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.
Ok. One or two woods on an entire table are not that big a deal. Are you assuming that tables are like jungles covered in woods?
Our GW store has three wooded terrain pieces for three tables. In total.
You aren't blocking line of sight in any meaningful way. Unless its ok that heroes need to hide behind that piece of wooded terrain all day and do nothing else.
You're talking on a 6x4 table, 3456 square inches of table, a citadel wood covers about 90 square inches of that you'll have line of sight obscurement.
If I have all three of those woods on my one table at the GW store that's roughly 270 square inches of guaranteed obscurement out of a 3456 square inch table.
Pick any table on the internet right now off a google search. There's literally nothing where a hero is going to escape being picked off by the enemy in one or two turns if the enemy is predominantly a missile armed force.
You're acting like the entire table is going to be covered in woods. Maybe against sylvaneth, but thats only because they can summon woods specifically onto the table.
And just tonight my nurgle force lost 2 of its 4 heroes by turn 2 to... shooting lol. With woods and with look out sir -1 to hit. So no... still not seeing it as that big a deal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 00:35:28
auticus wrote: Ok. One or two woods on an entire table are not that big a deal. Are you assuming that tables are like jungles covered in woods?
By this same vein, "one or two pieces" of fortifications in 40k "are not that big a deal" yet Commissars, Conscripts, and Infantry Squads all got hit with a ton of bricks because of it.
Our GW store has three wooded terrain pieces for three tables. In total.
Then talk to your manager about getting more?
You aren't blocking line of sight in any meaningful way. Unless its ok that heroes need to hide behind that piece of wooded terrain all day and do nothing else.
You're literally blocking line of sight as long as any LOS hits 1" or more of the Citadel Woods.
You're talking on a 6x4 table, 3456 square inches of table, a citadel wood covers about 90 square inches of that you'll have line of sight obscurement.
If I have all three of those woods on my one table at the GW store that's roughly 270 square inches of guaranteed obscurement out of a 3456 square inch table.
Pick any table on the internet right now off a google search. There's literally nothing where a hero is going to escape being picked off by the enemy in one or two turns if the enemy is predominantly a missile armed force.
You're acting like the entire table is going to be covered in woods. Maybe against sylvaneth, but thats only because they can summon woods specifically onto the table.
And you're acting like the entire table is going to be as bare as the guests at a nudist resort.
And just tonight my nurgle force lost 2 of its 4 heroes by turn 2 to... shooting lol. With woods and with look out sir -1 to hit. So no... still not seeing it as that big a deal.
You keep making these statements but you never produce lists or unit names.
Probably because I know that without a full written battle report with entire diagrams of the table on a turn by turn basis, talking about it here with you will not be very productive at all.
I will list what I fought, you will come back with a variant of git gud, and we'll go in circles. We'll just say when you combine several stormcast bolt throwers with stormcast bows and stormcast heroes with sniper bows, that they will hit what they want to hit and kill what they want to kill if its a standard infantry hero unless said hero wants to hide in a forest... which removes a melee hero from the game and is for all intents and purposes the same as killing him.
I've never once also said we play on barren tables. I've said with true line of sight there is really no way to block line of sight completely and thus shooting units can mostly shoot what they want with impunity.
The tables we play on aren't barren. They are always at the very least tournament standard tables because thats what the tournament guys demand. They average a solid 6-8 pieces. You aren't hiding on most of a standard table. There will be some pockets you can hide on but melee heroes are trying to move and get into contact, so if you can force them to hide the entire game so they don't get shot, you've done the same as killing them.
The attached image would be fairly common except that table has a lot of forests, so sub out a couple forests with things like the chaos hill or fence lines from the necropolis kit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 01:16:33
auticus wrote: Probably because I know that without a full written battle report with entire diagrams of the table on a turn by turn basis, talking about it here with you will not be very productive at all.
I will list what I fought, you will come back with a variant of git gud, and we'll go in circles.
Telling you to "use more terrain" or "keep people in cover" isn't really "git gud" but okay sure.
We'll just say when you combine several stormcast bolt throwers with stormcast bows and stormcast heroes with sniper bows, that they will hit what they want to hit and kill what they want to kill if its a standard infantry hero unless said hero wants to hide in a forest... which removes a melee hero from the game and is for all intents and purposes the same as killing him.
This is literally all you've had to say, minus the snark. When I've asked "what are you defining as a gunline", I want to know what armies you're defining as such. I want to know what units you're defining as part of this. In the past, you've only mentioned Skyfires--which are well acknowledged at this point as being OP as hell.
