Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by scrubyandwells

  1. Hi @Landohammer, thanks for your thoughts! Just following up: 

    1. Yeah, the book really leans into melee KH. If, e.g., Wyldwoods didn't block our own LoS, I think we'd see both KH Bows and Drycha a little more often (since we wouldn't have to expose them as much), even with KH Bows at 4's to hit in a game with so many ways to make them 5's or even 6's to hit.

    Previously, Hurricanums probably kept KH Bows at 4's to hit in their base profile. It's possible that CoS Hurricanums are still keeping KH Bows at 4's to hit, since dropping them to 3's means that they could be 2's in CoS, at which point they could be attractive to spam again, similar to how they were spammed in 2016 in Mixed Order. Regardless, from the POV of playing, you know, Sylvaneth, rather than Sylvaneth units in some other faction, KH Bows staying at both 4's to hit and 2 attacks, when Wyldwoods also block our own LoS, was one of the Day One flaws of our 2019 battletome.

    2. Yeah my heart wanted Heartwood to be top-table viable when the book came out, but reality quickly got in the way. On Fb, someone had mentioned 20 Irondrakes + a Runelord + Bridge in Ironbark. That would be a meaningful way to add reliable ranged damage, at a decent price, but...a Sylvaneth army with stunties? That's a high price to pay. :)

    3. I've been impressed by the damage output of Winterleaf, but still suspect the lack of meaningful ranged damage may tend to make it fall apart on top tables vs experienced players. Generally, with Winterleaf and Dreadwood, I tend to think we're looking at a few baskets we're trying to cover: 

    a. "Business in the front, party in the back" – a classic pattern in AoS/WHFB, expressed most strongly right now by Seraphon and Tzeentch, where you have your bodies in the front for chaff/screening/zoning/obj scoring (Skinks; Horrors), and you have your damage dealers in the back (Kroak + co + Salamanders; Flamers + Wizards), ideally with at least one teleport, allowing you to put one of your damage dealers in a key spot to deplete or destroy a key target. Other armies can showcase this pattern, such as Skaven and CoS, but I suspect not as well, at the moment, as Seraphon and Tzeentch.

    As long as Seraphon and Tzeentch players have built enough chaff into their lists to multi-layer screen their damage dealers, and as long as they position well during the game, I tend to think that Winterleaf and Dreadwood builds will have poor exchanges of value against those armies, especially if we're unable to cast spells, like Spiteswarm Hive, which provides such a crucial mobility buff.

    At the same time, I think these kinds of rock-paper-scissors matchups is another argument in favor of the double turn mechanic, since, in this case, it could open up the potential to break through your opponent's screens and reach one of their critical pieces with one of your hammers.

    b. Support-synergy-centric – armies centered around the buffs/debuffs of their support pieces, like Fyreslayers, DoK, OBR, and others. Fyreslayers and DoK, in particular, of course, are much more difficult for a melee army to deal with when their heroes, especially their 5-6W heroes, can continue to stay on the board. Same with OBR when 20 Mortek Guard are surrounding a Harvester. 

    c. "Intensify forward firepower!" – KO...and KO. Their own basket. :) It's possible that, with Spiteswarm Hive and a ton of KH, they wouldn't be able to do enough damage to prevent us from reaching them and doing significant damage in return. Alternatively, we focus on out-scoring on objs, and try to soak up the damage (and our obj points) for as long as we can.

    d. "My melee out-melees your melee" – IDK, Slaanesh, FEC, Warclans, BCR, Khorne...on paper, this is the one that looks the most even and dependent on generalship. I haven't had enough games vs armies in this basket, but suspect that we have a reasonable shot in most matchups, although it's still unclear if we can get away with builds that don't have a meaningful answer to ASF/ASL.

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1

  2. 17 hours ago, Shmaravoz said:

    Hello children of the forest. Check out the new Battle Report published by BulldogHammer Sylvaneth vs Gloomspite Gitz 

    Greatly enjoyed this batrep! Just subscribed. Would love to see one with the Winterleaf list you guys mentioned.

