ID FAB Public Idea Thread

    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!

    • ID FAB Public Idea Thread

      Here it is folks!

      With the full army book on the horizon, it would be better to have a dedicated thread for all the ideas and discussions about the Infernal Dwarf book. Here we can post ideas on what we want to see, or what we think Infernal Dwarves need to fix their more glaring issues (point costs aside).

      It does need to be said though, that there is no guarantee that any idea from this thread will make it into the book. I can promise though that I will discuss the best ideas/most liked ideas with the design team. So even if ideas do not make it in, the thoughts and wishes of the community will be known.

      Now, onto the topic at hand. I recommend that if anyone posts anything about solving an Infernal Dwarf problem, make sure to highlight what the problem is first (just to keep things clear).
      And lastly, if people are struggling to phrase their ideas, I can give some examples first.

      Lord of the Hobby

      The Great Horde of Chaos <-My hobby blog Tyranno's Ride into the Steppes <-My Makhar hobby/army-list blog
    • Just to be difficult, can I add that (in my experience) broad brush things are much more useful during the design phase.

      "My kadim titan should have res7 with a 5++ aegis (re-rolling ones) and hatred against aquatic models" is less useful than "I see the kadim titan as being the poster boy of the book. He should have strong stats and a strong flame theme."

      Or "I think the key feel to an ID army is being good at X, and I don't think that we should be good at Y" is much more useful than "we are supposed to grind so all our troops should have a 2+ armour save".
      Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
      Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
    • Maybe something could be done about our mounts finally? I hardly ever see Prophet mounted, most deem Great Bull bad (especially since Divination is sooo good) and the fact that you can have perma 5++ at small Bull is riddiculous...

      Making interesting general/bsb builds on mounts would also help with the other issue the army has if you don't want to bring lugars - playing in the bubble. With Incarnates having Frenzy, with Flintlocks being main tool in core, with Slaves taking so much space, it is very hard to play ID wider than 12" bubble. Are we supposed to be like vampires? Even they can play much wider than us because of Dark Coaches... I've seen more than a few ID battles recently and all of them came to hiding in one corner and trying to shoot the opponent. Is this what this army has come to? The ultimate gunline?
      2016 - ETC Team Poland
      2017 - ETC Team Poland
      2018 - ETC Team Poland (C)

      Abrasus Tactics Channel
    • Jarec wrote:



      Could we also go over the ASAW just once more for the sake of this dedicated thread?
      Project is changing/removing/updating ASAW, see announcement in another thread.
      January - 2019 Bi-monthly Team Updates

      So I wouldn't worry about ASAW at this point.
      Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
      Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
    • Purely speaking of themes, my favorite parts of this army are:

      1) flaming synergy
      2) short range but powerful guns
      3) variety in choice, unified in theme (i.e. I can have tough infantry, cheap infantry, fast monsters, medium cav, heavy guns, magic, etc in one list, and still have it feel like it is one army)

      Also, I agree that the kadim titan should be a centerpiece to the army. Something big and powerful (and on theme) that makes you want to build around it.
    • lawgnome wrote:

      Purely speaking of themes, my favorite parts of this army are:

      1) flaming synergy
      2) short range but powerful guns
      3) variety in choice, unified in theme (i.e. I can have tough infantry, cheap infantry, fast monsters, medium cav, heavy guns, magic, etc in one list, and still have it feel like it is one army)

      Also, I agree that the kadim titan should be a centerpiece to the army. Something big and powerful (and on theme) that makes you want to build around it.
      From my personal point of view, this is exactly the sort of info I am interested in right now.
      Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
      Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
    • First I choose the army because I liked the forgeworld models and got a big set of converted gw models cheap which I am still using and is the core of my army.

      I like the arrogant, kind of angry, industrial greedy theme of them. Thinking they are completely superior to anyone else (thas why I love the actually CoA).

      In play ctually I like the wide choice of different units. I like the big bull (even if I dont have him yet), the tanky mage with fitting lores. The easy mixable core with slave to sacrifice, elite, normal dudes. I love the mix of dwarves and the quick units spiced up with war machines and demons. Overall I feel more flexibility than other armies with unique tools (Immortals, Kadims) . I am not a big fan of a dominating flame synergy but Infernal means fire. Fire synergie is usefull but not necessary.

      I really miss the old rocket launcher because it made people panic like the sky is falling done on them. For me its my favourite army.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Traumdieb ().

