AoS Questions on List Building

[Tlac'Natai the Observer]

Hello, a question for the strategists out there!

Regarding the list building stage of pre battle, if you know you won't be able to take everything you want/need, what criteria do you try to fill for any given army? Whether it's an all-comers type list, or if you know your opponent, where do you start?

I'm wondering if I should be paying more attention to my synergies, or countering an opponent. Do I bring a Bastiladon because I need more defense in my own army? or do I get salamanders because my enemy has some heavy troops. You see how I'm making the decision based off of my list or theirs? Which is the right way to go about this?

Also, if there are some specific criteria to fill most of the time, what would those things be? Do offensive lists need a heavy hitter and a hero hunter to work? do defensive lists need ranged and mystic shield to work properly? (I don't know, I'm making up examples of what I think the answers might be (but of course, if they are more complicated decisions than this, then I really need help!))

I realize this is a really nooby question, but I understand synergies and all that, I'm really just concerned with where I place my priorities when my options are limited.

Thanks

 

[pendrake]

Are you playing AoS by the published rules? Or by one of the fan-published balancing schemes?

 

[Tlac'Natai the Observer]

Oh, ya, rules as written with wounds as balancing.

 

[Crowsfoot]

I always go for Synergies and as I only play Archie I know what he will be bringing so I tend to go defensive and build around 15 Guard and my warden where as Archie will just bring who he likes and he usually wins!

 

[pendrake]

Oh, ya, rules as written with wounds as balancing.

Given that: Avoid one wound models that only hit on 6+. Include numerous one wound models that hit on 3+ or 4+, etc. That assumes your goal is: win.

The raw number of wounds is not balancing. Alternatively, demonstrate that by bringing 50 one wound models that all need 6 to hit.

 

[dwarfepic]

If I were you I would go for a balanced list. If your list is well rounded enough then you shouldn't have to worry. Just take a little of everything. If there is heavy units, then sallies will help, and if you want to counter your opponents offensive build then maybe a bastilidon is in order. Just make yourself a core of something then adapt your army around it. For and offensive build you will want knights, defensive guard, and warriors and skinks are in between. Then put in some defensive/offensive units to for fill the different roles and aspects of an army. Heavy hitters, immovable defenders, versatile support units, assassins, fast movers to gain board control. Also do not forget synergies in your army. This will transform your army into one of the most versatile, game winning armies that age of sigmar has to offer. Most other races use them, we use them. With the few exceptions of stormcast eternals, who have a few synergies and already high base stats, and some styles of bloodbound and on one occasion I experienced, nurgle, with good saves and high wounds to begin with (there are other armies like this, but I'm not going to mention them). One army I have seen that needs, much like us, support commanders to work, is the fyreslayers. with low base saves, they rely on support commanders giving them rerolls, and bonuses to save rolls and the like. So, yhea, make your army well rounded and versatile with something to fill in all roles and you should be fine!

 

[Killer Angel]

The raw number of wounds is not balancing. Alternatively, demonstrate that by bringing 50 one wound models that all need 6 to hit.

To be fair, if you're deliberately fielding models with poor performances and no synergies, I could do the same with any WHFB edition and "demonstrate" that point buy systems are unbalanced.

 

[pendrake]

To be fair, if you're deliberately fielding models with poor performances and no synergies, I could do the same with any WHFB edition and "demonstrate" that point buy systems are unbalanced.

Perhaps that is why GeeDub just threw up their hands and gave it a miss—didn't provide one.

 

[dwarfepic]

problem with wounds is one temple guard is better than one saurus warrior, but for the same amount of wounds! other armies have this! bestigors over gors, grave guard over skeletons, greatswords over state troops... wounds just will never make people want to take the lesser of the two units...

 

[n810]

Kinda wish they used the 6th edition system,
choices where by slot (core, lord, hero, special, rare).
with min (core) and max (everything else).
and maybe have a wound count on top of that per slot.

 

[Killer Angel]

problem with wounds is one temple guard is better than one saurus warrior, but for the same amount of wounds! other armies have this! bestigors over gors, grave guard over skeletons, greatswords over state troops... wounds just will never make people want to take the lesser of the two units...

This reasoning doesn't always work... units cover different roles. A temple guard is 1 wound, and so is a chamaleon skink.
The problem exists only for units with the same role and the same keywords, and even that you'll have anyway something that can make the weaker unit a worthy choice, under the right premises (a horde of saurus warriors works better than a horde of temple guards)