    • Like 1

  3. Hi gang, 

    Just wanted to pop in with some thoughts and Qs. 

    Needed a break from trees after three years (have been playing SCE since last July), so never actually tested the new Sylvaneth book much when it came out; but have gotten some games in with them on TTS recently.

    Of course it's unclear when tournaments might happen again, but here's some views and Qs from that perspective, which I'd love any opinions on: 

    1. Sylvaneth's battletome remains one of the most well-balanced from a "healthy ecosystem" POV, i.e., if you take a solid list to a tournament, and you're reasonably experienced, you've got a shot at going 3-2. You could have an outside shot at going 4-1, but 5-0 will be exceptionally rare across the entire ecosystem. I think that's reflective of a "well-balanced" battletome. Unfortunately, from that POV, many other battletomes are not as well-balanced.

    2. I think the spread of what Sylvaneth are asked to compete against has never been more challenging. That spread includes: 

    • DoK: They remain difficult for traditional reasons, with some new wrinkles, e.g. efficient Scourgerunner Chariots. Generally, you want to be able to snipe a Hag Queen (or two), and, maybe ideally (?), do something about the Cauldron buff machine, the frequent cornerstone of DoK builds. Morathi can also be challenging, e.g., the potential to tie up your shooting (if you have shooting) for a number of rounds, forcing their shots into her.
    • OBR: With the caveat of not having faced them yet, I imagine Nagash is a difficult matchup. More broadly, I think you must be able to snipe at least one Petrifex Harvester (with a 3+ save, possibly RR 1's), since Sylvaneth won't do much vs Mortek Guard if it's nearby. And if you have to be able to kill a Harvester, you probably must be able to first snipe a Mortisan Boneshaper, which could heal 3 wounds on a Harvester each round. Sylvaneth's mobility and capacity to concentrate power can help vs OBR, but I suspect if you can't kill a Harvester, you'll be in for a bad day.
    • Fyreslayers: Unfortunately, if you're staring down two or three bricks of under-costed x20 Hearthguard Berzerkers (HGB), in Hermdar, you probably have to be able to "Just shoot the heroes" (or at least snipe a key hero at a key time next to x20 HGB). At the same time, you may need some semblance of an answer to Hermdar's ASF and double activation on a brick of x20 HGB. Hoping you roll a 4+ on a Groundshaking Stomp doesn't seem like a great answer, or even hoping you roll a 4+ on two Stomp attempts, assuming you can set up the opportunity.
    • IDK: Still difficult for traditional reasons, similar to DoK. I think Ishlaen Guard also remain undervalued, especially with a Turtle for a 3+ ignore rend save (potentially RR 1's in combat), as an anvil anchor for an army that can still fit 2x6 Morrsarr Guard and other goodies. As always, Idoneth have phenomenal mobility and capacity to concentrate power, even without relying on a Soulscryer, along with their MW shocks that can, e.g., potentially turn off a Spirit of Durthu's 6D before he gets to swing. Dreadwood CA, Verdant Spellportal, and/or Tree-Revs could be critical for mobility, especially to get around boats blocking off space. I suspect Sylvaneth could be fairly competitive vs IDK, with good play, but they still seem tough to deal with.
    • KO: The list that I've faced the most (with SCE...no games yet vs KO with trees) runs a Dirigible Suit Endrinmaster, Aether-Khemist, 3x6 Endrinriggers, 2x10 Thunderers, 1x10 Arkanaut Co, and 2 Frigates. Essentially the entire army can fly high and focus a tremendous amount of firepower from just within 24", with a lot of -1 rend, -2 rend, and multiple damage. Of course, flyers ignore LoS on Awakened Wyldwoods. That could be a problem. 
    • Seraphon: At the moment, I'm leaning toward certain Seraphon Starborne builds being the strongest, or among the strongest, in the game, but no one knows it yet other than TTS players (...a lot of experienced players are playing on TTS). I think they're a hard counter for melee Sylvaneth builds, and probably do just as well vs shooting builds, including Heartwood, given Seraphon's capacity to spam ranged MWs. The footprint of Starborne builds is similar to past powerful lists: "Mooclan" in 2016 (Thundertusks throwing 6MW snowballs + Grot spam for screens/objs), multiple iterations of Tzeentch across 2017-2018 (Skyfires, Changehost), Skaven in 2019 with multiple units being undercosted, and now Tzeentch again this year.
    • Slaanesh: As far as I can tell, White Dwarf Slaanesh bypasses the toning-down of depravity generation that happened via the Dec 2019 FAQ. Kurnoth are amazing sources of depravity, so it could be difficult to win the long game vs Slaanesh, especially if you can't threaten their heroes from distance. With that said, I haven't played against Slaanesh with trees; but on paper, this looks like another matchup where you'd like to have some ranged threat. Alternatively, maybe Sylvaneth has melee builds that can go toe-to-toe with Slaanesh?
    • FEC: This one feels similar to Slaanesh. The Chalice remains a critical piece of FEC's durability, so if you don't wipe out entirely that unit of 40 Ghouls or Gristlegore Ghoul King on Terrorgheist, they could be coming back fully (or almost fully) restored. Again, another one where, on paper, you'd like to have some ranged damage, and you almost definitely need the ability to kill a 10-body Ghoul screen without sacrificing something important of your own.

