Personal opinion on the whole EOS army

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

  • Personal opinion on the whole EOS army

    Hello everyone.

    I promised @greentide to give a short review on our army book. Since this also might or might not interest other players i thought to myself it might be a good idea to post it into the forums instead of DMing it. Don't expect any genius' enlightenments here, I'm more of an average player.

    ***06.02.2019: I inserted some points where other users cahnged my mind***

    Part 1: The overall impression:
    EoS as an army is cool. It absoulutely works in the ways is it supposed to, and it is fun while doing so. There are different playstyles and the special rules in general manage to give the army it's own suitable flavour without restrictingthe player too strong. I really like the book!

    Part 2: The biggest problems:
    I really like the book, but of course i don't like every singel aspect. Most of the things I don't like can be summarized into these two points:

    2.1: The Constrains of the Bubbles
    While it is very adequate that the army as a whole is dependent on the guidance of it's general and BSB this strong dependence strongly prohibits any "spread out" playstyle. As consequences a very compact and static army is favoured, a figthy general or BSB creates a great risk for the EOS player. Not only because they are at risk of dying, but because you just can't do a long charge with a unit containing your leaders when there are units staying behind. On another note i noticed how much time i have to take in the movement phase and during deployment, just to fit all these units into my bubbles.
    I will adress this point at multiple occasions in this post below.

    2.2: There is no countercharge
    I love the whole "order, parent-support" thingy. It's the reason I started building this army when i saw the first draft of the EOS rules. And it works great! Well, in theory it does. If i play against an opponent that is not familiar with our army, I like to explain the countercharge rules very drawn out and in detail, just to close with something like "but this will never happen". I don't even think that this is the fault of the rule's design. I think the problem lies firstly in the (lack of) options for fighting support units and secondly in the (lack of) options to support those units with buffs (looking at prayers and hatred here, but more on this later).

    Part 3: Let's look at everything!

    3.1 The Heredeteretedey spell:
    Well it's awesome. In every aspect.

    3.2 Special Items:
    I would like to split these into three categories:

    "You hit it on the head": These are in my opinion nearly flawless in design and execution:
    Light of Sonnstahl, Death Warrant, Hammer of the Witches, Imperial Seal, Blacksteel, Locket of Sunna, (Household Standard). Now the last one is in brackets, because it isn't as "cool" and "well designed" as the others in this category. However it helps in fixing one of my main complaints from above, so i rate it as excellent item.

    "Fine, I guess": These are items that i usually don't use, but that's not because they are bad in any way, but mostly because they don't fit my style or do not have any relevant impact for me:
    Witchfire Guard, Shield of Volund, Winter Cloak, Mantle of Ullor, Marksman's Pennant, (Exemplar's Flame). Here I actually have a minor problem with the last one: Why does it only last one phase? This is really counterintuitive since most combat buffs like this last one turn. I would like to see this changed, but it is a minor concern.

    "These are just wrong":
    Karadon's Courser: WHY DID YOU TAKE MY BANNER OF THE STALLION???? WHYYYYYYYYY ( I might be biased here...). The 6" bubble is the least thing this army needed. The "one use only"-clause makes it very unsatisfying to use. I can't see the upside this has over the old banner and I can't see where it fits inside our army. But that is a very personal opinion.
    Banner of Unity: This item is just never useful. It sounds cool in theory, but in praxis there is never a situation where it helps. You need all those orders because poo is gonna hit the fan? Well you probably do not need accurate now. You want to make that important charge? Well now you need your orders to go on the same unit.
    (I have playtestet both of these items)
    €dit: @SadlerCPII made a good point in that the banner effectively increases the range of one order.

    3.3 Heroes:
    Most of these are fine with nothing special about them. I'll leave those out of here.

    Prelate: The prelate is fine as it is. However, by tweaking him we could find solutions for the big problems mentioned above:
    By giving him Dis 9 he could enable a unit of knights to act outside of BSB/general bubble without just autolosing to every discipline check (There is no possibility of passing one with Dis 8, or is there?). (€dit: I agree with @greentide that the inquisitor would be more fitting for dis 9)
    Or, by making his hatred and prayers affect all support units in the same combat, maybe support units of 20 halberds could actually be useful. I would love that. Can you imagine that? Encicrling the enemy with your brave men would actually be a benefit, instead of a major drawback. What a world it would be...

