Havelocke
-
Posts
101 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Havelocke
-
-
I feel like the new reinforced unit rules are going to be a net positive for Sylvaneth in the new edition.
We've lost the ability to run nine Kurnoths, and losing the discount on large dryad blocks hurts a bit, but I think those are the only changes of note for the army. Tree revenants have always been best as MSU, and spite revenants have never really been competitive, outside of MSU outcasts battalions.
When you compare that to the rest of the field, I think some other factions got hurt a lot more. Our relative lack of 'elite' multi-model, non-battleline units means that our lists will have to adjust to the rules a lot less than many other armies.
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:
How far is the spacing on the front of that stagger? It looks like for every model you stagger you lose something like 1/4 inch of frontage. That means every 5 models will lose 1 models worth of frontage on units greater than 5.
If you want to maximize frontage, you'll lose about 1/4" per second rank model compared to a base-to-base line. Every other 32mm base (1.25") is being replaced with a 1" gap instead. That gives you an 11.25 inch frontage for a 10 model squad.
Of course, that's also for protecting against casualties. If your only concern is screening the maximum possible area, you can use a >-----< formation with 1" gaps for minimal lost frontage. You just have to deal with losing five models as soon as you lose one.
-
Just now, Kaylethia said:
I'll have to put some models on the table, but even on 32mm bases, you should be able to offset the second rank and keep the models far enough apart, that both ranks can fight, and losing models isn't an issue.
Yup just measured it out myself and came to the same conclusion. Seems I knee-jerked a bit. -
1 minute ago, Ganigumo said:
If you take wounds off the sides they don't break coherency, if you remove them from the middle they'll break.
If you lose one of the three units at the end, the remaining one will no longer be in coherency, which causes a chain reaction down the line.
- 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7
- - - 8 - - - 9 - - - 0 - - -Something like this might be the new standard formation for 10 model, 32mm units, with model 8 in range of 1/2/3, model 9 in range of 3/4/5, and model 0 in range of 5/6/7.
I think this allows you to remove any number of models without breaking coherency.
-
5 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:
I'm thinking that a >----------< kind of formation is going to be the new screening formation.
You're right, actually. I was thinking you needed a full two ranks, for some reason. I must need more coffee.
-
Ouch. Just when I was getting excited about the possibility of Spite Revenants being decent hammer units in Drycha's new battalion.
Pretty sure this basically forces our battleline to fight in two ranks at ten or more models. This isn't a huge deal for Dryads, since they have a 2" reach, or Tree Revenants, since you usually only want units of five anyways. Also not a huge deal if you're just taking small Spite Revenant units to get outcasts.
Barring a change to their warscrolls, or unless there's something I'm not seeing, large blocks of Revenants are basically out for this edition. Thoughts?
-
1 minute ago, Tizianolol said:
How we play this model?
There has been, to put it lightly, quite a bit of discussion over the past few pages about this.
One option that some people have advocated is that she should be used as a skirmishing support piece, supporting your front lines with her ranged attack and spells, then closing in to pick off favorable targets while moving away from threats that might be able to burst her down.
Another option is to use her for an early game strike to try to pin your opponent in their deployment zone. If she can do a lot of damage to one of your opponent's offensive threats, the threat of her healing could encourage your opponent to over-commit to removing her, and delay their ability to move up the board.
I lean more towards the first option, because I think it gets the most value out of all parts of her warscroll. The alpha strike choice could still be a good strategy, though. Especially against slower armies.
-
4 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:
Nobody seems to be talking about Roar. The ability to shut down command abilities on a 3+? Goodbye battleshock immunity. That will have great synergy with the new Warsong-Rev and opens up Drycha/spite leadership bomb.
Man, I wish. Roar only lasts for the combat phase, though. I'm still hoping they remove Inspiring Presence, or put some restrictions on it.
-
19 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:
It's not going to be a drastic change, but I think it probably benefits a lot of other factions more than Sylvaneth.
You're not wrong. I think all of the choices on the table are going to affect different factions asymmetrically, though.
For example, models with 2+ to hit or wound will be less able to take advantage of Their Finest Hour and Titanic Duel. Factions that already had terrain destruction will have less use for Smash to Rubble. Wizard-less factions are going to love Heroic Willpower more. And so on.
-
Put together some quick math-hammer on how the combination of Their Finest Hour and Titanic Duel would affect Drycha's average damage output. (The above assumes she's being run in Gnarlroot, since that's where she gets her best damage, and I like big numbers.)
It's worth noting that Titanic Duel assumes she's fighting another Monster, so the big increases you see for 5+ and 6+ saves probably won't be relevant very often. Also, just for fun, the math gives Empowered Shooting Drycha about a 7% chance of taking down Kragnos in one round, assuming no additional defensive bonuses.
-
1
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Landohammer said:
Exactly! Durthu could be on 2+/2+ vs a monster and a 2+ save.
