Aezeal
-
Posts
1,875 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Aezeal
-
-
On 7/7/2020 at 11:37 PM, Mirage8112 said:
Y’all’ seem to be having mad trouble out there. Granted I haven’t played too recently because of the plague that’s ravaging our idiot country, but from where I’m sitting, trees are still pretty competitive. It’s really tricky to pin down the differences why people are having problems but it’s been my experience that Sylvanethg only really work if you lean hard into their playstyle. This is why I think our points are in the right place : the faction is super strong played correctly and pretty bad if you try to play them like a normal army.
Results I've read about online don't seem to back this but maybe I'm mistaken.
On 7/8/2020 at 12:29 PM, Nos said:Agreed.
Especially weird at the GHB release to always see people comparing profiles as though that's all there is.
Sylvaneth units pay a tax for the ability to shape the board, manoeuvre, summon and heal and they are among the best in the game at this. They are not about going toe-to-toe with anyone, they're about managing one or two favourable combats in your favour and otherwise ignoring or negating all the others while you play objectives. In particular not only do they have excellent late game nabbing potential they also have the ability to change the shape and nature of the board late game meaning opponents often are not in a position to act as they would maybe anticipate in the final few turns.
A lot of players in particular who complain about abcense of space for woods at the start seem to just stop trying to summon them later on when theres less units to block them. They are *just as useful*. You can summon a wood, 10 dryads and make a fortress on turn 4 at a point when most things that would have thr ability to chew through it are depleted or dead.
They lack the auto devastation aspects of the favoured and imbalanced current meta factions but a Sylvaneth player has excellent tools to negate these if played well. The amount of posts which focus on issues around profiles etc just suggests to me people are not playing them to their strengths.
Except you need room for the forest and the dryads 9" out of enemy range.. and enemies will usually be at the objectives at that point and other places are less interesting late game. If I don't have first turn most armies are so quick that after their first move there isn't much room for forest in interesting locations (for me that is in enemy territory or in midline)
Also: a 6+ and a 7 + cast and neither of them should get unbound which is getting a problem these day. In my winterleaf builds (which will be the same for all build except those which get a casting item) I often have problems getting a 2nd forest on the table because enemies seem to crash my spells left and right. Summoning dryads is really getting hard for me.
On 7/8/2020 at 3:12 PM, Kaylethia said:Has anyone tried how our old-school woods generation via TLA (I'm thinking bring two, and they can't slag both?) and the artefact? Giving us two extra non-magically sourced woods, although the risk is that you can't really keep them in reserve until later.
I think we could pivot away from a magic-reliant build, without playing MSU 24 bow Hunters, if needed.
I don't think 24 bow hunters will be a winning strategy against most armies tbh.. if I thought it was good I might try it (with proxies) but I really don't think their damage output is anything near enough to win games.. and their mobility and lack of bodies means you'd need to win games by damage output
On 7/8/2020 at 3:40 PM, Kaylethia said:I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.
Seems an expensive back up just for that.
On 7/8/2020 at 3:56 PM, Popisdead said:I know, the idea is that you have a backup in case one gets nuked off the table.
Yeah. Maybe.. the powercreep in other books is a thing though maybe not yet enough to say it should be lower...
On 7/8/2020 at 10:48 PM, Pennydude said:Also, can confirm the points changes.
Drycha is now 300 and the Kurnoths are 190.
Yeah.. really odd.. our strongest stuff gets cheaper.. It's been said before.. but still.. really gonna lock us into these units instead of improving in-army balance. Everything that helps us is nice.. but lowering these while weaker stuff stays the same is still an odd choice.
-
12 hours ago, Walkirriox said:
I completely agree with all you exposed. But the only update we will get until the new book comes are points changes or a new unit. We have to play around with the warscrolls we have for a looong while...
At least GW could reduce the points for suboptimal units in order to see some (tournament) play.Also battalions point drop could also help in some cases.
True... point drop across the board would help a lot for non magic based builds. While dreadwood reliability wouldn't increase much some other build might just get the extra hitting powers, staying power or bodies they need.Thing is.. points drops will also work for LC so LC will probably remain the better choice to play with
(this is from hearsay... have yet to try this.. but will).
11 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:These point changes are all great, even if its only to two units. I was expecting a drop to Drycha (20 pts is fair) and the drop to hunters is a nice little bonus (Enough to maybe eek out another command point or an extra endless spell).
