Aezeal
-
Posts
1,875 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Aezeal
-
-
On 11/8/2020 at 10:57 PM, Kiekeboe said:
Nah in my opinion the woods are a core part of the Sylvaneth identity. A table where a Sylvaneth player has planted 2 or 3 woods just looks great, you can see from a few tables away that there's a Sylvaneth player here. I just really want more reliable ways to place them, casting them is stopped so easily. And if it does fail, your whole game plan for that turn goes out the window. Perhaps some more impactful rules as well, something with soul pods and returning models to units which would thematically be super-Sylvanethy. It's crazy we don't have model restoring already given how important soul pods are in every Sylvaneth piece of lore you can find.
Yeah that is it.. you can have a great plan... but if the wood doesn't come which is a real posibility then one of the 5 turns is gone.. and 5 is optimistic.. a strat really has to be rolling in turn 1-2 really turn 3 will be reactive and turn 4 and 5 way to late
-
1
-
-
Good point surprisingly many units have higher wounds while treelords should be one of the topdogs in that department. I'm not fine with the deterioration though
-
I'm hoping
- the wraith become priest,
- wyches stay mages
- 2 cast on TLA
New hunter character, just a combat beast with a combat buff.
- Alarielle becoming stronger (stats, abilities everything) with matching (but still competative) points to reflect her being one of the few gods. In comparison to Archaon her abilities are somewhat lacking eventhough they are not weak.. and in stats... well...
-
On 10/7/2020 at 10:52 AM, vesco said:
Hello guys,
I've been out from this game for the last 2 years, and now i'm kinda back with a 1k points game.
I do remember to have all Sylvaneth units, could anyone point me to a 1000 points list please ?thank you
Winterleaf, Drycha, a unit of T revs and a unit of 20 dryads and then hunters would be a decent list from the top of my head.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Pennydude said:
LoS isn’t needed for unbinding and looking back, I can see why my words could be interpreted as such.
I would not rely on any magic anymore unless you use The Vesperal Gem thanks to Teclis.
Yeah, magic is unreliable as hell without bonus to cast and that removes forest and their mobility as a reliable strategy for Sylvaneth IMHO. Sadly without mobility Sylvaneth just isn't up to par.
Summoning forests as a low roll prayer or as abilities might help a bit in that department. Also I think all units except melee hunters need to be about 10% cheaper. Another wound or attack on the Tree revenants would be nice too (another attack would keep their roll similar - glass cannon - but more viable and another wound would make them more durable still only average in combat but not glass cannon anymore.
The Gem is nice but Gnarlroot should just give a straight +2 to cast to TLA's and +1 to other casters. Insta return of magic trees (they'd be more viable as opposed to other builds of our army... still don't think this alone would make a gnarlroot build viable overall).
-
On 9/29/2020 at 5:52 PM, Pennydude said:
Yea, about all you can do is use the TLA woods to block line of sight and then try to cast Verdant Blessing and get another one down without it being unbound. Easier said than done.
' If a spell is cast, the opposing player can choose one of their Wizards that is within 30" of the caster to attempt to unbind the spell before its effects are applied. To unbind a spell, roll 2D6. If the roll beats the roll used to cast the spell, then the spell is not successfully cast. Only one attempt can be made to unbind a spell.'
Maybe I'm missing something.. but where is LoS involved in unbinding?
-
On 9/27/2020 at 12:45 AM, Rhetoric said:
I played two games versus a Skryre today. I tried Dreadwood for the CA teleport. My list is below.
TLA - General - Paragon of Terror
Spirit of Durthu - Jewel of Withering
Branchwraith - Spiritsong Stave/Throne of Vines
Arch-Revenant
3 Kurnoth Hunters - Scythes
3 Kurnoth Hunters - Scythes
3 Kurnoth Hunters - Scythes
30 Dryads
5 Tree Revenants
5 Tree Revenants
Free Spirits Battalion
Spiteswarm Hive
1 Command Point
I got pretty much hosed by the shooting. I didn’t win one priority roll over both games. I did as much as possible to avoid the Windlaunchers but his Stormfiends were just deleting units. I’m not sure what can be done to mitigate against shooting in Sylvaneth right now. Even the TLA/Spirit of Durthu are so susceptible to shooting. Does anyone have any advice for surviving in the shooting meta?
