Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


whispersofblood last won the day on July 11

whispersofblood had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

135 Celestant-Prime

About whispersofblood

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Once you take Thermalrider cloak you can't take Sword of Judgement so that is a non-issue. It doesn't put out consistent mw outside of charging, a KoS will generally put out as many MW as a charging Exalted Chariot, and more in the second round, or second pile-in. If you are talking about model diversity sure, but there is no ability based assessment to say it is more versatile, unless you meant different. In which case sure I agree its different. Also its much easier to summon a contorted Epitome or any version of Bladebringer than a KoS. Ignoring any abilties the Exalted Chariot does 5 wounds to a 4+ save unit, a KoS does about 7.4 wounds to a 4+ save unit. The both average less than one additional wound against a 5+ save unit. Each 6 to hit is worth .33 of an additional dmg on a Bladebringer at best, where on a KoS that is the worst, followed by .87 and 2.87. So even in the singular horde unit task the KoS puts out more dmg. The Bladebringer fills the same base role, single model dmg dealer, its has one ability the KoS does not, and that is acquiescence which is obviously useful. So not only do you get more dmg, you get a better locus, an extra cast, a GD spell, more depravity, more speed, and you are always in range of Excess of Violence. I think this would be more of a discussion if fiends or something generated depravity or if you don't have a enrapturess in your list already otherwise I'm struggling to find a reason why 3 KoS isn't just always going to be better than 2 and some other combat model.
  2. How is a bladebringer more versatile than a KoS?
  3. Yeah that follows, your combat elements don't generate their own locus.
  4. What isn't niche about a set up though? All set ups are niche until they are mainstream. I feel like I've already outlined the underlying factors for why HoS are exceling. You haven't I'm curious about what actual mechanic and impact you can point out to show that the winrate is based on something other than HoS not playing the heavily trade/alpha meta game that exists. DoK were over powered for mechanical reasons. They were tough enough, hitty enough, immune to battleshock, could rerolls the only spell they needed to cast, with the best specific blocker piece in the game (Morathi), had the best board manipulation AND high numbers of models. The game has come a long way since then and while few armies are as tough, many are as or more hitty. HoS are winning games because you can't alpha them off the board and everyone has built their army to deliver game ending combat phases. It's really not more complicated than that. HoS would have a much lower winrate if DoK hadn't vanished off the face of the earth, and I expect CoS to be a hard match up. If you want to beat HoS start by building your army to play 10 turns. If you want to slam your army into a HoS player's prepared defences you're probably not going to do well.
  5. I don't think I've ever not had thermalrider cloak in my list so that precludes sword of judgement right of the bat. But even I went hydrox my next item is rod of misrule. Perhaps I'm playing my epitome wrong. Typically I let my KoS dispel the low value cast rolls and let the epitome reach for the big casts. I've not found it to be particularly good at that role, and I don't need rrs to beat a 5 typically. Usually it's the bonuses to cast that give me the issues not the actual dice roll. Changing an 8 to a 6 when you add +2 or more is still outside my reach reliably. I find hysterical frenzy to not really be all that good an astute opponent just has to pre-measure and keep one model out of range and the unit is immune to the spell. It's also extremely variable in actual output making it probably the most unreliable horde spell, in average you you'll kill a third of a 1 wound unit. For the same points you can ally a Gaunt Summoner on balewind, and roll a die for each model within 24", increasing the number of viable targets and the eventual dmg is to that unit( half vs 1/3) I do have the Enrapturess in my list and a second has been my first summon almost every game. It might just be a playstyle thing since my entire game plan is built around basically not fighting combats that I don't wipe in one round, and trading KoS for a new KoS when I've spent the first one.
  6. Not really that niche Tyrants of Blood is probably the default bloodthirster set up. And we want to compare real examples of these objects. You haven't really addressed my analysis of the Blackout results either. Also Depravity and Summoning are literally just an allegiance abilities.
  7. Tbh I find the Epitome pretty meh, since I don't use blocks where horrible fascination has value. And, the majority of my damage over the course of the game comes from my KoS anyway. I think I would be more interested in the epitome if it had access to generally more dmging spells. Its biggest draw to me is overwhelming acquiescence. I'll see if I can buy/build/paint one in time for an event.
  8. It's basically necessary if you want to play the army. GW have done a good job making the Greater daemons key to playing the marked factions.
  9. Invaders is pretty clearly the winner, followed by godseekers and Pretenders last. Has anyone else been funding their lists drift towards 3 KoS? I find I'm just taking different things for list diversity rather than actual best choices.
