Discussion in 'Seraphon Tactics' started by Xasto, Aug 7, 2017.
True, this is also pretty much what I mean.
@Full Metal Maggot what is the base Kroak list in your opinion ?
Something like :
Lord Kroak 450p
Balewind Vortex 100p
Astrolith Bearer 160p
Eternal Starhost 130p
Saurus Guards x 10 200p
Saurus Guards x 10 200p
Saurus Guards x10 200p
Eternity Warden 140p
Skink Starpriest 80p
Skink Priest 80p
Skink Priest 80p
Skinks x 10 60p
Skinks x 10 60p
Skinks x 10 60p 1980p total
Never played Kroak so far but judging by the comments I read from the players that do, this list seems to make sense somehow ?
I've seen him post on facebook,
its Kroak a vortex and a eternity warden.
The eternal starhost, 1x20 guard, 2x5 guards.
2 normal priests
and a 40 man skink squad.
At least that's what I recall.
@Full Metal Maggot
Have you fought a Seraphon list with a shadowstrike battalion yet? I remember posing the question to you on facebook as a counter to your list (you rely on Kroak) and never got a response.
I actually really like that setup for the starhost. Ive always found guard suffer in 10man units from losing effectiveness too quickly when they suffer mortals. But if you teleport it you lose the wardens buffs so again im not really seeing the strengths to the battalion as a whole. It suffers too much from expensive bunker syndrome.
Im leaning way heavier towards sunclaw for more bodies and no range requirements on the buffs.
Honestly theres a whole load of claims being made here that dont make a lot of sense to me. Im just not following the reasoning.
@skipperyoss I did reply to you on facebook.
I made a blog on facebook for my own gaming experiences I will be posting to in the near future after playing at tournaments and stuff that will explain the army and how to make it function. https://www.facebook.com/SpaceLizardsRidingSpaceLizards/
I think this is the most toxic thread i have read on this site .
Yeah, might not be our best one...
But most of the time it seems we are a very friendly bunch. In fact I have seen much worse threads in most forums I've ever been active in.
I've just gone through the full thread and tbh I think it is very informative and yes there are a couple of replies that are getting a tad tasty but from reading it, I would say a slight over reaction and maybe taking things the wrong way.
Calling someone a "dick" for example would not raise an issue here (North West UK) as it is a used on a daily basis as banter.
I respect some people might find it offensive and ask if we can keep this thread on topic as I am picking up some great tips.
Yeah interesting points raised, definitely!
The question still standing for me is: do we have the chance to somehow measure just how many mortal wounds can likely be caused by enemies and not prevented by any means we have at our disposal, since that will greatly affect the effectiveness of Guards.
We are all know their weak point is mortal wounds. We seem to disagree on their prevalence though, which is probably the reason why some people regard Guards as near-broken OP while others call them weak.
Every time I've used Guards they have been outstanding, They wiped out Liberators without taking a wound (10 guard v 10 Libs)
They are weak against Mortal wounds but what isn't, I love them.
Well, many armies can have abilities or spells that at least give some protection against mortal wounds (ward save 6+, or even 5+, are not so uncommon), while we don't.
But that's not the point.
SG are amazing, but the problem still stands. I'll try to explain a thing that has not been raised again.
If i have a way to deal mortal wounds, usually I pick the best target in that moment, dealing with the rest in a more classic way.
Example: against dwarfs, i can MW a cannon's crew, or I can target the Irondrakes, or I can kill the battleline hammerers (all units that are dangerous and costly).
But I can choose. If I MW irondrakes, I can always charge hammerers with chances of success.
With Saurus guards, it doesn't work that way. The opponent cannot choose... SG are immortal if faced with "traditional" ways of dealing damage, so there are really no options available, target saturation doesn't exist.
Guards will be the target of all the MW sources available, because they are so resilient that you are forcing your opponent to spam them with MW (if he can, of course)
(it can be an advantage, nonetheless, leaving more room for the rest of your army to act more "freely")
I totally agree and understand that SG are targeted my MW as it is the only way to get them off the table, if they had someway of dealing with MW then they would be OP.