It not enough of a point change to actually change how we build our lists, but generally makes everything function more efficiently. It also shows GW is pretty happy overall with how our army plays . I’d agree, were in the best shape we’ve ever been (if you discount that brief period where we were super OP).But compared to newer books not that great unless they get a lot of point increases.. I'm still sore about my coalesced game.. and if his army stays the same I still don't know how to deal with that. I was nearly tabled in 3 turns and he only lost a few models. Now me and my dice take some blame for that... but the difference was really terrible.
11 hours ago, Grimbok said:And the batallions.... 140 for Free Spirits...come on. A drop to 80 would help a lot...it’s not worth more than that. The start tax is massive.
Outcasts are Ok, but Forest Folk could use a point drop also. Same with household.
Grimbok
True.. If I see what others get for 140 points (that THunderlizard batallsion I played against for example)... it's insane..
12 hours ago, Grimbok said:We need warscroll changes, and many other changes (wyldwoods etc). But for now, point drops could help. But nope...
It’s a joke. They have no idea...and playtesters, are they not supposed to help here? Oh, I forgot, playtesters don’t play Sylvaneth, only top level competitive ****** armies...
Can’t they do basic math. Blightkings down to 140 (of all nurgle units, these were fine, many other units needed to drop) and Kurnoths (which is our best unit) is 190.... Blightkings are 6,7 points per wound with 4+ save and often 5+ dpr...and with good damage output and sweet batallion. Kurnoths are 12,7 points per wound. It’s double the points for comparable units (elite units)!
At least Stormcast got som slight point reductions, that adds up. Won’t help them at top level, but will in casual games...
I was hoping for some considerable point reductions to Sylvaneth, to at least have a chance in casual games...and maybe try alternative wyldwood system...but no. Back to Living City and Stormcast...
Grimbok
LOL last time I played nurgle is a while ago but assuming warscrolls are somewhat similar last 2 years.. it's still odd.. then 5 BK blendered 3 hunters (they got the charge but considering the stuff they can do with their trees I think that will be generally the case)
6 hours ago, Xil said:I just quit the game to have a break. Playing in a semi competitive meta locally. The amount of bullshitery added up to an unbearable level.
There is just no way I can have fun with this army against competitive and competent players with Armys like Seraphon, Fyreslayers, FEC and Tzeench... Glad there are no Lumineth yet
I think that very good players can probably get a little more out of the army... but that isn't good. I don't need an easy army. But currently I feel like only our top 5% players will be getting above 50% win% in a competative setting.
-
12 hours ago, Kaylethia said:
I'd say problems with Sylvaneth don't stem from our points, but rather a playstyle issue in the current tournament metagame, as well as feelbads from 1.0 days and people overcorrecting for past "sins" like covering the table in woods, congalines, hurricanum + hunters in old Gnarlroot, etc.
Regular TL is basically a unit of hunters with a different dropoff and a different recovery mechanic.
Tree-Revenants are already a valid (if narrow) choice.
And I think TLA could stay the same but gain a second cast.
We could do more with a few changes to some warscrolls than points changes.
TL:
All TL variants have an insane drop in efficiency after only a few wounds.. Way worse than anything else I see on the table (other armies might have some monsters that have it worse.. but then they aren't played).
I think Durthu should get another woundbracket with 6 flat damage.
TLA should get 2 spells and/or +1 to cast. (or maybe something like mount choices some armies have, possible +2 to cast, possible +1 spell, spell range, and extra wounds or something)
RegularTL should get some improvement on the damage table as well.. it's not bad for it's points.. it just GETS bad.
Also: TL are tough monsters.. but a lot of stuff currently has more wounds or gets much more wounds (yes.. this is my coalesced experience again) I think another 2 wounds on either all variants or at least TLA and Durthu would be nice.
Tree rev:
Tree-rev currently are only a viable choice because of teleport and cheapness. Making them 10/140 and 30/350 with an extra attack would change their roll drasticly (and more inline with lore) but still not make them overpowered I think. They'd be medium powered infantry with high mobility. They'd loose their speedbump roll except in dire need. I think our army shouldn't be about cheap speedbumps but about preservation (or use spites if needed since they are outcasts). And they an affordable 10-20 of them could actually take an objective that is defended in a turn or 2. (maybe not make them 30/350 btw since teleporting units of 30 everywhere is not good for balance in the point scoring part of the game)
Spites and dryads are nice as they are but points might need to be dropped due to powercreep in other books.
