[Double turn]

On 9/23/2019 at 10:29 AM, Overread said:

With a game with only 6 turns at most where its most likely going to take at least 1 turn to get into range to do anything with most units and where the 6th turn might not happen (game state won before that) then you've really only got 4 turns of full action. That does not leave much room to sit back and be passive. In fact in general if you're playing with objectives sitting back and being passive tends to fail. 

Plus sitting back would only work for one single turn - probably the first. If the game had a lot more turns and things were spread out more then doubleturn wouldn't be as bad. If the game ran with say 20 turns then having one or two doubles in there wouldn't swing things so much; but with only a 6 turn game where the last turn is likely going to be more of a mop up - so a practical 5 turns - getting to take two at once isn't just adding random to the game; it's providing a massive swing. 

I get the idea of increasing random to break up tactics, but in general double turn actually allows one player to maximise their maths efficiency. If they get the option then not only do they get another turn, but their maths and tactics get to actually happen exactly how they want with no negatives. Because now their opponent can't mess with their position or approach. It actually rewards more "risky" charging forward and aggressive play far more so if you get the doubleturn. Meanwhile if you held back and got it then you can still gain advantage. 

And there's an issue, its very hard to actually pass on a doubleturn. The vast majority of times its advantageous for a player to take a doubleturn first when they get the option.

I actually disagree with most of what you've written in this post and in others. The double turn adds a LOT of tactical consideration to the game, forcing you to be very careful with your positioning when there's a risk of your opponent getting a double. In many scenarios it's actually perfectly valid to sit back passively for up to three turns, scoring with chaff and screen units as much as you can and waiting for your opponent to commit.

If my opponent is in no position to inflict heavy damage on me, I'll happily give them a double turn (I actually did that in a game I played just two days ago). That way, I can get into an advantageous position later in the game instead. It's all a matter of being in the right position at the right time. If your opponent is able to attack your monster or important unit for two turns in a row, then you've made a mistake earlier in the game to enable that.

If I position well, I can mitigate my opponent's double turn. If I position well, I can also maximize the the damage I inflict should I get a double turn of my own. At all times, you need to be prepare for both winning and to losing the next initiative roll. The players that do this tend to do well in tournaments consistently, and the players that don't do this tend to lose and/or complain about the double turn on the internet.

I actually think IGOUGO would make the game incredibly dull. Turn predictability would take away so much from the game in terms of tactical positioning and maneuvering. It would significantly empower gunline armies, making kiting and screening reliable ways of ensuring several turns of shooting.

["That Guy" in your gaming group]

46 minutes ago, Aryann said:

Me and my friend I play most of the games are both at the pretty same level regarding AoS. Nevertheless no matter how hard he tries to beat me with his Ironjawz he loses games against my Sylvaneth, Nighthaunt and Khorne armies. It's not his fault, it's Ironjawz to be worse due to older battletome. Also I don't take pleasure from beating him. We have 50:50 winning ratio when he brings his Chaos mix army. It can't be a coincidence. What I'm trying to say is that current "army power" is of high importance. I'm sure that if he played DoK or FEC I'd be on the losing side.

That's why I would distinguish firendly play from tournament play. I understand that the point of participating at a tournament is winning, thus you bring the best you can with you. However, when playing firends "just for fun" (do not confuse with narrative games) i think we should look for the most balanced play so that all sides are satisfied. In our games with Ironjawz in play we started testing some points adjustments so that we both feel equal.

Totally agree, I think it's the responsibility of both players to talk beforehand and adjust to their opponent's expectations when playing casual games. Sometimes I want to try a new list, sometimes I want to practice for a tournament and sometimes I want to roll dice and laugh at my Orruks doing stupid stuff and dying in droves. Talking to my opponent beforehand so we both know what to expect is key to a good gaming experience.

The previous point of letting go of excuses was related to playing top tier armies. When I play my DoK, I know that if I lose, it was because I made mistakes (most of the time). With my Destruction armies, there is always the feeling that I could have won if I brought a stronger list. There's a lot more pressure on me as a player to perform when I bring a strong army to the table.

["That Guy" in your gaming group]

2 hours ago, Aryann said:

To be honest for me a person who plays currently the strongest army (DoK,FEC...) with the most powerful list observed from the internet is playing with an aid. It's like admitting you need help to take an advantage.