I'm going to point out right now that Knight-Venators("Stormcast Heroes with Sniper Bows") have the 'Fly' keyword which means they ignore the no LOS part anyways. Their Star-Fated Arrow(once per battle use, drops you from 3 attacks to 1 and causing D3+3 or D6+3 vs a Hero or Monster) ability is certainly impressive, but it falls under the category of a "once per game" thing--just like Arcane Bodkins for Glade Guard. The normal profile is 3 attacks 2+/3+ with -1 Rend and 1 damage. In both cases, it's not Mortal Wounds meaning you can save against them.
Judicators are a 3+/3+ -1 Rend 1D with the special bow having a rule of their hit turning into a D6 result's worth of wounds. Since you said you were playing Nurgle, that means "Eternal Judgement" was in effect meaning the Judicators could reroll failed Hit rolls of 1.
The Celestar Ballista has "Chained Lightning" meaning that you get a successful hit, it becomes D6 hits instead of 1.
I get that ranged isn't great for Nurgle but it's not like Nurgle is hurting for protection from ranged even without LOS blocking. You even have a Command Ability on a melee hero(who gives nearby units a ranged attack to boot!) that grants a -1 to be hit by shooting attacks.
We use standard terrain. Using more terrain makes grown men throw hissy fits because its not standard. Its d3-1 pieces per 2x2 tile. Thats going to generate anywhere between 0 and 12 pieces.
Its average is 6-8 pieces. Big name tournaments, what is used as the standard in my region, is about 5-6 pieces, so we're already playing slightly more than the big name tournaments give you.
I've defined gunline several places. Its an army where over half of the models have ranged attack profiles. When you combine two or three bolt throwers with 20 lightning bow shots with a sniper bow once a game it easily removes infantry heroes. Thats stormcast.
We also have bretonnian players using a bunch of peasant archers and their quad fire once a game. That also erases heroes.
We also have skaven players popping up and doing a ton of ranged mortal wounds and ranged attacks with all of their contraptions and gadgets and stormfiends.
We also have a couple tzeentch players loaded down with skyfires.
We also have a sylvaneth player with about 12 hunters and then the various other ranged abilities that they have thrown in miscellenia.
Then there are the seraphon players with their dino war machines and salamanders and blowpipes.
We also have a kunnin rukk hold out because kunnin rukk is still very good against casual lists.
So in summary... facing all of the above, with the new rules, heroes are still dropping pretty reliably even with woods blocking line of sight and heroes now getting a -1 to be hit if near friendly troops.
We use standard terrain, and often it has to be GW terrain if we're playing at the GW store, which sucks for blocking line of sight, which takes us further back to the real culprit being... true line of sight being a garbage rule.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 01:59:15
What's the point in contention here? If shooting armies suck now?
In regards to sniping, I like the change. I feel like I can snipe heroes if I really need to (important for gameplay given how strong some support buffs are) but it's actually a choice now where as before a good 80% of the time the best option was to snipe the hero. Now I don't think the sniping situation was -that- bad, but I understand the extra tactical effort/list redundancy was something people didn't want to deal with and it did limit options in what heroes were viable and more so in what artifacts were viable (offensive artifacts for example usually weren't worth a dam because the hero would just die).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 04:25:27
The attached image would be fairly common except that table has a lot of forests, so sub out a couple forests with things like the chaos hill or fence lines from the necropolis kit.
Hopefully AOS isn't even half as terrain dependant as 40k. On 40k that would be super barren board. Even if those forest pieces would block LOS.
I have a quick question that doesn't deserve its own thread so this seems like the place to ask it.
I thought I remembered them saying something about us being able to theme our armies around coming from one of the realms, and that would give us access to certain things (notably artifacts). I looked in the Core Book and found descriptions of the realms and rules for battling in the various realms, bid didn't see anything about lists of artifacts from the different realms. I also skimmed through the GHB 2018 and didn't find it.
Did I just miss it, or did I imagine that whole thing about artifacts?
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I have a quick question that doesn't deserve its own thread so this seems like the place to ask it.
I thought I remembered them saying something about us being able to theme our armies around coming from one of the realms, and that would give us access to certain things (notably artifacts). I looked in the Core Book and found descriptions of the realms and rules for battling in the various realms, bid didn't see anything about lists of artifacts from the different realms. I also skimmed through the GHB 2018 and didn't find it.
Did I just miss it, or did I imagine that whole thing about artifacts?
It's about artefacts and the Realm artefacts are in the Malign Sorcery book. You can use them when saying your army hails from a certain realm.
Are you using woods with fixed trees that block sight/movement, or are you using them with the trees able to be taken off to allow models to move thru and/or stand where they were?