All 5 wound hero's are just... very vulnerable in the current game. There is a reasons CoS has special mechanisms to defend them as generals. Our Arch rev can be somewhat important in strategies but is way to vulnerable as is. The solution isn't easy imho giving each army the same rule as CoS is an option but wouldn't even be that great for us (since archie is s mobile). Just giving archie more wound would mean other models should get it too and I don't think that will happen. Giving all 5 wound generals 2 extra wounds would be a possible idea.
I realize my views are a bit Sylvaneth biased
-
So since GG are not in the CoS book.. is using GG as SoW without further conversion generally accepted? Since there is only 1 wanderer archer left (in this book, officially the GG are still a thing I guess (till next GHB?) but noone is gonna play any old army that is in this book outside of CoS right?) I used to take my old waywatchers as SoW but with points reductions you only play them instead of GG so you need about... 30 + of them and I don't have that many WW (and I've got plenty GG).
On 7/2/2020 at 9:47 PM, Kramer said:yes, it's the main reason you see many combat units with 'weak' shooting attack in the lists.
So T1 you move (into shooting range) then shoot, command ability on end shooting phase, move again for 1 CP and then charge? Allarielle gets a huge threat range then
(if you want her solo into combat that is).
-
On 6/8/2020 at 4:49 PM, Popisdead said:
You may also find a lot of us are converting and happily playing Wanderers in LC (where they aren't terrible).
My GG have mostly female torso's so I'm greenstuffing some flames on their bows. Same with Waywatchers. I know some people use those as Shadow WArriors but SotW are to LC and AoS 2.0 to what GG were at the end of 6th. Just solid scary shooting from 10-models.
Plus I feel CoS is a converter's army. You see steam-punk style stuff all the time. I'm converting my Warhawk Riders to Gyrocopters by adding bitz to represent their attacks for LC. I have uh. Decimators? but using some old Great Stag models. It isn't uncommon to see stuff converted over from older editions.
Ow that great stag as some heavy cavalry from Stormcasts is a NICE idea. Same for warhawks/great eagles. Are gyro's a good thing for living city?
-
6 hours ago, Landohammer said:
12 Hunters plus an Archie would be a site to behold lol. Not much could hold up to that.
It would be extremely difficult to get Skaeth in that list though, since he would be a third sylvaneth unit. You are going to have a hard time getting 9 decent cities units when 1020 points of your list are already spent on Sylvaneth stuff lol.
Personally I would leave Archie at home. A Hurricanum with the Wardroth horn can accomplish the same goal without burning up a Sylvaneth slot while also providing another cast and excellent mortal wound output.
Cogs is your only real option for charge buffs. Hive and Wildform happen in the Hero phase when your deepstriking units are not even on the table, so they wouldn't be able to receive the buffs.
Is wardroth horn the go to item for living city? Not some regular item?
-
39 minutes ago, Landohammer said:
I think Seraphon and OBR get to drop their terrain before the table is setup which seems weird in a tournament setting. Hopefully the GHB20 cleans up faction terrain once and for all. Currently its a mess of FAQs.
Well you will need magic unless you want to rely on rerollable 8's and 9's for your deepstrike charges. Though note that casting bonuses are a lot easier to get in Living City. For example swap out sisters for some dark shards and all of a sudden your Sorceress can cast Cogs at +2 guaranteed.
Arch Revenant would be fantastic but note that you are limited to 1 in 4 sylvaneth units. So you would need 9 cities units to unlock 3 sylvaneth units, and thats pretty tricky.
I personally prefer Kurnoth Hunters in most situations, but Rangers will perform better vs monsters and get a natural +1 to charge rolls which is absolutely huge after deepstriking. Also 30 rangers get 61 attacks with their 2" melee range and so they are less likely to whiff than say a unit of Scythes with 18.
Yeah I thought deepstriking that unit might not be a bad idea at all.
Or a unit of 12 hunters and Archie and just engage everything they've got at once. @ +1 to hit and +1 attack
(and +1 to wound from Skeath's Wild Hunt)
BTW In living cities would you go battlemage with wildform ; cogs or hive (on a sylvaneth caster)?
-
6 hours ago, Landohammer said:
It usually falls on deaf ears for the larger events. Its just not scene as a priority issue which I totally understand. In the past my solution has been just to ask my opponent for permission to fudge scenery so the initial forest can be dropped. I haven't had any problem but its something I hate to do, especially on a top table. (as rare as those are for me lol)
I change my living city armies around a-lot, but here is my initial list and its one that Sylvaneth (and old wood elf) players would probably find fun
Nomad Prince, Sorceress, Hurricanum with Battlemage, 30 Wildwood Rangers, 10x Sisters of the Watch, 10x Sisters of the Watch, 6 Kurnoth Hunters with Swords, 6 Kurnoth Hunters with Scythes.