    • I like the flaming theme - in combat as well as in shooting. So pretty much perfect there, as it is. Although I think I do myself a disfavour by choosing Pyromancy over alchemy - as the synergies with flaming CC is just so good. I just can’t help it. Fire magic is cool. Simple, basic, and very cool.
      I also like the mobile, short ranged shooting - a wave of shooting dwarfs while advancing in and going for the kill. Here we are on the right path, but not quite there yet. Qtf on Flintlocks, blunderbusses with a inverse S&S, moving (or at least pivoting) shooting bound daemons, for example.
      And my favourite idea - Taurukhs with blunderbusses. Very seldom will they have enough ranks to actually use the special rule, but I really like the image of advancing bulldwarfs shooting short but powerful bursts before charging in.
    • Irondaemon wrote:

      I like the flaming theme - in combat as well as in shooting. So pretty much perfect there, as it is. Although I think I do myself a disfavour by choosing Pyromancy over alchemy - as the synergies with flaming CC is just so good. I just can’t help it. Fire magic is cool. Simple, basic, and very cool.
      I also like the mobile, short ranged shooting - a wave of shooting dwarfs while advancing in and going for the kill. Here we are on the right path, but not quite there yet. Qtf on Flintlocks, blunderbusses with a inverse S&S, moving (or at least pivoting) shooting bound daemons, for example.
      And my favourite idea - Taurukhs with blunderbusses. Very seldom will they have enough ranks to actually use the special rule, but I really like the image of advancing bulldwarfs shooting short but powerful bursts before charging in.
      Why not use both? I really like the combo of two adepts alchemy and pyro.
    • Despite the near eastern imagery, I'd actually like to see it play more like a 18th/19th century army (or at least be capable of doing so). Focus on firearm-wielding infantry that advance into the teeth of the enemy, supported by good artillery. Specifically, the British and Hannoverian infantry under Friedrich von Spörcken at the Battle of Minden (1759) would be a great model.

      An error in comprehension across languages caused Spörcken to advance immediately rather than await a signal...

      Cem Arslan wrote:

      Spörcken’s entire force, some five thousand infantrymen, immediately began marching straight towards the French center.
      When the shock of the initial surprise passed, Duc d’Fitzjames, commanding the bulk of the French cavalry, fully realized the situation: eight entire battalions of infantry, with no support, marching straight on his rested cavalry ready to charge, and were about to enter the field of fire. Not the field of their muskets, no, nor that of the cavalry, for the era of the pistolier cavalrymen was long over. No, the fire support would come from two French artillery batteries at Malbergen and Hahlen, the full firepower of sixty field guns. Lieutenant Hugh Montgomery, who was among the British battalions, described it thusly:
      "Now began the most disagreeable march that I ever had in my life, for we advanced more than a quarter of a mile through a most furious fire from a most infernal battery of eighteen-pounders, which was at first upon our front, but as we proceeded, bore upon our flank, and at last upon our rear. It might be imagined, that this cannonade would render the regiments incapable of bearing the shock of unhurt troops drawn up long before on ground of their own choosing, but firmness and resolution will surmount almost any difficulty."
      Firmness and resolution was one thing: but against those men was the finest cavalry force in Europe, sixty-three squadrons in eight brigades and three lines, some 7500 horsemen rested and ready to charge. Against were five thousand infantrymen less than half a kilometer away, under the punishing barrage of sixty eighteen-pounder guns.
      The French cavalry drew their sabres.
      The onslaught came from the Cravattes and Mestre de Camp brigades, from the first line under Marquis d’Castries, fourteen squadrons of trained cavalrymen. They streamed towards the British and Hanoverians in regimented order, breaking out into a thundering charge that seemed it would move heaven and earth. Spörcken’s infantry lined up, pointed their muskets, and first rank opened fire from thirty meters.
      The first volley shattered the cavalry line and turned it to a chaotic mess of men and panicked horses. The second volley fell upon the mass and stopped dead any attempts to break through. Yet the French cavalry still marched on. The leftmost squadrons of Mestre de Camp turned around the thin red line and the rightmost two British companies were trampled underneath their hooves. Yet the infantry regrouped, facing the French horse in a swirling melee that left the cavalrymen in chaos. These kinds of merciless, brutal melees one on one were the forte of the elite warrior-cadres of the Medieval times: these men, trained to fight in line formation where large numbers decided the day, were utterly unprepared for such a chaotic melee, and soon they were fleeing in chaos.
      Next were the second line of the French horse, the brigades of Bourgogne, Royal Etrangers, and du Roi. Twenty-two squadrons barreled down towards the stone-faced infantrymen, and were greeted with the same close-range volley that shattered their ranks: a British soldier would go on to say that nearly every bullet found its mark, a statement that, while exaggerated, gives a good impression regarding the impact of the volleys. Battered though it was, the French line ploughed into the British, several squadrons managing to break through it, only to face the fire of the three battalions that formed Spörcken’s second line that put an end to their advance.
      Next was the turn of the infantry. As Spörcken’s redcoats marched through the gap where five brigades of French cavalry used to be, the rightmost battalions of Duc d’Guerchy opened fire, but the British wheeled around and drove them off through ten minutes of vigorous volley exchanges. Then came an assault by the French grenadiers, which too was driven off, as was an attack by eight battalions of Swiss and Saxon infantry from the French left flank, this last one by a textbook half-turn and subsequent assault by the three battalions in Spörcken’s second rank.
      While the infantrymen were giving each other Hell, Fitzjames let loose his reserve: eighteen squadrons of cavalry in the third rank under Duc d’Poyanne, the brigades of Carabiniers and Gens d’armes, two thousand that made up the cream of the French cavalry, best horsemen in the whole world. Their attack was not to come frontally against the Allied line, which by now had begun to resemble a mess of curves and corners. Poyanne led his men around the right, and fell on the Allied left with full wrath. Most devastated were the Hanoverians and the 23rd Foot on the flank, whose fire had availed them not. But even as the French reformed for another charge, the remnants of those three units regrouped, and with the rear ranks of the other battalions, greeted the French elite with an utterly withering fire.
      Every new onslaught saw more massacred. The brigades of Poyanne were likewise broken and subsequently driven off, leaving Spörcken’s men utterly exhausted and worn. But Fitzjames was left merely with the relatively intact remnants of the du Roi brigade and the still undeployed Touraine brigade. There was an enormous hole in the middle of the French battle line. The time was to charge, to sweep through the last remnants of the once-majestic French horse and roll upon itself both French flanks.
      Needless to say, if you filed the 'serial numbers' off that, I'd totally believe that was a story about dwarves. That's how I'd imagine an ID infantry action.

