EldritchX
-
Posts
76 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by EldritchX
-
-
19 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
Let's say your goal is to get off a CV 6 spell. You have one cast.
If you hard cast that spell, the odds are 72% to get that spell off.
If you cast Cogs first for the extra spell, you need to succeed one 72% roll (Cogs CV is also 6), and then another 72% roll to get the actual spell off. So your odds of actually casting that spell go down to ~52%. That's what you lose: 20%.
It is correct that you would have failed the original spell if you fail to cast Cogs. But having to cast the original spell on top of Cogs afterwards introduces another chance to fail to cast it. That is what makes the difference, and why casting Cogs is not actually free if your main goal is to get out a different spell.
Exactly. The events ARE connected, and there NO gambler's fallacy in any shape or form.
To be fair, you do gain the Cogs on the table, which is essentially a chance of extra spells on subsequent turns or a reduction of 1 spellcast or unbind. I doubt that's worth it though.
-
On 9/4/2021 at 2:53 AM, NinthMusketeer said:
In response to people saying that a low-cast army doesn't want to use it's spells on cogs: as explained previously, there is no loss. If the wizards tries to cast cogs and either fails or is unbound then whatever other spell they tried to cast would have been too so there is no penalty. If it does go off, they immediately get another spell and can cast whatever they originally intended.
Incorrect. If the Cog cast fails, yes, there wouldn't have been a difference if you'd rolled that for another spell instead. However, if you passed, you'd need to roll successfully and avoid unbind a second time, whereas just casting the other spell instead would already be successful.
But yes, it's terribad now.
-
16 hours ago, HostilSpike said:
But 90 points doesn't buy you anything worthwhile in our battletome which is what I meant about being starved for points to use one.
I'm probably just being close minded though as I only ever saw HoSH as a battalion tax in 2.0 and now they don't even have that niche.
You can't look at it in isolation. If you're at ~1910 points with just the one HoSH, then sure, the best thing to do is probably upgrade to a FLoSH. There are many occasions where you might be at ~1960 points with a FLoSH and then dropping to a HoSH may allow you to afford an extra Butcher, etc.
Another possibility is just to leverage the HoSH's cheapness to max out on Metalcruncher. A Hunter-led Boulderhead list can squeeze in 5 HoSH, for example.
-
1
-
-
On 8/19/2021 at 2:16 AM, HostilSpike said:
Firstly as someone who loves theory crafting I appreciate the addition of the graph to clearly show the damage numbers. I wasn't really talking about overall output though, simply the effectiveness of subbing out a FLoSH for a HoSH in the list.
The base effectiveness of the Mournfang doesn't really change between the two, all you are gaining is Linebreakers at the cost of the Frostspear, +1 Wound, +1 Save, +1 Bravery (relevant due to Heroic recovery) and +1 to Wound on your Punches and Kicks. It just doesn't seem worth the downgrade unless you're really starved for points.
Unless I did the maths wrong (which is always possible 😅) the attacks with the Frostspear on average equate to the same damage as a single use if Linebreakers on 4 Mournfang but obviously is much less situational.
I've yet to actually get Thunderbellies on the table due to covid and have always been slightly curious about Rip and Tear; does it activate against a unit of single wound models who have lost a model or does it require an injured multi-wound model?
You don't have to be "starved for points" for the HoTT to be a good value proposition. 90 points is over 20% less. And you're also gaining a Vulture.
-
3 hours ago, Enokisawesome said:
Thanks @Charleston! I'd heard some of this wisdom before and wasn't sure if it held true for 3.0 I was eyeing these lads up for the Eurlbad last edition.
Any recommended lists based on what I have? I've played with points but not factored in wizards and endless spells. Mostly looking at Boulderhead if I have two heroes, or the Mournfang one if I only have one hero (in a one drop battalion). But I think I'd need to have no tribe to get the generic tone artifact?
Also any experience in magnetizing the heroes for flexibility in lists?
I wouldn't play a FLoTT if you don't have a couple of non-monster heroes, because it only shines when you put an Amulet of Destiny on it, and no-tribe isn't very good at 2k. Based on what you have, Boulderhead is probably the best choice by far. If you can proxy or rebuild the HoTT, you can bring 3 heroes on SH with Metalcruncher, and use the Mournfangs as battleline. It's a 3-drop list with strong melee damage and is fairly tough.
