it refers to units anywhere else in the text, there's an assumed and unwritten "stormcast eternals" adjective before every instance of the word unit.
Worded a different way, it would look like this:
QuoteInstead of setting up a STORMCAST ETERNAL unit on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and say that it is set up in the Celestial Realm as a reserve STORMCAST ETERNAL unit. You can set up one reserve STORMCAST ETERNAL unit in the Celestial Realm for each STORMCAST ETERNAL unit you have set up on the battlefield. At the end of your movement phase, you can set up one or more of the reserve STORMCAST ETERNAL units in the Celestial Realm on the battlefield, more than 9" from any enemy units. Any reserve STORMCAST ETERNAL units in the Celestial Realm that are not set up on the battlefield before the start of the fourth battle round are slain.
I believe there's enough precedence between what's written in the core rules and the FAQ to point to the fact that the one use of the "STORMCAST ETERNAL" keyword at the top of the description applies to every mention of the word "unit" that follows.
But yes, I'll agree it could have been written more clearly so as to remove any discussion...
-
4 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
I don't see anything in the FAQs or Commentary, so the rule in the book itself would lead me to conclude for the contrary:
"Instead of setting up a STORMCAST ETERNAL unit
on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and say
that it is set up in the Celestial Realm as a reserve unit.
You can set up one reserve unit in the Celestial Realm
for each unit you have set up on the battlefield"
It’s the part that clarifies that only stormcast eternals have this rule, and that it doesn’t apply to allies. I’ll look it up in 30-45 mins.
-
1 hour ago, Boobashamaka said:
Hello,
Question: I have 2 units of Idoneths in my army as allies. I set them on the table iny deployment. Does it mean that I can put 2 units in the sky for these 2 ally units?
The wording of the rule says "for each unit on the table" so I would say yes but as they are allies I have a doubt.
Thank you for helping clarifying!!
It is only for stormcast units on the table. There IS something in either the wording of the Scions rule, or the allegiance page just before that, that makes it clear, but I don't have my book with me at the moment.
-
20 minutes ago, Desolater said:
Cheers for you in-depth answer and if am playing against monsters then will definitely give this a try. What if my opponent has 0 monsters?
Same strategy. Just try to drop and kill something really big or valuable .
-
Maybe Astral Templars. Something like this.
Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Astral Templars
Mortal Realm: Ghur
Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger (220)
- General
- Command Trait: Dauntless Hunters
- Celestial Staves (Artefact): Staff of Focus
- Spell: Chain Lightning
- Mount Trait: Wind Runner
Lord-Ordinator (140)
- Artefact: Godbeast Plate
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces
3 x Castigators (80)
Celestar Ballista (110)
Hailstorm Battery (120)
Extra Command Point (50)
Total: 980 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 2
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 38
Basic idea is you set up the LA and sequitors close to each other and put the battalion in the sky. 4 drops should give you a decent chance to determine who goes first.
If you see a good opportunity to alpha strike your opponent, use the before game move to move your sequitors and LA forward 6". otherwise move them back 6" and give your opponent first turn.
Use Chain Lightning with Staff of Focus and try to snipe a pack of units (hero) if you can.
The ballista should try to aim for any monsters. If you want to go all in, spend 3 CP before shooting to RR 1s on both the castigators and ballista, and a CP on your ballista to add + 1 to wound against monsters. With good luck you'll overkill just about any monster you should face at 1k.
Try to drop at the bottom half of a turn so that you can get a chance for a double turn.
Also, use your range. The castigators and ballista have an 18" range, so drop at your max distance.
Also, if going extremely competitive, don't forget to roll yourself a triumph if you're less points than your opponent.
-
2 hours ago, Desolater said:
Hey guys, I have my first 1000 pts tournament coming up (it’s more of a beginners thing). I just want to learn more about how to utilise our strengths etc. Here’s my list of what I have painted and therefor my 1000pts list. Looking for recommends on stormhost or traits etc please.
LAoGC, 5 Seq, 10 Seq, Lord Ordinator, 2x Ballistas =970
Cheers
Paint 3 castigators and take the battalion in trade for one of the ballista. Put it in the sky. Take 5 sequitors out. Give the LA the Staff of Focus artefact and the LO a melee artefact . Buy an extra CP if you have points left. Otherwise buy the endless spells if you can afford it and take the vortex. Put chain lightning on the LA and combo it with staff of focus 1 turn. Use one of the extra CPs to give castigators rr1s and -2 tend on the drop. GL
-
That would be interesting to try.
AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion
in Stormcast Eternals
Posted · Edited by Mark Williams
My hobby group has a rough set of guidelines for playing casually.
1. No named characters. We talk out any exceptions, but as a general rule, none.
2. Don’t spam your best units. IE. Long strikes, evocators, ballistas, etc
3. Avoid missions with instant win conditions. IE. The game ends on turn 3.