    Plenty of other matchups could be challenging, but those are among the ones that stand out personally.

    3. In terms of competing against the above matchups, it often appears that you'd like to have 1) some meaningful ranged damage capacity, and 2) some ability to answer the ASF/ASL Q, when it arises. (Maybe I'm misreading #1 and/or #2?)

    In that regard, when first reviewing the book last year, two things jumped out:

    a) A personal desire for Heartwood to be among the most competitive, since it presented the chance to play "combined arms." In light of Wyldwoods blocking our own LoS (entailing that Kurnoth Bows and other shooters must be more exposed), the nature of Look Out, Sir!, the greater prevalence of -1 to hit (and stacking it for -2), and the amount of higher durability, I'm not that confident that combined-arms Heartwood is an actual choice for top-end play. 

    b) Dreadwood's CA as arguably the strongest element in the book, providing incredible mobility that both bypasses Wyldwoods and pairs effectively with Spiteswarm Hive, allowing you to teleport a threat piece anywhere and have the chance to get a 6+ charge with a CP RR.

    "A" was the hope that Sylvaneth could compete in a fashion similar to how they began in 2016: a combined arms build with a blend of some magic, some shooting, some melee, and some mobility. I'm not confident that hope reflects reality.

    "B" was the potential reality that Sylvaneth, represented by the strengths of the Dreadwood CA and the core elements of Winterleaf, had become an army that would now focus primarily on combat as the means of trying to compete on top tables.

    4. With all of that in mind, at the moment I'm struggling to square this seemingly round hole: A clear strength of Sylvaneth is melee, but the faction is staring down the barrel of a number of matchups where a dominant melee focus doesn't appear to be the answer, and the faction's ranged damage options are...limited, to put it mildly. 

    Hopefully this ramble wasn't too rambly. :) Would love to hear your thoughts. 

    I'll follow up with another post on some of the current lists getting tested out.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • LOVE IT! 1

  4. 2 hours ago, Emissary said:

    In case anyone is interested, here is the size of the new Wyldwood to the old:

    In kNEoWH8.jpg


    Would you care to get the approximate width x length dimensions?

    And if you have a second one, would be great to see some photos of what's possible with up to 6 of the "Citadel Woods models," to use their updated terminology, where 1 of the new Awakened Wyldwood kits consists of 3 Citadel Woods models.


    • Like 1

  5. Thanks to everyone who responded re: favorite AoS Pitched Battles.

    Here's the rankings for 2016-2018 and 2019 battleplans.

    Of course we have less experience w/ 2019's, so we'll see how opinions evolve.