Could you delete some units yourself by alpha striking?
-
On 7/8/2020 at 7:25 PM, Icegoat said:
The grand alliances are dead and fallen. Your army is your army. They are a relic of the first age
I consider CoS the grand alliance in a more lore correct way with some background and rules that match the rest.
-
7 hours ago, albionsangel said:
Trying to army build with Battlescribe. Are you saying that I need to have 3 units of spites, THEN take outcasts which ALSO comes with 3 units of spites (for a total of 6 units of spites). Or are you saying I need to have 3 spite units in my army, which then BECOME an outcasts battalion if I choose that option (and pay the points)? The way that battlescribe is set up, when i select the outcasts battalion, its a separate "thing" in my army, that has 3 units of spites in it.
No at your first line, Yes at the second. Outcasts comes with nothing except the rules it has. It has a requirement : you need to have 3 units of spites before you can pick it. You get no units form it just the rules, an extra CP and an extra artefact (the last being the main reason to pick a batallion for sylvaneth since the benefits from the batallions itself are quite a bit weaker than in other books). I don't use battlescribe but I guess the way you describe it you just pick outcasts, accept the units it gives you or increase it. No need for other battleline if you don't want.
7 hours ago, albionsangel said:Yeah, I dont know why I thought the Tree Revs were more hardy than the spites. They have one fewer attack, require one more to hit, get rend, and can reroll 1 roll per phase, but it seems their real benefit is teleporting. From what I understand (and correct me if I am wrong), I get to summon dryads (and some models can summon hunters) at Awakened Wyldwoods, I can teleport one unit per round if it is near an awakened wyldwood to any other awakened wyldwood, certain units can do this in addition to the one unit picked (Treelord Ancients, for example, have this as an ability, which presumably does not count towards the 1 unit limit), Dreadwood gives a command point teleport for a single unit within 18" of a hero to anywhere on the board, and Tree Revs also get free teleports if they have waypipes. Of course, if I go Gnarlroot for that sweet, sweet chalice, then I lose a teleport, but gain better dryad summoning.
Yes at everything. 1 woods teleport and all TL variants get to teleport from wood to wood too and Trevs always and everywhere (everything 9" away from enemy of course which will be a problem often)
7 hours ago, albionsangel said:So, assuming that the way I have Outcasts right now (where I am assuming it comes with 3 spite units and their associated points costs, as battlescribe shows), and rolling in what you say, I probably want to drop at least one tree rev unit, and maybe squeeze in another hunter unit, or as Pennydude suggested, a unit of dryads that is fielded from the start. Ok, I can start to see this taking shape. I def want to try and have dryads being summoned. It seems extremely useful to just have more free batteline units appearing when and where I need them.
Sounds like a good basic army - roll with gnarlroot or dreadwood. Just play a few games and get a feel for it and the strategies and see what you like (dreadwood is often used for a sort of alpha strike with a large unit of hunters for example and in combination with an endless spell improving charges to make the 9" charge more sure I've not actually played it but it might be a bit trickier to get done than most other strats so I'd suggest trying a few gnarlroot or winterleaf games first.. but that is just me)you'd like.
Personally I'd say: with a single unit of 30 dryads, Drycha, a wraith and with a few units of hunters (9 or more models in total) back with an arch revenant you can't really go wrong.
7 hours ago, albionsangel said:What are the limits on artefacts. Is it one per army, or one per hero? Because I obviously need to take the one associated with a grove if I take that grove, but both the acorn and the spiritsong staff seem too good to pass up (acorn would bring my wyldwoods up to 3, while the staff would help the branchwych when I am not taking Gnarlroot as my grove).