  10. Summoning is similar to every other aspect of the game, model count, magic, movement, combat, why not make all armies the same? That isn't a reasonable suggestion. Its similar to saying every faction should have the same amount of unbinds. These things aren't directly comparable, you have to look at these things as their abstraction. Why do HoS summon models, Why does Khorne have unstoppable magic, and high rate of unbind accumulation? Its an inherent part of the faction, but you wouldn't say every faction should have some similarly paced mirror of that ability. All these factions have one thing in common they are playing the same game, trying to score points on objectives. How they specifically go about that goal varies wildly even if the focus of that strategy might be called the same thing. If Your argument is that somehow because they are all skinned in a Chaos sleeve that these 5 factions should do things similarly you are playing Chess my man not AoS. Khorne Summoning is not the crux of blood tithe, and that people think that is a detriment to their ability to properly play Khorne. The closest mirror would be Nurgle, and in a game about taking board positions with numbers of bodies Nurgle's natural abilities to remain on the board, far outstrip HoS ability to remove models. They are playing the game from opposite directions, now you can play Nurgle like they are HoS it just won't go well, and you can in a fashion play a denial game with HoS but it looks way different. So, if the goal is to have more bodies on more objectives, so you win the game, durability is a huge factor that should be taken into account when determining how fast a faction should add models to the board, as its the eventual factor that wins the game. Also Nurgle summoning isn't locked to the location of removable characters, they can summon from their own terrain. Which means I can put a tree close enough that the front can be 9" away from an objective a summon onto said objective. You are seeing summoning and thinking all summoning is the same, but that just isn't the case its too simplistic a view on any mechanic much less one like summoning where the specifics vary wildly from faction to faction. The engine isn't the same, how the models are summoned isn't the same, where the models can go isn't the same, what the models are isn't the same. I mentioned this on THWG, look at the names of the people who finished in the in the top 10 (because we are using a consistent measure) with HoS, they are all guys typically finish 4-1. Heck one is Ben Johnson, and the event was won by another fantastic player, not playing HoS. The Top 10 also include two SCE fyi. So the question is are good players playing a good army and therefor doing well. Or is the argument that Ben Johnson over achieved finishing 2nd, because HoS are overpowered? If a bunch of 3-2 players (coming from other good factions) were all of a sudden jumping up 5-10 places tournament there would be a discussion to be had. But to me Blackout says hey look, the typical cast did their thing, and Slaanesh is understandably a really popular army. I'm not trying to tell you HoS are bad army, they are good, they are specifically good at stopping the meta that exists at the moment. But IMO for something to be OP it needs to be fundamentally too powerful at playing the game, not playing the meta. And, HoS are not that. DoK, specifically Hagg Narr, are probably the last army that did that. Also a KoS does not kill a GUO, at Max MW output it does 23 wounds passed a GUO sure. But on the more reasonable Locus goes of and you roll one '6' per attack profile, and one 6 per to 6 wound dice it does only about 4 dmg per pile-in and attack. A combat GUO after taking its 8 wounds still does about 5 dmg back to the KoS, giving the GUS a cmd point like I gave the KoS. And, it does about 3-5 MW back to the KoS on its disgustingly resilient saves. A KoS might kill a bog standard Bloodthirster, but Tyrants of Blood, Halo of Blood, and Rejoice in Slaughter basically create a situation where a KoS never survives to fight if you need it to not. I think all the Bloodthirsters slam 8 points of dmg past a KoS.
  11. I would say that the main strengths of the KoS are outside of its Warscroll, and its one of the few greater daemons this is true of, the closest would probably be the Lord of Change but that is by virtue of primarily being a caster. Just based on the Keeper of Secrets warscroll you are going to hard pressed to convince people its a stronger Greater Daemon than say a GUO. Its damage potential is hard to map in instantaneous combat, and its defence is the same as the much cheaper Bloodthirster. Its a shockingly poor caster despite its 2/2 wizard profile due to the limited nature of Slaanesh magic, the short range of its spells, and the need to have nothing alive around it after combat. Now its allegiance abilities is probably some of the best. But opponent fight last =/= you fighting first and people falsely equating the two are only demonstrating their poor grasp of the rules and tactical limitations of said rules. Its not even "in affect" the same rule. I do think the KoS is costed up for its depravity generation though and its correct that it should be. I think part of the shock of a KoS is that it has the ability to spike so high. But some examples of its damage have people rolling 2 sixes to hit and 4 sixes to wound, or sticking to the inferior Pretenders builds. But there is nothing with the overwhelming power of say Tyrants of Blood. Based on my reading of your argument it seems to be that HoS summon > Nurgle/Khorne = overpowered. And I don't think that is a logical inference there is no reasoning there only demonstration of its superiority. They are different factions who play the game in different