    • 2018: Focal Points - 13 (36.1%)
    • 2016: Border War - 12 (33.3%)
    • 2017: Starstrike - 11 (30.6%)
    • 2016: Blood and Glory - 10 (27.8%)
    • 2018: The Better Part of Valour (with no burning objs round 1) - 8 (22.2%)
    • 2017: Scorched Earth (with no burning objs round 1) - 8 (22.2%)
    • 2016: Three Places of Power - 8 (22.2%)
    • 2017: Battle for the Pass (long way deployment) - 7 (19.4%)
    • 2017: Duality of Death - 7 (19.4%)
    • 2016: Escalation (with updated rules) - 7 (19.4%)
    • 2016: Gifts from the Heavens - 7 (19.4%)
    • 2018: Places of Arcane Power - 5 (13.9%)
    • 2018: Shifting Objectives (long way deployment) - 5 (13.9%)
    • 2016: Take and Hold - 5 (13.9%)
    • 2017: Knife to the Heart - 4 (11.1%)
    • 2018: Total Commitment - 3 (8.3%)
    • 2017: Total Conquest - 2 (5.6%)
    • 2018: The Relocation Orb - 1 (2.8%)


    • 2019: Places of Arcane Power - 26 (72.2%)
    • 2019: Shifting Objectives - 26 (72.2%)
    • 2019: Duality of Death - 25 (69.4%)
    • 2019: Starstrike - 25 (69.4%)
    • 2019: Total Conquest - 24 (66.7%)
    • 2019: Scorched Earth (long way deployment) - 23 (63.9%)
    • 2019: Battle for the Pass (long way deployment) - 22 (61.1%)
    • 2019: The Better Part of Valour (long way deployment) - 22 (61.1%)
    • 2019: Focal Points - 22 (61.1%)
    • 2019: Knife to the Heart - 20 (55.6%)
    • 2019: Total Commitment - 20 (55.6%)
    • 2019: The Relocation Orb - 18 (50%)
    • Like 1

  6. 14 minutes ago, PJetski said:

    I would be surprised to hear a tournament using any battleplan printed before 2019... but especially those from 2016, that's really weird.

    My top 12 would have to be the 12 battleplans from 2019.

    Based on the data so far, quite a few folks are still fans of Border War and Blood & Glory, for example, among others. 

    Appreciate the view, though! Hopefully this survey will be helpful.

    • Like 1

  7. 3 hours ago, Lionheart said:

    Hello guys, need help with one question:

    If a unit of Mighty Skullcrusher charge a unit of Vanguard Raptor (with the prime in it), wich ability have to be solved first, the one for the skullscrusher to inflict the MW on the charge or the one of the Raptors that inflict MW on the chargers?

    "Start of phase" order is determined by who has the turn. The person with the turn does all of their "start of phase" abilities first, then their opponent does theirs, if they still can.

    • Like 2

  8. Forest Folk looks reasonably compelling, especially in a low drop list w/ a TLA to get at least one reliable Wyldwood out and bunker some Dryads in it, a la old-school Sylvaneth. The retreat-and-still-charge ability could come into play a fair amount. Opens up pinball options for greater mobility outside of our now more limited teleport. And a unit of 20-30 Dryads w/ +1A from Arch-Rev and other buffs (e.g. Winterleaf, etc.) could do a lot of work in combat.

    Not as high on Lords of the Clan at the moment, since two TLAs is one too many IMO. You don't get two auto-Wyldwoods from two TLA -- just one. The extra stomp can be nice, but it's 600pts into 2 models that don't tend to do much in shooting or combat.

    • Like 1

  9. 48 minutes ago, Emissary said:

    Problem is that's 600 points in bow hunters do that.  I've found that can be done in 1 turn with 3 of the other two types of Hunters.

    Yeah been having this debate locally.

    If not doing Heartwood Bows for ranged damage vs FEC, Khorne, Slaanesh, Daughters, Idoneth, Fyreslayers, etc., or generally having ranged damage vs Activation Wars and powerful combat units, then we're relying on Groundshaking Stomp, all else equal.

