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

WoollyMammoth

Members
  • Content Count

    628
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

WoollyMammoth last won the day on June 16 2017

WoollyMammoth had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

644 Celestant-Prime

3 Followers

About WoollyMammoth

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant
  • Birthday 09/14/1984

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. WoollyMammoth

    LoN after grimghast reapers.

    @Lucky Snake Eyes The dice roll thing is just an opinion. I find hiding the dice much more fun. Of course your opponent is going to want to kill Nagash. For enemy spellcasters, they have to get through a +3 unbind, then if they get mortal wounds off, every mortal has to go through 6++/4++. Things like Vordrai and Thundertusks are brutal but there are many ways to prepare and mitigate them, then over half their mortals are canceled anyway. If your Nagash gets charged you are not playing Nagash correctly Nagash can heal up what little wounds he takes with spells I agree that Nagash does not have 800 points of combat (that is because you are paying for other features). You need at least a couple more hammers in your list if you take Nagash. I have played many games with Nagash since LoN, and I have yet to lose him once. (The last time I lost him was to 9 Dracoth shooting, but that was before the new tome). This is including many local games and tournaments - maybe 20 games so far. In addition to what I said above, he has some of the best debuffs in the game. At a tournament I was 88-2 for getting my spells off. Nagash lists are some of the strongest in the game right now. Regardless, if you don't know what you are doing, your Nagash will die and you will lose. Currently I like to take Neferata and Nagash, because this makes Nagash immune to rend, and Neferata is a potent hammer.
  2. WoollyMammoth

    LoN after grimghast reapers.

    The tome is good. The NH coming in second reinforces what I've been saying. People saying that the NH tome is garbage are just internet trolls. I think there will be a change coming to reapers, but I don't think they will get a huge nerf.
  3. WoollyMammoth

    LoN after grimghast reapers.

    @Tropical Ghost General If the nerf reapers NH can still use bladegheists. You can use other battleline. Blades are 3+ so they dont rely on re-rolls, have extra attacks without buffs, and also reroll (against everything) with buffs. The 1" range is annoying since they are on 32mm, but its not a major issue if you are good at maximizing your charges. The treelord issue is just a stack of problems. There was no point in charging him with your rasps. When I build lists, I think about every battleplan and how I can use the list to win. The one with monsters 24" can be really hard to build around, but the ones that require heroes should be expected. But Sylvaneth is probably the hardest list to beat with that battleplan so I get where you are coming from. The only thing worse is probably if Nagash gets on the objective first. Ignoring rend is variable depending on your opponent. Against armies with a lot of mortal output its useless. Against armies that have a million attacks its not enough. Against elite and monster heavy armies its 100% OMG awesome. Its particularly annoying against other NH, which feature a lot of rend ... which is why I'm not currently playing a lot of NH (about half the local meta plays them now). I went three years only seeing one or two other death players .. now I can't not see them.
  4. WoollyMammoth

    LoN after grimghast reapers.

    @Tropical Ghost General Nice post. You would fall under the "experienced players are still working them out" that I made reference to. A few points- A lot of people were saying the NH book was complete garbage, I was just saying it wasn't, not that you should not play NH without Reapers. That's like saying try to play DoK without witches. But NH does have an alternative in BG Revenants which other than their 1" range are actually better than reapers and could easily fill out lists in place of reapers if need be. I wasn't saying to take away reapers from NH I was saying take them out of LoN, which is perfectly logical given many units already are not included, as well as the entirety of Flesh Eater Courts. I'm sorry to hear about your attack on the Treelord but that is anecdotal. I've done the same thing with Skeletons and taken down the treelord. That being said the best option to assault a treelord is something with -2 rend, its going to be uphill without that, treelords with 2+ re-rolling 1s and immune to -1 rend is one of the most defensive units in the game. The best bet is to save up and focus all your mortal wound abilities on it and then focus it down. Regardless if you swarm a standard objective with a horde, you have more models and therefore take the objective regardless. The fact about other armies ignoring rend is not necessarily true. There are a few mechanics to ignore -1 and very rarely -2. Many units have -2 or better which work awesome against those units, but have no effect on NH. Overall rend is still a key ability sought by most armies. NH can get +3 to cast with Reiknor which puts them in a better place with magic than most armies. Certain armies like Nurgle would kill for something like this. In NH it can almost guarantee Cogs which is a huge deal given everything can ambush. It sounds like you are playing against armies that are building against you. I've not heard of anyone using the doppelganger cloak. Technically you could counter that with the Gildenbane. I have rolled a 10 to charge but had Kairos change my 6 to a 1 .. that hurts. Keep strong with the NH, you have the tools you just have to figure out the best way to use them. You'll get there. I don't think that all the units are as easy to counter as you think.
  5. WoollyMammoth