You get 1 in a basic army to go on any NON-special character (Alarielle or Drycha) hero. Then you get an extra artefact for every batallion you take. No matter how many artefacts you may take it's ALWAY max 1 per character. Your general could have a command trait and an artefact for more abilities but no hero can have 2 artefacts.
Yes we have good artefact options (which is why I said it's the main reason to take a batallion) but our batallions are relatively expensive for what they do besides that in my opinion. Another option is to not take a specific glade so you have a free pick for the first artefact..but that means trading a lot of good abilities - and often a good artefact too - for that option (overall it's not done a lot I think).
-
Drycha is good at most point levels, certainly at 2k.
If you want to play outcast it means you need to have 3 units of spites in your army before you can select outcast (and pay the points for that). The tree-rev's are not needed unless you want another 3 smallish units with weak defense (my suggestion: if outcast go 3 units of spites , MAYBE a single unit of tree revs and then get some more heavy hitters --> hunters or if you need more bodies get a big unit of dryads or increase size of the spite units).
Spites are glasscannons , in large units maybe a bit of a hammer but you certainly shouldn't think T-revs are an anvil. They are very much NOT an anvil (for their points relatively low wounds, lowish and no other defensive option) their teleport is where the magic is: perfectly placed roadblocks, the treat of getting behind lines forcing the opponent to keep stuff on objectives and actually getting behind lines if there is something weak or an undefended objective. Hunters and dryads are anvils (though usually you'll be using hunters on the offence, but if the enemy hits them they can certainly take a punch).
My experience that is unless you take specific items summoning dryads isn't very reliable but in gnarlroot it should be an option.
-
18 hours ago, Xil said:
The new Wyldwood won't be a place of power.
Only the one you pick before starting the game is a place of power (or other certain terrain piece)
As he said: you pick a specific piece of terrain that becomes your place of power, not a terraintype.
-
On 7/24/2020 at 8:32 PM, Tizianolol said:
@Mirage8112 nice thats the model i have seen. So its not a awakened wildwood we cant use it for our buffs. I wanna make a sylvaneth list , but first i wanna test withh tts( amazing program i discovered during lock down )
om tts there is only new wildwood with 3 parts as triangle. So you say when i place a new one on the board i can use 6 piece of that if i wanna put into a big unit? My problem with first test is that opponent split his units everywhere and i cant place many wildwood because i have no space. How you risolve that in competitive games?
Well... I have exactly the same problem. Going first SHOULD give you the option to place one somewhere if there is some room.
About the forest. Wyldwood and awakend wyldwood use the same models (atm 3-6 of the new bases or 1 old base) if it's placed as regular terrain it's a wyldwood, if it's placed as faction terrain or summoned forest (spell, TLA, acorn) then it's an awakend wyldwood.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Kaylethia said:
Yup. You can make your awakened wyldwood from 3 to 6 pieces. The tips have to touch, and it needs to be circular.
The longitudinal one mentione above with 4 is legal right?
-
10 minutes ago, Tizianolol said:
When i red first time i thought that too. Yes i think its a normal wildwood not a sylvaneth wildwood. Anyway can i use old wildwood model for my list in aos 2.0 or i have to play the new one?
You can use a single old wyldwood base as a complete (single placement/summon) forest (so not 3 bases anymore, it's only 3 bases if you use the new woods). Doesn't it say so in our book (not sure where I got this rule from really)?
-
6 hours ago, Kramer said:
And a wild wood is one of the options I think.
yes.. but not an awakend wyldwood... there is a difference... a rather important one for Sylvaneth
-
On 7/21/2020 at 2:29 PM, Tizianolol said:
Guys what sylvaneth wildwoods model i have to use? Can i use old one or i have to play with new model? I mean in a tournament? I just realizzati model is changed:(
- about terrain.. its each player chose 3+2 terrain, so when player A deploy them its 10 terrain in total. Thats what i understood.!
