Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Amishprn86 wrote:



Right and i was making it simple to show a point, in AoS you dont string them out either, you make all types of shapes just like you would in 40k, U, T, L, V, O, Q, etc.. The difference is in AOS you only need 50 models to literally cut off 1/2 the table.. this is my main tactic when playing BoC as i don't have a lot of the tools to deal loads of damage like other armies. And by 1/2 i mean he literally can't place models outside of charging on my 1/2.

I am afraid you made an over-specific point that I found rather unpersuasive. I generally run 60-80 screening models when I run table control lists in 40K but in AoS I just find the points cost per model tends to be higher and that limits me to 50 or so models in that role. Given that a lot of my zoning is also against teleport - with a 9" zone around each model rather than 1" - I just find screening more productive in 40K. If you personally find it the other way round then that is fine but I stand by my comment - this subjective difference of opinon between us does not explain the massive difference in how important table control is between the LVO AoS and 40K tournaments. The missions go a lot further to explain why table control matters more in AoS - 80 screening models in the ITC 40K missions just gift my opponent easy kill/kill-more plus a trivially easy 4VP for a secondary - VP I will struggle to ever justify by getting Hold More a few times.

What are you using in BoC that is so much cheaper than skinks which are my AoS screening unit?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
And AOS is more balanced around summoning, my CoS army that doesn't summon that i use for events doesn't care if you summon 1500pts turn 1, as you also spent something like 1200pts to do that, so you really only gained a couple hundred points. Then turn 1 all your heroes are dead, so by by casters.

Thats the difference in AoS to 40k what seem OP isnt, look at OBR EVERYONE thought they was going to be top dog and they did really bad to what people was expecting in all 3 events this past weekend, b.c movement and board control is just as important to raw numbers and stats. OBR didn't have board control.

Well the list I was mentioning has six gaunt summoners and brings in a lord of change turn one, and is summoning in six units of pink horrors that cast, and has minimum battleline that casts, and it isn't particularly optimized either. Oh and all those things shoot.

Also to be fair to the community it was only the less experienced who were saying OBR would dominate. Give credit to the tourney crowd who predicted (correctly) that Petrifax have trouble sealing a tourney win because they are likely to hit another tier-1 army at some point that will dismantle them.

I know the list you are talking about the gaunt summoner is 240pts summoning 200pts, you take 5 of them thats 1200pts to summon 1000pts, but at that point you are now 5 casters, without the summoning are value at 100pts, so you really only net 500pts, hence why i said a couple hundred points. Most high level summoning armies can easily do 500+ points. And those armies are more balanced with that in mind.

Yes then you can cast to summon, (if you casted 10 spells which would be average) you'll only get 1 more 80/100pt unit. And as soon as a couple of those gaunt summoner dies (only 5 wounds) thats it, you are spent.

Heck seraphon summons like 300pts a turn if you cant kill the Slaans, by buddy that i beat almost everytime normally summoning 2k points.

The game is built around summoning so it isn't all that big of a problem, yes DoT is strong right now, but thats mostly b.c of Flamers and Horrors together, and flamers are going to take a hit, Horrors might take a small hit too (Thinking you cant add more Pinks back in once they are gone).

Is it true for all armies, or is it just armies that have summoning themselfs that are balanced vs other summoning armies?

A number of non-summoning armies have done quite well for themselves. The outlier on OP was Slaanesh but they had many issues that didn't even need summoning to be a problem.

You'll generally see many other armies up in the top slots amongst summoners.

Many non summoning armies wins 1st place at GT's too and when they don't their still winning 5 games for the event.

FS, DoK, IDK, Skaven can all place in top 3.

The only reason why DoT is placing so well is not from Summoning, but a crazy damage combo of 6-9 man units that are dealing 80+ damage in 1 turn, which will be nerf really soon. GW over looked all the bonuses + teleport it seems.

EDIT: Also some summoning armies are doing bad, and then some armies with summoning (yes it is 2 different things) are also doing bad, Both Goblins and BoC are doing really bad and both can has minor summoning. Seraphon are hard to play even tho they can summon a crap ton and often dont win (tho they can, just depends on match ups and missions) vs anything with shooting they are instant lose.

Then you have 1 army that can summon but chooses not to, Khorne, b.c if they don't summon they can move or melee twice, and they are one of the top armies as well and they don't summon when they can lol.

Ordana wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Which is interesting since ITC was developed out of some perceived bad parts in GW's line up.

Of course, what is considered bad is not always universally recognized...

ITC comes from a time when GW withdrew from the tournament scene and the basis for the game was universally seen as bad. I'd argue we are in a different time now and the custom missions are no longer needed.

And the same group has apparently not seen anything to change their minds that there is something bad that needs to be changed.

