Cynric
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Cynric
-
-
On 4/21/2021 at 10:27 AM, SU-152 said:
Any ideas to convert Glade Archers to Sister of the Watch???
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
-
2
-
1
-
-
One is battleline, the other is not (unless you make an unusual chouce of general).
-
1
-
-
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.
-
2
-
-
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...
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, mrteige said:
So i just made my version of a Dreadlord on black dragon. What do you guys think
I call it "Shard and his pet Owl"
You could also put the larger base under it and use it as anointed with pheonix.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Popisdead said:I have been converting my Glade Guard into SotW with scrounged flaming bows. I may green stuff flames on more bows but there are enough 3D printers out there to maybe print flaming bows and replace the hands and bows.
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).
-
1
-
-
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.
-
2
-
-
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...
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Popisdead said:
Combine your Hunters cause they have 2" reach. If you had taken Swords, then 2x3 makes sense.
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.
-
On 1/26/2021 at 11:28 AM, Tzeentch said:
What do you guys think about the following list? I'm going for something relatively fluffy (ie wood elves and treants) yet still effective.
It's basically a 6 drop that doesn't really care about going first or second. All your effective units can deepstrike, EG are quite tanky first turn, and Knight-Incantor can pop his scroll to counter either offense or defense depending on opponent's army. SoTT can provide support and capture distant objectives.
You have SotWx20, Knight-Azyros, and Spirit of Durthu as a really nasty deepstrike drop wherever they'll be most effective. Arch-Revenant + Kurnoth Hunters can be dropped at a critical objective, and with Emerald Lifeswarm provide a really really nasty roadblock.
The Aetherwings and Gyrocopters seem kind of useless and out of place. They were necessary for 12 units to meet the requirements for 1/4.
Any suggestions for improvement? Cheers
++ **Pitched Battle** 2,000 (Order - Cities of Sigmar) [2,000pts] ++
+ Leader +
Arch-Revenant [100pts]
Knight-Azyros [100pts]
Knight-Incantor [120pts]: 1. Lifesurge
Spirit of Durthu [300pts]: 1. Ironoak Artisan, 1. Spear of the Hunt, General
+ Battleline +
Eternal Guard [130pts]: 10 Eternal Guard
Eternal Guard [130pts]: 10 Eternal Guard
Eternal Guard [130pts]: 10 Eternal Guard
+ Other +
Aetherwings [40pts]: 3 Aetherwings
Gyrocopters [70pts]: Gyrocopters, Steam Gun
Kurnoth Hunters [380pts]: 2x 3 Kurnoth Hunters, Kurnoth Scythe
Sisters of the Thorn [130pts]: 3. Ironoak Skin, 5 Sisters of the Thorn
Sisters of the Watch [320pts]: 2x 10 Sisters of the Watch
+ Allegiance +
Allegiance
. Allegiance: Cities of Sigmar: Living City+ Game Options +
Game Type: 2000 Points - Battlehost
+ Malign Sorcery +
Endless Spell: Emerald Lifeswarm [50pts]
++ Total: [2,000pts] ++
Created with BattleScribe
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.
-
On 12/25/2020 at 8:08 AM, Lavieth said:
I want to build a free spirits battalion but I am not sure how to build the last 2 hunter units. So far I have a Durthu and 1 unit of 6 scythes. If you were going to add the last 2 units do you make them bows or great swords?
I dont plan on owning more than just the 3 units.
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.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Draakur said:
I very much like the Drycha model and would like to try her out, andnpeople have said to replace the TLA for a Durthu in some cases, but they’ve both been described to me as big beat sticks basically... are they collectively too much in a list together?? (Bearing in mind I won’t be getting Alarielle for a fair while here so she’s not technically an option for me yet)
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.
-
7 hours ago, overtninja said:
I'd rather double down on the teleporting mobility, cover-based mechanics, and skirmishing fight-on-the-move style that we've got than become an allied faction to another army. If any army is going to survive long-term it needs it's own identity, both thematically and in terms of play-style.
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.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Aloth_Corfiser said:
I would like to add a sketchy Battle Report to the List:
Had a game against two Friends who brought me into Warhammer - One was Playing Khorne, the other Clan Skryre. Apologies if it becomes too incoherent.
As an aside: It was my first time playing the Waystone Pathfinder Battalion and we may have got the deployment rules wrong. In the description it says: "(...)instead of setting up the Units in this Batalion on the battlefield you can place them to one side. In your first Movement Phase set up all of these Units wholly within 6" of the edges of the Battlefield and more than 9" from any enemy Models. (...)"
Now my Interpretation always was that I could only place all the Battalion's Units to one side of the Battlefield and I was always confused that it read "edges" rather than edge - because I was under the impression to choose just one edge in my first Movement Phase. Maybe not having English as Native Language is a factor in that misunderstanding. Anyway I was convinced that I would be able to theoretically deploy wholly within 6" of all the edges of the Battlefield - more on that later.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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Orsino said:
I am boring and use Vajello deep, olive and light greens. Or make them autumnal.