You deepstrike 1-2 units of Kurnoth Hunters with the Hurricanum so they hit on 2's and can get the charge reroll with a CP. If you want to take it to the next level competitively, swap the rangers for more sisters and add cogs for charge bonuses.
Its essentially like our dreadwood lists but your deepstriking rather than teleporting. Its more efficient since you don't need to waste points on throwaway Spite units and battalion taxes, and you don't need to burn CP for deepstrikes (and can infiltrate multiple units a turn rather than just 1)
Also your Kurnoth Hunters heal 1 wound a turn which is nice
The Seraphon get to set up their terrain before other terrain is setup (at least that is how it was explained to me and a quick glance seemed to confirm that. Would be ideal for our first book.. but how do TO's deal with that rule?
That list looks nice and the sure teleport seems a good idea. And not reliant on magic at all yay. Would an archrevenant not help that list btw? What hits harder? 30 rangers or 6 hunters
-
2 hours ago, Grimbok said:
@Sleepa
My arguments exactly, just better written 🙂
Grimbok
I agree with him too.
Tree revenants. They are too weak offensively to take an objective that has ANYTHING guarding it.
Summoning trees should become a prayer and wraiths should become priests (and give the summon spell to wyches then instead of their useless spell - wait it's GW: just make a new priest model they can sell ). Having 2 wraith that can get a forest on a 3+ isn't odd considering what Khorne priests can pull off.. and it's even fluffy I'd say. We have a goddess in our army and no priest for that religion. A 66% chance is not a full proof way for a strategy but it's better than nothing.
I think Kaylethia isn't completely wrong: our army is reasonablly internally balanced.. which means all of our stuff is about average (hunters slightly above) BUT since other armies all are less balanced people you face will often only be bringing their BEST stuff ... so even if 2/3 of their warscrolls are abysmal that doesn't matter if you only face the 3-4 warscrolls that are better than the rest of their army and sadly also better than anything in our army.
Going back to my original post: I'm pretty sure my Seraphon opponent has warscrolls and battallions that would make his army way less strong ... but he has access too Slann, salamanders and bastilladons.. and a batallion that migitates their weaknesses ... so he brings them. I can't fault him I'd bring those too when playing coalesced.
-
4 minutes ago, Landohammer said:
His list is pretty stout but the true terror of Seraphon is Salamander spam. But do note that Kurnoth Bow Hunters (and maybe even double Branchwraiths) are decisively noncompetitive list selections. Compare Sisters of the Watch, Ballistas, or Vanguard Raptors to your 200pt Bow Hunters and prepare to be pissed off lol.
But, at the end of the day, Sylvaneth are just in a rough place right now. I hate to say that because they are my favorite army of any game system. We just don't really do anything particularly well and our strongest mechanics like teleport charges and ASL are simply too unreliable.
Personally, I have come to a two main conclusions that I wanted to share with the group. These aren't necessarily directed toward you but maybe these will help others who are struggling re-evaluate their list.
-Every competitive Sylvaneth list needs to have at least two units of 6 Kurnoth Hunters and an Arch Rev. These are the breadwinners of the entire army. Swords or Scythes are fine. Screen and buff these units and they can carry the army.
-Don't overly rely on magic. Right now the competitive meta is full of armies that can simply shut down your magic and its only going to get worse with Lumineth on the horizon. I feel like Dreadwood has been knocked down the "Glade hierarchy" a bit recently with Nagash, Tzeentch, Khorne and Hallowheart becoming more popular. If you can't reliably cast Spiteswarm hive then Dreadwood just isn't reliable enough.
I agree with all your points. My opponent hadn't played for over a year so both of us didn't know his list was much stronger than mine so I'd not taken a top grade list (as I said.. just a bit of everything).
