• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

Tutorial Seraphon List for Battletome 2.o

Grotpunter said:
The lists only had 3-4 more than you? Doesnt seem that excessive to me. I predict every serious Starborne list fielding 6 every time. I get 18 is a bit silly, but 2 units isnt that uncommon or absurd and I wouldnt call it “salamander spam”.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I brought 12, but I wouldn't call it broken either, because it has some hard counters. It really lacks some tools.
 
Grotpunter said:
The lists only had 3-4 more than you? Doesnt seem that excessive to me. I predict every serious Starborne list fielding 6 every time. I get 18 is a bit silly, but 2 units isnt that uncommon or absurd and I wouldnt call it “salamander spam”.
Click to expand...

Nart said:
Totally agree. I brought 12, but I wouldn't call it broken either, because it has some hard counters. It really lacks some tools.
Click to expand...

I recognise I was unclear.
7 or 8 sallies + handlers is not broken and is not even spam.
But when 1000 points of the list go into Kroak + salamanders, that group defines the list.
When the great majority of tournaments lists contain that core of Kroak + salamanders, new Seraphon will be identified by that setting.

To make an example… ATM in 40k Space Wolves are amongst the top tier army. A good portion of the lists you see in BatReps is copy & paste of the same bunch of units: Bjorn the fellhanded, Longfangs, 6-9 Wolf cavalry with stormshield. There's no way these are not included.
I don't blame the players, those units are so good you are almost forced to include them, but the result is the same: you, as "outsider" take a look at the lists and all you can think of is "again? boooooring".

I'm seeing the same trend for Seraphon.
 
Bartuk said:
Isn't that the case for every top army?
Click to expand...

I'd say, for every list, which tries to compete. Like, what is the reason not to take kroak or salamanders? If you are going for the win - none.

And actually, if you check top-3 lists for the last 3 months, there are quite a few non-standard lists with coalesced/bastiladons/etc. So things are not that bad.
 
Bartuk said:
Isn't that the case for every top army?
Click to expand...

more or less, yes. That's one of the reasons why i actually don't like too much competitive tournaments.

Nart said:
And actually, if you check top-3 lists for the last 3 months, there are quite a few non-standard lists with coalesced/bastiladons/etc. So things are not that bad.
Click to expand...

hopefully not. I should really try to write some optimized and competitive lists with more unusual units...
 
Killer Angel said:
more or less, yes. That's one of the reasons why i actually don't like too much competitive tournaments.



hopefully not. I should really try to write some optimized and competitive lists with more unusual units...
Click to expand...

Join me and together we might be able to figure out a way to make Kroxigors top tier.... I’ve posted a rather lengthy post in the Seraphon list section involving the Thunderquake Battalion. I don’t know if it’s competitive and it’s looking like perhaps not but... that won’t stop me!!!
 
Krissey said:
Join me and together we might be able to figure out a way to make Kroxigors top tier.... I’ve posted a rather lengthy post in the Seraphon list section involving the Thunderquake Battalion. I don’t know if it’s competitive and it’s looking like perhaps not but... that won’t stop me!!!
Click to expand...

DOn't know when, but i will take a look at it. ;)
 
Kroak is objectively just a better Slann and our other casters honestly suck. The Starseer is super underwhelming casting-wise. So it is really no surprise Kroak is everywhere, especially with the CP generation ontop of spells.

For tournaments people usually want consistency and units that are easy to pilot. Terradons got alot of risk but super high damage potential, yet only once a game. With Salamanders you just teleport or plop them down through Dracothian’s Tail. Zero risk, high constant damage.

Melee units need to deal significantly more damage to be a real contender, since ranged by default is strong due to being able to project power over a much larger area of the table. Even then, damage is not everything, the most important thing is how easy it is to apply that damage to the desired target. You could have a melee unit with tons of damage, yet terrible movement ability and it would be no good since it wouldnt be able to deliver that damage and likely just stuck fighting screens.
 
Grotpunter said:
You could have a melee unit with tons of damage, yet terrible movement ability and it would be no good since it wouldnt be able to deliver that damage and likely just stuck fighting screens.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why you use Lord Kroak command ability on Kroxigors to give them flying and run them in the Thunderquake Battalion with the Hunter and Steed constellation to run them and charge with flying :P Obviously.
 