Even keeping the trees on the base, the citadel wood hardly blocks any line of sight to anything. Any of my heroes behind a tree can be seen and shot at because an arm or a horn or a foot can still be seen. Obviously a unit behind or in the citadel woods doesn't matter if the trees are there or not, you'll always be able to draw line of sight to someone in the unit (unless you say the woods block line of sight, which they now did).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 11:37:56
auticus wrote: The concept of reserve points are gone. They don't exist anymore.
So these spells work free of charge then? That's pretty good value!
No, all those spells are now gone. There is no "Summon Pink Horrors" spell anymore, for example. The GHB includes the errata that removes all those.
I wasn't talking about the summoning spells but rather spells like the Ogroid's Fireblast which creates a brim for every model slain or the Magister's Bolt of Change turning slain creatures into chaos spawns. Are those free now? It used to be they cost reserve points.
Any changes to those rules can be found in the appropriate FAQs and Designer's Commentaries.
Those rules were never listed on the warscrolls but in the reserves chapters of the 2017 general's handbook. I didn't find anything about what became of them in the commentary nor the FAQ thus why I posted here Thanks tho
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: I have a quick question that doesn't deserve its own thread so this seems like the place to ask it.
I thought I remembered them saying something about us being able to theme our armies around coming from one of the realms, and that would give us access to certain things (notably artifacts). I looked in the Core Book and found descriptions of the realms and rules for battling in the various realms, bid didn't see anything about lists of artifacts from the different realms. I also skimmed through the GHB 2018 and didn't find it.
Did I just miss it, or did I imagine that whole thing about artifacts?
It's about artefacts and the Realm artefacts are in the Malign Sorcery book. You can use them when saying your army hails from a certain realm.
Thanks! My copy of Malign Sorcery hasn't come in yet so that explains why I haven't been able to find it.
auticus wrote:Pick any table on the internet right now off a google search. There's literally nothing where a hero is going to escape being picked off by the enemy in one or two turns if the enemy is predominantly a missile armed force.
You're acting like the entire table is going to be covered in woods. Maybe against sylvaneth, but thats only because they can summon woods specifically onto the table.
And just tonight my nurgle force lost 2 of its 4 heroes by turn 2 to... shooting lol. With woods and with look out sir -1 to hit. So no... still not seeing it as that big a deal.
Just anecdotes from my game on Saturday vs Sylvaneth:
- Treelord got 2 triple tree bases down, combined with the normal wood on the table for 1890 square inches of woods - I actually asked him, didn't woods block LOS somehow now? He said no, just all the Sylvaneth buffs against non-heroes and non-monsters, plus cover (which I never remembered!) - His 3 kurnoth hunters mowed down a unit of pink horrors a turn, shooting from a wood through a second wood - Very late game, with just a herald and ~5 horrors left, I scuttled my herald away from his unit and behind a tower so he couldn't be shot, as I didn't trust -1 to hit. Sylvaneth dude laughed, teleported the hunters to a wood that did have LOS ... and then rolled a huge handful of 1's, leaving the herald alive
Personally very happy to have some abstraction added to woods, giving them a purpose beyond cover. Terrain that matters in AOS 1.0 seemed to be large LOS blockers, flat-ish things big enough to give units cover, special scenery like realm gates, or anchors for nonsense magical effects (i.e. mystical or GTFO). Happy to see the random nonsense get toned down in both effect and radius, and woods added to the list of terrain that does something tactical.
- Salvage
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 14:04:55
I agree. One of the things that I really did not like in 1.0 was the lack of tactical depth, and the terrain not really mattering was a big contributor to that.
Terrain has come up a notch. While its not where I'd like it to be, its a compromise and something that needs managed on the table now a lot more than the last three years required.
He probably didn’t know the woods block LoS now since that’s new. I only know because I was told. I still haven’t seen where it’s actually in the rules yet as I work my way thru the Sylvaneth, Core, General’s, Sorcery, and various FAQs and Designers Commentaries that I picked up over the weekend.
AduroT wrote: He probably didn’t know the woods block LoS now since that’s new. I only know because I was told. I still haven’t seen where it’s actually in the rules yet as I work my way thru the Sylvaneth, Core, General’s, Sorcery, and various FAQs and Designers Commentaries that I picked up over the weekend.
Guh, the rules you actually care about really are so scattered across all these books
FWIW I don't think he was screwing me, clearly neither of us had read the new rulebook we both had sitting next to us in shrink wrap
- Salvage
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/07/03 14:17:55
The rules for Citadel Woods are in the GHB. I don't know why they wouldn't put the terrain warscrolls in the core rules but... thats what they did.
