Aezeal

I'm all in favor of there being a choice instead of shield being an auto-include..... however... why just us

The one I replied too from Heksagon, but I just interpreted it incorrectly. Nevermind. And thanks for your explanation since due to me interpreting it incorrectly I feared stormcast heroes where out for us and it's good to know this isn't the case.

I knew what this meant in effect (the no artefact and spells part), I though you meant you couldn't take hero's as the order unit in several battalions in addition to that in some new FAQ.

In most games with objectives the opponent will probably not do that and just move to and stay on an objective.

Wait, which FAQ was that exactly?

Thanks for this. Some of it is obvious but the confirmation that SotT aren't worthwile is nice, I won't have t try it. The Wayfinder build is nice. And using wildriders for objective taking seems indeed their only real use, and the best unit we have for that role.... doesn't mean they aren't overcosted sadly but means I'll have to try them again I guess, especially in the batallion they're possibly less a waste of points than the sisters.

I'd say using a dryads or branchwych and do something with greenstuff making a cape or something and add a bunch of spites. I've not done this (never tried greenstuff) but I'd say that should make something fitting. Maybe something in the hands which resembles some priestly artefact (something NOT a weapon mainly) or something which resembles some acorn or other nature thing (I'm using some odd roundish dried plant stuff on my bases which would fit for example).

Dryads are great if you have a forest. I just think most wanderer units including the shooters should get a slight price drop.

And this was without objectives... so you could actually teleport at will and still do something towards winning the game with your archers. In objective games they could just move to objective and stay there while they die getting shot at. And if they do that a few turns they'll probably have won even if tabled.

Was debating that myself at the time. I chose grass for 2 reasons. 1. My bases are mostly grassy with some rocks, not that much mud. 2. There are wheel tracks visible in the mud. Now there are wheeled machines in AoS and there would obviously be carts and carriages outside of battles.. but still it gave me a WWII vibe. (ofc you'll not notice any of this when playing since you completely forget about the mat anf focus on terrain so it's not that important).

Hey Atreyu, I use the https://www.deepcutstudio.com/product/wargames-terrain-mat-grass/ I have the mousemat material one. You can see it well on the site ( and I don't feel like unrolling mine) I said I get you some pics of the mouse mat forest bases too, I'll just put them in here. Those are from a 3x3 swap mat. https://www.deepcutstudio.com/product/wargames-terrain-mat-swamp/ Got 15 out of it, just drew lines around a GW base with a pen and cut just within the lines with scissors. ( edit: wait I had another one not in the pic.. so 16.. way more than I've needed so far) The swampy stuff sees to resemble trees quite a lot branches etc. Works for me.

We pay for movement yes... and it's worth something... but in never armies it seem they don't have to pay for it a lot.... which seems like a slight (cough) imbalance. You really need melee in front of your shooters (and then hope they can't teleport behind you or fly) . In the current game shooters (and especially our shooters with 20"or less range) cannot get out of reach of melee at all.

I'd agree with this.

I like that spell singer

Why is that?

yes if you place them as one it's one terrain feature.. and no teleporting between the bases of that terrain feature.

I think you still don't understand the point I was trying to make (though you might disagree on that one too ofc) because I don't specifically disagree with you on that point (I have no opinion on which is best tbh and I certainly think both have a role in the army and complement each other). It was more about separating them being elite in the lore and better per model from total unit effectiveness and rules per point as I tried to explain but probably me not being a native english speaker/writer makes it hard to get the point across correctly or maybe I even didn't understand your post correctly. But I'll leave it at this because I can't explain it better anyway

I think we don't understand each other (Maybe how I wrote the reply had something to do with that - and possibly I didn't understand your posts): I didn't mean to say you where incorrect in your view on which of them was best. I actually didn't mean to go into that at all (except in the last paragraph). I meant to say: The fact they are elite is just based on the lore and because they have better stats per model (which reflects the lore): we agree there since you say that in this reply too. Waywatchers where the elite archer unit and now sisters are (which makes me sad.. but that is another discussion). The reason I found your reply incorrect was because you mentioned: they are better now as they should be because they are our elites and you mention this in relation to them getting a boost in effectiveness (the not moving rule in combination with teleporting - which is related ot balance.. which is reflected in points - which is why I mentioned them), my point is that: that rule is just a balance thing and doesn't make them elite. for example: if they have that rule but GG where 80 points per 10 models the GG would be way better in game but that wouldn't make them the elite archers in the lore or per model in stats.. it would just mean GW hadn't balanced them correctly. Or shorter: whatever the rules: SotW are the elites in the lore so a mention of balance related stuff to them being elite is not relevant because they are seperate things in my opinion. Which is why I ended with the fact that balance wise there is no uniform conclusion on which of the 2 is better ingame so that means the balance must be about right. PM: I see you are also annoyed by me saying "completely" and I can see why that is. The first parts of your reply (the short one) are obviously correct and I just meant to say that I found the last part incorrect(I hope my explanation of why I thought it was incorrect is clear now - even if we might disagree on that because I still have that view). So while I will stand behind my reasoning of why is incorrect. I will admit the rest was obviously fact - as you mention in your latest reply and I'm sorry if my phrasing of the reply using the word "completely" added insult to injury disagreement, it was not intended that way so sorry for that. And if you still don't agree with my reasoning about the stuff above I hope we can just agree to disagree on that part. It was more intended as a sort of academic/irrelevant discussion. But wanderer melee isn't all that good for it's points (well EG isn't BAD.. but doesn't do much damage either).

This is a completely incorrect statement. They are elite archers because they are better per model regardless of points. And they've always been that. Balance means that both should be somewhat equal in effectiveness for their points or have different roles that have a somewhat equal value. Being elite is more a lore thing and doesn't (shouldn't) mean you they are more point effective.. that just makes them overpowered in comparison to the GG. Luckily there is still enough discussion about it so that probably means GW got it somewhat right.. both have similar roles as shooters but not quite the same (GG alpha) so that makes the exact comparison difficult enough for it to be an issue that isn't completely clear: both are used and both have fanbois in here.

Teleporting doesn't count as having moved right? I thought that was the last consensus here backed up by some FAQ's etc.

for 2K points? at least 50 I'd say. But I prefer to start with at least 1x20 and 1x10. Then hope you can summon another 20 during the game (I've not had THAT much luck with summoning I have to say. There needs to be a forest, there needs to be room in that forest 9" outside of the enemy - who will prefer it if that room ISN"T there.... and there needs to be a somewhat high roll that isn't countered).

Depends on what you want her to do I guess.. it hardly changes much IMHO so if you had reasons to pick a ranged attack before those reasons are still valid. I take her as an anti horde monster since we have nothing else that does it that easily.

sorry for late reply but yes. I just drew line around an original base and used the scissors just within the line. Then drew the circles in around an empty tape thingy which had the same size (measuring the position a bit from different sides)

I don't think Alarielle in a 1K list is that bad tbh.. her buffing shines better in a larger list and smaller lists still need to get objectives.

Hadn't interpreted it that way myself... I'd see all AoE things as not needing line of sight.. but I never play flitterfuries anyway since I aim for battleshock tests on big units if I use her.