Alright, time for those responses:
@ Sinsigel
For 3k+, I definitely think that a Star Dragon is mandatory. It gives so much hitting power, and can be coupled with magic quite well, without compromising. The challenge then becomes how to fit a similar setup in a 2.4-2.5k list. I think here, the Star Dragon is less important, and the Anointed actually takes the cake, because it opens up the Bolt Throwers in Rare, without being forced to take a Phoenix. I'll talk more about this below.
@ Sandstorm
Five Frosties seems like drastic overkill to me: even two seems somewhat redundant. I'd much rather take the Anointeds on Flamespyres at this point, or more importantly, some magic. The magic heavy list is a lot more interesting IMO, but 20 White Lions is too small a number for an environment that will be heavy with Monsters. If the spells don't do enough turns 1-2, you've just lost the game. I am interested though in what kinds of magic we will start seeing. I could easily see 2x Level 4 + Lv 1s Coven being a thing. I'll be thinking more about how to pull this off.
@ Swordmaster
Why do you think higher character allowance is an opportunity/good thing?
I posted this in the Fantasy Thread, and I feel it bears repeating:
"Firstly, this is going to cut down in the time it takes to play games, which I feel can only be a good thing. While playing with large armies is awfully fun, the physical time it takes to play against an all-skink player, for instance, is too high. There's also the fact that if games get shorter, tournaments will require you to play more games, which helps to find the truly 'best' player in the room rather than the 'luckiest,' (quotes very much intentional).
Secondly, point deflation has kept us putting more and more models on the table with each edition, without any consequence. At the current rate, next edition edition or two might have had us putting 4k worth of models on the table, in 5-6th edition terms. If this was an objective of GW, which I feel it was, mission accomplished.
Finally, on a very selfish level, High Elves benefit from these changes quite a bit. With all the access to fliers, monsters, magic, and Bolt Throwers we're setup well to weather the storm. I'm looking forward to playing the game in a different and new way."
Do you assume that your lists are going to face character heavy armies only or are they supposed to be good against regular armies too?
I don't think there's a distinction to be made here between 'character heavy' and 'normal.' I think that after seeing these changes, there's a knee-jerk reaction to call this Herohammer, but I don't think that's entirely accurate. I don't look at this as an overhaul, I look at this as a meta shift; a loosening of restrictions that will allow for new innovation. Just as if they made Rare able to be 50% of your army, or Core went down to 10%, I would be interested in seeing what new combinations start appearing.
I already mentioned that I think this change is self comping, but let me expand on that. First, as Furion points out, you aren't going to see anyone really committed to taking the 3rd Level 4, and 2x Level 4 is already a sub-optimal choice for most armies (including HE), so I don't feel too bad going up against Level 4 + Level 4 & Coven: for the points, I feel I can do a better job.
There's the same thing with characters as a whole. Because I still have to fill Core, I want to make sure that my Core is reasonably supported, for the points. This means yes, more monsters, fliers, Cav Lords, but it also means I'll be taking Bolt Throwers, Phoenix, and maybe some Great Eagles (maybe). I foresee other armies will look at it the same way. Alternatively, they're playing "Herohammer with 625 deadweight core," which I don't think min/max-ers will tolerate, and the meta won't support. Don't get me wrong; in the short term, you might see craziness, but once things settle down, I don't see "625 deadweight" being a trend.
In your initial analysis you scraped entire special section, picked only one type of a regiment from rare and two from core. It means you have only 3 unit types and associated characters out of 18 (I think) units the book has to offer. How such sever limitations are going to promote innovation in your opinion?
It's a shift of where the options are coming from, and that breads creativity and innovation. Before, there were only 2-3 Lord choices that were consistently playable (competitive, and ignoring special characters). Now, if you count the combinations, there are closer to a dozen. Where before, a lot of our variety came from Special, now it comes from Lords and Heroes. Not bad, just different.