I especially agree on not relying on magic. I don't rely on it this was actually the first time I took spite and I didn't play Dreadwood but winterleaf. Though I loved magic tree at start of AoS (and I hope we'll get it back; Allarielle not having a +2 to cast being a goddess is odd, and while treelord ancients are no slann they are described as wise powerfull mages.. in the current game 2 spells and +1 to cast on them wouldn't be out of line... probably even without point increase). Magic as it is is pretty unreliable for basic mages (unless you have a starmaster with 3 spell @ +2 to cast and unbind and a reroll ofcourse). It's just that I had some points to spare and because I did know seraphon was magicky but didn't know HOW strong I figured a third caster for a 3th unbind might be usefull (of course.. that was a complete illusion. Against his list any point invested in magic was worthless.. and any points in characters too since he can just snipe anything in a few turns with the combination of the Slann spell and running and shooting bastilladons. Combined with his -1 D (min 1) I figure the best against his army is just spamming wounds.. tons and tons of dryads and spites and stuff to buff them might be the best option. And while I agree melee hunters are generally our best bet (will take your advice on taking 2x 6 and forgetting bows in general) I think against this list they might not even be worth it since damage of swords is halved and damage of scythes is.. well not doing the math but I think it's probably lowered by about 1/3 or 3/8.
I might try living city (using my old WW or GG as sisters since noone really field GG anyway I think)
-
So I had not played in a while due to COVID regulations. First game against the new Seraphon.
I had taken a bit of a mixed list:
Drycha, Arch rev, 2x wraith, 1x 6 swords, 3 scythes, 3 bows, 20 spites, 30 dryads and 5 T revs and the hive.
He played Coalesced (apparently not even the best lists/lists played in tournaments according to my opponent)
1 slann, 1 EotG, 1 Stegadon with something shooty, 2 bastilladon (shooty), 1 OB on carnosaru, 5 knights, 5 TG and 2 salamanders
While it was fun to play again I couldn't do much. So a bit of a rant below, don't read if you don't like to hear complaining.
Summary: Before I could play my 3th turn I was nearly tabled (3 sword hunters - in a combat they'd loose, 2 bow hunters and 3 dryads - also in a combat they'd loose- remaining) and was already behind on points.
Now I'll readily admit I made tons of mistakes but it seems to me his book is way better than ours in almost every phase. He didn't use fancy tactics either.. just shoot and magic half my army away while moving melee elements my way.. and even in melee he had the advantage.
Command abilities: He has several good abilities and generates enough points to make use of them
Batallion: The option to run and charge or run and shoot means one of his bastilladons had essentially the same range as hunters. The alternative to get +1 attack on the batallion is a very good alternative too. Sure it's a bit more expensive than most of ours but it's quite a bit better than the stuff we take mostly to get items and it adresses one of the weaker points in his army (while ours are a bit fluffy.. but also weak and unneeded often).
Magic: A slann killing 2 of my 5 wound characters in 2 turns with magic (@ +2 to cast) and damaging the arch rev so that it's gone too in his 2nd turn shooting phase. And the same Slann unbinds all my spells at +2 (due to some artefact) and having a reroll on that once per hero phase is just nasty. I think I got to try to cast 6 spells the whole game and all failed or where unbound.
Shooting: His shooters have less range than my bow hunters (however see batallion.. it's not that bad) but do about 1.5 times the damage I think.. and bastiladons have enough range so they can hit something and do that damage. The Salamanders have a pretty low range.. sure but -2 rend . He had nearly half my army gone after 2 magic and shooting phases I think.
Combat: All damage against him is at -1 D (min1) making sword hunters effectively useless. And his bastiladons are pretty hard to kill too (unless with MW .. but our magic that needs to do that damage is unable to do it). His Old blood on carnosaur was pretty terrifying with all the buffs it had (yes some cost CP but his slann generates those too) - +1 to hit, +1 to jaw attack and I think something else too... which means his melee is ALSO better than anything I could put against him. Slann with temple guard is pretty hard to kill too (especially at -1 D)
Movement : Sylvaneth does have better base movement overall and we have teleport options (though when it's near impossible to place a 2nd forest that is limited). But he had options to give a battalion run and shoot or run and charge in essential turns.
Am I missing something? I think I'll be playing again against this guy so I'd really like to know if it's really as bad as I think it is and if not I'd like some pointers in the right direction about how to play this. Even if I tailor a list against him (mostly 1 damage so it's not lowered by the coalesced ability maybe) I just don't see enough potential there to make this a somewhat even match-up.
-
8 hours ago, NauticalSoup said:
They're used because they're the cheapest way to meet your battleline requirements - your average SCE player will assume it's just a mandatory 300 point tax for playing SCE, and that the only thing they'll accomplish if you're lucky is to eat a charge and die. They serve no other purpose except being an overpriced speed bump. Sure, the other options will do more work, but they all require more investment which instantly writes them off. I've seen the case made that if Sequitors were 110 points and default battleline you would still take the Liberators because every point spent on a unit that isn't Raptors or Evokitties is a point wasted.
That's the absolute state of SCE right now.