I have no experience in AoS tournaments but I've been to quite a few card games tournaments. At my local shop half the people were playing the same, most powerful deck. Playing against them was comparable to cleaning floor with a toothbrush - that kind of fun. Yeah, those decks won most of the time. Was it thanks to the players using them? Only partially. That was the reason I stopped coming there.

Don't be a handicaped guy who needs a bigger gun than his mates to play at the same level. Especially if it's not a tournament.

I disagree with this, what you're describing is a person trying to do the best they can. For me, both list building and gameplay are quests for perfection. I play strong factions because they lend themselves well to this - polishing a diamond is more fun than polishing a roadside rock.

For my competitive armies, I have never copied someone else's list, yet there always ends up being many similarities. If several people try to optimize the same faction, chances are they'll arrive at similar conclusions. As an avid tournament goer, I know some people that do copy other people's lists, and they tend to perform significantly worse than the players that actually design and perfect their own lists.

There's also something to be said about daring to let go of all excuses and accepting that when you lose, the fault lies with you as a player and not your army.

This is somewhat off topic, so no need to discuss it further. I just want to challenge the notion that trying to perfect your craft is "admitting you need help to take an advantage". That's a narrow-minded way to look at things.

[What would it take to balance Daughters of Khaine?]

1 minute ago, SwampHeart said:

Assuming they continue to use the GHB as a points adjustment vehicle rather than a rules adjustment one I don't see how armies can be brought up to DoK levels. The issues that create the gulf between DoK (and FEC) and other armies aren't just points. There are certain models in DoK that are undercosted, I don't think that's really debatable. Or are you telling me that 30 Wyches should be cheaper than 30 Daemonettes?  I don't want DoK to be non viable but clearly some of what needs to be done involves adjusting points up to account for how effective the army is at current. 

Yeah, of course. I'd prefer Witchbrew and Hagg Nar to be rewritten, but that won't happen. Hags up to 100 or so is a given, they are just far too good currently. Witches and Sisters losing their horde discount might be fine, if other units are adjusted down to compensate. Larger changes will remove them from contention.

I think points can bridge the gap between DoK/LoN/Skaven/Slaanesh and others, but I don't think points can do anything to FEC. They just break some core mechanics of the game, and you either have access to an answer or you don't. The only thing that can be done is bringing FEC down, but that won't happen this year since the book is new.

[What would it take to balance Daughters of Khaine?]

2 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

So what non DoK players have been having to do since 2.0 came out? 

Yeah, sure. What's your point?

What I'm saying is that I'd prefer them to remain strong, and for other factions to be brought up to their level. If you prefer them to be brought down instead, of course we'll have differing opinions on what should be changed in the faction.

[What would it take to balance Daughters of Khaine?]

I think it's just a matter of where people want the army to end up. DoK are currently a top tier army. Some people want them to remain as such, and just want the internal balance of the faction to be improved. Other people want the army taken down a notch or two, to be in line with currently weaker factions. Depending on what they wish for, people have different opinions of what should change about the army.

In the current meta there are several factions as strong as DoK. Since many of them are new, they will not be attended to in General's Handbook 2019. The options are to either nerf DoK (likely to happen), or to buff other factions up to their power level.

Personally, I would much prefer the latter, since that would allow me to continue bringing my army that I've spent so much time on to tournaments with the chance of bringing home the trophy if I play my cards right. If they are nerfed instead, the odds of podium will disappear. In that case I'll have to bring something else to compete.

[What would it take to balance Daughters of Khaine?]

5 hours ago, Lord Veshnakar said:

 

AoS 2.1 stats are hardly relevant anymore, the 2.2 table is what you should be looking at. Either way, DoK are still a power house, of course, but they now have really stiff competition from FEC, Skaven, LoN and to some extent Slaanesh. BoC and Tzeentch builds with 12+ Enlightened on Discs are also extremely strong. In many ways, the top tier meta is rather healthy now, with many armies fighting for the top spots. This is in stark contrast to AoS 2.1, where DoK and LoN were extremely dominant.

