AoS NEW *rumor*

rupture, its considerably more reliable and doesnt involve throwing points away. You really don't have a bunch left after that, as you said. so its basically just min battleline.

Kroak
slann
astro
starseer x2 (to fill necessary battalions)
skinksx2
guard
incarnate
maelstrom
gravetide

warlord + acolyte battalion.

Think ultimately it just comes down to the summoning in starborne being pretty broken. It lets you get away with these ultra elite armies while still have decent board control just because of the summoning. It desperately needs a fix, the starborne side of the book is really quite problematic from a balance/playstyle perspective.

 

I know it's "pilot error," but I've lost practically EVERY time I've played Starborne. My friend is a very good player, that's part of it. I just don't seem to have the bodies most of the time, and the summons are just a speed bump to either his Soulblight or Skaven armies. My magic phases tend to be "good, not great" as he manages to dispel a moderate amount.

I guess I'm saying for those of us AoS idiots out there, even a "broken" list isn't a guaranteed success.

 

There is also just playing a list that complements your play style. Starborne is not for everyone, especially if you like to play tanky coalesced lists. Going from a list of suarus with 3+ save and minus -damage to a list of skinks with a 5+ save an no bravery is a completely different play style and might just not suit you.

 

My dabbling into starborne has always been a mixed bag of glorious godlike victories and utterly humiliating defeats. I eventually settled into coalesced because of my awesome rolling capabilities and it seems to have a more stable damage output for me . When your opponent starts cheering for you, you really know how awesome your rolls are!! "You got this dude no way your rolling ones again" me "Snake eyes miscast awesome" Roflmao As much as i love the flash bangs of magic i have no magical consistency and limited redundancies available.

 

My experience with starborne has pretty much been I win to the point where it isn't fun for my opponent or I get completely destroyed the best game I had was when I left kroak behind and brought aggrodons and 20x warriors it was one of the closest games I've ever had.

 

so what im gathering is that running starborne is superior.

well shit, there goes my colorscheme plans.

 

I think i said the same thing back in July, but I don't think Coalesced is weak as much as Starborne just has a lot more synergy between your units and is compounded by the current season being magic focused. You can definitely win with koatl's claw blocks of saurus (and honestly probably also win with monster mash thunder lizards, if you're playing them as koatl's claw with a strategic amount of extra monsters to make use of the extra rampages) but there's just so much flexibility in starborne and everything slots together so well that it's easier to go in with a decent understanding of your purpose in the game (just keep casting spells until there's nothing left to cast them on) and win with that magical board control. Skinks are just very good units, they work together well, and starborne works with them on top of that to make stuff keep rolling.

Then if you hit a roadblock skinks or spells can't climb over, you're kind of screwed and you just lose

 

I primarily play coalesced and I definitely prefer it I don't think that starborne is wildly more powerful I read a woehammer from a week or 2 before the new season that did a subfaction winrate break down and fangs of sotek had 53% and koatls had 45% but there was a lot more representation for fangs of sotek because of meta chasers. I've thought of running kroak in coalesced for the casting power.with the new season but I think him and some defense for him is pretty expensive for the other stuff I like to bring.

 

why?

 

dont you have to paint with the starborne scheme to field it?

i actually have no idea, im new to all this

 

I don’t think starborne has a set scheme other than the cool studio example with the black and blue, but AoS doesn’t restrict your subfaction choices based on paint scheme at all

 

Wasn't that only if you use the colours of an official faction so as not to confuse an opponent?
I thought that as long as you avoid the whole "yes I know they look like Ultramarines, but really they're salamanders" you could use whatever subfaction you wanted by just claiming it's your own custom chapter/forge world/whatever.

 

That held true in 9th ed, but 10th ed is a different beast altogether.

GW functionally gutted the very idea of subfactions in 10th to merely be a special character/unit restriction aide. Beyond that, appearances don't matter beyond WYSIWYG and play-style is instead determined by what detachment you choose for your army. Insofar as I can tell, this is basically GW saying, "Go ahead and play your Salamanders as if they were Raven Guard."

 

Ah, could be, the switch to 10th is fairly recent I guess. Just remember a white dwarf article where they expressed frustration at people playing with "confusing" paint schemes (so you know, the well known ones)

 

Hey if GW wants me to play my ultramarines as actual ultramarines make them better.

 

I'd just say reject 10th Ed and embrace Horus Heresy. LOL