ways. Your argument seems to be that all the chaos factions should summon approximately the same pace, which there is NO reason to assume that, or even suggest that is a desirable outcome. We may as well suggest Khorne is overpowered because they summon faster than IDK. Grand Alliance grouping isn't a relative mechanics balancing barometer. Nurgle summoning is the slowest, because Nurgle armies are notorious difficult to shift, the Khorne economy is one the most flexible in the game and hyper responsive to player ability and strategic circumstance. I believe earlier in the thread I demonstrated how slight HoS combat abilities actually are above the damage curve. Basically, its combat damage completely revolves around the KoS. Everything that makes HoS apply damage to the opponent contained in the KoS (Locus of diversion, and Excess of Violence). Now you could argue the ease at which such a cool, fantastic model range is able to apply its core philosophy is grounds for a nerfing, but that perspective will only see every faction with 10 or less warscrolls and some good rules nerfed in a few months. Here is some info on Mortal Slaanesh. It has 2 rules, Euphoric Killers, and Depravity Points, but the book includes no models that buff mortal units. Everything is keyworded to Hedonites, a Mortal HoS army basically is just the KoS and chaff, or a walking speed combat army with limit depth. A Mortal HoS army is powerwise the weakest marked Mortal faction, by some margin, the game is sleeping on Mortal Tzeentch, Nurgle has some disgusting (haha) combos, and Khorne has the most straightforward Mortal approach. Slaanesh doesn't even have a mortal Warscroll Battalion I'm going to stick to what I've been saying since the beginning. HoS are counter meta, and people aren't willing to accept that any faction should be able to shift a meta drastically. If people have a problem with alpha combat armies well you need some force that makes the risk/return on alpha combat less obvious. We had highly mobile walls with Changehost, and Vanguard Wing, people hated it, we had low drop shooting and people hated it, we have the most direct answer in the form of HoS and people hate it. Do we want to live in a world of alpha combat armies, where the best faction is the faction that can alpha combat most reliably or do we actually want some alternative playstyles and strategic depth in this game? The most irritating thing for me is that some sizeable portion of HoS players seem to have previously been DoK players which means DoK has all but disappeared competitively. So a potentially very difficult match up for HoS is gone. People can talk about win % all they want but if the meta is all one type of strategic problem whichever faction best counters that problem will win a disproportionate number of its games compared to the expected outcome vs the number of strategic problems contained in the game.
  12. @Overread your post deserves a full response. Won'tt have time until Monday unfortunately.
  13. Ok but you are conflating two situations that have different solutions. In the store gaming scenario or one off garage hammer, you are always building against your friend, and seeking advice against your friend. In your SCE v HoS match up the SCE player is going to trend towards including more shooting units, more board control units or accept that they are choosing the most difficult path to playing against their buddy. And, as the SCE player takes more shooting, and more control units the HoS will have to adapt by putting more of a in-game emphasis on units that aren't as vulnerable to shooting and changing their reliance on Depravity generation and spend. In the context of playing a series of games with one list, you as a player are making meta calls. If you think you are going to run into a ton of DoK then you are probably screwed as a HoS player. Its not just because you don't generate DP off of single wound models, its because depravity is your method primary method of defence followed by Locus of Diversion. If you expect to repeatedly run into situations where those tools don't work you are out of luck, just like any faction who's tools don't work in a match up. Now you can mitigate this by focusing on objective play and trading and I've done this with many armies. But, it definitely will have a last of the Mahicans vibe. AoS doesn't have a table wipe win condition, all that matters is points on the board. Again the variance in DP generation is a feature not a bug in the list design. Half of this discussion is like watching people charge their whole army into a 30 hearth guard, when they control 5 of 6 objectives, and then after the match hearing them complain about HGB being broken. There really seems to be a market for strategic rather than tactical battle reports at the moment. We don't have a 120 hagg narr witch meta where some army has more models, more board control, more power and more defence than almost every army.
  14. No one knows what you mean by counter play. Several posters have outlined exactly how you interact with HoS, and yet you continue with this nonsense. Counter play is not limited to rolling dice at someone else's dice. @Kitsumy What does winning tournaments mean as a vector of analysis? Who won these events, what sorts of results did those players have using other books? What was their strength of schedule? If a faction is both good and popular (one does not mean it has to lead to the other) it will over represent at tournaments.
  15. I have two questions. What does flighty mean to you? And. Are you sure Nurgle matches your playstyle? Factions have some versatility, but eventually you are just square pegging.
  • Create New...