Jump to content

Sagittarii Orientalis

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sagittarii Orientalis

  1. As an owner of a battery consisting of 4 celestar ballistas, even 10 points discount per model would be appreciated. 

    Better solution would be increasing the consistency of the damage output. D6 damage for a single shot that has to hit, wound, and hope for the enemy to fail save is too unreliable for its cost. 

    Changing the damage characteristic for the single shot profile to 2d3 would improve ballista's performance in this regard. Or maybe d3+3, just like how damage characteristics of some iconic heavy weaponry(lascannon) in 40K are changing into.

    In fact I'd rather see all d6 characteristics, which are not exclusive to stormcast warscrolls, removed altogether from the game.

    • Like 4
  2. All abilities allowing movement or shooting in hero phase should altogether be removed. 

    It gives too much importance to early phases(i.e. first two battle rounds) of the game and, combined with lack of tactically meaningful terrain rules, relegates the matchups into "who decides the priority". Removal of such abilities, along with improvement of terrain rules and layout, would help toning down lethality of the game; thus making later phases of the game more meaningful.


    • Like 5
  3. 19 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

    Nighthaunt recently went 4-1 at Da Boyz GT and 5-0 at Little Bo Peep GT. I think Beasts of Chaos also recently went 4-1. Not to mention the other recent notable upsets, like Flesh Eater Courts, OBR and Slaanesh:

    AoSMetawatch Nov16 Chart1

    As far as competitive games go, AoS seems to have a fairly healthy number of tournament viable factions and a combination of skill and luck seems to allow even low tier factions to have a shot at winning a tournament.

    I must first confess that I am no expert on interpreting statistics.

    But isn't it "disingenuous" to conclude that the above table shows "fairly healthy number of tournament viable factions", when top factions are sporting 20 or even more(in case of SoB, more than 50) 4-1 Wins while Nighthaunt and BoC have ...... 2 or 5 4-1 Wins? And I am not counting 5-0 Wins, of which there are none for two factions(nighthaunt, BoC) you have specifically cited.

    Unless you are assuming the faction is competitively "viable" as long as there is even a single case of 4-1 Wins for any faction, regardless of how great the gap between top performing factions and underperforming factions is.

    • Thanks 2
  4. 55 minutes ago, PrimeElectrid said:

    Don’t buy dragons this weekend guys (unless you like the models). This from discord, same source correctly leaked a menagerie change and translocation nerf:

    From sources:
    Winter faq will bring:
    point increase for:
    - fulminators, dragons and longstrikes
    - New scroll for dragons

    It would be ludicrously comical if the usual suspects of the meta(sentinels, morathi + stalkers, tzeentch archaon, sons of behemat) evade nerf bat while already costly vanguard raptors get point hike. Even more hilarious if GW leaves pile of underpowered SCE warscrolls untouched.

    • Thanks 1
  5. 1 minute ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

    As for Sentinels, I suppose we could argue that Covid and the edition change delayed their first balancing passes. Those two factors resulted in the AoS winter FAQ being skipped last year, after all. However, I suspect the real reason is that Sentinels are just working as intended. Their relatively mild point increase in the post 3.0 FAQ suggests this. They are probably just supposed to be an overperormer in their role. Since they can't be spammed effectively anymore, maybe the rules team thinks they are fine now.

    Then all the more reasons for me to doubt their competence and/or "equitableness" towards various factions. I do not think I have ever witnessed massive points nerf on models that are yet to be released, let alone accumulate enough data on competitive scenes. 

  6. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/11/19/dragons-are-on-their-way-but-not-before-a-quick-balance-pass/

    So the models that were not even released along with the battletome is found to be too strong, according to Studio's extra playtesting.


    And the Studio bumped the stormdrake guards' point to 340 from 285. 


    Now, I do not totally disagree with the points increase on the stormdrake guard, although stunning 55 points increase might be debatable.


    But their decision does make me wonder: if they were enthusiastic enough to drastically adjust points on models that have yet to see tournament plays, how come they are so slow to apply changes to factions/models that are already overperforming for months? You know, Lumineth Sentinels for example?


    The rules designers maybe doing their best for the balance of the game, but what they have done effectively through this action is making me lose faith in their capabilities.

    • Like 3
  7. 40 minutes ago, Kadeton said:

    I can give anecdotes instead, if that helps? I went to a tournament on the 30th of October, and played against a Slaves to Darkness list with Archaon in Feral Foray. It was easily the most intense, hard-fought games I've ever played - it's a powerful army, and was piloted by a skilled player. Use of defensive resources was extremely important: I had to carefully sacrifice units and spend resources to keep Archaon busy while dealing with the rest of my opponent's army. Only after his support was eroded and his own defensive buffs spent and unavailable did I seize the opportunity to take him out (on turn 4).