How do we feel about Drycha with these new rules? A lot of her damage typically comes from mortals, but +1/+1 on 20 attacks with +0/+1 on ten more is a lot of extra power...
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Tizianolol said:
Ok , sad , i immagine 3 KH cant be in cover into 1 ww right?
A single wyldwood can be anywhere from 1 to 3 models. A single model isn't going to cut it, but you should be able to hide them inside of a three piece wyldwood, and probably behind a two piece wyldwood, as well.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Xil said:
Does she heal 2d6 each hero phase or just YOUR hero phase?
Your own hero phase only.
-
14 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:
...that is not too hard to nova down in a single phase for a good hammer unit...
It's not my suggestion, but I'll defend the idea:
The point is not for her to survive, but to disrupt. Keeping your opponent's primary offensive threat(s) in their own deployment zone for a turn can have a serious impact on the game. Using Alarielle in this way puts your opponent in a bind because over-commiting to removing her will stall their ability to move up the board, while under-commiting represents a huge risk because of her regeneration.
And of course, all of this becomes even trickier for the opponent if Alarielle manages to remove or severely damage one of their primary offensive threats on the turn she charges in.
-
7 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:
I think her main issue as she sits right now is too many points "invested" on just being beefy and strong in melee, when that's not really where you want her. I wish they would have given more emphasis on her ranged spear and taken some damage away from the beetle; then at least I'd know where/how to play her. Currently I feel like she's being wasted if she's not making use of them big antlers.
I think the reason it's hard to see where/how to play Alarielle is because she's designed to be a versatile generalist. Here's how I think I would try to use her:
In the first couple turns, Alarielle wants to be somewhere in the midboard, behind your frontline units. Between her spells and her spear, she does enough to be a factor without forcing her into melee. Make the other player choose between investing resources in getting to her, or just taking the damage she puts out.
In the mid-late game, her mobility shines. Being able to fly 16", along with retreat and charge, means you have a decent ability to pick and choose her engagements. This is where her melee profile comes in. This Alarielle will be amazing at cleaning up damaged units and picking off targets of opportunity as the game develops.
Is that enough to justify 740(-190) points? Hard to say. I think it's possible, though...
-
21 hours ago, a74xhx said:
Anyone see a user for both Alarielle and the warsong in the same list? Add 2 wraiths, and that's a lot of spells, and not much room for decent melee.
I don't think you're going to see it much, except at very high points values. I think both Alarielle and the Warsong occupy similar roles in a list, as generalist mid-board support pieces. They're both also on the expensive side, so if you include both you're left without as many units to support.
I also think that Alarielle and the Warsong will both want to be casting Throne of Vines quite often, which creates some tension when they're both on the field.
21 hours ago, a74xhx said:With Alarielle taking so many points, is it worth dropping taking a battalion? Been that long since I played the trees, I struggle to remember exactly how essential an extra artefact+CP is.
A lot of Sylvaneth lists like to have access to an extra artefact because it really helps our casters. Branchwraiths with a spiritsong stave & throne of vines are quite common, as is the combo of vesperal gem on any wizard with verdurous harmony. These casting combos might not be as necessary in an Alarielle list with a power caster. Beyond those, the most common artefact is probably the acorn of the ages, which is especially popular in lists which don't include a treelord ancient.
The extra CP is very relevant in Dreadwood lists, which often run a battalion and an extra command point to start with three. Outside of that glade, it's nice but not necessary.
The final reason to run battalions in Sylvaneth lists is to reduce the number of drops in your army, which many Sylvaneth lists really care about. Getting a wyldwood down in a prime midboard location often requires going first, so we really want to have that option. That said, the new wyldwood rules might make change that dynamic. A list that runs Alarielle will likely be light on drops anyways, so this probably isn't as relevant.
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Abstract_duck said:
I hadn't considered that Balewind still works for it. Makes me consider trying to use Balewind & spellportal with the guy, spamming mortal wounds while staying behind your frontlines.
Umbral spellportal is a great addition! I think the ability to project the bubble would make it much more viable to drop spellsinger in order to run gnarlroot.
4 hours ago, mojojojo101 said:Do we think Baelwind is going to survive into AoS 3.0? They haven't sold the model for quite a while now.
I think it's like a 65/35, in favor of getting squatted. It's been a culprit in a few broken combos over the years, and it's an OOP model, like you said. On the other hand, I think it's a warscroll that has a lot of fans among list nerds and combo builders, and its current iteration hasn't really been a problem outside of Kroak, who is no longer eligible to use it.
-
A thought occurred to me while writing my post about wyldwoods a moment ago. While the general consensus is that the new Warsong Revenant is overcosted and I have to agree, I think the model, along with the new wyldwood rules, might breathe new life into the classic 'Branchwych Bomb.'
-
When combined with a balewind and the spellsinger command trait, a warsong bomb is dealing mortals to every enemy unit in a 21" bubble.
-
The warsong has three casts on the vortex, which means they can be stacking TOV every turn and spitting out their AOE, while still having a leftover cast for healing, mystic shield, or additional damage.