I read just what you say (not much knowledge about the soecific warscrolls otherwise)
I understand means internal balance is suboptimal between battleline and non battleline, and while battle line is supposed to be a bit of a tax it's more than average in this army).
However being the cheapest battle line in a given army is apparently a huge thing in this case making them better than the other choices. Not having cheap speedbumps and cheap battle line is a design choice I think. It represents the eliteness(?) Of the army .. an army which has an otherwise broad choice of units and tactics I'd like to point out.
-
On 3/20/2020 at 10:15 PM, NauticalSoup said:
The humble Liberator is always my go-to for a bad unit. They're understatted, their shields suck, they have no banners or drummers, they have terrible bravery, their weapons hit like a wet noodle and they are totally barren of useful warscroll abilities. And SCE is still required to shove in 15 of the goobers because they're the only moderately affordable battleline. They also have no reach weapons despite their heug bases, which means that as soon as you go above minimum size they'll struggle to pile in and fight (not that they'd do much damage even if they could).
You're left with an overpriced minimum size screening unit that punches down and melts to even the most pathetic overtures of aggression. They're a tax on any SCE list and while any unit can serve as a speed bump, they're a particularly expensive and unimpressive speed bump even by speed bump standards.
I actually wonder if after more than a year of battletome releases anyone still has to suffer a battleline as awful as the Liberator.
If they are still used that much they ain't that bad. The other battleline options are obviously worse if you pick libs over them.
-
Nice Across.. but we've just had a book so don't get your hopes up.
-
Is LOS used/usable in some way?
-
7 hours ago, IndigoGirls said:
I think what is optimal is largely based on the situation. That said, we should analyze what kurnoth hunters are good at and what they are bad at. For this review I will not incorporate bow hunters as they differ greatly from the melee variants.
Pros: durable, medium damage, consistent, self sufficient
Cons: slow, low model count
We can shore up their weaknesses, lean into their strengths, or a little bit of both.
TLA - improves their movement (via woods), improves their durability on the charge (command ability). Costs ~1.25 hunter units. Nice way to get them to move around better and kurnoths in terrain are much stronger than kurnoths in the open.
Wraith - improves movement (can cast woods or spiteswarm, etc.) OR improves the bodies issue (summon dryads). Costs ~0.5 hunter units. Flexible army addition, doesn't do a ton for kurnoths but can help with the bodies issue or their movement (or both with multiple casts).
Archie - improves kurnoth consistency (re-roll 1s), improves max damage output (command ability). Costs 0.5 hunter units. Nice piece to force multiple kurnoths or other units. However, spending 1 cp to add 3 attacks to a unit is pretty underwhelming. Archie encourages larger blocks of kurnoths to make the most of the CA.
Drycha - improves movement (can cast woods or spiteswarm). Costs ~1.5 hunter units. Drycha is going to be a replacement for kurnoths. She is a flexible unit (ranged damage, melee damage, caster, fast). Strictly speaking I prefer 1.5 hunter units to Drycha; unless you build around Drycha.
Dryads - solves the bodies issue. Costs 0.5 - ~1.5 hunter units. Relatively durable and cost effecient. Strictly going to replace kurnoths. If you need to contest objectives you'll probably be using these (or some form of the more expensive revs).
Outcast battalion - will get you more CPs, another artifact, and lower your drops. No direct impact on your hunters but CPs and artifacts can boost them in interesting ways.
None of what I wrote above explains how you replace hunters and I think that's important. It's great to compare units but what matters even more is your game plan. Your game plan typically starts with the glade you choose and that immediately changes how hunters behave. Example, if you take Dreadwood your hunters movement problem is solved. If you take Gnarlroot you improve their durability. To give a meaningful answer on this theoretical exercise we need more info. 'Optimal' shifts based on your plan, the scenario, and your opponents list.
What I will say is this. Kurnoth hunters are my rock. They do basically everything I want and my lists often run 9 of them (block of 9, block of 6 and 3, or 3 blocks of 3). That said I have 0 lists running running more than 12 of these guys. In my experience spending 1k points on hunters starts to reveal weaknesses in my lists and limits my ability to produce meaningful list synergies.
I'm not sure if this post is helpful at all but these are my thoughts. I also think you slept on Alarielle as a replacement but maybe I'm in the minority.
About Alarielle: I've played her in most of my games and I'm not that happy with her so I left her out of the equation :D.
Yesterday I played this 1500 list (2 battleline) : I had 10 dryads, 5 spites, drycha, TLA, archie, 6 scythes and 3 bows (and palisade and wyrm). Opponent played CoS with lots of phoenixguard. We played focal points.