    My opponent made sure to keep defensive buffs available for Archaon as much as possible, but he also wasn't brainlessly buffing him when it wasn't needed and would use those resources elsewhere when he knew it was safe to do so. However, I do think that the emphasis on keeping a "safety net" for Archaon made him more hesitant to buff other units, and that eventually gave me the edge I needed to scrape out the win (it was something like 29 to 27 VP in the final tally).

    If I'd just charged in against a fully-buffed Archaon I would have lost the game, no question. The list is way too strong for that. But recognising that, and having to work out how to survive and win without just taking Archaon off the table right away, led to the most enjoyable game of AoS I've ever played. Hence my position: save stacking makes the game more interesting.

    That explanation is definitely more helpful. I really appreciate it.

    However, I think you missed out the most important part: what army, and what roster did you use? There are still power discrepancies across the board, and some armies might lack the tools to achieve the goal you have mentioned and hence struggle even with right tactics. For example Lumineth Realm-lords and the new Stormcasts(which I play) might have little trouble removing enemy support piece from afar, whereas some other factions with older tomes do not have such luxury.

    As many members have already pointed out, newer tomes and already powerful tomes might leisurely deal with 3+ save monsters with stacked saves. But I am not so sure about other numerous factions who do not have such privilege. 

    • Like 2
  8. Of course the timing of save stacking is important. Question is, why would you not stack the saves for your Archaon, Vhordrai or Nagash when entire KO fleet or 6 vanguard raptors are shooting at your monster? How often does it happen, and how meaningful is it in actual competitive play?

    However, let us suppose outmanouevring lists with save stacking powerful 3+ save monsters is far from problematic. As you have explained, removing objective holders and support heroes are valid options. Why then do multiple factions with access to such lynchpin models perform very well in competitive tournaments? 

    Stats provided by HonestWargamer show Slaves to Darkness or Tzeentch lists boasting winrate of 60% or more, with Archaon being a staple choice in large number of winning lists. There might be other examples such as soulblight lists with Nagash or Vhordrai too. Although as of now I will cite Archaon lists as an example since I haven't looked up tournament stats for Death factions.

    Unless you want to argue that most players who played against Archaon lists at top tables were tactically incompetent, I think using actual game examples would be more helpful to demonstrate your point effectively.

    Maybe there is subtle nuance of gameplay I overlooked. Or perhaps I misinterpreted statistics, or in the worst case I was referring to misleading statistics. Any in-depth discussion citing cases of actual competitive gameplay would be very helpful

    • Like 3
  9. What is so tactically brilliant about stacking as many saves on centrepiece monster model then? This does not seem more novel and advanced than the "classical" and "inflexible" tactic you have mentioned. All you need to do is include good 3+ save monster, supporting characters in your roster, and then just effortlessly apply buffs to the said monster. Might as well just play MTG at that point.

    I think the issue is exacerbated by large number of battleplans with objectives clustered at the centre of the board. It basically degrades the game into melee brawl. Tactical manoeuvre becomes less meanigful than battleplans with objectives spread around the board. And winning is easier said than done without removing fully buffed 3+ monsters.

    However If I were to change rules while maintaining save stacking, first I would remove all sources of re-rolling saves, including the ones so much favoured by many Archaon lists sporting winning rate of 60% or more. 

    Then change all out attack so that it gives extra rend to the weapons used by the unit receiving the command. OR change all out defence into giving -1 penalty on to hit rolls to enemy units instead. Save stacking still works, but players will have to become more considerate before throwing out extra saves wantonly.

    P.S. I prefer Finest Hour giving +1 bonus to Hit rolls instead of save rolls, but that change might not be necessary.


    • Like 3
  10. 21 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

    Dice rolls happen - he overall failed many saves, but he also saved many D3 and D2 shots and the KO player still had a unit of Riggers to shoot. (with potentially 6 MWs via drill launchers)


    I don‘t claim that Kragnos was dead there a 100% in general but in this batrep for sure he was. 

    And my point still stands - how problematic can save stacking really be if a 700+ model with a 0+ save still dies in one round of focused fire? 

    Even if he took just like 8-10 wounds he would die as soon as finest hour went away. 

    As I said in my caveat, I do not have the full picture of that german battle report - there are moments where the uploader did not record the full process and instead skipped here and there. 

    Sure, Kragnos might have had average roll for his save during the actual game - or perhaps much less than average. Either scenario could be plausible.