-
The new wyldwood rules still block LOS, so the warsong can remain safely tucked inside a wyldwood the entire time.
-
The Warsong spell deals twice as much damage as the old Branchwych spell used to.
- Compared to the branchwych, the Warsong is much more durable. Albeit for a lot more points. The build even has a free artefact slot, which could be used to increase survivability
You could also ditch Spellsinger to run the build in gnarlroot so that you get the chalice. I think it's better with spellsinger, though.
-
When combined with a balewind and the spellsinger command trait, a warsong bomb is dealing mortals to every enemy unit in a 21" bubble.
-
49 minutes ago, martinwolf said:
Any thoughts?
Overall, the woods feel a little bit stronger to me.
Like @Pennydude said, the 3" from objectives is the only new piece of those placement restrictions. If you were using these rules before, the ability to reliably get woods down all game long is a huge upgrade. We lost the ability to make big woods out of 4, 5, or 6 models, but placement feels like a huge upgrade on the whole.
The line of sight buff is big, but I don't think it's as huge as some people think it is. The new warscroll requires 3" of wyldwood to block LOS, rather than 1". When you combine that with the addition of a 3" objective buffer, it's not possible to have models sitting on an objective while out of LOS. I think those rules are a net wash.
Finally, you've got the changes to the damage feature. You gained the ability to make the charge phase damage more reliable, but you lost the hero phase opportunity. The math works out to the same amount of damage, on average, if you're getting both of the old rolls in versus a buffed roll on the new scroll. There's a lower ceiling, but it's easier to get the buff than it was to get both rolls off on the old scroll. Overall, I call this one a wash as well.
So I don't think it's a straight upgrade across the board, but I'd certainly rather play with the new scroll than the old one.
-
2
-
-
Drycha's battalion is her and two units of spites. Battalion gives the spites -1 rend. That's... not terrible, actually. With their horde discount, a blob of Spites with rend could actually be a halfway decent hammer unit.
-
1 hour ago, Pennydude said:
WOW GEEDUB MUST HATE THIS ARMY.
No kidding. I have to think that if more games were being played this year, we would've seen an errata by now.
I'm excited to see what changes to terrain come with third edition. If the rules call for more terrain on the board, as has been rumored, we could be in for some pretty dire times until our rules get updated.
Or maybe BR:Kragnos will change something. I'm not holding my breath, but it's possible...
-
On 5/16/2021 at 1:53 AM, Abstract_duck said:
When reading about the distance of forests from other terrain features, what is the notion that forests summoned during the game follow the sylvaneth book rules when playing a matched game?
On 5/16/2021 at 5:31 AM, Pennydude said:General consensus has been that the allegiance ability woods is 1” from enemy territory, 3” from other terrain, and 6” from objectives and all others are 1” from everything. I’ll have to look more into the TLA woods bit.
The other person is definirely wrong about the Verdant Blessing forests because that’s not an allegiance ability.
Pretty sure Verdant Blessing is an allegiance ability, actually. People most commonly think of Battle Traits when they think of allegiance abilities, but Command Abilities, Artefacts, Spell Lores, and Glades are all also technically allegiance abilities.
The general consensus, as mentioned by Pennydude, is definitely the way most people play. I'd recommend it, too, as woods can end up being very hard to put down when additional restrictions are imposed. That being said, your opponent's reading of the rules is the correct one as per the rules strictly as written.
-
9 minutes ago, Havelocke said:
Verdant Blessing and the Acorn of the Ages are a bit less clear, since they are not on individual warscrolls
Okay. Artefacts and command traits are a subset of allegiance abilities. It's still not crystal clear, though, because they're not an allegiance ability that lets you include a wyldwood, nor are they a warscroll that allows you to set up one.
-
32 minutes ago, Pennydude said:
This wood literally make the extra Wyldwoods unusable though. I haven’t seen or heard of the 3” restriction this from anyone else.
My 2020GHB is packed up for moving so I can’t just reference it.
Here is the relevant wording from the book...
"Sometimes the allegiance abilities for an army will allow it to include 1 or more terrain features, or a warscroll will allow you to set up 1 or more terrain features once the battle has begun..."
The first part calls out warscrolls that allow you to set up terrain, which would include Alarielle's Metamorphosis and the Treelord Ancient's Silent Communion. Verdant Blessing and the Acorn of the Ages are a bit less clear, since they are not on individual warscrolls, and I can't find any rule that explicitly says they are added to a unit's warscroll.
"...faction terrain must be set up more than 3" from any other terrain features and more than 1" from any objectives, in addition to any other restrictions that apply."
This second part indicates that faction terrain, as defined previously, is subject to these restrictions in addition to any others.
I might be missing something, but if so I'm not seeing it.
AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion
in Sylvaneth
Posted
This is a total guess, but I suspect that artefacts might fall under the 'enhancements' mentioned as a benefit of a couple detachments.