Except it doesn't work that way. Kroak can kill threats, but not in the first turn, and there are builds that can seriously cripple an army in the first turn and probably go first. A couple of thundertusk with huskard delivers 14 mortal wounds to target/s. In the first turn you'll have the warden and 6 guards dead. The khorne formation with 5-6 skullcannons will shoot at you in their hero phase AND in the shooting phase. Wrath of Khorne Bloodthirster will let a Bloodthirster of Insensate Rage charge in the first turn, delivering up to 15 mortal wounds (average 6-9) to each enemy's unit in an area of 8" (at least with the old GHB, must check if it's still feasible with the same deadly rate) SCE can simply pop from heavens a couple of shooting units, backed up by a Venator, killing Kroak. I could continue. Kroak + balewind + eternal starhost is strong, but can be beaten, so the claim 15-0 may be true, but is far from granted. If your opponents are as good as you claim, then the problem is in the models they have at disposal.
Ah, and while we're at it: No one here was a dick. They were asking about the skills of your opponents to understand the possible reasons behind that score 15-0. But let me quote your first post: Bolded for emphasis. This is an insulting and condescending attitude.
No I am tired of people saying guard and the eternal starhost are bad. They aren't. Not even remotely. And when someone immediately jumps to the conclusion of "Oh you're winning? Your opponents must just be bad at the game" Comes off as incredibly insulting and makes me think you're a jealous retard. The context of the statement needs to be made more clear which it was in subsequent posts as text does not convey tone or intent 100% there is no issue here though.
Except that is exactly how it works. Kroak can do up to 9 mortal wounds to a single target and 2 D3 to others. Most armies are going to be out of range to threaten you if you deploy properly. I've faced multiple huskard on thundertusks lists in the previous handbook when those lists were much better and won all of them. The huskards die to the guard if they try to get into range to hit kroak and Kroak weakens them so that they aren't getting the auto 6 mortals. If they happen to roll a 6 for their mortal wonds you use one of kroaks command ability rerolls to make them reroll their dice for a lower result if you really need to.. I've literally never seen anyone run more than 3 skullcannons even at GTs and the times I have played against 1 or 2 skullcannons they didn't do much. Bloodthirsters / bloodletters charging means nothing when they are charging into skinks. It's about deploying properly vs each enemy. The biggest thing about demons is that kroak is doing D6 wounds to them. I laugh internally at khorne armies. They are probably my easiest matchups. Stormcast paladins do the same thing as bloodletters and such when they run into skinks that eat their mortal wounds. Venators, judicators and raptors have all tried killing kroak. You can summon a starpriest and give -1 to enemy hit rolls against Kroak thus protecting him. So far the ones to come the closest were SCE raptors with those god damn crossbows. They managed to kill the warden and get 4 wounds on kroak. Then subsequently died. Sure my list can be beaten. It has a handful of times in the previous handbook. But now it's even harder to do so. It's not even remotely an easy feat and I've NEVER had a game where I was like "wow there is just no way this list can beat yours" in fact it's usually my opponents telling me that. The few times I have lost was in the previous book when my army suffered from a lack of mobility and I didn't lose the fight I just lost on points. The reason I haven't lost with the new one is the new allegiance ability fixed the one weakness my list had as well as giving me several hundred points extra to play with. Of all my games kroak has only died a handful of times (And not once in the new book.) and usually he dies far too late for it to matter. The models being at my opponent's disposal are not an issue. The issue is that you cannot tailor your list in tournaments which I am thinking is what would be necessary to stop me besides just getting ridiculously lucky. Anyways summing up for the original question of this post: Saurus guard are insanely effective but only if you run the eternal starhost and only if your list is built to support it. If you are just slotting it into a generic seraphon list it won't be worth much.
Right, you hadn't mentioned the skinks, that does change it a bit as there's now actually some part of your army that can move. I was under the impression it was just Kroak and the guard. At which point it's easy enough to bring a tailormade counter.... At some point the opponent'l get to go first and will kill kroak in one go... Hell, at some point kroak will simply fail his spells. 15 overwhelming wins in a row seems, unlikely taken that into account. Anyways I'm curious what you're actually facing (and if your opponents are learning from their mistakes, maybe you're just facing new guys every time that don't know the army so they make the same mistakes as their predecessor) could you list some battlereports?
I'm definitely not facing new or bad players. I'm playing in ranked ITC games. I'm taking the advice of an earlier poster here and starting a blog on facebook to explain my journey and give tips and tricks and battle reports etc. The list I use is only like 5 drops so most armies won't go before me and when they will I deploy in a way to minimize damage taken and protect Kroak. If you can name a competitive list I've probably faced it in the previous handbook with only a few exceptions. I just took a tournament where the finals were me vs disciples of Tzeentch and everyone was certain he'd win. I tabled him and took the trophy though. http://imgur.com/a/QzvxC (I'm in the punisher gear) As I said my opponents cannot tailor their list to beat me because we're playing in tournaments. If they were tailoring their list against me I'd be tailoring mine against theirs and it would end up wonky as hell. In a tournament you have to bring something you can take on any enemy with. All comers lists should now have an asterisk next to them. All Comers List* *All comers does not include Seraphon.* My Blog thingy I'm starting: https://www.facebook.com/SpaceLizardsRidingSpaceLizards/
Here comes the condescending comments again, Dude tells everyone to not be a dick but finishes his replies with attitude ''Lol''s. You're the worst.
