Cynric
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Everything posted by Cynric
-
I just wish for my old wood elf gang to be back together. Living city almost gets me there but it doesnt synergize with forests, without the forest many of the sylvaneth units are handicapped/overpriced, it has difficulty deploying forests and those forests hinder the other 3/4 of the army. I would like something that is closer to 50/50 and gives the wanderers/city units sylvaneth keywords.
-
Dont convert, just agree with opponent that archer units without banners and musicians are elite archers which are sisters.
-
I refuse to give up on my wood elves. Living city is the best fit i have found but it takes an inderstanding opponent. Here are my counts as substitutions: Orion = lord cellestant (hero on 40mm base) Orions hounds (i use 40k fenric wolves) = gryph hounds which synergize with orion Wood eld heros on foot on 32mm base = nomad prince Wood elf heros on 25mm base = anointed or assassin depending on flavor Elite archers (no banners/musicians) = sisters Battleline archers (have banners/musicians) = darkshards or crossbowmen or handgunners (all imperfect fit). Woodelves with spears = eternal guard Wardancers (depending on their dance which is specified before battle) = executioners or rangers Giant eagle = pheonix of one flavor or the other Warhawk riders = aether wings Lord on forest dragon = dreadlord on black dragon Sylvaneth dryads, treemen (treelord) as themselves. Misc mages on foot = sorceress, imperfect but at least its an elf
-
One is battleline, the other is not (unless you make an unusual chouce of general).
-
While they took all the horses away from cities heros they do allow you to bring stormcast which have mounts. You could use your model and count it as a lord cellestant on a dracoth for example. As cities 1/4 of your units can be stormcast.
-
Or allow the forest to replace/overgrow other terrain or be allowed to be anywhere that doesnt actually displace an opponents model... more than one way to fix the problem. If the design intent is for the firest to be an active part of the army, fine, just make it not suck. The rules generally dont allow me to prevent my opponent from deploying his army, why does it stop mine...
-
You could also put the larger base under it and use it as anointed with pheonix.
-
-
-
I didnt convert my glade guard. My convention is wood elves with bows/banners/musicians are some sort of battleline ranged unit (usually darkshards but i have played with them as crossbows or handgunners, none of them are the ideal proxy but darkshards keeps it in an elven 6 inch move although the range is a bit too short and the number of shots too high.) Units without banners/muscicans are counts as elite ranged which is clearly sisters. I am much more about bringing my wood elves to the table than i am making them match the current imagery. I look for profiles which get them as close to the spirit of what they were as i can. Other proxies i use are: Orion uses lord castellant profile His hounds use the gryphound profile and are orions retinue (i use fenserian wolves models from 40k) Eagles are Phoenix, which variety depending on mood. My old wood elf mages are usually sorcerous but not satisfied with that Warhawk riders are aetherwings Lord on forest dragon is counts as dreadlord on black dragon. Wardancers are counts as either executioners or rangers. Neither is really perfect but it lets me put the old figures on the table. Living city does a descent job letting me keep the old gang together which is perhaps more emotional and important to me than it should be (i have 30 years of history with those exact bits of metal).
-
If its a wish list, i would wish to return to the old school wood elf army and get the gang all back together. Something simple like allow half the units to be wanderers and keyword them all sylvaneth so things synergize and the forests dont kill them. Beyond that maybe change the wildwood deployment to be a bit more flexible and allow them to be placed anywhere they fit without moving other models, including encircling them. None of this will help much against top teir competitive armies but id be happy.
-
Glad to see a wood elf, but whats up with the face mask... i dont want to see facemasks on my miniatures.... its too soon for that...
-
I wonder if living city changes the conventional wisdom for multiwound models. Two units maximize healing from the city trait, gives operational flexibility, helps with the 1:4 units possibilities, firewalls off some damage and help with "wholly within". If the army has significant buffs then of course one unit gets more attractive but as living city feels weak in magic i tend to not rely upon it much.
-
Perhaps change the eternal guard out for one of the 100 point battleline ranged weapon units (crossbows or handgunners or darkshards.) I use my old woodelf archer models and count them as one of those. Eternal guard as a block of 10 has never done much for me (20 or dont bother imo), while archers consistently do something. You might be happier with the performance and you get 90 more points to spend.