If DoK are to remain a competitive choice in the current meta, but be better internally balanced, some changes need to be made. Hags need to go up to 100 or 120 points. Blood Stalkers are useless and need to go down significantly. Even then, they will only be used if they work as an efficient combat unit, since their shooting is so subpar. Warlocks could probably go down to 140, and Lifetakers to 70. The Slaughter Queen should go down to 80. She will then primarily be a cheap priest unit, since noone in their right mind takes her as general. The Hag on Cauldron could go up to 330 to match the Slaughter Queen. The Avatar is a joke unit and will be competitively irrelevant regardless of price. Witch Aelves and Sisters of Slaughter should probably not have their horde discounts, but if they lose that the army is quickly approaching tier 2.

The ideal change would be to fix the temples (Hagg Nar in particular), but that's not going to happen any time soon.

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

On 11/16/2018 at 7:03 PM, InSaint said:

1. Use Gryph Feather Charm from Malign Sorcery for +1" movement a....

 

20 hours ago, Qayin said:

Here are my 2cents;

1)10-12 unit count is pretty high; consider dropping  a ....

Sorry if I wasn't clear guys, the list is submitted and cannot be changed. I'm looking for general advice and tactics for the army, rather than specific suggestions for how to change my list. Steed of Shadows for the Medusa shooting is a neat idea which I never considered, so I'll think about how to incorporate that into my future builds. For the time being I want to focus on the gameplay though, because the list is set.

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

Hey guys!

Bringing my Daughters to a tournament for the first time soon! Hit me up with your #1 top tips for playing the army competitively

Here's my list, for reference:

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

13 hours ago, kenshin620 said:

Perhaps but as far as we can tell though the Mortal Keyword implies Human origin for chaos (even chaos spawn has the mortal keyword for this reason since chaos spawn originally were just with slaves to darkness).

I suppose though it is for game play purposes, otherwise he would only be able to get tzeentch arcanite stuff instead of both arcanite and mortal stuff.

I don't really care about the reasons, I just lament the fact that one of the coolest miniatures released for AoS isn't included in the army =(

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

1 hour ago, ShaneHobbes said:

Being a fan of Tzeetch I wish Ogroid Thaumaturges carried over to BoC.

So much this, I love the model and was endlessly disappointed when I realized it wasn't in the book.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

16 minutes ago, Frozenbeast said:

Sorry if this might seem a silly question but what do those numbers refer to? I understand you are comparing a block or 30 gors with a block of 40 ungors and how they behave when they are attacked by attacks with different rend characteristic but those numbers are the result of which math calculation?

It's essentially the number of wounds an attacker has to deal to kill the entire unit. Take for example 30 Gors with a 4+ save. If you deal 30 wounds to them with no rend, they will save half and take 15 casualties. In order to kill all 30, you need to deal 60 wounds to them (note that there was an error in the calculation previously - updated numbers are found in the original post).

As for the math: if x is the number of wounds in the unit, y is the number of wounds required to annihilate the unit, and p is the probability of them failing their saves, y is found by solving:

x = p * y

--> y = x / p

In the above example, x=30 and p=0.5 (Gors vs no rend) yields y=60.

20 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

Fair point and good math - the 25mm base is actually more helpful in alot of cases as well. I may go ahead and order some more and try them out. 

Yeah, I also think the 25 mm base is an advantage here. If you want to string them out, 40 models with 25 mm bases will reach further, and if you want to pack them as compact as possible (to be fully within 12" of a shaman, for example) they will still cover less area.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

4 hours ago, Myrdin said:

I tried that but the problem I saw with it is as described above. They dont have any damage output, but being only a single model units of 6 W, dont hold out either. Its very easy even for ranged units (even more so if those units are of the tough sort like Stormcast for example) to remove one of them in combat.

A unit of two however has plenty of durability to survive and tie the enemy unit long enough for your heavy hitters to get in.

I'm mainly looking at them from an ambushing perspective, so keep that in mind. For ambushing, I like several smaller units over a few larger ones so that I don't have to rely on any single charge roll. Needing a 7 on the charge (Cogs, which goes off reliably since I cast it with my potion-drinking Tzaangor Shaman), and ambushing 2-3 units each of the first two turns, I can reliably get one or two charges off. With the inherent rerolls of the chariots, that is especially the case. The more dice I roll, the more likely I am to get a few units into combat.

Now, what I want to do is charge one enemy unit simultaneously with two independent chariots. If I get both of them into combat, my opponent has to split his attacks between them. This increases the odds of at least one of them surviving.