-
4 hours ago, Karragon said:
That's another thing I've found largely irrelevant. I don't think anyone, (myself or my opponents) has yet opted to go 2nd if they've won a roll off, 1 extra CP just isn't a consideration compared to getting to take a turn (Turn 1 excluded). The objective removal is pretty meh as well as I've previously noted most of my games end T3 or before so it doesn't make much difference, it's an after thought of "oh, I might as well remove one then"
I have the same experience so far. This is in contrast to 2.0, where I opted to go second quite often if Geminids were on the table, even giving my opponent double turns. I was playing -hit stacking, always strikes first lists though. That said, I've been double-turned several times so far in 3 and still won.
-
1 hour ago, Arkahn said:
3+ save is far better than 4+ in v3
It's far better for one unit in your entire army per phase/turn, because AoD and Mystic Shield are thus limited. It's much less so for the others. For these others, the lower cost of the HoSH works out to higher resilience per point. The relevant offensive output per point of HoSHs is also comparable or better.
-
On 7/24/2021 at 2:37 AM, Charleston said:
It is my first tournament so expectations are low anyway. I still try to figure out if Husskard on SH is a good idea or if I shall cut down 2 Mournfangs to get a Frostfang instead. The frostspear, additional wound and 3+ save look damn crisp to me, especially as many battletactics favor a strong and killy monster hero.
You can consider a FloSH if you definitely need that one hero to survive. In any scenario where you don't, the HoSH is imo better value. The Frost Spear is complete trash against hard targets in this edition, averaging barely 1 damage even if buffed to 2+, 2+, and Ogors already have a lot of other good sources of damage against soft targets.
-
1
-
-
On 7/20/2021 at 12:06 AM, HostilSpike said:
I don't see a place for the Tyrant anymore. His old appeal was Command Point efficiency Vs Inspiring presence but with there being so many more command points now it seems less relevant.
I can't imagine a list without a Frostlord in it, they're just our best units by a large margin. The FLoTT gained a huge amount of survivability if you take the 5+ Ward Artefact and the worsen rend by 1 Mount Trait.
I mostly see the Tyrant being useful for the Trophy Rack now, tbh. That said, there should be a lot more worthwhile Hero/Monster targets around, so maybe? Definitely useful in an Underguts list.
-
On 7/18/2021 at 5:54 AM, Lord Krungharr said:
Also for the Wizards in an army, does their first spell come from either the Universal Lore OR the Tome Lore? Or do they know a Tome spell in addition to a Universal Lore spell? Then for Bloodgullet, looks like the 2nd spell they know must be from the Gutmagic Lore?
The former, and yes.
-
1
-
-
On 7/2/2021 at 5:11 PM, Drazhoath said:
Doesnt matter because SoB have no allied units
The AoS app, though still for the previous version of the game, shows that SoB can take the Fungoid Cave Shaman as an Ally. He used to have a rule where any Destruction army could take him but I'm not sure about the status of that now. Maybe someone else knows more?
-
On 6/27/2021 at 5:28 PM, Celadoor said:
Mancrushers can be troops yes, but we can't do linebreaker, as it requires non-leader behemoths, of which we have none.
We can do Battle Regiment amd Hunters of The Heartland, thats all.
Can Allied units not count for Core Battalions?
-
3 hours ago, Walrustaco said:
Their ranged output is unbelievable. Unbelievably underwhelming!!!! You're lucky to do 6 mortal wounds against a unit of 20., you used to just do 6 anyway, regardless of unit size. And it costs you between 300 and 390 points for a monster than doesnt do anything well. Pretty awful honestly. Think most of us have shelved the thundertusk at this point tbh.
You used to do 5 on average, not 6, because you could 'miss'. You also now do 3.5 more MW on a charge, and move faster. However, the Huskard is a trap choice. The only good TT is the FLoTT, with Rimefrost Hide or Alvagr Ancient, and possibly not outside Winterbite.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Nubl0 said:
Problem with gnoblars is they’re so slow and will get wiped out in one round by most stuff. The gluttons then get a counter charge and probably wipe out the monks for example but then will in turn will get eaten by the next wave of them.
firebelly is cool but I don’t see him being good in many other matchups.
Uh, I'm not really sure what you're expecting from a screen. It's a hundred points for a unit with 20 wounds that can stretch as far as 40". They're an inch slower than other screens on average.
As for the Firebelly, I in fact prefer to bring him over any other wizard in TAC lists, outside of Bloodgullet lists. If you want to outgrind others in melee, I don't think we can do any better than to stack penalties to hit.