Again, what is considered bad is not always universally recognized. What you think is bad may not be what they think is bad, and vice versa.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
And AOS is more balanced around summoning, my CoS army that doesn't summon that i use for events doesn't care if you summon 1500pts turn 1, as you also spent something like 1200pts to do that, so you really only gained a couple hundred points. Then turn 1 all your heroes are dead, so by by casters.

Thats the difference in AoS to 40k what seem OP isnt, look at OBR EVERYONE thought they was going to be top dog and they did really bad to what people was expecting in all 3 events this past weekend, b.c movement and board control is just as important to raw numbers and stats. OBR didn't have board control.

Well the list I was mentioning has six gaunt summoners and brings in a lord of change turn one, and is summoning in six units of pink horrors that cast, and has minimum battleline that casts, and it isn't particularly optimized either. Oh and all those things shoot.

Also to be fair to the community it was only the less experienced who were saying OBR would dominate. Give credit to the tourney crowd who predicted (correctly) that Petrifax have trouble sealing a tourney win because they are likely to hit another tier-1 army at some point that will dismantle them.

I know the list you are talking about the gaunt summoner is 240pts summoning 200pts, you take 5 of them thats 1200pts to summon 1000pts, but at that point you are now 5 casters, without the summoning are value at 100pts, so you really only net 500pts, hence why i said a couple hundred points. Most high level summoning armies can easily do 500+ points. And those armies are more balanced with that in mind.

Yes then you can cast to summon, (if you casted 10 spells which would be average) you'll only get 1 more 80/100pt unit. And as soon as a couple of those gaunt summoner dies (only 5 wounds) thats it, you are spent.

Heck seraphon summons like 300pts a turn if you cant kill the Slaans, by buddy that i beat almost everytime normally summoning 2k points.

The game is built around summoning so it isn't all that big of a problem, yes DoT is strong right now, but thats mostly b.c of Flamers and Horrors together, and flamers are going to take a hit, Horrors might take a small hit too (Thinking you cant add more Pinks back in once they are gone).

Well no, that is not the list. The list I was referencing is much more powerful but it wasn't a particularly serious reference either. This isn't really the place for an in-depth discussion anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
Is it true for all armies, or is it just armies that have summoning themselfs that are balanced vs other summoning armies?

While it varies (a lot) by army, summoning armies out-perform non-summoning on average.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

happy_inquisitor wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:



Right and i was making it simple to show a point, in AoS you dont string them out either, you make all types of shapes just like you would in 40k, U, T, L, V, O, Q, etc.. The difference is in AOS you only need 50 models to literally cut off 1/2 the table.. this is my main tactic when playing BoC as i don't have a lot of the tools to deal loads of damage like other armies. And by 1/2 i mean he literally can't place models outside of charging on my 1/2.

I am afraid you made an over-specific point that I found rather unpersuasive. I generally run 60-80 screening models when I run table control lists in 40K but in AoS I just find the points cost per model tends to be higher and that limits me to 50 or so models in that role. Given that a lot of my zoning is also against teleport - with a 9" zone around each model rather than 1" - I just find screening more productive in 40K. If you personally find it the other way round then that is fine but I stand by my comment - this subjective difference of opinon between us does not explain the massive difference in how important table control is between the LVO AoS and 40K tournaments. The missions go a lot further to explain why table control matters more in AoS - 80 screening models in the ITC 40K missions just gift my opponent easy kill/kill-more plus a trivially easy 4VP for a secondary - VP I will struggle to ever justify by getting Hold More a few times.

What are you using in BoC that is so much cheaper than skinks which are my AoS screening unit?

40k absolutely has more screening than AoS. Even without teleports/deep strikes in mind units can screen for characters in 40k and doing so is an important game element largely missing in AoS (for those who don't know: characters are at a penalty to hit for being within 3" a friendly unit of 3+ models regardless of positioning). 2" unit coherency also means fewer models can screen a much larger area so there is much more coverage per point relatively speaking.

That's more due to AoS having significantly less shooting though, so does that count.

Well at least the tournament wasn't dominated by Ork buggies and Emperor's Children Noise Marines, right?

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Well at least the tournament wasn't dominated by Ork buggies and Emperor's Children Noise Marines, right?

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Well at least the tournament wasn't dominated by Ork buggies and Emperor's Children Noise Marines, right?

Hey, Ork Buggies aren't good.

Well the Squig Buggy is broken but luckily we have Rule of Three in place to stop such abuses.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Well at least the tournament wasn't dominated by Ork buggies and Emperor's Children Noise Marines, right?

I would prefer seeing that myself, but personal preference I suppose

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Well at least the tournament wasn't dominated by Ork buggies and Emperor's Children Noise Marines, right?

I would prefer seeing that myself, but personal preference I suppose

The buggies are coming, the buggies are coming !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!