    Regardless, taking literally one example(of which we do not have full understanding) to support your opinion that save stacking high save monsters is not problematic seems to be at best ... hasty generalisation.

    • Thanks 2
  11. 33 minutes ago, Beliman said:

    Can you share the Game? I'm really interested in this type of games because KOs have a really hard problem to kill things in this save-stacking season. 

    I am not sure if this is the battle report which Phasteon referred to, but it features a game between KO and SoB.

    KOs removing Kragnos in a single turn can be seen from 19:09 to 24:34, although It seems that controlling player of Kragnos rolled 1's for his saves suspiciously often - he rolled 1 for every 2~3 dice frequently. 

    However the uploader did not seem to have recorded every moment of the game, so this might not be the full picture.


    Edit: Phasteon already uploaded the video before I did.

    • Like 1
  12. I prefer applying rend characteristics after completely resolving save modifiers. So that no matter how many positive save modifiers are applied, save increases by 1 point at maximum. And then the rend modifiers come in. In this situation rend will become more relevant in the meta.

    I wonder if save stacking issue will be addressed in the rumoured winter FAQ.

    • Like 3
  13. 26 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

    Man, I hope Knight-Judicator spam does not become the standard. That would be unfortunate.

    To me it's actually a very reasonable choice in competitive games. While I do not wish to beat the dead horse by mentioning the latest FAQ, I think Knight-Judicator spam list perfectly epitomises post-nerf Translocation Stormcast lists. Stormcast melee hammers lack mobility, so many competitive lists are shoehorned into using shooting as their "hammer" instead.

  14. 33 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

    Let‘s be real here. 

    Stormcast are in a VERY good spot again, most people talking about actual game experience are more than happy, some dude at warhammer world even pulls of victory after victory it seems and every batrep I‘ve watched so far they made a very good performance + in my own games I‘ve never experienced them to be such a potent force before. 

    Everyone talking trash about the army is either exaggerating massively, which is nothing new on the internet, especially in this forum (Which has a VERY negative atmosphere all around), or just tries to troll other people, ruining their fun for the army / game in general. 

    If someone like @Ragest called the Lord-Imperatant a marketing trick to force me to play Annihilators at the LGS I‘d literally shut him down, telling him to annoy someone else. 

    The internet is the only place people are anonymously allowed to talk such nonsense without any real consequences, in reallife people would either shut them down and put them in their place or avoid them. 


    I partially agree with your comments on the overall improved state of the Stormcasts. I have heard of several tournament winning lists this month across Europe, and I personally feel current Stormcast is still a solidly improved version of the last book; even though the latest GW statistics show Stormcasts being fourth lowest performing faction in 37 events held during the last two months(https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/10/21/metawatch-meet-the-warhammer-age-of-sigmar-armies-upsetting-the-meta-at-the-warhammer-open/).

    But your general tone does not seem to differ that much from the negative hyperbole which you are now criticising. Your own anecdotal experience(e.g. "most people talking about actual game experience", "every batrep I've watched so far") can be dismissed as easily as you dismiss other players' varying degree of experience. 

    While Ragest's comment does show generally negetivity attitude towards the tome, I do not think his comments on Lord-Imperatant and Annihilators are far from reality. While using Lord-Imperatant does not necessarily force players to use Annihilators, he does grant significant bonus and hence potentially make people consider running both him and the Annihilators. After all, all models are essentially part of GW marketing "trick" to be brutally honest - why should Lord-Imperatant be an exception?

    Yet you are disparaging such comments by using caustic expressions such as "I‘d literally shut him down, telling him to annoy someone else" or "anonymously allowed to talk such nonsense without any real consequences". To me your comment actually rivals, if not transcends, the very same comments you are so vehemently blaming in terms of toxicity and hasty generalisation.

    • Like 6
  15. Time will tell. There is still not much tournament data. 

    As of now I admit that top placing stormcast lists are rather diverse, although the sample size is too small.

    However I believe many stormcast lists at tournaments would more or less be shoehorned into rosters depending even more heavily on shooting. 

    In this regard, I think the winning list by Tom Mawdsley at Mencunian Carnage(where translocation was "nerfed" by TOs) is prophetic as it best describes the competitive stormcast lists without translocation: Plenty of high quality shooting with liberator meat shields.

    Release of stormdrake guard would change such trend, but even then the lists would be polarised into shooting heavy lists and stormdrake galore lists. 

    Let's hope I am proven wrong.

  16. New FAQ for Stormcasts and Orruk Warclans are available now.



    Apparently stormcasts using translocation to teleport and move a single unit at the same turn is unacceptable, but Warbosses using same command ability twice of thrice(with only the first command issued costing command point) is totally fine.