It was my first game with a unit of 6 scythe hunters (mostly been played scythes, swords in 3's) yesterday. I gave my opponent first turn and he confidentely moved his big unit of 20 PG backed by the ice phoenix to the middle objective.... I charged, +1 attack CP and winterleaf artefact double hit.... totally destroyed the unit (significant overkill I might add) despite -1 to wound, save and invulnerable save.
Review of some of the options mentioned before based on that game:
The arch rev was nice.. especially since I needed a carrier of the frozen kernel anyway so he's a real force multiplier in winterleaf - other character options usually don't want to hang that close to the hunters. And his movement helps keeping them in range of whatever he wants. Even if the hunters are going to charge - his high move mean he can pass them in the movement phase and then the hunters can pass him when charging. Less easily done with slower characters. Basicly a 100% include IMHO.
I was happy with Drycha (as always, I nearly always use her), she might his slightly less hard than 1,5 unit of hunters but her speed and strong shooting do give her options which complement hunters (character/small unit sniping, objective claiming or threatening. For me she's a 100% include currently (in my Alarielle hating period at least) and trying to be a bit more objective I'd say a 80% include.. having a dispel is always nice as is regrowth (which she generally has). Maybe if you have a lot of shooting and movement options you'd prefer to take her out for more hunters.. but I think she's very useful.
I was less happy with the TLA. Getting the spells cast and not unbound is a real issue (as all magic.. I think magic is too weak in AoS atm especially when comparing too say.. Khorne priests who also have easy options to make it much more reliable to mention get multiple prayers each turn). The TLA didn't do much except put the 2nd forest down (which .. again.. as often... I didn't use to teleport.. though it was nice to have the option if the game wasn't so one sided in my favour). His shooting never got through, he got attacked by the phoenix and didnt' do much in combat either. He cast the wyrm once which did 1 damage to the phoenix and healed him for 3 (which was nice, when I have a few points leftover I guess I'll take that spell again since it's cheap). Didn't use the palisade at all.
PS I think I should've dropped the palisade and taken tree revenants instead of spite so I could threaten his objectives better. That would be the first step in improving the list, not switching hunters in or out
-
On 2/21/2020 at 6:44 PM, Trevelyan said:
That’s a classic example of a basic inductive fallacy. Just because X is good, it does not follow that more X is better and most X is best. That may be the case, but in practice there are always limits.
Consider that you could take 2,000 points of Kurnoth Hunters - ten full units, or 30 bodies on the table. That’s maxing out on Hunters. Clearly that isn’t an optimal list - swapping a single unit for an arch revenant or two is going to improve your output.
In practice, you recognise that - you aren’t actually calling for a 30 Hunter list - but you still dismiss the TLA option on the basis that they cut into the Hunter budget.The TLA brings a guaranteed Wyldwood to aid Hunter mobility (they are significantly weakened if you can only stomp across the table on foot). The TLA is also the only caster we have that can operate safely (and with reasonable damage output) in the second line - Wyches and Wraiths need a lot more protection - so if you want spell support to heal or resurrect your Hunters then the TLA is a solid choice.
The TLA isn’t the fire-and-forget level of easy Hunter support that Archie brings, but it’s a gross oversimplification to dismiss the TLA out of hand; there are many things I would be inclined to drop first.
That leaves the question which things are worth dropping hunters for (lets take full hunters and min spites as the baseline):
-TLA?
-wraith?
-Archie?
-Drycha?
-A large unit of dryads
-outcast batallion
I think all of them are contenders but I'm not quite sure on what is optimal.
-
I tried a first game against Fyreslayers (with a.o. 20 berserkers in the annoying lodge.. so it was a unit with -1 to wound, fighting 2x (often rr 1 on hits and rerolling all wound rolls, with a 3+ and 4++ at least ). How does one deal with that. I tried to avoid him and roadblock him but I'd not taken that much chaff with me. Then he got a charge on my 6 scythe hunters (who where positioned for countercharging.but he got a longish charge of)... and they where gone . POOOOF gone in one turn (2 got to hit back inbetween his attacks since he didn't attack the 2nd time with them right away... else they'd not even have hit back).... while he only got 8 of the 20 in fighting range.
He also got Alarielle in LOS of his shooting dwarfs.. and 10 of them got her to 2 wounds in one round of shooting (tactical retreat saved her).