The problem with melee seraphon lists is lack of ways to deal with ASF stuff. How would you deal with Fyreslayers, for examle? Or Tzeentch? Or 40 mortek near Harvester? We cannot go to Idoneth/DoK/OBR levels of survivablity/damage. You may go 3-0 if you don't run at bad MA, but going 5-0... won't believe it is possible until I see it with my own eyes.:D
 
Krissey said:
Which is exactly why you use Lord Kroak command ability on Kroxigors to give them flying and run them in the Thunderquake Battalion with the Hunter and Steed constellation to run them and charge with flying :p Obviously.
Click to expand...
You will no doubt see Terradons/Kroxigors etc on the tables, my point is just that it is no surprise people opt for the models that perform the best with least risk and most consistency when it comes to tournaments. I also think “Salamander spam” has become a bit of a meme, hence the 18 list.
 
Grotpunter said:
You will no doubt see Terradons/Kroxigors etc on the tables, my point is just that it is no surprise people opt for the models that perform the best with least risk and most consistency when it comes to tournaments. I also think “Salamander spam” has become a bit of a meme, hence the 18 list.
Click to expand...

I decided to change things up and see how I would fare running Terradons and no Kroak/Slann. 2x units of Salamanders helped me go 2-1 but I lost against Deepkin in the final game on Table 3.

My thoughts are now to test a variation of the magic heavy list I brought on The Honest Wargamer a couple of weeks ago- eschewing the Troglodon and Salamanders for Gotrek.

I think running the little guy in a summoning list with lots of MSU Skinks and bound spells could be viable and I am excited to try it out.
 
Our non Slann casters are not the best at casting, but they pretty much all have really good free buffing abilities and/or command traits. As a result they are still good models.

The exception is probably the Troglodon, but even he can be useful, he's just not nearly as efficient as other things.
 
The question is always if their abilities are worth thier price in given situation.
 
Nart said:
But you are not saying in which situation. ;)
Click to expand...

Pretty much all of them. The Starseer has a chance to give a CP on a 4+, has the ability to grant anything that SHOULD wish to charge the ability to roll 3d6 and an innate spell that gives either +1 save or -1 save which can be huge. It's a rock solid Warscroll, especially for the points. Granted I'm coming from the perspective of Orruk Warclans where...well look at the Weirdknob Shaman :/ I actively love the Wurrgog Prophet and I feel like the Starseer is a better wizard. Easier to get +1 to cast, and can even get access to a horde clearing spell just like the one on Wurrgog Prophet's Warscroll. Pound for pound I'd say the Starseer rocks.

The Starpriests ability to add mortal wounds on wound rolls of unmodified 6's is worth its weight in gold. Literally anything you put it on becomes automatically better, and more often than not it's used on something that's spammed anyway, like 40 skinks, 20 chameleon skinks, or high volume attacks like 6 Kroxigors which is at worst 30 (24 drakebite maul, 6 bite) attacks. Not to mention it too can give a CP on a 5+, and has a nice defensive buff -1 to hit. Put that on Daemonettes or the like and they're suddenly 5's and 4's. Not to mention any Slann can channel spells through him.

I can't see a situation where they're bad unless you're taking like MSU low attack spam ? Like improving the save on any one unit is amazing, so good, in fact, they changed Mystic Shield to just be re-roll save rolls of 1... Plus it can debuff your enemies! The charge ability is typically a spell, or a roll on like a 4+ or something for other armies, and they both can give CP! Like I'd bring them for that alone. I'd bring the Starpriest JUST for the mortal wounds nvm he's a wizard.

I think they're fantastic wizards. Slann and Kroak are just so powerful it makes them look bad in comparison, but with all the interlocking synergies they fit right in and can easily get +2 to cast as well.
 
Krissey said:
I’m going to go ahead and say yes they are.
Click to expand...
On something like Salamanders both arent that amazing. A Starpriest is 1,5 Salamander point wise, but doesnt even add the damage equal to 1 extra Salamander. +1 to hit also isnt that great when you already hit on 3’s. From a damage point of view, you are better off skipping the two support heroes for more firepower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top