    • Like 1
    • Sad 1
  17. I should just go all-out shooting until (surprisingly) un-nerfed stormdrake guard are available for sale. 

    But hey, maybe people will think the likes of 5 knight-judicators list represent "healthier" meta, more so than lists with telporting paladins/dracothian guard. ;)

    On a side note, I hop GW soon uploads FAQ containing all changes. It is quite time consuming to look through all the stormcast warscrolls.

  18. 10 minutes ago, jhamslam said:

    I think people werent ready for SCE power, theyre used to us not hitting hard/ not hitting at our weight. Maybe theyll start to consider other builds/tactis or get crushed under all that sigmarite.

    Or maybe people could cry sky is falling and demand immediate nerf on stormcasts.

    How dare they win three tournaments after the release of their battletome!


  19. I doubt GW would go as far as that. GW is surprisingly hesitant and slow when it comes to nerfing certain factions. 

    While this is an example from 40k but, it took weeks of podium domination and steady win rate of 60% or more before GW slightly nerfed Adeptus Mechanicus and Drukhari. And even then both factions are still enjoying absurdly high win rate(60~70%) in tournament matchups.

    And the new stormcast obviously has not reached that level. Also I believe GW has already made their intentions on translocation clear by maintaining its current form in multiple 3rd ed. FAQs. That, and cutting down nearly every mobility buffs stormcast already had. My pood knight heraldor!

    However if the rumours on translocation actually turns out to be true ... then maybe I really should go all out for spamming knight judicator, or what ever shooting units stormcast has. If this is the "list diversity" which haters of translocation think will be achieved by nerf, so be it.

    Or maybe I could stop playing and just focus on painting as I lose my faith towards GW's capability to adjust balance reasonably.

    • Like 1
  20. I agree that Ballistas still lack reliability, even with the presence of Lord-Ordinator. Hence my choice of Celestial Warbringers whenever I run multiple ballistas. Even a single re-roll can help mitigate the randomness of single shot mode, especially when the said Lord-Ordinator is buffing the ballistas. The stormhost trait also comes handy should you use unleash hell in crucial moment. 

    As of now, I am running 3 ballistas(without Lord-Ordinator) with Stardrake, 4 fulminators and stormkeep liberators; liberators especially are crucial as they ensure ballistas are protected while not easily giving up objectives. 5-man liberators that count as 15 model unit, AND potentially dealing considerable damage to whichever unit charging them means they can be a significant threat that should be removed. This also provides target saturation and tends to further increase the survivability of ballistas. 

    Stardrakes provide a sturdy anvil and good high rend shooting at the same time. Fulminators act as hard hitting hammer that can deal terrifying damage to both high save monsters and low save hordes, the latter posing significant threat to multiple ballistas. 

    While I still need to play more games, as of now I am trying to switch the stardrake with Knight-Judicator, Lord-Ordinator, and a fourth ballista. In other words, more points on high rend firepower that could be focused on enemy units from turn 1. A unit of gryph hounds could also hopefully be used to provide more "road blocks" to the opponent.

    • Like 1
  21. Funny to see TOs already assuming RAW translocation is unbalanced enough to warrant outright ban. 

    Lumineth foxes were already moving 24" or 36" every turn. Ironjaws could move several units twice a turn. They can also combine Hand of Gork and Mighty Destroyers to essentially do what translocation does now. 

    Such mobility tricks enjoyed by other factions are totally acceptable, but apparently not for the stormcast. I would not hesitate calling it ungrounded anti-stormcast bias.

    Why preemtively ban something when they do not even know how actual games will turn out? Players could learn to adapt to it by more clever use of screening and timely Redeploy.

    If the stormcasts with translocation as it is now do manage to absolutely dominate the podium for a considerable time, then I could understand TOs prohibiting its use.

    As of now however, I think ban on translocation is premature and unwarranted. Stormcast already lost most of their mobility buffs for heavy hitters in the new battletome.

    Stormcasts can no longer reliably run and charge every turn. And the holy order cannot be combined with automatic 6" run move command. Nor can stormcasts retreat and charge except for a single mount in the army. In fact, I am actually fine with translocation going away if stormcasts could earn their old knight heraldor back.🤨

    • Like 4
  22. 11 hours ago, Dream said:

    Minimum battle lines that you can resummon one at the end of the game to ensure that you get your grand strat. 

    But is it possible to accomplish Hold the Line with Call for Aid? The Grand Strategy states that any battleline unit from the starting army should survive when the battle ends . And unless I am mistaken, summoned units technically do not count as units from starting army.

  • Create New...