    Inquisitor: I really like the new concept. Melee inqui works very well, with or without the upgrade. But I don't get the ranged upgrade. Am i supposed to pay 295 for the dude on horse with 3 shots? Or is he supposed to do something with the crossbow? I might just not be seeing the obvious here.
    Also I would love if he had Dis 9, for the same reasons given at the prelate.
    (€dit: @The Changing Constant and @Daemondred gave a nice example of a situation where the shooty inquistor is quite good. It's probably nice as it is, even if it's not competitive)

    3.4 Core:

    Heavy Infanty: The name makes no sense at all. Othwerwise it would be nice if there was another melee supporting unit except for the 20 man HW+shield-"we-are-steadfast-until-you-have-killed-16-of-us"-guys (although they are awesome, just another alternative would be cool)

    Light Infatry: Well, if "heavy infantry" made no sense, I guess this name makes negative sense? It destroys the sense of other unit's names? On a more serious note the handguns are just plain worse than the crossbow. I don't want to go too deep into the detail here, but 30" vs 24" has just too many upsides, mostly in taking the first turn and in shooty-vs-shooty match-ups. Maybe the handguns could lose unwieldy until they have shot once? They need somethig small.

    State Milita: This unit just doesn't have a role. I really like the idea with the different weapons, but they need something, that other units can't simpyl do better. A couple ideas: Insignificant, can take orders without being parent/support or being parent/support without being able to take orders. Somethign along those lines. Hey, this could be real "light infantry".

    Electoral Cavalry: I really like the cavpicks. Big fan. I would love if the KO-upgrade could give Dis 9, as you probably had guessed after reading the above stuff :) (€dit: I agree with @greentide that the inquisitor would be more fitting for dis 9)

    3.5 Special:

    Imperial Guard: Now what do we have here? An oppertunity to have 10-15 man melee support units with 2handers? That sounds like a great idea to make countercharges a thing!

    Knights of the Sun Griffon: The weapons choice here is not really adding something in my opinion, except maybe irritating our opponents. "No, they have only 3+ armour save, because they don't have lances, obviously!"

    Arcane Engine: Mostly not my style. I think it is fine however.

    3.6 Imperial Auxiliaries:

    Imperial Rangers: Love these guys. Love the face opponents make when these guys kill their big monsters with good armour or fortitude save.

    Reiters: Love these guys, too. However I don't think anyone has ever cosidered the melee option. And the melee option would still be in the auxiliaries category. Maybe kick them before people make models for them?

    3.7 Imperial Armoury:
    Everything is fine. Well, the way cannons work sucks, but that's not an EoS problem.

    3.8 Sunna's Fury:

    Flagellants and STank are also fine as they are, in my opinion. However, I think that the STank is very popular because it is the only element of the army that works without any support. At least that's the reason i value it very highly.




    That's it for now. I hope that some of you find my thoughts interesting.

    Peace

    The post was edited 4 times, last by baexta ().

  • Thanks for the review, mate- and great to meet you in person at the tournament :beer:
    Much useful input over here- just some notes/remarks.

    baexta wrote:

    As consequences a very compact and static army is favoured, a figthy general or BSB creates a great risk for the EOS player. Not only because they are at risk of dying, but because you just can't do a long charge with a unit containing your leaders when there are units staying behind
    Jep. Unless they play cav-heavy/all mounted, when the imperial prince and marshall on griffon
    move more or less in line with the rest of the army.

    baexta wrote:

    like to explain the countercharge rules very drawn out and in detail, just to close with something like "but this will never happen".
    It´s difficult. Herminard was quite succesful with a maxed out parten/support army consisting
    of multiple IG parent and sword/board support units. Apart from him nobody came close to the Village Idiot from old game.

    baexta wrote:

    Why no griffon for the BSB? I want a griffon for my BSB.
    I guess it would be an obvious choice and would allow 4 flying marshalls on griffon- could be a tad too much from BT perspective.

    baexta wrote:

    Also I would love if he had Dis 9, for the same reasons given at the prelate.
    I would really like that on the Inquisitor and don´t see any serious objections.
    Since he already has "not a leader" I see no real issues with that(unless it makes him/her too expensive).
    That´s very unlikely for the prelate though. He would become the default choice for general at disci 9.

    baexta wrote:

    State Milita: This unit just doesn't have a role. I really like the idea with the different weapons, but they need something, that other units can't simpyl do better
    We discussed this a few days ago and you know my slightly different view.
    Marching up within 6" and peppering the enemy with S4 AP 2 shots(hitting on 4´s) makes them valuable for me
    and not to forget- they fill our core unlike the second chaff unit on foot(rangers).
    Nonetheless they could use something special or a small price discount :wink:

    baexta wrote:

    An oppertunity to have 10-15 man melee support units with 2handers? That sounds like a great idea to make countercharges a thing!
    Neat idea, like the sound of that. But we had the discussion somewhere.
    It was a kind of fluff/immersion thing. No proper guardsman should do support functions, something across those lines.
    Kruber wrote:
    Imperial Rangers burn the woods ---> Sylvan Elves go cry in the corner.
  • baexta wrote:

    But I don't get the ranged upgrade. Am i supposed to pay 295 for the dude on horse with 3 shots? Or is he supposed to do something with the crossbow? I might just not be seeing the obvious here.


    Try the silver shots, the repeator pistols, paired weapons and hero's heart + defensive gear. You get an inquisitor with 1 less attack and slightly slower than the pure melee inquisitor but +1 ap (battlefocus triggers so rarely it's not really relevant), and when outside of combat you get 3 shots a turn, on a light troop, quick to fire character (so oftentimes hitting on 3's) that rerolls to wound and does mwd3 as well. The end result is a character who excels at hunting down multiwound models, particularly monstrous infantry and monstrous cav.

    I have routinely wiped out bricks of 7-8 minos with just the shooting inquisitor. about 2 turns of shooting + charging into a flank is more than enough to seal the fate of the poor cows. Obviously this is done in conjunction with chaff and units projecting a threat range to keep the minos from turning to face the inquistor. But I have found agility 4 (5 on the charge) is more than sufficient against those kind of targets, and the ability to cause damage while refusing combat makes the model far more versatile.
  • Ok, some nice thoughts. Let's see:

    greentide wrote:

    I guess it would be an obvious choice and would allow 4 flying marshalls on griffon- could be a tad too much from BT perspective.
    I deleted what i wrote about this, because I didn't see the obvious: BSB on griffon would mean 18" bubble. I can see why we shouldn't have that

    greentide wrote:

    It´s difficult. Herminard was quite succesful with a maxed out parten/support army consisting
    of multiple IG parent and sword/board support units. Apart from him nobody came close to the Village Idiot from old game.
    If I'm not wrong you are talking about an army that also utilized 4 units of the old militia, right? Those old militia were very strong and single handedly enabled such an army.

    greentide wrote:

    I would really like that on the Inquisitor and don´t see any serious objections.
    Since he already has "not a leader" I see no real issues with that(unless it makes him/her too expensive).
    That´s very unlikely for the prelate though. He would become the default choice for general at disci 9.
    I agree, that of the three options for dis 9 i proposed, the inquisitor would probably be the best.

    greentide wrote:

    Neat idea, like the sound of that. But we had the discussion somewhere.
    It was a kind of fluff/immersion thing. No proper guardsman should do support functions, something across those lines.
    Hm, it's often tough to argue with fluff/immersion. With this matter, I can't see the argument. I would suppose the opposite should be true: 0815-normal guys forming the bulk of the army and elite guys supporting at strategic critical positions. But I guess you could argue in every direction here. My strongest point is that it would help with the countercharge thingy and it would be hella fun.

    On the topic of the Inquisitor with silver bullets:
    I think he is better than it seemed to me. And he checks all the right boxes for a gimmicky, fluffy, cool character. So he probably doesn't need to be competetive. The other two options (melee or no upgrade at all) seem perfect, so no need to tinker with him.

    Peace
  • The Changing Constant wrote:

    I just going to bring up that the inquisitor averages 2 wounds per round against Minos. So you end up paying 80 points for one extra wound a turn.
    I'm not really sure how you get that.

    With paired weapon heroes heart, an inquisitor gets 4 attacks, hits 2.6 times, wounds, 1.7 times and does an average of 3.5 wounds.

    The cc version with hammer of witches
    Gets 5 attacks, hits 3.33 times, gets no battlefocus, wounds 2.22 times for 4.44 wounds. So the shooting version averages 1 less wound versus minos.

    However, in shooting it gets 3 shots, at long range hits 1.5 times, wounds 1.3 times, doing 2.6 wounds. And at close range does 3.5 wounds.