Yeah just read it myself... means my table will be just as filled as is was I guess. If you win the roll to setup the terrain you can put more (all) on the sides though
Just line em up on one side (I'd never do this tbh but would be legal). But putting a few of the larger piece more towards the corner might help deploying forests
-
12 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:
1. Players pick the scenario, and then place objective tokens
2. We pick terrain from a pre-set list. 3 from primary and 2 from secondary
3. Players roll off, with the winner picking player A, or Player B .
4. Players A then sets up ALL the terrain
5. Player B then chooses which territory they wish to use.Wow.. only 5 pieces of terrain.. that really makes a difference.. I usually play with no less than 9 including some pretty large pieces (and I usually set up the table myself). If the rules now clearly state 5 I can leave SO MUCH more of the table free.
11 hours ago, Nos said:That's what I usually do with TLA's free wood after placing my initial one somewhere more aggressive.
I usually try to get the first one in the middle (but that was 1" away from enemy territory so still not THAT offensive) and the 2nd one near one of my own objectives, but I often had difficulty getting even a 2nd forest out there (this will partially be solved by the new rules - see above in this reply) but trying a TLA will be nice anyway.
-
52 minutes ago, Nos said:
To clarify, I wasnt saying go all magic ,
I know, but I wasn't advocating it at all
.
Interesting build. I must admit I'm not going to try it right away since I'm first gonna try my full on 1D approach with tons of dryads, spites and T revs. I think Alarielle might be a weakpoint in the specific army I was against since it had quite a lot of pretty high rend shooting though. If you use your summoner to cast throne 2 turns you'll only have 30 dryads extra max since she only has one cast even in this build right? Also there is a high chance of 5 wounds characters dying early on (as by personal experience).. but I have no real idea what to do about that except take a TLA which also gives the 2nd forest without a cast which means I'll certainly be using that one in a rematch. Drycha just has so much potential so she's to good to ignore too so she'll be there too (but she got killed in turn 2 by bastilladon shooting I think, 2 bastilladons, one double shooting hurts. I didn't know he could move and shoot so wasn't out of range as I though I'd be turn 1).
9 minutes ago, Popisdead said:I found this really good last game I played. I tossed out 10 Dryads a turn (got lucky) and it made a huge difference. Held up a bone grinder a couple turns.
I've personally not average more than 1 succesfull summon last games so I'm quite jealous. Partially because failing casts, partially unbinds (that terrible Slann for example) but also lacking good target wyldwoods due to the 9" rule when enemy has engaged.
-
17 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:
I believe when you’re dealing with overlapping restrictions, you use the most recent version. Not “the worst” version. This is why we use stats the most recent battletome, rather than the stat lines from previous battletome regardless if the unit is better or worse.
Our “faction drop” woods have a 1” from terrain, 6” from objectives and 1” from enemy territory in our BT. The 2019 GHB actually dropped after our book was published, and the matched play rules superseded our BT rules. That is why we used the 3” from terrain, 1” from objectives and 1” from enemy territory (“an additional restriction” covered by the GHB) when using the GHB 2019 for matched play. The restrictions are the same in GHB 2020 (3” from terrain, 1” from objectives) but as an “additional restriction”, we also can’t drop our faction terrain in enemy territory (1” away).
However, the order of operational looks a little like this changed in GHB 2020. This think this is relevant because it looks like terrain (including faction terrain) is set up before players actually choose which territory they want. This means there is no enemy territory when our faction terrain drops, so I assume we don’t have to follow that restriction.
3” from other terrain and 1” from objectives looks to be the proper guidelines to use.
Yeah for 2020 GHB I think that would be it.
In the link I found I didn't see it described but since objectives is still mentioned in the rule that must mean you FIRST pick scenario, then 1 player sets up all terrain (so you can stay away from objectives) and then the other player picks a side and after that the first player (who setup terrain) starts deployment?
-
17 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:
This game has 5 phases: Hero, movement, shooting, charging/combat, and battleshock. To win a game of AOS, you need to be able to compete in at least 3 of the 5 phases (preferably 4) or absolutely dominate 2 phases.