So GHB 2018 has a few of the terrain warscrolls altered. One is the citadel woods, which state you can't see more than an inch through (which interesting enough, when I asked if there were terrain warscrolls added for things like woods, I was told no by the guys that had the books early... so they either were lying to troll or hadn't read all of the books yet and acted like they had... which is why I hate when people get the books two or three weeks before everyone else because we can't share in the context of the conversations while they are doing podcasts and you tube videos about it)
There are a LOT of terrain warscrolls not in any of the books though that used to have rules... so I have kept my old books for those for right now. I anticipate that GW has a 2.0 terrain book in the works just like they did with the Dominions of Chaos and Chaos Strongholds books for 1.0.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 14:24:00
The attached image would be fairly common except that table has a lot of forests, so sub out a couple forests with things like the chaos hill or fence lines from the necropolis kit.
Hopefully AOS isn't even half as terrain dependant as 40k. On 40k that would be super barren board. Even if those forest pieces would block LOS.
I believe many AoS tables suffer the hanghover from fantasy where terrain was squarce. But at the same time I have seen 40k tables like that pic from auticus.
Lucky for us, most stores and big tournaments here use minimun double the terrain from that pic. Just two weeks ago in the biggest tournament of Galicia for 40k i was able to hide behind terrain 3 predators from 3 baneblades in turn 1.
The same for AOS. Even with how simple terrain rules are for aos and 40k, having enough terrain and los blocking one makes the game much more tactical.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
I'm not convinced the cover aspect of the citadel woods is meant to carry over to Wyldwoods. Our local player base (including the GW employees) argue the wyldwoods are made of citadel woods models but aren't citadel woods themselves, and while I don't think that holds water, from a gameplay perspective it buffs Sylvaneth extremely.
Speaking as a rangeless Sylvaneth player one of my favourite tactics is to put down a forest between an objective and the opponent forces (or in a choke-point or something) and warp in a blob of dryads or three-piece kurnoth hunters unit and goad them into trying to charge through the woods.
It helped bring out the advantages for the dryads (which are peppered throughout the book and need to be remembered) and blunted enemy charges already (often out of fear of what the woods could do over the actual damage) and having the woods also block LoS is a very big bump in that strategy'effectiveness.
For the record, I only have three woods models and usually I find that's enough with the amount of terrain they put down here. (Though for a good while it was that stupid chaos plant stuff that seemed to only exist to keep me from placing woods.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/03 14:43:35
Sylvaneth wildwoods are themselves Citadel Woods. They are an "is a" relationship. It specifically states that a sylvaneth wildwood ARE 1-3 citadel woods.
From an english language perspective, they ARE citadel woods, and thus would gain the rules of citadel woods on top of their own specialized rules.
It certainly buffs sylvaneth extremely. My g/f plays Sylvaneth and we have five woods she can lay down. The downside is that her ranged units lose line of sight when she employs this tactic, but she gains in other areas.
But at the same time I have seen 40k tables like that pic from auticus
It is a multi faceted issue.
Shooty players will scream bloody murder if you have too much terrain on the table (and too much is subjective to the player). Melee players will scream bloody murder if you're playing on planet bowling ball. Whats the middle ground? Whats the compromise? You need some kind of mechanism in place that is seen as fair. Most players I've known gauge what is found at large tournaments as what should be "fair". Adepticon was full of those sparse tables as well, and thats the expectation.
We use the terrain chart that was in the 1.0 rules to generate number of terrain items on the table.
Now I have held specialized campaigns in places like Lustria that was all jungle. Let me tell you, a solid handful of tournament whfb players pitched a massive fit complaining that the campaign "screwed them over"(we had planned Lustria a year in advance and made a lot of aztec style jungles and pyramiids but when it came down to putting it on the table, the shooty whfb tournament players lost their ****, apparently to them a jungle table meant mostly a flat featureless table with a few jungle stands put in the sides of the table and a river or something but free access to shoot whatever they want like in a tournament).
It causes a lot of headaches for me as an event organizer to deviate from tournament standard. Even if I'm doing a campaign and not a tournament. Terrain has always always always been one of those hot topics that can cause grown men to have a melt down in the store.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/07/03 15:02:54
auticus wrote: Sylvaneth wildwoods are themselves Citadel Woods. They are an "is a" relationship. It specifically states that a sylvaneth wildwood ARE 1-3 citadel woods.
Which is why I say the 'it's only a model' argument doesn't hold water.
Either way, play it the way your meta allows and wait for clarification from GW one way or the other. I would not recommend buying into the army with that strat in mind, as its future is uncertain.