    So for 50 more points than the cc version you average 1 less wound in cc, but have the ability to drop 1-2 minos before charging in( or roughly 1 mino a turn if there isn't a good time to charge in. ) It seems to be a pretty balanced trade off.


    Kruber wrote:

    Shooty Inquisitor is just too expensive for what he does. For 300+ points you can do much better (i.e. two Rocketeers). No to mention he's 7"/14" which makes pairing him with Reiters sub optimal.
    no no no, you take an inquisitor + 2 rocketeers and watch the mw models melt :evil: to be fair, my meta is swimming in mw models, which obviously inflates the value of as inquisitor in it.

    But my bh player dreads when i whip out that inquisitor because short of buffing his minos with magic there isn't much he can do
  • Daemondred wrote:

    age 1 less wound in cc, but have the ability to drop

    Daemondred wrote:

    The Changing Constant wrote:

    I just going to bring up that the inquisitor averages 2 wounds per round against Minos. So you end up paying 80 points for one extra wound a turn.
    I'm not really sure how you get that.
    With paired weapon heroes heart, an inquisitor gets 4 attacks, hits 2.6 times, wounds, 1.7 times and does an average of 3.5 wounds.

    The cc version with hammer of witches
    Gets 5 attacks, hits 3.33 times, gets no battlefocus, wounds 2.22 times for 4.44 wounds. So the shooting version averages 1 less wound versus minos.

    However, in shooting it gets 3 shots, at long range hits 1.5 times, wounds 1.3 times, doing 2.6 wounds. And at close range does 3.5 wounds.

    So for 50 more points than the cc version you average 1 less wound in cc, but have the ability to drop 1-2 minos before charging in( or roughly 1 mino a turn if there isn't a good time to charge in. ) It seems to be a pretty balanced trade off.


    Kruber wrote:

    Shooty Inquisitor is just too expensive for what he does. For 300+ points you can do much better (i.e. two Rocketeers). No to mention he's 7"/14" which makes pairing him with Reiters sub optimal.
    no no no, you take an inquisitor + 2 rocketeers and watch the mw models melt :evil: to be fair, my meta is swimming in mw models, which obviously inflates the value of as inquisitor in it.
    But my bh player dreads when i whip out that inquisitor because short of buffing his minos with magic there isn't much he can do
    I was referring to shooting. Hitting two thirds, wounding half the time, times 2 for multi, then 3 shoots. So 2/3 * 1/2 * 2 * 3, works out to 2 wounds.
  • @baexta I could have written thar review, its that close to what I think.
    I have tones of suggestions to fix the problems though.
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, FREE command groups for EoS units. Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. Brace for impact should be changed to, or there should be an extra order: " Have at THEM!" The unit gain battle focus.
    For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • The only thing I straight up disagree with is the banner of unity. One of my favorite banners for our army.
    EVERSHADE GAMING! AMERICA'S FAVORITE YOUTUBE BATTLE REPORTER :thumbsup:

    Hey, I'm Charles. I'm the main contributor for Evershade Gaming on YouTube. I post Battle Reports, List Reviews for Midwest (U.S.A.) Tournaments, and videos on my ideas about the Ninth Age. I post 2-3 videos monthly.

    Link to my Channel! youtube.com/channel/UCKjjkWnXanizMuTh5obkxpA

    theforgottenturtle.com An Awesome Painting Blog!
  • Any list with multiple Light Infantry units. I put in on my Imperial Guard and give my BSB Marshal Great Tactician so he can give accurate to both. I like the BSB can be on one corner, to give Accurate to one unit, he can buff the unit, and then the unit can give accurate to another shooting unit. I think it’s a great combo.
    EVERSHADE GAMING! AMERICA'S FAVORITE YOUTUBE BATTLE REPORTER :thumbsup:

    Hey, I'm Charles. I'm the main contributor for Evershade Gaming on YouTube. I post Battle Reports, List Reviews for Midwest (U.S.A.) Tournaments, and videos on my ideas about the Ninth Age. I post 2-3 videos monthly.