    LoN after grimghast reapers.

    Regardless of your opinions there is going to be a change to reapers come the January FAQ. LoN with 60 Reapers and NH with 60 reaper lists are currently 20% of the meta and counting. If GW does not fix this tournaments will devolve into nothing but reaper on reaper games and all of their time spent on all the other armies will be wasted. Too many people will want reapers so they will go out of stock for months and cause all kinds of problems. It is not a question of "if" there will be a change, but what that change will be. First on the topic of NH, it is an extremely competitive army. Just because the meta is going in one direction doesn't mean that NH is bad. There have been NH competing at the top tables in many tournaments and events in the last couple months. Two weeks ago a pure NH list beat a 60 reaper legion of sacrament list and an insane Khorne list to win a local tournament. The entirety of NH is flying with good speed and can ambush. Immunity to rend is nearly a hard counter to elite armies, especially monsters. Chanrasp are great, Kurdoss is a beast, Myrmourn have a lot of punch, Reikenor nearly guarantees Endless Spell combos and there is some awesome synergy going on. The only thing about NH is that they are heavily being played by new players (and losing games with them) while experienced players are still working them out. For these reasons there is no 'netlist' that everyone can refer to. Competitive players have all turned to 60 reaper LoN lists, but that does not mean that NH is not a good army. The LoN book was probably the most competitive book that came out this year. The entire grand alliance of Death now has a myriad of ways to play with several beatstick allegiance stuff. It got nerfed a little with the last FAQ but it is still very strong, even without Reapers. Reapers takes it to another level to be the strongest list right now. Blood Knights took the hardest hit but I agree that Grave Guard could use a point decrease. Even so, they are in a really good place right now. The problem with them was always that you could not afford to have them targeted down, but now you can just bring them back with 1CP - so they are easily worth their points. So what changes are needed? I don't think they are just going to add 20 points to reapers and call it a day (though they might). I think the problem is that gravesites are a bit too strong, and reapers are a bit too strong, and when you give them free compatibility it gets out of control. So - the simplest change is to just take reapers out of the list of LoN units and make people pay for them as allies, restricting them to about 30 per LoN army. An alternative way to solve the problem is to take a closer look at the "summonable" mechanic. Too much stuff is summonable right now. If they update the gravesites (and Necromancer spell) to target only 'battleline' units, this would preserve much of their strength without completely nerfing them. What is probably the most needed is to give opponents a way to interact with gravesites, but that would require a lot more complicated of a rule - which is not likely going to happen. Unfortunately there tends to be a 'rule of 3' with GW nerfs .. so expect reapers to be removed from LoN, get a point hike and have their summonable keyword removed.....
  6. WoollyMammoth

    Are Morghasts worth it?

    Thank you @Lucky Snake Eyes @Ravinsild Morghasts are a very good unit and totally 'worth it'. With the halberds they are -2 rend 3 damage - that is pretty wild. That means most units are going to fail their save and be taking multiple 3 damage wounds. The -2 goes though annoyances like 2+ saves, Seraphon shields and -1 rend ignoring Treemen. At 3+/3+ they have extremely reliable attacks, and with 8 of these attacks I would list them among the most reliable damage dealers in death. (I tend to play them with Nagash so they are re-rolling hits and saves of 1 which makes them crazy good, but they are still really good without that). If you like this unit and you want to play a Grand Host list, by all means get them and enjoy them. The only downsides to them is they are not great against ethereal and they can't heal from gravesites, but I expect some changes are coming to that before half the meta becomes broken death lists. Note per the FAQ several Nighthaunt units are part of the Legions of Nagash - so they are not allies and are fully part of the army. That is why we have the 60 reaper Nagash lists right now.
  7. WoollyMammoth

    Are Morghasts worth it?

