Jump to content

KrispyXIV

Members
  • Posts

    169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

KrispyXIV's Achievements

Protector

Protector (6/10)

156

Reputation

  1. It's a great list and I've already had some success with making certain elements of it work well for me. Blissbarb Seekers are great, and Cockatrices are fragile but perform. Still Struggling to get the proper usage of an Epitome down, but I can see why it SHOULD be extremely valuable.
  2. You mean like Finest Hour and Titanic Duel? The guts of challenges are already back. For all we know the "season" after Monsters in Ghur will be Heroes, with a new or enhanced Heroic Action list for non-monster heroes with Battle Tactics focused on Heroes doing Heroic things.
  3. Having been playing 1-3 games a week for some time, I can't remember the last game I played that was 'ruined' by a double turn. Its swung the balance a couple times, or reinforced a strong position, but I can't remember it being the sole deciding factor in a long time. Since 3E, I'm way more likely to lose a game because I made a bad decision and failed on a Battle Tactic than I am to lose to getting doubled. But it also probably helps that every game I play isn't set in some hypothetical hellscape of nothing but Tzeentch and LRL tournament lists...
  4. I run Godseekers exclusively. +1 to charge helps summons get into combat more reliably, and having more open access to command traits and artefacts is welcome.
  5. I wouldn't expect any particular aspect or warscroll to be particularly, overtly good in Slaanesh since all points of comparison will be better for the same cost, as Slaanesh is 'paying' for Summoning in all of its base costs.. That said, the shooting elements play well with the faction mechanics. I've had the best luck in games where I'm able to generate lots of Depravity points, and then get an extra 800-1200 points of stuff over the course of the game, eventually 'overwhelming' our heavily taxed base costs and coming out 'ahead' of the curve on army size. Shooting units are great for applying damage widely, and enabling the farming of Depravity. They're also functional enough in many cases to focus fire and eliminate a vulnerable target... but don't expect the sort of board clearing power you see in other armies. What's weird with addressing 'What units are commonly seen' is that the few people who have done notably well in events thus far with slaanesh have all had wildly different builds, with significantly different unit choices. Even 'notably bad' warscrolls like Painbringers and Keepers of Secrets showed up in some peoples starting lists... so its hard to say with any confidence what is commonly seen/good. The closest would be Synessa, who is a staple just about everywhere because she's good for one powerful spell, has very reliable and potent shooting (that if nothing else is a reliable DP), and has other general utility as a 9 wound Hero Monster.
  6. Bow snakes and sentinels are not particularly tough turn 1 without their defensive tech, and are pretty big footprint wise to hide on most tables. This list has a lot of fast, mobile shooting that can probably threaten them regardless of where they end up - and what remains probably isn't going to wipe him off the table. If he goes second, he deploys out of range of getting double shot by snakes, puts his summoner Heroes in bfe out of shooting range (or relies on his fane to summon), and knows for a fact he isn't getting doubled - in fact he threatens the double himself. Also, he's MSU so unless his opponent risks under killing stuff incoming damage is likely to overkill units and limit the overall incoming damage to him. It's not exactly foolproof, but I can imagine a game plan for those match-up.
  7. They clarified Wards to make it 100% super clearer that it was a definition that applies to all abilities that roll dice to negate wounds. Regardless of timing. No real room for debate - if you roll a die its a ward and doesn't stack. If you don't roll a die, negate away.
  8. Yep, may as well just be the move bonus. 9 times out of 10, it's a bad gamble to risk a spell cast to try and "transfer" a cast from one wizard to another.
  9. I think you'll find that - Most armies aren't willing to risk one of their small number of spells to cast cogs, especially if they brought only one or two important ones, due to the risk of it being shut down. Many armies don't run the requisite two wizards to actually come out ahead on casting it, IF they manage to get it off. Many armies don't want to cluster and position to take advantage of the +cast benefit of cogs. Most players won't be familiar enough with the scenario to properly manage them once in play, knowing when to dispel them to be able to maneuver and bring them forward. And In order to get even 45 points worth of use out of them, many armies will be considering whether it's worth it to try to cast them for the movement bonus. I'd predict what you'll find is that whether cogs are even useful to spend a (typically limited) cast on is extremely variable based on army and build, and that many times even for free they won't make any difference at all. Remember, Cogs aren't free casts. They're a mechanism for gambling for extra casts at a cost in positioning, which is a subtle (but extremely impactful) difference.