Note that with a 15" movement (10" inherent + 3" from Great Bray Shaman + 2" from Cogs) you can pull this off deploying normally as well, you just have access to less angles of attack and are hindered more by screens.

1 hour ago, SwampHeart said:

I unfortunately don't have much experience with them - there are a few reasons. First is a purely personal reason of having never liked the models or the concept (I like the Brayherd elements the most). Second a unit of 3 Bullgors seems less efficient than 10 Bestigors to me. I can't provide much consistent advice on their use so I'll have to let one of the Bullgor experts step in to talk more about their best applications.

Totally agree on the Bullgors, they are unfortunately designed in such a way that they cannot fully exploit the strengths and synergies of our book, and are pointed too high. There is no reason to ever take Bullgors over Bestigors or Enlightened.

1 hour ago, SwampHeart said:

Not a bad thought process - I'm interested to see how it works out. You've hit the nail on the head as to why I personally won't be investing - them not being battleline is crippling for me. If they were a battleline I'd probably experiment with them more.  I have however had a great deal of play out of summoning them as excellent missile units for early game disruption. I actually think their base size is a benefit - its gamey but turning that thing sideways allows you to contact very large swathes of units if you need/want to. 

I also consider the large bases an advantage in this case. Roadblocks and screens are board control pieces, and larger bases generally means increased board presence. The only disadvantage I see to the base size is that it may be harder to find space to ambush them.

21 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

*I prefer Gors over Ungors for the role because I find the 4+ save more valuable than the 10 extra bodies. 

Just wanted to briefly comment on this, here is the effective wound count of 30 Gors and 40 Ungors, depending on the rend of attacks targetting them:

Rend -
Gors: 60, Ungors: 60

Rend -1
Gors: 45, Ungors: 48

Rend -2
Gors: 36, Ungors: 40

Rend -3 or better
Gors: 30, Ungors: 40

As you can see, 40 Ungors are consistently more durable than 30 Gors and cost 10 points less. The way I see it, Gors are in an unfortunate spot where they are worse than Ungors as screens and board control pieces, and worse than Bestigors as damage dealers. Unless required by a battalion, I would never bring them - they just have no niche in the army.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Yeah, I'm also looking at them as an ambushing roadblock. I'd go with a few units of single chariots, instead of a unit of two. That way, you can charge an enemy unit from two sides so that a lot of the models are stuck in the middle and unable to attack. Your opponent will also have to divide his attacks between your two units, instead of putting them all into one unit.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

4 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

I'd also like to be clear - I don't intend to attack or belittle your ideas. I see merit and understand where you're coming from and I enjoy the discussion. I know text doesn't carry tone so I just want to make it clear that I think you've got valid points, just ones that haven't worked out in my personal experience. 

Yes, in case it was unclear I'm also not attempting to be combative in the slightest.  I'm merely trying to make the point that ambush is not as useless as you seem to think it is ? There is also no such thing as an automatic loss in Total Commitment just because you have a list built to be good at ambushing - it's not a huge investment.

Granted,  I'm a new Beasts of Chaos player and have nowhere near your 20 games yet, but I do think there is merit in using small ambushing units to threaten the board from every single angle at once, and my experience playing against Legion of Night lists backs that up.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

Nah, it's not a 1/5 loss at all. If it is, then you are playing overly reliant on one tool out of many, which is on you and not on the mechanic itself.

Ambush is not a gimmick, it's a strategic tool. It allows you to play a denied flank while still threatening the side of the board where you have no presence if you wish. If your opponent doesn't guard that side of the board, you ambush there and score objectives. Otherwise, if your opponent overcommits to defending the ambush you bring the ambushers in on your strong flank to gain a numerical advantage. Ambush is a flexible tool to threaten board space, and forces your opponent to react to it. That is its main advantage. You can't do the same with normal deployment.

As with any tool at your disposal, you can use it situationally. The only trap is the mental one of relying on it every game.

And yes, charging Bestigors against the right target with one or two extra levels of rend are comparable to the units you mention, and Enlightened are fantastic as well.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

I don't really agree with that assessment, there are many units in the BoC book that pack one hell of a punch in relation to their points cost. In general, I think a balanced approach is usually the best, mixing board control elements with offensive ones. Ambush is a strong tool at our disposal, and having it unavailable in 1 out of 18 scenarios does not deter me in the slightest from keeping it in mind when building lists.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

34 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

Our Battalions aren't good for the bonuses they provide (largely) - they're good because they allow us a ton of control over our drop count, grant us access to a valuable CP and another artifact. Effectively you've got to look at BoC Battalions as 200 points for running a 1-2 drop army, plus 1 CP, and plus one artifact - whatever they do on top of that is a bonus. 