    Back before the nerf i played two Archai to bodyguard Nagash and they were incredibly powerful. They would just kill everything. A Lot of people are scared to use them in first cohort but if you charge with them, they are amazing. In terms of points compare them to the fact that one (in LoN) has the exact same offence as a single Avatar of Khaine. The only argument against them in LoN is "reapers are so much better". Reapers are the best unit in the game right now - of course they are better. People are spoiled by etheral so they think that a 4+ save with 5++ to mortals is bad defense. Reapers will get nerfed soon and then Morghast will be in a great place, so I would reccomend building them and getting ready. Their bravery debuff is also useful. Harbingers can be very strong ambushing in Legion of Night. Morgast are a great unit. The only downside to them is that they cannot be summoned or returned, etc. This puts a target on their head because your opponent will be desperate to kill something that will stay dead. The gravesite mechanics are likely to see some nerfs soon too.
  8. WoollyMammoth

    Overview of the tournament scene

    @Lhw maybe people are nicer in the UK. Currently a lot of people are taking 60 reaper lists and 60+ Witch Elf lists .. these lists will smash you to pieces. People leave tournaments all the time, but you don't often hear about it unless you are directly involved. Depends on the situation. Local tournaments, you generally know some of your opponents and see it through even if you are losing badly. At LVO though, people quit to go have fun in Vegas. @Ravinsild If you really get into the hobby and have a fully painted army you should. If your mindset is that you just want to have some fun games and you dont care if you win or lose - you are likely to have a great time.
  9. WoollyMammoth

    Overview of the tournament scene

    @Lhw You are misunderstanding my meaning of cutthroat. I know plenty of good guys whom its fun to play games with, but that play with cutthroat lists indented to smash you into the ground. Some people are so competitive that they are bad sports and that sucks but is not always the case at a tournament. Those people tend to quit as soon as they lose a game so if you lose a game and keep playing, you are likely to run into more laid back people and so your experience will be better. But in a narrative event generally everyone is laid back from the get-go so you do not have to worry that you might win too many games lol. Regardless @Ravinsild hasn't said anything about playing events.
  10. WoollyMammoth

    Overview of the tournament scene

    @Ravinsild I'm just talking about what pushes the tournament meta. People like you will probably go to a tournament and hate it and never go again. If you went to an event - you would probably more enjoy a narrative event or just taking classes and just enjoying everyone's artwork. Tournaments are pretty cutthroat. Personally I am considering if going to an event only to take classes and enjoy the scene is a much better life choice overall. Vampires and Skeletons are extremely good. - A vampire lord on a zombie dragon is the pinnacle "generic" hero for any list in the new Legions of Nagash list. Being generic he can take the command traits for a lot of flexibility. With the ethereal artifact hes especially good right now. Or you can make him Prince Vordrai to make him a smash-face named char. - Neferata is one of the most powerful heroes in the game - Nagash lists are probably the strongest right now (albeit with reapers) - Arkhan is an incredible wizard in a time when magic is a very strong part of the game - A Vampire Lord is a very good hero - 40 skeletons are one of the best battleline units in the game, and with the heroes and gravesites bringing them back, they are to the point where they are too good. - Grave Guard are expensive but they are insanely good, and very hard to kill with gravesites. The problem is that if your opponent focuses them down it really hurts. - Black Knights got a good update in the new book and are in a great place. They are kind of like a mobile wall though which is not super exciting - so they are not as flashy as other units and don't see a lot of play. - Blood Knights unfortunately were gutted and left super expensive. They are probably the worst unit in death right now. Since its still a $100 resin kit, this is probably for the best. That being said they can still be a very hard-hitting unit in a Legion of Blood list, so they are not useless.
  11. WoollyMammoth