    And if we're investing a lot into individual models (Durthu, TLA, Treelords), that's reducing our model count and potential ability to compete in scenarios w/ lots of objectives (e.g. Better Part of Valour and the new Scorched Earth). 

    If we're not doing 3-4 drop and playing like we used to (getting woods out and bunkering on objs), then we need to be able to do enough damage, quickly, to catch back up on objs (in a # of scenarios) later in the game, since many opponents will have gone first and bunkered.

    We also need to be able to survive a strong alpha strike, since opponents out-dropping us could go first and try to pin us in our deployment zone, while they're scoring objs. 

    Thankfully our damage output potential has gone up considerably, but I'm still not sure whether to focus on Stomps vs Activation Wars, or meaningful long-range damage (Heartwood Bows), and then balancing that ranged damage with some combat punch (in that regard, I like Heartwood's RR 1's to hit and wound CA + combined w/ Arch-Rev's +1A for a unit).

    • LOVE IT! 1

  10. 30 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

    The diagram from the warscroll describes/shows the “ring” placement of a 3 piece WW. I don’t think a WW with more peices has to form a ring, since the shape of the footprint would make this impossible with more than 3 pieces. It would come out looking more like a 4 pointed star or something. 

    I think the intention here is just that the ends of the scenery pieces need to touch one on another to form an enclosed space, with all the point turning inward. If if that’s true, we might be able to get some flexibility in the shape provided we have enough woods to do so. Not sure until the kit comes out how that will work. 

    Yeah that's a good point, thanks. Just generally meant we're going to be more constrained than we were in Sylvaneth 1.0.

  11. 38 minutes ago, Warbossironteef said:

    So it has been confirmed that no Woods can placed on objectives? I thought it was just the first one that had to be away from objectives.

    Apart from the pre-deployment one, Wyldwoods must be 1" from the center of objectives, as well as 1" away from terrain and models, as normal. The 1"-from-center-of-objectives requirement isn't minimal, since Wyldwoods can now only be placed as a ring, instead of the myriad ways we could place them previously.

  12. Brendan Melnick and I started talking a couple years ago about potential supplementary awards for AoS events. In particular, we were interested in awards for "casually competitive" players: folks who enjoy going to events but who also enjoy playing non-optimal builds, or generally uncommon armies, for a variety of reasons.

    Those discussions led to Brendan ironing out the kinks for two awards that he's been offering at Brew City Brawl: 

    The Sigmar Hardmode Award (AKA the "Special Snowflake"): Eligible for players that finish at least 3-2 with an army that is both unique and challenging to win with. Assessing the winner can be done in different ways. Brew City, e.g., has a small, private group of trusted voters who make the final selection.

    (Sidenote: We were thrilled to see @domus and AoS Coach add a similar award to Midwest Meltdown and Sydney GT respectively.)

    The Big 3 Award: At Brew City, the Big 3 is awarded to the player with the highest total score whose list includes only 3 Leaders, in addition to the rest of their 2K list. Of those 3 Leaders, 2 must be Unique and 2 must be Behemoth. (Thus 1 must be a Unique Behemoth Leader.) Of course, some armies can't meet those requirements, but as a supplementary award, I think it's OK if it has some exclusions.

    Different parameters could be set for both awards as well. The Big 3, e.g., could be reoriented to make it more broadly accessible. (In that regard, @Ben Johnson was part of our original inspiration, in light of his well-known love of running at least 3 Behemoths.) However, I think Brendan ended up with the limitations that he set for the Big 3, in part because it's not that usual nowadays to see lists running 3+ Terrorgheists, Bloodthirsters, Keeper of Secrets, and so on.

    Recently, he and I have been discussing another possible award. At tournaments, it's common to see lists that duplicate the same warscroll: 18 Morrsarr Guard, 60+ Witch Aelves, 60+ Dryads, etc. We thought it'd be cool to have an award eligible for players who bring faction armies that better reflect the variety of that faction's model range.