    Link to my Channel! youtube.com/channel/UCKjjkWnXanizMuTh5obkxpA

    theforgottenturtle.com An Awesome Painting Blog!
  • But what order do you use on the parent unit then?
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, FREE command groups for EoS units. Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. Brace for impact should be changed to, or there should be an extra order: " Have at THEM!" The unit gain battle focus.
    For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Either Brace for Impact if they might be getting charged the next turn or steady men.
    EVERSHADE GAMING! AMERICA'S FAVORITE YOUTUBE BATTLE REPORTER :thumbsup:

    Hey, I'm Charles. I'm the main contributor for Evershade Gaming on YouTube. I post Battle Reports, List Reviews for Midwest (U.S.A.) Tournaments, and videos on my ideas about the Ninth Age. I post 2-3 videos monthly.

    Link to my Channel! youtube.com/channel/UCKjjkWnXanizMuTh5obkxpA

    theforgottenturtle.com An Awesome Painting Blog!
  • baexta wrote:

    greentide wrote:

    It´s difficult. Herminard was quite succesful with a maxed out parten/support army consisting
    of multiple IG parent and sword/board support units. Apart from him nobody came close to the Village Idiot from old game.
    If I'm not wrong you are talking about an army that also utilized 4 units of the old militia, right? Those old militia were very strong and single handedly enabled such an army.
    Yepp, that was ONE vital part of @Herminard s army . As such it wasn`t a Village Idiot style army (he hadn`t any missle units in it) . That is, why I call it a Herminard style army :) (Honour to whom honour is due). And as such is a bad example of shwoing that the battalion style (battle-line) style works currently (today ´s evening, I will try that once more..two parent units, two light inf. support units and tweo heavy inf. units + one militia ..I am still looking for a way to make it work...somehow 8-) ).
    Good to see that other EoS gamers see it the same: the mobile missle units made this style possible ...as such I wished the for light inf. would be able to move/march and shoot without the usual mali when in 8 of a parent unit.

    But we were given to understand , that this is not "in" for EoS (mobile missle units like e.g. Bombardiers).
    Veteran of the Chaff Wars
  • Phosphorus wrote:

    baexta wrote:

    greentide wrote:

    It´s difficult. Herminard was quite succesful with a maxed out parten/support army consisting
    of multiple IG parent and sword/board support units. Apart from him nobody came close to the Village Idiot from old game.
    If I'm not wrong you are talking about an army that also utilized 4 units of the old militia, right? Those old militia were very strong and single handedly enabled such an army.
    Yepp, that was ONE vital part of @Herminard s army . As such it wasn`t a Village Idiot style army (he hadn`t any missle units in it) . That is, why I call it a Herminard style army :) (Honour to whom honour is due). And as such is a bad example of shwoing that the battalion style (battle-line) style works currently (today ´s evening, I will try that once more..two parent units, two light inf. support units and tweo heavy inf. units + one militia ..I am still looking for a way to make it work...somehow 8-) ).Good to see that other EoS gamers see it the same: the mobile missle units made this style possible ...as such I wished the for light inf. would be able to move/march and shoot without the usual mali when in 8 of a parent unit.

    But we were given to understand , that this is not "in" for EoS (mobile missle units like e.g. Bombardiers).

    The Militia were a nice tool to make the enemy run towards the lines of EoS, and Orders were much better, but the Parent/Support mechanic is untouched.

    @Watertheplant have had some decent results with a similar list

    For myself I am certain that making a very potent EoS list is quite possible, but it is not an option that I am willing to explore.
    Hermund Vigerust Endressòn Furu - Savage Sage of the Norse
    Faux-pro player and ETC vagabond.
    Enjoys the company of deluded nerds and women of unquestionably low morale.

    For questions, ramblings, Battle Lines ratings & tactics, The Savage Arts of Playtrolling
  • Nice discussion, i like where this is going.

    SadlerCPII wrote:

    Any list with multiple Light Infantry units.
    I for myself could never make the Banner worth. As stated above, the situation where it is useful is very rare. And it has not only to be useful, but worth the points and, more importantly, the banner slot on a decent fighting unit (otherwhise the additional order would be useless. However, your point about the slight range increase for the order is valid and i did not see it before. So that's a plus for the banner.


    Casp wrote:

    But i desagree on the counter-charge. For me they are perfect. And i do countercharge pretty often.
    Very good to hear! What units do you typically use for countercharging? Are those units dedicated to this purpose?

    Herminard wrote:

    I am certain that making a very potent EoS list is quite possible
    Absoulutely! I was quite pleased with my list for the last tournament.