In principle the trees exist and block movement, though you can place models on their roots and such. People leave them unglued so you can remove them so their branches don't snag on your fingers or knock over tall models, but in those cases the holes for the trees remain impassable.
This is how it's supposed to be, but most people play it as abstract and removable.
One time playing against flesh eater courts we realized sufficiently large bases were effectively locked out of wyldwoods. Then we realized this particular model could fly and so the zombie dragon landed on top of the trees.
We then invoked WMS and removed one of the trees instead.
auticus wrote: Probably because I know that without a full written battle report with entire diagrams of the table on a turn by turn basis, talking about it here with you will not be very productive at all.
I will list what I fought, you will come back with a variant of git gud, and we'll go in circles. We'll just say when you combine several stormcast bolt throwers with stormcast bows and stormcast heroes with sniper bows, that they will hit what they want to hit and kill what they want to kill if its a standard infantry hero unless said hero wants to hide in a forest... which removes a melee hero from the game and is for all intents and purposes the same as killing him.
I've never once also said we play on barren tables. I've said with true line of sight there is really no way to block line of sight completely and thus shooting units can mostly shoot what they want with impunity.
The tables we play on aren't barren. They are always at the very least tournament standard tables because thats what the tournament guys demand. They average a solid 6-8 pieces. You aren't hiding on most of a standard table. There will be some pockets you can hide on but melee heroes are trying to move and get into contact, so if you can force them to hide the entire game so they don't get shot, you've done the same as killing them.
The attached image would be fairly common except that table has a lot of forests, so sub out a couple forests with things like the chaos hill or fence lines from the necropolis kit.
Hm, to me that table looks almost entirely devoid of meaningful terrain, I mean you can draw LoS to almost any point on the table no matter where you are. I can certainly understand you have problems with sniping if that’s the sort of table you play on regularly, I would chuck in at least two but preferably three reasonably big hills (maybe 12” long and about 3” high) on top of what’s there already.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/07/03 17:23:22
Captain Joystick wrote: In principle the trees exist and block movement, though you can place models on their roots and such. People leave them unglued so you can remove them so their branches don't snag on your fingers or knock over tall models, but in those cases the holes for the trees remain impassable.
This is how it's supposed to be, but most people play it as abstract and removable.
One time playing against flesh eater courts we realized sufficiently large bases were effectively locked out of wyldwoods. Then we realized this particular model could fly and so the zombie dragon landed on top of the trees.
We then invoked WMS and removed one of the trees instead.
If the trees block LoS now, I can guarantee you 100% that slyvaneth players are gonna need to get good at navigating those woods with the trees in them. No way in HELL is anyone gonna let you put models where the trees are supposed to go anymore. Otherwise you're looking at 30 invisible dryads and an invisible Durthu just camping out an objective.
If the trees block LoS now, I can guarantee you 100% that slyvaneth players are gonna need to get good at navigating those woods with the trees in them. No way in HELL is anyone gonna let you put models where the trees are supposed to go anymore. Otherwise you're looking at 30 invisible dryads and an invisible Durthu just camping out an objective.
It's not a question of the trees blocking LOS. It's the whole terrain feature.
If you make a ranged attack and it goes through 1" of a Citadel Wood, it's not able to get LOS.
If the trees block LoS now, I can guarantee you 100% that slyvaneth players are gonna need to get good at navigating those woods with the trees in them. No way in HELL is anyone gonna let you put models where the trees are supposed to go anymore. Otherwise you're looking at 30 invisible dryads and an invisible Durthu just camping out an objective.
It's not a question of the trees blocking LOS. It's the whole terrain feature.
If you make a ranged attack and it goes through 1" of a Citadel Wood, it's not able to get LOS.
Who was shooting 30 dryads and Durthu off an objective anyways? If the Sylvaneth player really wants to camp that many points on one objective go after another one and let that massive chunk of points sit there.
AduroT wrote: So how Do people play the trees on the woods? Removable and abstract, or they are stuck there and they block movement?
Not AOS but regardless of game system always abstract and removable. I might consider non-abstract in some super small skirmish game where each model is individual but as I don't play that small game(like 5-6 models per side) but rather ones where smallest units are squads playability comes into issue. No way should normal human be blocked from positioning under tree because his god damn sword is so high it interferes with the terrain model! The warriors aren't in reality doing silly poses like that all the time. He would lower his sword there ;-)
Same reason why I hate TLOS. It just isn't feasible with playable terrain if you then want LOS to be something other than planet bowling ball without using just big square blocks for terrain.
Thanks tho