If you don't like screens, then just drop the Tyrant, etc and bring another 12 Gluttons, I guess.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Nubl0 said:
We were using the new monk scroll, and I’ve been thinking a Flosh might help but honestly I think it would just die to a unit of monks in one round with only 13 wounds. Balewind deffo is going and probably the the cmd point, tyrants no battleshock cmd ability was pretty useful mind you.
also kind of need the battalion for the extra relic so I can t a decent one on the Flosh and because ogors don’t really have decent screens I feel we need to dictate who goes first to avoid get alpha’d off the board.Gnoblars have been pretty good screens, in my experience. Against Monks specifically, I'd drop the tyrant for a Firebelly and Billowing Ash. And probably trade the Balewind for Geminids.
Remember that the Thundering Charge and Metalcruncher damage doesn't trigger the retaliatory mortal wounds, and you have a save against any caused on the FLoSH. If you charge strategically with a Thermalrider cloak, you can most likely prevent him from contacting with too many monks too (and avoid Frenzied Assault).
-
33 minutes ago, Nubl0 said:
Anyone have idea on how we deal with shaven? I played a game today and for the first looked at the table and genuinely didn’t have a clue how to win. Scenario was total commitment and the lists were...
Tyrant w/Trophy wrack, red stuff cmd trait
slaughter master/blood feast, ribcracker
slaughter master w/greasy deluge, bloodfeast, splatter cleaver
2x 12 gluttons with 2 clubs
8 iron guts
2 leadbelchers
goremande batt, extra command point and balewind. Skaven were rocking 120 plague monks, 40clan rats, 20 storm vermin, grey seer with death frenzy, verminlord corruptor and a plague furnace priest.
I held back turn one setting up good charges for the next turn and his turn one he surged everything forward screening the blobs of monks with the rats and stormvermin. He did get the double turn but only wiped out one unit of gluttons with a unit of monks. Problem I had was the ogors just could not keep up with the sheer number of rats, my gluttons and ironguts were literally killing themselves when wiping out 2 monk units by just drowning in mortal wounds. Then another wave of monks would counter and kill them all. I managed to keep it at a one vp difference for 2 turns but after that I was pretty much cleared off the board by monks.
I was thinking maybe dropping the cmd point and balewind for a screen of gnoblars but more often than not they just get in the way of the gluttons. I don’t really know what I can do vs giant hordes of that size, thoughts anyone?
Firstly, Plague Monks recently (a few days ago) had their Warscroll nerfed - so it might matter if your opponent was using the old rules.
Secondly, there are some suboptimal things in your list, like the Tyrant, extra command point, Balewind and even the Goremand and Leadies. You could get more Ironguts or even a full unit of 12 more Gluttons or a FLoSH.
-
43 minutes ago, Frowny said:
Has anybody tried yetis? I see lots of lists with gluttons but I just finished making 9. I'm excited about how they look and at least on paper, they seem strong. Losing out on damage to unbuffed gluttons but with rend, and that amazing 6inch activation to almost always strike first.
Is it worth going winterbite for 9 of them? I find they often get out past their buff artifact with the long pile in, so just going with bloodgullets or something might be better anyway. Or even going with the basic command stuff.
3x3 or 1x9?
I use a lot of them. You really need Winterbite for the General trait for +1 to wound and the ability to hit at the start of combat. I don't think they're good outside of that. Used correctly, they're brutal killers who'll make your opponent wonder whose turn it actually is. You should include some -to be hit stuff too.
-
10 minutes ago, Bululu said:
Is that list even legit? i mean i think you only have 1 battleline, the frost sabres as your general is a the icebrow hunter. Mourfang and stonehorn are only battleline if your general is a beastclaw raider. You could somehow fix it by moving the general to one of the stonehorns and breaking the mournfang in 2x2 units
Icebrow Hunters have the BCR keyword. No fixing needed.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Fundre said:
Hey guys,
Rules question, billowing ash spell from the firebelly has a aura effect of 12". If I place the firebelly on a balewind vortex, does the aura effect of billowing ash increase by 6" or not? My game group is arguing it only effects the casting range of spells but I disagree
This is pretty definitively answered in the designers' commentary:
So, yes, but be warned that they will have a chance to dispel Balewind in their turn and deny you the effect if you rely on the increased range.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Forrix said:
Slaughtermaster. Really hope they update the base guide or the MawTribes FAQ since this is confusing. Butcher is still sold on a 40mm square base.