I scrapped the Special section completely because the points have to come from somewhere, and Bolt Throwers and Phoenixes are still likely playable, but units like Sisters, Skycutters, Swordmasters just don't compare with Cav Princes, Life Archmages, Star Dragons, and Phoenix Anointed. These units were already weaker in the meta, and they've only gotten worse. As I pointed out, resiliency, speed, and hard-hitting are the characteristics of this meta, and this shift: those units which don't epitomize those characteristics are less likely to be seen now.
Your examples show cavalry with mounted characters as well as flying ones plus bolt throwers as range support. The units are organized as either main regiment with all characters or as small support elements. It gives the impression that the forces are meant to engage the enemy as fast as possible in sort of point-and-click manner. Or in the case of archmages on dragons a force that is good at denying points to the enemy and maybe even avoiding combats if possible since it is quite risky to put level 4 in the fight.
No, not at all. Let me explain.
If you're playing a "lineup and push" strategy, you don't need mobility as much as you need resiliency and hard-hitting (thinking Nurgle wall). Speed adds a completely different element to the game: board control. Warhammer, now more than ever, I feel is going to be about controlling very specific, and sizable, chunks of the table at a time. The armies that can do that the best will consistently beat those who cannot.
High Elves have always had access to speed, but have been notably lacking in resiliency, with a few exceptions. This edition, the Frostheart, Core Silver Helms (and characters), and Phoenix Anointed have shown that resiliency can be achieved, which gives us a deadly combination.
This means two things: 1) HE units are in a unique position to be able to dictate terms and 2) are not afraid of getting into combat, thus can create a equilibrium on the board, rather than having to give it up in a hurry. Assuming 1) leads to 2), you create a scenario where you control large swaths of the table, giving you plenty of time to clear away any annoying chaff, pick at characters and monsters, and cast plenty of magic. This, I feel, is going to be the strength of new HE: being able to control the table, wear down the enemy, and finish with a triumphant charges.
This is very different from "lineup and push," but I expect it take a good helping of patience to make it work, and (especially in the short term, while players are testing) the instinct will be to play aggressive. I view this as a mistake however.
I hope that shows some of the reasons I'm excited and optimistic about the changes. I feel there are going to be a bit of learning, as there was with 8th itself, but ultimately we'll be better off, just how I feel with 8th.
@Feeblings
Well, I bet there will be less models on the table and quicker games. I think overall the changes only strengthen the strong builds that high elves already have, while weakening the builds that were used less.
Precisely.
For specials I think they will still work, botwd white lions and phoenix guard will still be good alternatives to other things depending on the list. I'm a little worried about swordmasters though, they were in a tough spot and now I think it's going to be even tougher... dragon princes could be useful if core ends up being a chaffparty of silverhelms and reavers.
I'm not yet convinced of the merits of White Lions and Phoenix Guard under the changes. Currently, even with Banner of the World Dragon, White Lions have a tough time against Monsters, and even lots of Peg-spam, specifically because they're still to vulnerable to the sides and rear. I'm also worried that without a Prince in the Phoenix Guard, they lack the hitting power to deal with what's likely to be taken and, if you want to invest in the Prince, start to become more expensive than the alternatives. I will say that if you are going to take a foot element, a Lothern Sea Helm is now 100% a requirement; you won't be able to get by without the free reform against highly mobile opponents.
What are you thoughts on how effective foot is, compared to say a Star Dragon instead? I'd be interested on hearing some analysis.
@ Rod
I think most people play standard battleline without objectives. Which makes those less important. I can imagine that in a future edition objectives will become a lot more important. But for now, they hardly feature in games. And, if you simply destroy everything your opponent has then objectives stop mattering as well of course.
I hope this is true. I actually like the objective-heavy gameplay of 40k, and while I wouldn't necessarily advocate an equal emphasis be placed on the Fantasy side of things, I think there's still room for expansion. This does also make sense, with the shift towards less models and faster games, which seems to be a focus of GW across all their systems.