    Overview of the tournament scene

    First up - this graph is really cool and I hope to see more stuff like this in the future. The meta seems to be dictated by a combination of two factors: A. The 'New Hotness' Many of us are addicted to plastic and when something cool and new comes out, we want it. Some people get everything new that comes out, either because they can afford it or by constantly selling and buying to recycle the hobby. I have played Death for years and rarely ever came across another death player. At LVO this year there were only a handful. That was only 9 months ago. Today, after the LoN book and the Nighthaunt, death players are 20% of the meta (also this is only the tournament meta, in stores it seems like 50% nighthaunt right now). Stormcast is perpetually the new hotness and they make up the largest meta. The top 5 are all new tomes of this year. Is this because the books were especially strong, or because more people are excited to play them and make the most of them? B. Competitively Effective Lists You have to balance the 'new hotness' compared to what actually does well on the table. Death models (other than NH) are not particularly new and hot, but the mechanics of the gravesites and the power of Nagash is extremely potent right now, so a lot of players are gravitating to LoN lists, whereas Deepkin models are particularly new and hot, but they are do not seem to outperform certain LoN and DoK lists. A sub-factor of this is some kind of broken combo that boosts the meta. For example the multi-waaagh list is performing very well right now, and I expect Ironjaw lists are on the rise. There is also the factor of 'hotness longevity' .. some armies just always seem to get a lot of love. Orcs seem to always have a big following for example, and you will often see a lot of orc players even when they have not had any releases for a long time or are not shining competitively. Fyreslayers in contrast fell off the face of the meta as soon as their list was not competitive. Overall I think there is some really interesting things going on in the meta with AoS 2.0. They seemed to have balanced out some key issues. Things are a bit wild right now but nothing particularly frustrates me like certain exploits before 2.0. Locally I have seen all kinds of lists win tournaments - Nagash, Ironjaws, Stormcast, Nighthaunt .. and many other armies that came very close. If I had to nitpick I would say that witchbrew is a bit wild right now and I would love to see DoK get rounded out a little more. One thing you cant really see from the chart is how many people are taking 60 reapers. They are in the Nagash lists, they are in the Legion of Sacrament lists, they are in the Legion of Night lists, and they are in the Nighthaunt lists. They are like a glass cannon unit that just happens to have unbreakable glass. In the Nagash lists they are crazy good, where you need very specific tools to deal with them and even if you do have those tools and kill most of them, the unit easily refills to full - and then even if you manage to kill it they can re-spawn the entire unit with a command point. I stopped playing NH/Death lists because its annoying just being another one in the crowd doing this right now, I wish they would tweak the rules a bit so its not the current netlist.
  12. WoollyMammoth

    Any News From FaceHammer GT 2018?

    @broche I think sportsmanship is the #1 thing that needs to be policed at tournaments, there is nothing worse than a bad opponent. I have gotten blown out in a big game, that sucks but I have nothing against my opponent. But when you get an immature, rude and even cheating opponent, that ruins tournaments altogether. I've had some pretty good opponents at tournaments. People are people, not everyone is the most enjoyable opponent, but everyone can keep the social contract and be a reasonable person. I had one belligerent player at a local tournament and I just walked away. Unfortunately when you are in the late games of a tournament, especially at the top tables, you don't have the luxury of walking away. Against a bad opponent, its like being locked in a box with them for 3 hours. This can be a living nightmare, and I would not be surprised if many people have quit tournaments altogether after this kind of experience. We need to be able to prevent this kind of thing 100%. Due to a low number of moderators and without a clear sportsmanship guideline, this kind of thing is unfortunately very real in the tournament scene. I have heard first hand reports of this kind of behavior not only unchecked, but the perpetrators rewarded - finishing high ranks in a tournament. If this continues, the top tables will become dominated by cheaters and jerks. I don't agree that best game vote is a popularity contest other than, if the opponent is a really great guy and people just enjoy playing games against them. I think that being a really great guy and a good sport is something we should all strive for, and those that achieve it should be rewarded. If we allow opponents to merely list us as "bad sports", the bad sports will simply list all their opponents as bad sports and punish good sports for no reason. The best game vote is a great system because you have to save your vote for the one stand-out player. Unless you played a good friend, this is objective. Unless you showed up with a large club its unlikely biased. TO can also look into this and have a rule where you cannot vote for someone in your own club. I'm not sure the best answer but I'm sure that TO need to seriously think about this and come up with a solution. I can't imagine spending all the time and effort to organize a tournament, then find out some players were abused and I did nothing about it. Currently in some tournaments the abusive people are winning and taking home the trophy. If I ever organize a tournament, my number one priority would be to identify and disqualify bad sports during the event. I would want it to be known that my tournament is the one that doesn't tolerate BS.
  13. WoollyMammoth

    Any News From FaceHammer GT 2018?