I just got a Butcher and it came with a 50mm round along with the 40mm square, as did the Firebelly. SM should come with the 105mm oval.
-
30 minutes ago, Pitloze said:
I mean it works. I only loled at it because 50% of the wounds my Ironguts usually get come from the Tyrant passing it on to them. My Tyrant killed as many Ironguts as the people in my playgroup have done, as the true bully he is. Only thing I'm not sure about if the mortal wounds from the hammer counts as wounds in regards to splattercleaver activating. If it does it's really great. But so far I played it as that it needs actual wounds to activate.
The description for mortal wounds in the rules does say "after they have been allocated, a mortal wound is treated in the same manner as any other wound for all rules purposes", FWIW.
-
2 hours ago, Kramer said:
If both contact a unit of bezerkers they average 3,5 mortal wounds after the 4+ save, not the biggest difference but you forgot that part.
byt you also picked a fight you shouldn’t be taking on. Which btw is 150% the point cost of one stonehorn so they better be good
your argument still stands imo but that’s 600pts + a hero of minimum 100pts. And as with any Death Star unit you should take apart it’s synergies or evade.
Which is easier said than done.
For reference this is what the damage is on a plain stonehorn on the charge, no traits or artefacts included and before the hearthguard after save.
I didn't forget it, but the calculator I used had minor issues. The average damage from both SH charging is about 17.7, so maybe 9 killed. And about 16 from the Ironguts, so about 8 killed.
And I'm not sure it's a Deathstar when it's less than a third of the army and you can take two. Remember: just one unit can outfight BOTH artifact equipped FLoSH at the same time.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Warbossironteef said:
Thanks for sharing! I'm taking that idea to heart with the below list. The Huskard on TT is there to support the Stonehorns and like you said, to also control objectives. The Ironguts are there to control the midfield and to cleanup after the Stonehorns. I think it creates a lot of problems for your opponents. The 8 man Ironguts cannot be ignored. If they get a charge off at full strength, they are a force. Big screening armies will be a struggle but I think it has tools to compete with most lists.
The toughest units out there will laugh off the 2 FLoSH still, unfortunately. If both of them contact a unit of 30 Hearthguard Berzerkers and get off all their attacks before being degraded by the counterswing, they'll only kill less than 6 on average. The counterswing will maim or kill one, and the first attack on the opponent's turn will certainly finish one off, and the other will struggle to kill even 2 after being degraded and missing the charge damage.
Then there's the next 30...
OTOH, 8 Bloodfeasted Ironguts will outdamage both FLoSHs by themselves on the same target, but still only kill about 9.
-
17 minutes ago, Hebroseph said:
Right, but did you read the list idea. I'm aware that cats arnt very good. What they do have is deepstriking and the ability to put pressure on enemy objectives. 12 gluttons and change does nothing when you lose the whole unit and kill 3 fyreslayers, or a double fighting terrorgeist/ keeper of secrets one shots the unit before they get to swing. I know gluttons are good, but only against units that also arnt good in melee. They are school yard bullies who fold against somebody who actually knows how to fight. Removing hunters, cats and skal, for another block of gluttons, just makes it a regular Ogre list, that can't compete against top lists. I'm trying to think outside the box and give us a shot against some of the better lists.
Kinda how like Beasts of Chaos, has units across the board that are trash, but they still pull out wins because they play to the objective and not to killing. I'm trying to use our fast, obnoxious units, to stall to make it too late to eat through 96 wounds of ogres late game to take back objectives and catch up on points.
I've run 3 blocks of 12 gluttons, when it works, it works great but not really the point of the above list.
If you're looking at a tailored list to address a specific opponent, (a big) maybe. But in a tournament? The list has barely any teeth and the 'pressure' from 6 cats and a Hunter would barely dent a 200 point objective holding unit, while costing significantly more.
If you don't like 12 Gluttons and change, bring a FLoSH with the cloak and change/Cogs to threaten the same backline objectives instead. He can double up as a frontline combatant when appropriate too.
your argument still stands imo but that’s 600pts + a hero of minimum 100pts. And as with any Death Star unit you should take apart it’s synergies or evade. 
chronomatic cogs, do i miss anything or are they super op?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Not so. The case described is, in fact, the ONLY case now, rather than something that only happened for a single wizard list, and helps to explain why the spell is so terrible after the nerf.