    We don't have a name worked out yet, and would love to hear any suggestions; but here's some early thoughts on one potential spec.

    The award could be eligible to players with a faction-specific list that includes:

    1. a minimum of 4 Leaders and 6 Non-Leaders
    2. no duplicate warscrolls, unless the faction has 2 or less Battleline/Battleline If options, in which case you can duplicate that faction's Battleline/Battleline If, up to 3 total Battleline in your list (note that a duplicate warscroll still only counts as 1 warscroll toward your minimum 6 Non-Leaders)
    3. allies limited to Heroes only (e.g., this allows factions without Wizards to add them as allies)
      • #3 could be removed possibly i.e. no extra restrictions on allies

    The above excludes some factions that have a small range (e.g., Ironjawz), but most of the ranges are eligible. 

    Here's an example of a 2K list under the above conditions:

    Aether-Khemist (160)
    Arkanaut Admiral (120)
    Aetheric Navigator (80)
    Endrinmaster (120)

    10 x Arkanaut Company (120)
    10 x Arkanaut Company (120)
    10 x Arkanaut Company (120)

    6 x Endrinriggers (240)
    6 x Skywardens (240)
    5 x Grundstok Thunderers (100)

    War Machines
    Arkanaut Ironclad (420)
    Grundstok Gunhauler (160)

    Total: 2000 / 2000

    The above has 4 Leaders and 6 Non-Leaders, with the duplicate Arkanaut Company only counted as 1 warscroll toward the minimum 6 Non-Leaders.

    In terms of competitiveness, some factions will be able to build lists with excellent variety that are stronger on the table than the variety lists of other factions. That's inevitable, and perfectly cool. (On average, though, lists will tend to be less optimal.) The main goal here is just to have an incentive and award for players drawn toward collecting and experiencing a faction on the table that more broadly reflects the faction's model range.

    So that's one potential spec for another award to go along with Sigmar Hardmode and the Big 3. It probably has some kinks, and other specs might be better.

    Would love to hear any thoughts on the above, or other potential supplementary awards for AoS events.

    • Like 3

  13. 4 minutes ago, scrubyandwells said:

    Another thing to consider is 1x6 Kurnoth Bows instead of 2x3, so that if you need to teleport all of them out of harm's way, you can (as long as you have somewhere for them to land...). This isn't great with Heartwood RR hits artefact on a Bwraith, though, since you may have to teleport her as well, which runs into our new Nav Realmroot once/turn limit.


    Sorry for double post. Still no way to delete posts? 

  14. Another thing to consider is 1x6 Kurnoth Bows instead of 2x3, so that if you need to teleport all of them out of harm's way, you can (as long as you have somewhere for them to land...). This isn't great with Heartwood RR hits artefact on a Bwraith, though, since you may have to teleport her as well, which runs into our new Nav Realmroot once/turn limit.

    Thankfully, the artefact bubble is wholly within 12", so with a Bwraith moving 7" and then running, that's decent board coverage even without teleporting her.

    An Arch-Rev would give greater mobility to keep the artefact in range of the Bows (or other Kurnoth) for the RRs to hit, but he has some misalignment in lists I've been looking at, unless going both, say, 6 Bows and 6 Swords, so that you can better leverage his CA.

    At the same time, with our ******-for-all CP generation, it may be a moot point, since you'll be spending CP on the Glade CA, charge RRs, etc.

    • Like 1

  15. Of course it's way early, but Heartwood is the initial front-runner in my mind for an all-comers build.

    While maybe not as sexy as some of the others (hi, Winterleaf), it seems to provide meaningful ranged damage vs Activation Wars, while still having some anti-horde pieces (e.g. pick two (maybe three): Alarielle, Drycha, Durthu/Double Durthu, 3-6 Sword Hunters, or maybe 20-40 Spites), along with a decent # of bodies.

    Heartwood lists are also looking pretty good even with 5 drops, but remains to be seen if we need that low of a drop-count.