-
16 hours ago, Undeadly said:
Howdy ya'll! I haven't been on this side of the forum for a hot minute, but I thought I'd hop in and ask for some advice on how to proceed with my Sylvaneth collection:
So far, I was able to get quite a decent collection when the new Sylvaneth book came out, as I picked up Looncurse, a SC and then purchased 2 more Treelords, Drycha, another box of Revenants and a Branchwraith. Although, I am now running into the problem of how to effectively build them, and how to expand them as an army. I am also, admittedly, daunted by the cost of Trees. Any advice on how to get this army
Well it's really up to preference. I prefer to have 30+ dryads and 15 spite revenants to have flexibility to choose between minimum outcasts for battle line or do some thing with more bodies ( max dryads unit for discount and or max spite unit for discount - point discount that is). Then A wraith.. After that it's just piling on the fun stuff and that mean hunters, trees (build all 3 options with your 3 boxes) and characters.
When I look at your list I think you are short
- some dryads for the battle line part.
For the heavy hitters Id start with
- Drycha : she is a great model, great rules and you don't have her yet. (oops missed her)
- 1-2 units of hunters because they are great
After that
- more hunters
Or
- Alarielle
All depending on playstyle ofcourse but this gives you some options to build armies since you already have made a decent start
-
I love the Gotrek model but hate the fact the scenic base isn't the one for official game play so I've not bought him yet
-
On 12/22/2019 at 8:01 PM, Eldarain said:Bit of conversion planning help here friends.
How tall is a Treeman Ancient compared to a Realmgate?
Ok I've tried to put up a picture showing it..- and finally suceeded
Anyway. The "hair" of TL is just below the inner arch of the gates with the TL standing on the ground (not on the level of the gate up the stairs). Sorry for these mostly unpainted models. The TLA and Durthu I actually use are in their transportbox.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Icegoat said:
Cities of sigmar is by far the worst armybook ever written. GW gutted every old faction cobbled together the plastic models they could still be bothered to reproduce and said these people now live and fight together. Play this until we squat all of you.
The Complete lack of a proper human order faction in age of sigmar continues to kill any love I have for this setting. Its clear by next year cities will be once again gutted and even more will be lost and squatted. And I'm sure we will get three new Aelf factions another load of bone people and a magic sky grot and fire lizard wizards long before we see an order human faction
The more I see of GW treatment of the old factions. Slaves to darkness stuck with half a model range still in ancient fine cast. Dwarfs almost completely gone high elves totally dead. I cannot wait for the old world to return.
Citites of sigmar destroyed high elves, Basically destroyed dwarves and left the only good human representation in the realms ancient empire plastics soon to be squatted. And did barely anything new for dark elf players so what was the point?? Its the crumb we old timers got before our armies are squatted to oblivion.
To be fair it has been lore for years they live and fight together. The fact you don't like it doesn't change that.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Erdemo86 said:
What do i Need for a competetive 1000 points list focused on kurnoth hinters?
12 hunter 1 archrev 1 wraith and some forests.
-
On 11/22/2019 at 2:12 PM, a74xhx said:
I keep seeing lists with Branchwraith + Throne and no artefact
In lists where you can't reasonably give her an artefact, I was fairly certain Thrones is a trap, so did some maths....
Without thrones you'll be summoning 4 times (turns 1 to 4) at 58%, giving 2.32 successful summons on average.
With the throne, first let us assume throne works, then you'll be summoning 3 times (turns 2, 3 and 4) at 83%, giving you on average 2.49 successful summons. On a bad day, you'll fail thrones (17% chance) and the following turns you'll really need Dryads, so will be stuck at 58%, giving 1.74 average. If I've got the maths right, then we're down to 2.36 average successful summons overall.
Plus with throne we're down to max 3 successes instead of 4, losing the very useful early summon. Plus you can't move her out of danger without losing your bonus.
Does that include the difference in unbind chance too?
-
1
-
AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion
in Sylvaneth
Posted · Edited by Aezeal
I think household (and basicly all our batallions) do not give a lot in comparison to other army books (at least in comparion to the batallions I see on the table).
While I usually take a unit of T-revs to force the opponent to keep something back, hopefully more points and thus giving us an edge (in points at least) elsewhere on the table as mentioned before.. however.. in combat efficiency they lag a lot behind other units so even a unit of 20 will have a hard time actually conquering an objective so I'd hesitate to try and use a unit of 20 for that purpose.
I think assuming +1 attack from archrev or harvestboon is not the most likely scenario when attacking a backline objective after a teleport btw (especially with a unit of 20). Also it's another 100 points and 1 CP.