I also agree: there should be some awfully fun Gryphon builds, especially if you take lots, barebones.
@ Spellarcher
A lot of people will assume multiple monster lords are coming and load up on cannon. Further, players will deliberately move to armies with cannon from armies without. So the first question is, "Can armies with two or three monster lords do well in a cannon-rich environment?"
This is why I don't feel the impact on the overall game will be that devastating, although I do predict a shift in the meta. At first, everyone will take as many monsters as they can get their hands on, then Dwarves will take 7x Gyros and max Cannons and everyone will drop their monsters as fast as they can, in favor of anti-warmachine and chaff clearing tools.
@ Malossar
I think there's a case to be made for the humble Skycutter with Eagle Eye. Why? Another Bolt shot although only at str 5 but is ignoring armor saves and dealing d3 wounds shouldn't be overlooked. Another thought is heavens since i'm assuming the most abusive lists are going to be coming in the form of flying monsters or characters on flying mounts. Comets help with board control and harmonic is great with a bolt throwe bunker
I don't see it to be honest. Rare points are being lessened as people take more Monster Lords instead, leaving room for 4x Eagle Claws with points to spare, and I just can't justify taking a SKycutter before I've taken my 4th Bolt Thrower, nor can I justify its combat contributions against a Frostheart, Eagle Noble, or even a 1+ Blocking Noble. Care to persuade me?
I strongly agree about Heavens. Fliers are going to be in 90% of lists that can take them now, and Heavens is a great way to counter this. It also synergies very well with the themes of hard-hitting, quick, and resilient, not the least because it allows for chaff clearing that saves points to be spent on the aforementioned themes.
@ Vespacian1
Not sure about the particulars, but the concept seems solid. If you beef up the Helms by 5, you have plenty of resiliency without compromising on speed. I would, however, drop the second Frostheart for 2x more Bolt Throwers here, as I think you desperately are going to need the chaff clearing, and I'm also not sold on the Lore setups. I think it needs to be Life/High/Death on the Dragon-Archmage and I think, unless the Dragon-rider has it, High on the Helms is better than Life, due to lower casting values. The first Noble also will need S6 more than ever; I'd recommend Ogre Blade here, or Potion of Strength if you like.
@ cptcosmic
too much focus on power builds...
how about fun builds, like spamming eagle nobles along with a beast archmage?
All in good time
For the moment, I'm interested in seeing what works well, then sliding the scale back from there. This will give us all a better idea of how much we can 'get away with' without sacrificing understanding of how much we can accomplish.
@ Curu
I disagree that the Star Dragon list needs both a Cav Prince and a Frostheart. You're at too much risk of letting the game stalemate and getting worn down at ranged by magic and shooting. I think 4x Bolt Throwers is a must for allowing good combats that are favorable, but also to prevent unfavorable ranged wars. I would drop the Prince here, as the Star Dragon provides enough combat threat that you needn't worry.
I do, however, like the concept. I personally think I'll favor the Flamespyre/Frostheart Anointed instead, just for the options, and for the added survivability in a meta that's bound to be magic- and cannon-heavy.
2nd Post:
The first way is taking 2 combat lords, backed up with an Archmage and possibly a hero mage or two to round out magical flexibility and/or the need to include certain items (e.g. Scroll, Book). These 2 combat lords can be any combination basically, but I doubt that it's effective to put them both on monsters as it'll lose you the L4. Basically then, I see 4 approaches:
- Star Dragon + Cavprince
- Flamespyre + Cavprince
- Dual Cavprince
- Cavprince + Footprince
Too narrow a view I feel. Let's start with generally: what do lists now need to be able to do? I've already pushed the idea of hard-hitting, mobile, and resilient, but if there's anything else here that you think should be considered, please feel free to expand. After that, there are several ways I foresee categorizing play styles: "push," "dance," "point denial," and "ranged" are the general ideas that come to mind here.