    One general challenge is how to get off a reliable bonus to move/charge, especially for teleport charges, while staying within a Glade

    With Heartwood, have been looking at: 

    1. Alarielle w/ Throne + Spiteswarm or Cogs 

    • Option 1: Throne, Spiteswarm, Verdant (w/ Acorn on Bwraith), puts alpha strike on table + hopefully maintains our ability to have 3 Wyldwoods on table after T1 even if we go second (but the degree of importance now re: multi-Wyldwoods is unclear...)
    • Option 2: Throne, Cogs (slow time), Verdant, 4th spell via Cogs + RR saves for Alarielle, but have to setup/wait for turn 2 strike

    2. One Bwraith w/ Acorn and another w/ Throne; Throne cast T1 to then cast Spiteswarm T2 for bonus to move/charge (requires Bwraith staying put T1)

    3. One Bwraith w/ Spiritsong Stave and Throne to cast Throne then Spiteswarm; puts alpha strike on table for T1 but you lose Acorn

    • LOVE IT! 2

  16. 50 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

    2) Request for advice. Bearing in mind old experience and new rules, how many Wyldwoods am I likely to need for 1000 point and under games?

    I'd think 4 of the new Awakened Wyldwood kits (i.e. a total of 12 Citadel Woods "models") should suffice for 1K or under.

    • Like 1

  17. 11 minutes ago, jake3991 said:

    Winterleaf: The buff here is that 6s turn into 2 hits. 

    Standard shooting: 4.3 hits

    -1 to hit: 3.32 hits

    Winterleaf Winter's Bite (6's = 2 hits) is melee weapons only...


    Fun Killer

    • Haha 3

  18. Just now, scrubyandwells said:

    Yeah Doppelgänger was my initial go-to vs GKoT. It does still work in your own turn, but you can no longer cause them to "skip" their activation window entirely. They errata'ed that as well. Let's say you activate Doppelgänger, attack, and the GKoT remains alive. It can then still attack.

    Of course, in your scenario above, maybe your general has gotten 6" out of dodge and the situation doesn't enable the GKoT to reach the general with its 6" threat (3" pile in and 3" Fanged Maw).

    Oh, and hi @Mirage8112 + @swarmofseals. I see we're still here for our regular reunion with the new shiny. 🙂

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1

  19. 24 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:

    Ugh. Errated. I was working from an old copy of the book.  Talk about an amazing item being made totally garbage by an errata.

    Whelp. That clearly wont work then. Lol. 

    It would still work in your own turn (I think),  it would definitely take some engineering, but the list I provided before has enough chaff (I think) to set-up the positioning to make it go off in your turn. You would very much be putting all your eggs in one basket in that case though...

    Yeah Doppelgänger was my initial go-to vs GKoT. It does still work in your own turn, but you can no longer cause them to "skip" their activation window entirely. They errata'ed that as well. Let's say you activate Doppelgänger, attack, and the GKoT remains alive. It can then still attack.

    Of course, in your scenario above, maybe your general has gotten 6" out of dodge and the situation doesn't enable the GKoT to reach the general with its 6" threat (3" pile in and 3" Fanged Maw).

  20. 15 minutes ago, Thalassic Monstrosity said:

    I wonder if we'll keep Ironbark Wargrove in one form or another?

    General expectation is most (or all) of the Wargroves will become Stormhost-equivalents, each with their own built-in rules, command traits, artefacts, etc. (i.e., the Wargroves will no longer be one-drop battalions). And then we may see existing non-one-drop battalions, like Household and Forest Folk, maintained with some updates.

  21. After nearly three years and hundreds of games: IMO Wyldwoods have been unequivocally the most frustrating part about collecting, playing, and playing against the faction.

    I do hope the rumors are true: We'll be able to play the army with one terrain box, like Gloomspite, FEC, Skaven, Khorne, Fyreslayers, and Slaanesh.

    An initial sense of frustration at their (potential) loss is understandable. As others have said, though, we can use them as regular Citadel Woods terrain, so there's essentially zero loss in our past investment.

    • Like 8
  • Create New...