-
I would build one of each because variety is more fun to paint and more fun to play with. Also while scythes at the moment seem to be smiled upon more than swords the difference is not large and that can change and my army will still be how i built it.
-
I am hoping that the new terrain is an additional wildwood model rather than a scraping of the existing ones. Only three base models of trees is rather lame and more variety for the modeling is welcome. Perhaps put the new grove on a smaller base to allow more placement options. If I was going to shoot for the moon I would also wish for the existing placement rules to be relaxed to remove the "distance from" clauses and instead just require that models not need pushed aside to deploy the woods. The original rules I think were conceived in an era when tables were less cluttered.
-
For me hours spent painting greatly exceed hours spent moving models on the table. I would go with what I wanted to paint and let the chips fall where they may when it is time to game.
-
It does not have to be either or. I loved my old wood elves which blended beasts, trees and elves. I could skew the blend one way or another as suited my mood and the variety was much more fun to paint than an endless queue of archers. The ideal outcome for me would be a tome that brought back the wardancer/eagles/forest dragon and allowed for wander centered forces while also allowing (perhaps through battalions) for combined sylvaneth/wanderer forces. To make allied sylvaneth practical the battalion would need to solve the wildwood summoning problem.
-
It is interesting that you read setting up "to the side" in a very different way than I do. I always took it to mean put them somewhere other than in play but in a place that your opponent can see them and know what is lurking about. The deploying on the edge imo has nothing to do with where the models were put aside.
-
You could always allie a dragonlord and ask your opponent to allow a forest dragon as a proxy.
-
English is my first language and what exactly they mean is not clear to me either. To me it is not clear how spending points on a sylvaneth battalion is different than spending on a treelord; I don't see why they would come from a different pool. My guess is the bit from the errata is talking about situations such as a wanderers alliegence army that decides to bring a sylvaneth household battalion. The units in the household would of course come from allies as they are not wanderers. They also might have been talking about battalions that include non native units such as winterleafs 0-1 order unit although that is even less clear and it would I think make the guardians of allariel battalion unworkable as it would require either really high points or force the army to be generic order. That battalion requires 460 points of stormcast with units a minimum size. That said the sylvaneth book has a battalion called sylvaneth war grove which requires something like 9 battalions as members (1 lords of clan, 3 household, 3 forest folk, 1 outcasts and 1 free spirits.) I cant imagine how silly that game would be or how many points would be required to put it on the table so perhaps the rule writers are imagining situations of a scale far beyond the games I play.
-
I am constantly suprised by rules that I did not know existed so I am not doubting you, but I would like to know where it says battalions are paid for in allies. What if we simplify it and lose the freecity (can add that back later after rules are more clear), and create an order army that is 50% one faction and 50% another faction (wanderers and sylvaneth in this case), wouldnt the battalion just be paid for with normal points just like the sylvaneth units that are wrapped within it?
-
It seems like a half implemented feature. For example freecity has no artifacts or command abilities so although they give you an allegiance ability you still need another allegiance to get the other two. To my thinking it's closer to being a battalion than an allegiance or I suppose it could be thought of as dual citizenship.
-
I am confused too. The warscroll battalions in the sylvaneth book do not have keywords. But even if they did have a keyword "sylvaneth" that would still be native to the living city so use of allie points on the battalion does not seem right.
-
Ok, so to clarify the scheme... the dryads, branchwraiths and battalions still leaves a lot of points for the rest of the army. That rest of the army would mostly be wanderer, with a TLA or possibly a treeman and the allies points would grab two units from wood elves compendium (forest dragon and an eagle for example or wardancers and waywatcher unit or avatar of hunt and hounds, lots of choices). This would force "generic order" which then leaves the dryads without a method to get wildwoods on the table. Hence the interest in the harvestboon item that lets a wraith cast verdant blessing. Combined with a TLA and it might work... it's not going to win tournaments but that is not the intent... the goal is to bring an oldschool army without it being grossly handicapped.
- 2,454 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- order
- mixed order
- (and 8 more)