Until GW give us back our forest dragons I am attempting to convert idoneth eels to fill the role:
You could always allie a dragonlord and ask your opponent to allow a forest dragon as a proxy.
-
58 minutes ago, Beliman said:
@Cynric I'm not sure if there is a rule for GA: Order, but from Core Rules Errata:
"An army can include a warscroll battalion of a different allegiance to the rest of the army, but if it does so the units in it do count against the limits on the number of allies the army can have (and the points for the battalion and the units in it count against...".
Imo, that means that GA: Order is not Sylvaneth, so Sylvaneth battalions will use "ally points" for GA: Order.
English is not my main language and I hope I'm wrong, so if someone knows anything more to skip that restriction, It will be nice.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Beliman said:
I'm afraid that Sylvaneth don't have that option, so if you want to take amy Sylvaneth Battalion using GA: Order, then you need to pick them as allies and build a legal list to use GA: Order Allegiance Abilitites (and then ally with Sylvaneth for that battallions).
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?
-
1 hour ago, Aden said:
I'm not trying to be argumentative but it seems to me if the design intent was to enforce more esoteric lists they would have stated such explicitly. Further, considering that Free Cities do have specific allegiance abilities/traits wouldn't it be equally legal to take those as opposed to native constituent faction(s)? I admit I'm not really familiar with anything other than order so I might be missing something regarding why they wouldn't let you simply choose between native AA versus Firestorm AA.
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.
-
2 hours ago, Aden said:
Page 8 of the Core Rule Errata says:
Warscroll battalions that share the same allegiance as an army can always be taken as part of the army, and if they include any allied units, these units do not count against the limits on the number of allies the army can have (or against the points limit that can be spent on allies in a Pitched Battle). An army can include a warscroll battalion of a different allegiance to the rest of the army, but if it does so the units in it do count against the limits on the number of allies the army can have (and the points for the battalion and the units in it count against...I'm still a bit confused too. We should all probably start quoting sources to avoid it.
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.
-
5 minutes ago, Beliman said:
I think that you can't. It was FAQ'd that when you have a legal option to take an exlusive Allegiance Abilities for your army, you must take them. So, if you can take Sylvaneth Allegiance Abilities, you must take them (removing the option to take GA: Order). One option is to take other battlelines (ex.: Wanderers) breaking any possibility for your army to be Sylvaneth only. At this point I'm a little lost, because I think that you could take specific battalion from other armies and still be Order? This battalions must be taken like allies for GA: Order? What's the Allegiance of this battalion, Order or their specific keyword?
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.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, SpiritofHokuto said:
Battalions do work with the Firestorm Living Cities, but in a weird roundabout way. A not so recent FAQ changed it so all units under a battalion are considered to be of the allegiance that the battalion belongs to, regardless of any other keywords or allegiances they may possess (completely screwed over the Tzeentch Fatesworn Warband army I was putting together). Living Cities get around this, by using your army as an example it's technically a Sylvaneth allegiance army, but you've chosen to take GA:Order allegiance abilities which qualifies you to use a Living City allegiance. At it's heart it's still Sylvaneth allegiance army, but you've chosen to forgo the Sylvaneth allegiance abilities in favour of GA:Order allegiance abilities with the added bonuses of a Living City "tacked on". Much the same thing can be achieved by just being a GA:Order army, but on the off-chance that you want to retain Sylvaneth battleline choices the above reasoning still lets you do that.
Thanks for the reply.
The "other points to taste" would be wanders with 2 units from the woodelves compendium drug in under allies (as they are order and thus allowed) so it's far from sylvaneth allegiance. Wish it could be sylvaneth and have more than a token wanderer allie as their spell lore/special rules/wildwood before setup/artifacts are all better than generic order.
Mostly this is a scheme to put something that looks like the old wood elf army back on the table. This scheme seems to provide a way to put wildwoods on the table at a fairly low cost as the dryads pay the battleline tax and branchwraiths are a bit of a bargin and harvestboon is pretty good on its own merits.
-
Is it permissible to bring a battalion within a living city? I do not see anywhere it is written that you have to for example be sylvaneth allegiance to bring a sylvaneth battalion, did I miss something?
Here is what I am thinking.
Allegiance: order / living city / realm to taste for artifacts that are not trash.
3x Dryads
2x branchwraith
Forest folk
Harvestboon
Rest of points to taste...
Per harvestboon one of the wraiths can take tear of grace as an artifact which grants an additional spell that is selected from the deep wood spell lore. That spell would be verdant blessing of course solving the wildwood problem. Is this legal/did I miss something?
Sylvaneth - Broken Realms Wishlist
in Order
Posted
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.