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.

So I have been playingAOS lately and have to say everything I build seems to be OP...

I tried several builds and so far I played

I played:
Clan skyre: Turtle tactic with hordes of clanrats, weapon teams etc behind them and a couple deepstriking to take out ranged threads. was nearly unbeatable except for abilities as Celestial prime's "meteor strike" or Bloodthirsters "Outrageous carnage" or which make short work of them
Slaves to Darkness: Used Mark of Slaanesh. A Ruinbringer warband with chariots and knights with glaves accompanied of Wulfrik the Wanderer with marauders. Sometimes added a Sorcerer on manticore. To fast for my opponents, turn 2 it is clear they are goint to loose
Khorne Daemons: My opponents never have an answer for more then one bloodthirster supported by skull canons.
Tzeentch Daemons mixed with Slaves for melee support: Lord of change and sorcerer on manticore just used its magic and blew the hell out of any real opposition, while the knights did the mopping up. Must say there was not an update on the Balewind vortex model at that moment so my lord of change could use it...
High Elves (legacy list): Loremaster+ Sea Helm bsb, seaguard + bolt throwers. Gets you 3+2+ with re rolls on the bolt throwers. and 4+2+ on the seaguards arrows. Good for 40-50 wounds a turn. Only weakness is turn one deepstriking forces which can be countered with 2 units of phoenix guards.

So far I annihilated:
Clan Moulder
Clan Skyre (was a tough cookie)
skaven
Free People
Stormcast Eternals
Vampire Counts
Tomb Kings
Exiles (dark elves)
Ogors
Duardin

These builds are all straight forward and fluffy in my eyes.. I just put units that buff unit x in their respective battletome/compedium/GA book together and choose models that look good together. no complicated combinations.

I want to have fun in this game. so I was wondering how the tiers are build in this game. Which are the higher tiers and which the lower tiers. So that I can tune down to lower tier armies and bring some less useful units and tune up against the higher tier armies.

How are you getting 2+ to wound on the seaguard?
Also the bolt thrower doesnt have the highborn keyword for the +1 to wound

Personally I'd go with an army based on synergy if you want to be able to control its power level.
Same with the formations too.

Clan skryre are relatively OK, run them in goutfire scorch and suddenly they are great.

Bonsplitterz are again a good solid army.
Run kunnin rukk and they suddenly reach new heights.



One army I'd avoid is beastclaw raiders though.
You cannot really adjust the power level of them and alot of units are just good without help.

aquietfrog wrote:
How are you getting 2+ to wound on the seaguard?
Also the bolt thrower doesnt have the highborn keyword for the +1 to wound

Ok I misread the boltthrower, it is not the crew that fires. but you can get them re-rolls one with the loremaster and the another with the command ability of the Sea helm.

The sea helm on foot has the following:

Sea Drake Pennant:
A Lothern Sea
Helm with a Sea Drake Pennant gains the
Totem keyword. You can add 1 to all wound rolls for Highborn units from your army if they are within 8" of a Sea Drake Pennant when they attack, and you can add 1 to all wound rolls for Lothern Sea Guard and Lothern Skycutters w it h i n 16".

So the Sea guard benefits from both as they are highborn and Sea Guard

Crewed War Machine: A Repeater Bolt thrower can only move if its Crew are within 1" at the start of the movement phase. If its Crew are within 1" of the Repeater Bolt Thrower in the shooting phase, they can fire the war machine. The Repeater Bolt Thrower cannot make charge moves, does not need to take battleshock tests and is unaffected by any attack or ability that uses Bravery. The Crew are in cover while they are within 1" of their war machine.

It's ambiguous but the warscroll states it is the crew that fires the bolt thrower making me think it benefits from the Highborn bonus.

I think the two different attitudes that you describe sum things up perfectly. You are building lists with the goal of winning, your opponents are building lists with the goal of being fluffy/flavorful. You are going to have an advantage unless basically no matter what you play.

It also doesn't help that a lot of the opponents you have played are using weaker armies. Tomb Kings are an exception, but they can be built weak. A good TK build though can give anything that you mentioned a good run though.

swarmofseals wrote:
I think the two different attitudes that you describe sum things up perfectly. You are building lists with the goal of winning, your opponents are building lists with the goal of being fluffy/flavorful. You are going to have a n advantage unless basically no matter what you play.

It also doesn't help that a lot of the opponents you have played are using weaker armies. Tomb Kings are an exception, but they can be built weak. A good TK build though can give anything that you mentioned a good run though.

Is this game basic synergy powerplay? Like model A says it boosts model b. Is combining both building to win?
Or is when a scroll says you get boost a if you bring 20 or 30 doing so building to win? To me that is just playing them as they are intended.

Consider that you may be more skilled than your opponents. It may be worth building a weaker list intentionally as a handicap so that you can go all-out in game without crushing people all the time.

 minisnatcher wrote:

aquietfrog wrote:
How are you getting 2+ to wound on the seaguard?
Also the bolt thrower doesnt have the highborn keyword for the +1 to wound

Ok I misread the boltthrower, it is not the crew that fires. but you can get them re-rolls one with the loremaster and the another with the command ability of the Sea helm.