Yeah, and then you have to look at the bonus, the unit composition and the cost to determine if they are worth using or not. I think most of them aren't, to be honest.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

My personal favorite is the Desolating Beastherd, I think that one has potential in an ambush list.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

You don't get it for normal deployment, since units deployed normally are set up before the first turn of the game. It's purely for ambushers. And no, I don't think the battalion is all that hot. The bonus is nice, but the unit requirements are taxing and the price is high.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

1 minute ago, willange said:

I'm new to the game, but don't you have to make 10'' charges after an ambush?  I thought ambushing units had to be placed more than 9'' away from enemies.  Is that correct?  

A charge only has to get you within 0.5" of the enemy.

[AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion]

On 10/16/2018 at 3:24 PM, Myrdin said:

Ahh.... right

Forgot we can only ally with Slaves of Darkness..... 

I dont wanna swear, but its extremely Idi**** that we cant ally ourselves with even the old Beastmen sub factions. I mean its really dumb.  I think for the Demons it was fixed,, but you still have to take that specific Battalions (and even then I am not sure if it works. I know the errata should have fixed this though.) so the unit selection options are limited to what we can bring in those (notice how no other monsters other than Gorghon and Cygor are listed in those. Not even Razorgor. I imagine a Nurgle battalion would be intersting with bunch of Razorgor suicide bombs for 40 pts each, but nope. None of that).

I guess I`ll just use my old Wargor BSB model as Bloodsecrator. Instead of +1 to Wound, the +1 Attack will have to do. 

(Funny how they can have this type of buff hero, but we cant.... damn I am getting salty here, better stop.)

 

Thanks for entertaining the thought guys. I completely forgot I actually cant do that due to the Allies chart. ?

It wouldn't work either way, because your assumption about warscroll builder being fully updated is not correct. There are lots of outdated units lingering there. It doesn't matter. If it's not in the most recent General's Handbook or in a book released after the most recent GH, it doesn't have points and is not part of Matched Play. There are loads of old warscrolls with old points costs around, and none of them are relevant anymore.

Regarding Bestigors, I think units of both 10 and 30 are good. With the speed we have, a unit of 30 deployed normally can get a lot of models in, and is great to stack buffs on. Units of 10 are more independent and are great ambush units. With only 10 models in a unit, failing the 9" charge doesn't hurt quite as much.

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

@Scythian @Rekmeister

Cheers guys, thanks for your help. I know blood sisters and hagg nar are the most efficient option, but it doesn't really appeal to me in terms of how it plays. I'm instead looking at a khailebron list, which seems more fun. I also don't want to play the hardest list out there.

Keeping in mind that I don't want to change temple or remove the  battalion, how would you rate this list?

Bloodwrack shrine, general

Hag on cauldron

2x hag

2x10 blood sisters

2x5 blood stalkers

30 witches

5 heartrenders

Temple nest

2000 points, 1 CP, 6 drops

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

2 hours ago, Scythian said:

You have several choices for the snakes. You could use the standard Temple Nest build, or you could build just a straightforward snake list with no battalion. I always use a Medusa on the Shrine with 3 Hag Queens, and then 3 units of 20 Bloodsisters. If you wish, try either a Stormcast Knight Incantor or a unit of 5 Blood Stalkers for the remaining 160 points. I’ve been on a tear with my girls lately.

And what is the standard temple nest build? I know what units are needed for the battalion, but I'm wondering about the army composition. Cauldron, no cauldron? Max size blood sister units? Shrine? Witches? Khinerai? Which temple? What's the overall list?

Sorry for my ignorance, I just want to know how people run Melusai-centric lists and how they perform.

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

On 8/25/2018 at 5:06 AM, Scythian said:

DJ is right. The all snake list is brutal! People hate them, lol

Hey! New to Daughters, and primarily interested in running a snake-focused list. Do you have any examples of competitive 2000-point lists?

Also, is there a whatsapp group or something for Daughters of Khaine players?

Cheers!