It's not just prevalence, it's reliability and safety. My girlfriends stormforged have a lord celestant with dracethion thing, lord relictor, judicators and retributors, all of which have mortal wounds. Which means somewhere around half her army has mortal wounds (she is a very slow painter). However, retributors I can simply block with another unit, the celestantand relictor are fairly unreliably and shortranged ( 9", miss half the time, only 1 attack each). Only the judicators have reliable throughput and even then only against a 5+ unit, against a wounded unit they become unreliable as well. On top of that, only the judicators can attack from anything resembling safety, all the others risk being charged and consequently being murdered. And that's without taking into account whatever else is in my army supporting the guards.
All this allows the guard to flourish. Yes every so often half the starhost will be annihilated in 1 turn. But more often than not I suffer 1 maybe 2 mortal wounds total in a turn. Which is perfectly acceptable in most situations, and even expected.
Essentially as long as the guard don't face entire armies of mortal wounds (*ahum* skryre stormfiends) you should usually be able to field them effectivly simply because the mortal wounds will not be prevalent enough, not reliable enough, and not safe enough to outright wipe the floor with them. Admittadly, there's still other issues like point cost, mobility, range, that might make the bad picks. But in general mortal wounds doesn't seem to be the end-all be-all.
SG are really good vs some army , but they are really bad vs others. That's the point. If you face TZ ( and last meta it was one of the most popular army) you can't say they are good , when they can put like 12 or more mortal wounds every hero phase. Just that.
About what Battle traits are we talking here, sry about asking now cause i found the thread just now ^^
We have allegiance abilities now, including these Battle Traits that apply whenever you choose Seraphon allegiance for your army (all of them):
- Slann can unbind spells on the whole table
- Slann can add a few inches to their spell range if they roll doubles
- You can teleport one unit per round
Last weekend, my Eternal Starhost (bolstered by a Skink Priest) got handily butchered by some sort of insane Stormcast combo where his frontline unit had 2+ armor saves, re-rolling 1's, that could heal wounds when rolling a 6 to save. My Saurus Guard could barely make a dent in his guys, while his Judicators and Prosecutors just sniped my heroes from a safe distance until all my bonuses were gone.
In all fairness, my army was woefully lacking in flexibility for dealing with fast or distant threats, so perhaps I'm to blame.
I tend to struggle a lot against Stormcast, no matter what I field. The only exception is when using the skirmish rules, where my Skinks win through numbers and mobility; perhaps I should try a Skink-heavy list in my next regular AoS game against Stormcast.
Anyway, I'm quickly losing my delusions about the might of the Eternal Starhost. I'm never fielding it again without something like a Shadowstrike Starhost for support.
Yea an eternal starhost on its own is either unstoppable or utterly pointless due to its inflexibility, either case it's not much fun to play.
Though I'm suprised he managed to get 2+ armor saves re-rolling 1's going, especially considering the guard have rend as well. What did he field? Something with sigmarite shields for the re-roll? But how did he get to that 2+ save?
Also, sounds not so much as "eternal starhost is weak" as much as it sounds like "stormcast are stupidly OP posterboys". A frontline that heals, has re-rollable 2+ saves, even when facing -1 rend, and is backed up by snipers is kind of an amazing set-up. Only thing missing in that description is mobility.
Also, did you field like 1500 points worth of eternal starhost? Cuz it sounds like what he had should've been expensive.
Maybe he had a Castellant buffing the saves. That would only get him to 3+ though. Maybe an allied wizard or a terrain piece to get those 2+ on Liberators?
Oh and yeah mass Skinks could actually work. Damn SCE are just too good against Guards.
I think it was an item of some sort. (Definitely not terrain or magic.) If I can't figure out what it was when I get back to my books, I'll ask him.
Oh no, 2+ was the pre-Rend save. But even with Rend, we're talking about a 3+ save, re-rolling 1's, meaning (if my math is correct) a 2/9 chance of getting through the armor. With every 6 healing a Wound, to boot. So it wasn't invincible, but it was certainly a tough nut to crack. At one point I made the stupid mistake of attacking with my non-Rending shields, which meant a 1/36 chance of hurting him and a 7/36 chance of healing him.
Yyyep. I wish GW would stop playing favorites and give Elves and humans some love.
It was only a 1,000-pt game.