The sea helm on foot has the following:

Sea Drake Pennant:
A Lothern Sea
Helm with a Sea Drake Pennant gains the
Totem keyword. You can add 1 to all wound rolls for Highborn units from your army if they are within 8" of a Sea Drake Pennant when they attack, and you can add 1 to all wound rolls for Lothern Sea Guard and Lothern Skycutters w it h i n 16".

So the Sea guard benefits from both as they are highborn and Sea Guard

Wow, I always just interpreted that as the seaguard as benefitting from an extended range. I might have to try that some time.

Anyway, apart from the high elves, I think you are bringing some pretty strong armies. I think you may just be playing a lot better than your opponents, or they don't really know what to bring to the table.

 minisnatcher wrote:


Is this game basic synergy powerplay? Like model A says it boosts model b. Is combining both building to win?
Or is when a scroll says you get boost a if you bring 20 or 30 doing so building to win? To me that is just playing them as they are intended.

It's more about your method of thinking when constructing your army list.


Examples of "play to win" thinking:

1. I'm going to field this unit because it's very efficient for it's point cost
2. I'm going to field these two units together because they are more powerful together
3. I'm going to avoid fielding this unit because there is another option with better stats for the cost
4. I'm going to buy this powerful unit so that I can use it

Examples of "fluffy" thinking:

1. I'm going to field this unit because I like the way it looks
2. I'm going to field this unit because I like the backstory, or because it fits into my army thematically
3. I'm going to field this unit because of narrative reasons
4. I'm going to field these units because they happen to be what I own


The theme here is that "play to win" design primarily considers how good something will be in gameplay, whereas "fluffy" design primarily considers factors external to actual gameplay.

Yes, fielding units together because they give each-other a bonus is a very basic form of powerplay. Note that I'm not saying that powerplay is bad! All I'm saying is that if you are building lists with battlefield effectiveness as your primary criteria and your opponents are not, then you are very likely to win the majority of your games. "Playing as intended" has nothing to do with playing to win or playing for fluff/narrative. The system very explicitly supports both ways of playing. Remember that even in the GHB, the AoS rules emphasize getting on the same page as your opponent before you play. Talking it out and getting a sense for how "hard" your opponent's list is and trying to come up with a fair game (unless you are playing in a tournament, where you can safely assume some degree of playing-to-win) is expected and "playing the game as intended". If you are stomping your opponents every time, you probably are falling short at this particular expectation.

Also want to chime in and say that I also interpreted the sea-guard thing as simply extending the range of the Sea-Helm's ability, not getting a double bonus.

swarmofseals wrote:

 minisnatcher wrote:


Is this game basic synergy powerplay? Like model A says it boosts model b. Is combining both building to win?
Or is when a scroll says you get boost a if you bring 20 or 30 doing so building to win? To me that is just playing them as they are intended.

It's more about your method of thinking when constructing your army list.


Examples of "play to win" thinking:

1. I'm going to field this unit because it's very efficient for it's point cost
2. I'm going to field these two units together because they are more powerful together
3. I'm going to avoid fielding this unit because there is another option with better stats for the cost
4. I'm going to buy this powerful unit so that I can use it

Examples of "fluffy" thinking:

1. I'm going to field this unit because I like the way it looks
2. I'm going to field this unit because I like the backstory, or because it fits into my army thematically
3. I'm going to field this unit because of narrative reasons
4. I'm going to field these units because they happen to be what I own


The theme here is that "play to win" design primarily considers how good something will be in gameplay, whereas "fluffy" design primarily considers factors external to actual gameplay.

Yes, fielding units together because they give each-other a bonus is a very basic form of powerplay. Note that I'm not saying that powerplay is bad! All I'm saying is that if you are building lists with battlefield effectiveness as your primary criteria and your opponents are not, then you are very likely to win the majority of your games. "Playing as intended" has nothing to do with playing to win or playing for fluff/narrative. The system very explicitly supports both ways of playing. Remember that even in the GHB, the AoS rules emphasize getting on the same page as your opponent before you play. Talking it out and getting a sense for how "hard" your opponent's list is and trying to come up with a fair game (unless you are playing in a tournament, where you can safely assume some degree of playing-to-win) is expected and "playing the game as intended". If you are stomping your opponents every time, you probably are falling short at this particular expectation.

Also want to chime in and say that I also interpreted the sea-guard thing as simply extending the range of the Sea-Helm's ability, not getting a double bonus.

Well for me going OP is looking for not straightforward components and comboing out... Stuff abusing Archaon' command ability (old version) in a skaven army (I consider that not fluffy) Or go looking for gamebreakers like playing 3 bloodthirsters and Skarbrand.


As for the Sea helm thing, you guys are the first I met to read it different, for me it is the reason that they did not make Sea Guard battle line and that that bsb became legacy.
Also note that they reformulated in the Swifthawk version for the Skywarden where it only gives 1 bonus and not get that double bonus.

The rule is clear. It says "and" not "or" and there is no "instead" on the back of the sentence, so it stacks.

Sea Drake Pennant:
A Lothern Sea
Helm with a Sea Drake Pennant gains the
Totem keyword. You can add 1 to all wound rolls for Highborn units from your army if they are within 8" of a Sea Drake Pennant when they attack, and you can add 1 to all wound rolls for Lothern Sea Guard and Lothern Skycutters w it h i n 16".