You can’t really win games *just* by dominating the magic phase. This is an objective game, not “see how many of your opponents models you can blow off the board” game. If totally wreck face in the magic phase But you can’t get on objectives: you lose. If you dominate the magic phase and get on objectives but can’t stop the enemy from getting to you then you had better hope the unit you picked to hold the objective can take a punch: or you lose. Get a shut down in the magic phase, can’t get on objectives and picking the wrong combats? Guess what? You lose.
If you are putting all your eggs in 1 basket and hoping to dominate the magic phase, it’s likely you’ll do fine provided you don’t come up against a magic specialist (like Seraphon or DoT). If you do, and you cannot compete in 3 of the other phases (moving, combat, shooting or BS), then you’re a goner.
Absolutely 100% spot on. couldn’t have said it better myself.
Odd post.. it was Nos who was talking about focussing on magic (against coalesced) and me saying it wasn't a good option against that army due to the Slann and it's magical options. Also I didn't focus on magic, I just had 3 casters and no magic specific items which is fairly standard in this army. So how you make that into me saying you should dominate the magic phase (let alone all your assumptions about me and other phases which I don't mention here) and him being right about everything I can't follow since you directly contradict that part of his post.
I can accept you saying he's right about the rest but the above is just a plain contradiction.
-
23 hours ago, Nos said:
Against Coalesced for example I would focus on all the magic and maneuverability I could, I wouldn't be looking to spam KH because without the auxiliary units to make them really powerful it's just lining up melee fights which arent going to pay off. Coalesced literally hard counter KH with their wound negation so points wise they're already compartivley less economical. Drycha on the other hand becomes invaluable, as do all those Spite or Rev units that Colaseced melee monster units will overkill 4 or 5 times for nothing but a 60 or 80 point return. Alarielle becomes more of a consideration than in most lists because of high movement and situational summoning, and the Beetles charge is comparatively more reliable damage vs coalesced than KH due to multiple D6s.
I think focussing on magic might not be that easy. I had 3 casters and his single +2 and 3x cast and unbind over whole table slann made sure I only got a single spell off my last game against them. Not to mention he killed my 2 wraiths (5 wounds) in 2-3 turns (also the arch rev btw) with his annoying signature spell. I took an all comers list with a bit of everything, 9 hunters, not that much since I didn't know anything about his army and also because I don't often tailor lists in general. As I said, in a rematch I'd try to tailor a bit since the difference in power was significant and I'd go with lots dryads and spites (I don't have that much T revs).
-
1 hour ago, Nos said:
Sylvaneth epitomise the "cant hurt what you cant touch" maxim. If as a Sylvaneth player you're in a position where big chunks of your army are getting tabled in one go, you're either assessing the wrong fights offensively or setting up badly defensively. Theres no reason with the amount of maneuverability that Sylvaneth have to let a substantial investment be getting munched in one turn or even double turn.
While I agree this should be our good points and I also agree this is what we are paying a lot for I think it's not working very well.. with the high movement values, teleports and a lot of run and charge options spread out over tons of armies it appears others have enough mobility to hit is where they want unless we bunker up in our own zone and move back if they advance... which is totally not acceptable when playing for objectives. This even without taking the strong shooting and MW output some armies have.
1 hour ago, Nos said:At the very top level, where the best players are playing each other, it stands to reason that players whose decision making and understanding of the game is excellent,that in control of an imbalanced faction, they will beat a similarly gifted player using a merely balanced army such as Sylvaneth. Because not only will they have an army designed to win from the outset, they will have the strategic capability to respond to things they wernt anticipating as well.
But that's not 99% of people on here, and most of the issues on this forum or similar on the internet demonstrate that the issue isnt Sylvaneth, it's people trying to play them as something they arebt and ignoring the strengths of what they are.
If 99% of the players here don't have a good win ration - even if it is because they 'play the faction incorrect' as you put it then the faction is not in a good spot. Especially if the other 1% of the competative players ALSO can't do extremely well in tournaments... basicly you said most players over all levels of play don't do well.. which - to me - means the armies isn't in a good place balance wise and thus the issue IS sylvaneth.