  10. I haven't found them to be bad in units of 10. They're not a high priority target, so they don't tend to encounter your opponents big hammers or draw the attention of their buffs (like All out Defense). Therefore, their bravery 10 means they don't tend to vanish to partial casualties, and their rend 1 means they do slightly better damage than expected (no one is putting AoD or Mystic Shield in front of 10 daemonettes). They're quick, and they're bodies in the table. My issue with Daemonettes comes when you try and invest in them. 30 is not worth the tax at 420 points, and their weaknesses are apparent when they're scary enough for opponents to care and put resources in their way. I think they really suffer from the removal of horde discounts, as they're an excellent case of where it makes a lot of sense. I worry about buffing their warscroll, as they're already a fantastic 12DP summon, and I've had absolutely zero complaints about their performance when I'm not paying points for them in that quantity. 3 hits on 6s means weight of dice is a terrifying threat to most things.
  11. I certainly personally can't wait for them to be nerfed, and eternally shelved like the rest of my generic endless spells. ...oh wait, that's not true at all. Most of them are hideously overcosted for their impact on the game, and entirely too easy to counter or remove from play if they DO manage to wind up on the table. Cogs may be slightly OP in general and problematic in a couple armies, but seriously - the proper response isn't a major nerf that removes the spell from all tables everywhere. Well be right back to only Spell Portals ever seeing play, and only then in niche lists with OP spells bound only by their tragically comic ranges. Endless Spells need to be capital G Good if they're going to be worth taking. Even Shackles isn't showing up in all lists everywhere as some had predicted - and everyone thought it was gonna be OP as hell.
  12. I'm really shocked on people's perception of Blissbarb Archers (Re:Survey). They're consistently one of my highest performing units turn 1-2, capable of doing real work and fueling my DP engine for the critical early game. If I need a squishy target dead, a buff or two on them gets that done for me. They feel extremely worth the 180 points to me, as they feel like they'd be really good at 140 or so (which is essentially their cost before tax - clearly they're not better than sentinels at 150, but that's also clearly not a fair comparison since sentinels also generally aren't helping summon). Of all the units I run, Blissbarbs are one of the units that clearly adds more value in summoning than they pay in tax for summoning (30-50 points). I dont feel like they're even in the same hemisphere of cost issues as Slaangors, Keepers, or Daemonettes. They're extremely synergistic with the armies mechanics, and it'd shown repeatedly for me in actual play.
  13. Ran this three times today - Allegiance: Slaanesh - Host: Godseekers Host - Grand Strategy: Prized Sorcery - Triumphs: Leaders Bladebringer, Herald on Exalted Chariot (265)* - General - Command Trait: Speed-chaser - Artefact: Amulet of Destiny (Universal Artefact) - Universal Spell Lore: Flaming Weapon Glutos Orscollion, Lord of Gluttony (475) - Lore of Pain and Pleasure: Battle Rapture Synessa, The Voice of Slaanesh (260)* Infernal Enrapturess, Herald of Slaanesh (140)* Be'Lakor, the Dark Master (360) - Allies Battleline 11 x Blissbarb Archers (180)* 11 x Blissbarb Archers (180)* 1 x Seeker Chariots (130)* Core Battalions *Battle Regiment Total: 1990 / 2000 Reinforced Units: 0 / 4 Allies: 360 / 400 Wounds: 84 Drops: 3 Got a win vs. LRL with Teclis and a 20 block of sentinels after he handed me a shot at a double, with Be'lakor shutting out the sentinels from being able to harass me turn 1. Teclis also obligingly showered me with DP, because elves are delicious or something? I got the double, pinned him in his deployment zone and put together a commanding lead very quickly. Second game was vs. Soulblight with Nagash, which went ok. I ended up losing, but afterwards during the discussion of the game, determined that it was due to play errors - had I made different decisions at the start of my last turn, I could have grabbed an insurmountable lead and won. Third game was hard fought vs. very tough STD, which ended up in a tie. In general, it was a very good day.
  14. Again, either that or the core rulebook as it's printed is intended to define any ability that negates wounds on a roll as a ward (which would then, by definition, mean they happen prior to allocation). If you assume that, then the FAQ makes perfect sense. People are assuming a lot - most of the old wound negate abilities say "each time you allocate a wound", not "when" or "after". That could also interrupt the wound allocation process and apply "before" as per the description of wards....
×
×
  • Create New...