    This tournament was won on sportsmanship. That is awesome.
  14. The other topic was closed so I have to say this: - My accounts are first hand from a family member. - I have nothing against NOVA. If not for these reports I would have considered going next year - I do not know anyone in the official final top 10, and I do not care what the final results were. I am related to someone who played two games at the final top 10, who went with a club of guys, some of whom did very well and were also at the top tables. My point is that terrible attitude & cheating was not policed at NOVA. This means the culprits have learned they can get away with it, and sends a message to others that they can get away with it too. If you are like me, and want to have fun games where your opponents play fair without any shady behavior, this is a very bad sign. Cheating and bad behavior has been a big theme of 40k tournaments lately (you can look into the facts and first hand reports on your own) and it seems this behavior is now becoming a part of the AoS scene as well. Believe me or not, this affects the community. Hopefully some action is taken to turn this around.
  15. This topic has digressed far too into rage about "painting matters". That was not my point at all. As I stated, I am a painter and I care about painting. I have no respect for people who get 3 coats on just to smash face at a tournament. I have every respect for someone who is trying their best but does not have a lot of painting talent. You can easily tell the difference. My main concern is BAD BEHAVIOR being REWARDED at tournaments. There is talk on the 40k side about making tabletop legitimately competitive. Every sport or eSport is moderated, where tabletop games are not - there is no 'referee' watching the games. The balance of the game (and the prevention of cheating and poor behavior) is balanced only by the social contract. At NOVA, this social contract was bent and broken to its limits at the top tables. This needs to be prevented if tournaments are going to be thought of as an enjoyable experience by the community (and attendance is going to go up rather than down). Obviously I cannot provide evidence, that is a big part of the problem. I know for a fact all of these things happened, you can choose to believe it or not. I am saying this in hopes that the TO's can learn and improve. They can dismiss me but if this is how tournaments are going to run - I won't be attending any and they will regress to mainly including whiny, immature, over-competitive cheaters. So why was a model that was barely allowed given so many painting points that he surpassed those with better scores in the rankings? That makes no sense. AoS painting is always beautiful. I never said there should be no painting incentive. There should just be at least an independent 'best general' so that people on the internet can see what lists are doing well independent of objective things that they cannot see, like painting. Combining painting and scores, you cant get a handle on either. The best painted army could have lost all their games and came 80th place. The best general could have bad painting and come in 20th. Its fine if you want to give the 'grand prize' to someone with combined scores but here on the internet we need to be able to separate the two. In terms of painting scores, I have never attended a tournament which I would rate even satisfactory execution of paint judging. They are usually one hour arbitrary popularity contests within the small gaps between games - a time when most people are frantically trying to get something to eat. Adepticon has the Crystal Brush but that is a separate thing - you generally are either playing a tournament OR participating in the painting. The only tournament I've ever heard of which gives army painters their proper due is SCGT. As a painter I want to see more tournaments organize a proper painting judging and not halfass it like I see at nearly every tournament. Also to be clear, painting is the least of my concerns. I'm far more concerned about the cheating, immature behavior, over competitive attitude and bad moderating rampant at the top 10 tables that is being rewarded rather than punished. @hughwyeth There is a big divide between 40k painting and AoS painting. I have never seen a '3 color minimum' AoS army at any tournament. They appear here and there (but frankly, they are usually 40k players playing AoS .. lol) I understand your point, I lost my first couple games at LVO, and had a great time. All my opponents were great and I enjoyed the whole tournament. Unfortunately, It's hard to keep a good attitude when your opponent is being an immature ******. Your own attitude is only half the table. I have a great attitude at the start of all my games, but I've had to walk away from games because my opponent was a belligerent ******. If you are playing the top tables you are kind of locked in and have to deal with it. This is exactly what happened to one player I know who attended NOVA.
×