The first ("push") obviously wants as many combat elements as possible, that function well independently and together. The second ("dance") would place more of an emphasis on magic and shooting, eliminating chaff and creating opportunities before hitting home with a final charge. Point denial could feature several blocking Cowboys, all fliers, and lots of resilient choices like Flamespyres and Frosthearts, and less Cav. Finally, a ranged play style would have to rely on Lions or Phoenix Guard, with lots of magic and shooting, a play style my gut says is weakest, but could still do well.
Your list of options fits very nicely into the first, and some of the second, but I think there are other choices that need to be considered. Double-Loremaster, for instance, is incredibly versatile, works well against monsters and characters alike, and still leaves plenty of points to be spent elsewhere. Archmages on Dragons I also think are likely to be more popular, especially with Death, because there isn't the requirement of exclusivity with the other Lords.
Then there are the heroes, which I think deserve and entire discussion unto themselves. Lightly-kitted Nobles on Eagles, Steeds, or Gryphons all could work pretty well, provided you have enough of them and aren't skimping elsewhere. Also another topic, how does Light Magic factor in? I agree, it is particularly good. As Malossar also points out, Heavens is also a lot stronger in a meta dominated by Fliers. There's a lot of meat here, that's going to take some time to digest. I'm very much interested in everyone's thoughts on these matters.
I expect, by the end of this, there will be about a dozen different character setups worth trying, and my hope is that at least six are effective enough that we'll see them commonly. My gut feeling is that the delta's between the different-options power-levels is going to be relatively small, which means there's plenty of room for options.
@ nick larking
I dont think any of our character or monster combos are that broken that it will make it OP, armies like WOC DoC are another story though. Cannonless armies might get some serious problems with those.
If we're talking about normal lists, I don't think any monster combos are particularly broken; even WoC 2x DP and Disc Lord doesn't scare me too much. Four Eagle Claws, plenty of fliers, and BotWD Helms is enough to deal with such threats.
If we're talking about special characters however, all bets are off. I think Teclis + Alarielle is the strongest HE can come up with, but it's on foot, so I'm not particularly attracted to it, given everyone else will be flying circles around me, and the first 1-2 magic phases pretty well determine the game.
@ Toledo Inquisition
If people are up to it, also consider if you play all 6 scenarios. Have a Watchtower, and Blood and Glory Build.
Exactly one of the points I wanted to talk about. The lists most of us envision auto lose in Watchtower and (sometimes) Blood and Glory. How should we address this when playing BRB scenarios? I'm open to suggestions here. I think MSU might (oddly enough) be the answer here. I'll talk more about this at length, when I have time.
@ Lord Anathir
I really really fear for dwarfs. The new rules really let armies become even more polarized than before.
think Dwarfs will be just fine. Take a healthy number of helicopters (5-7), double cannons and double organ guns, double infantry blocks and you're good to go. Every single monster-heavy list in the game will be heavily out-deployed and you still have the artillery to hurt them a lot.
+1. I don't think they'll have too much trouble, although I think their builds are going to be the least flexible. Besides the option that Curu listed, I'm not sure of how else to play it, and that makes the army very stale and one dimensional, which is sad indeed.
@mcmulligan
LM and HE have far more problems dealing with the Herospam about to occur (I feel really bad for my LM, since they have no cannons/artillery to target high toughness targets, and their own monsters outside of Stegadons are pretty bad, those poor poor carnosaurs.... but hey, cowboy spam....)
Lizardmen yes, High Elves, no. I think we're actually one of the strongest armies to take advantage of this change precisely because so many of choices are narrowly focused, meaning we can deal with both Heroes and Monsters efficiently providing we take the right units. It's going to be a min/maxing game, with several right answers, and when that's the case, armies with the most unit variety will come out on top, and High Elves have variety in spades.
Thoughts? I'd love to hear everyone's opinions!
Axiem
Might look forward to a Cavalry Prince/Loremaster or Archemage now though.
, lvl4+dragon(s). Caradryan on ashtari+noble, eltharion on stormwing+lvl4.