1 hour ago, Nos said:If you're looking for a kill all comers net list that some factions have, with a central gimmick designed to deny the opponent from the get go, Sylvaneth dont have it, you wont find it. They are the antithesis of a point and click approach. That dosen't make them weak though.
I'm not sure I get exactly what you mean... but when playing a tournament you NEED to have a single list that can beat everything that it meets on the table. For me the same is mostly true in casual games too: I often don't know which army my opponent will play, either because I don't know the opponent that well or because he has multiple armies. Even IF I know what my opponent plays I prefer not to tailor my army against a specific opponent. I prefer to have a list that is well rounded enough to work a few games against different opponents. Sure I change my lists a bit or a lot depending on what I feel like or based on what playstyle I want at the moment but no real list tailoring. (I'll be tailoring my list for the rematch against that Coalesced Seraphon army with thunderlizard battalion though.. but only because I'm pretty sure that EVEN when I do that I won't win
and because my current thoughts are our strongest weapons - the hunters - sufffer a lot from the damage reduction so I'll be going mass infantry with 1D)
-
2
-
-
On 7/14/2020 at 11:21 AM, Mirage8112 said:
From what I remember this was a debate when GHB 2019 came out last year. IIRC the settled upon interpretation was you used the least restrictive of the options available. That wasn’t the reasoning (obviously) but it was the conclusion. This was also the general concession of the player base at large, not specifically Sylvaneth players.
Also have we anything to say about the new terrain rules? I.e. Picking 3 wyldwoods and then rolling off to see which player places ALL the terrain. And the other player chooses sides? That’s got to be a huge win for up in matched play games, although it remains to be seen how this and the other changes are treated by tournaments.
I always play all restrictions on top of each other. I think it's : in our territory, more than 6' from objectives and more than 3' from every other terrain feature for the pre game forest.
I must have missed the new terrain rules: since when do we place 3 woods (the one in 3 pieces you mean I guess)? I always place terrain in consensus with opponent. Then roll for missions, place objectives, roll off and someone picks a side. Then I place my single wood within limits mentioned above. I know the Seraphon have a different rule which means their terrain piece is placed before table setup.. seems annoying for tournaments though.
EDIT: ah googled the new terrain rules.. those help. I guess if we let the GHB 2020 rules not only overrule the GHB 2019 but also the battletome (which is also a possible source for discussion but I think that is the intention), if the rule that it needs to be setup away from enemy territory is really completely gone that helps a lot too. In the link I found I didn't see you place forest first though... I read terrain and then 1' from objectives and 3' from other terrain.
Hopefully I can now more regularly place forests.. though enemy movement often limits my placements a lot if I don't get the first turn even if I get the spells off.
-
On 7/11/2020 at 4:59 AM, Mirage8112 said:
Sylvaneth are about asymmetrical warfare. We cannot win combats by engaging in 1 v 1 fights. If you have 1 unit of hunters fighting 1 unit of something on one side of board and another unit of T-revs fighting something on the other side of the board: you’re doing it wrong. The correct way to do it is have 1 unit of hunters and 1 units of t-revs fight 1 enemy unit on one side of the board, and then you teleport and fight the other enemy unit with the hunters and T-revs the next turn. 2v1, 3v1, 5v2.
I don't see our army do that though. The fact forest are not that easy to place, certainly not in the places you need them AND the fact our teleports like most of them are still @ 9" and most options to get increased charge ranges are magic based and thus extremely unreliable means it's a to unreliable to base a strategy on.. hell lately I've read that even dreadwood based alpha strikes aren't reliable and that is much easier to pull off than what you say every fight we pick should be like. Not to mention lots of armies have quite a good mobility without teleporting so they'll charge us too and nothing we can do about it.
.
AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion
in Sylvaneth
Posted
I honestly think returning models too the table should be undead only.. and not FEC either.. just zombeis and skeletons.. and I guess the abomination that is bonereapers. Healing and good healing.. ok.. summoning if not to much (ours is too weak) but not more.