" Attitude lols" That's a new one. Couldn't possibly be that I was laughing at the potential of your face lighting up with glee when you realized you could use both abilities and crush your enemies. You're the one being a bit of a douchebag about it now. If you're going to be that way just go away? I'm just trying to help people here.
Im not gonna "go away", especially since i'm the one who started this thread. I'm just gonna ignore your comments and find real, valuable information from other members who don't act like you do! Good day to you!
Also you edited out the Lol at the end of your sentence? Why explain to me what it meant if you're just gonna edit it out anyway, you really are the worst haha.
If you roll max damage. If your targets are within range of celestial deliverance (30" on average, with astrolith bearer and vortex). If you go first (a thing that opponents will learn soon to try to avoid) But this is going out of tracks. Eternal Starhost got some mayor weaknesses: it's slow, it depends an a hero that can be sniped and suffers mortal wounds You are (correctly) saying that Eternal Starhost shouldn't be run alone, but must be supported by something that makes up for those weaknesses. And at that point, you use one of the strongest magic combo that exists in AoS. This tells me two things: - a starhost that NEEDS something else to work at its best, is not top tier, otherwise it would excel by itself. - Lord Kroak on steroids is what makes your army strong
If you say so. Wouldn't be caught dead running any other battalion. Nothing better in the entire army. Top tier units in the guard. Way above anything else people usually run at tournaments.
This is not entirely correct, or at least it depends heavily on what you expect a battalion to actually do. If you expect a battalion to be an effective army in itself, then yes, a battalion that requires help is not top tier. However, if you expect a battalion to be a part of a larger army this would be completly expected. No battalion should be a fully fledged army on its own and they should need external help. And if you look at our battalions this is true for all of them (excluding maybe the ones that contain other battalions like sotek fang). They all have glaring weaknesses if you don't take something to support them. Which makes sense as they're all very specialised battalions.
Cannot like this enough. Pretty much what I would say were I not on my phone. Except I would add that I REALLY hate our new battalions. ;P
Fair point. I expect a battalion to be the main bulk of an army and the rest should be of support. Plus, there are battalions (also in other armies) that can stand their own. But it's also true that some battalions are explicitly designed to cover just a support role (shadowstrike), and so we can assume that battalions are just "elite corps" and only in rare cases they are the main army. With that in mind, I tend to evaluate battalions / starhost, not only in terms of sheer power, but also in terms of utilities and versatility. Eternal Starhost is strong, but against mortal wounds needs heavy support. And as much as it's strong, it's just a costly block of grinding power. Shadowstrike is stronger, because even if its is just a mere support role, brings so much goodies to the table that it's pure gold. It's cheaper, it's fast, can snipe characters, can kill monsters, can take objective everywhere, it's not tied to a single kind of model and so on.
We have received a few reports from this thread, and this is a warning to keep the thread on topic and civil. When posting make certain you read over your post, and ensure it is civil and helpful. Thanks
I'd disagree with a single battalion being the main bulk. I'd expect to need 2 battalions with a possible 3th or at least some random loose troops to be the minimum for making an actually fully fledged army. The first battalion forming the core of the army providing the it's backbone of fighters, the second to provide support in the core's weak point or to abuse the core's strong point and the third/leftover troops for utility. As for the battalions that can stand on their own, those tend to either allow for massive leeway in troops (e.g. a weirdfist allows all normal ironjawz units and only forces the weirdknob to be there) or the troops they contain are stupendously versatile (e.g. stuff like kurgoth hunters that have range, melee defense and mortal wounds). Frankly our battalions are probably some of the best examples of actual battalions, as opposed to "small armies". As for the shadowstrike being "better" than a eternal starhost. Shadowstrike has better utility in it's hero, it has far greater mobility and is a tad more versatile due to its more varied troop composition and has the assasination thing going. However, it is far more easy to kill, doesn't have the ability to stay in a prolonged fight. Furthermore, a shadowstrike probably isn't going to win any battles on its own ever. They might assasinate some crucial enemies, but they're unlikely to survive the prolonged fight after their initial attack. And in this aspect they're just as much in need of help as the eternal starhost. I wouldn't field either starhost without supporting troops to make up for its weaknesses (or abuse the openings they create). This is without looking at cost though, pointcosts don't Always make equally much sense which makes it a tad difficult to really Judge it. For example an eternal starhost can singlehandedly defeat entire amies worth of stuff if there's no incoming mortal wounds, but a single weirdknob shaman having his foot of mork go off might wipe out the entire starhost... it's a bit iffy at times..
That's true, but imo it doesn't negate my points. Shadowstrike will never win by itself, but it brings to the table unique abilities that otherwise we don't have. Eternal is one of our strongest battalions in terms of combat prowess, and can win by itself, but it's just melee power. Shadowstrike is more versatile, and can help any kind of army in a decisive way. Eternal is not versatile at all, and needs help to avoid certain threats. I can avoid the term "strong", because it gives a different feeling than what I want. Heck, maybe it's even wrong to compare apples with oranges: those battalions cover so different roles that you do some injustice when you make a comparison. But imo it's easier to build a brute melee block, than to replicate the utilities of a Shadowstrike.