      I'd also like to see more ability to focus on a 'cavalry' force. (probably Taurukh able to count as core somehow)

      ID also seem to be a race driven by logic and desire for power, and not emotion or tradition. So it bears to reason that they'd be willing to arm their 'cavalry' with firearms. So I'd like to see Blunderbuss (dragoons) and/or pistols (light cavalry - ID must surely be able to make pistols) as an option for Taurukh. They have the firearms, and they have Taurukh. It's kind of silly they can't use them together. Unlike Orcs and hobgoblins, it's not like they have to worry about the Taurukh turning the weapons on their masters - Taurukh are dwarves in the caste system, and highly respected ones at that. (Arguably even hobgoblins should be capable of being armed with firearms, as they seem to be willing and trusted servants, not slaves, but it's not necessary).
      Just because I'm on the Legal Team doesn't mean I know anything about rules or background in development, and if/when I do, I won't be posting about it. All opinions and speculation are my own - treat them as such.

      Legal

      Playtester

      Chariot Command HQ

    • Irondaemon wrote:

      Yeah. But you know - me wants those higher up spells. But I guess an apprentice and a master is okey. Only need those points.
      Assuming you take alchemy master its 150 pts for silver spike and Corruption of tin. The two adepts work well together. Try it.

      I personally swear on occultism and heirloom or crown of wizard king.
    • Pretty much just repeating what I wrote in the genearl thread, but here it is.

      Unit entry fluff feeling:
      The book is Infernal Dwarves. Not Infernal Dwarves & Orcs & Goblins.
      Make the names/fluff for the hobgoblins and orc slaves generic. Same with their weapon options and special traits. That way players can pick whatever enslaved models they want. And you also don't get the O&G forum crying about the cool stuff Infernal Hobgoblins get.

      Now on the flip side, we can't go too generic with Dwarves either. Otherwise we should just call the book Infernal Incarnets and their rag tag band of subjugated races.
      I'm talking about the racial traits for the dwarves of T9A. ...i'm not going to argue in this thread about whether or not we should have racial traits. I'm firmly on the side of we do. I'm a fan of Lightening reflexes, I'm a fan of Orders, I'm a fan of manifestations, a fan of virtues, etc...
      Sometimes a cultural trait is enough, but I'm primarily I'm talking about Sturdy and the Engineering rune in Dwarf Holds. Stuff like Shield wall can be explained by tactics. Stuff like longbeards, grudges can be explained by culture. So don't be giving Dwarf Holds racial traits while expecting the statline of a dwarf to be 'good enough'.
      There have been many good suggestions on what Sturdy could become. Only people I've seen who love the +1S,AP are powergamers. Best suggestion I've seen was in the hombrew section which was called True Grit. But anyway, just get the feel of the dwarf right. I don't want to look at the infernal dwarf statline and think I just have a Iron Orc on a 25mm base. If I want generic statlines for everything then the game Kings of War is perfect.

      ----------------------------------

      Infernal Weapons
      Instead of being a separate weapon, have them be an upgrade for mundane weapons. I don't really care what attribute they give, it just feels right that ID would enchant their mundane weapons.
      My suggestion is +1 to wound, but this type of enchant would have to be tested no matter what the RT decides the enchanted attribute is. Heck it could even be something simple like making them flaming weapons with the ability to turn on/off.
      Its like in the old warhammer fluff when they talk about the old days of the dwarfs when everyone had runic up armour and runic weapons. But after the fall, the dwarfs didn't have the resources to equip everyone. Perhaps the Infernal Dwarves do have the resources as long as the individual dwarf can afford it. So this is why basic warrior don't have access, they are just last minute levies.
      Maybe the infernal weapon enchant can change per unit so it will make things easy to specialize that unit to a specific role.
      Say something like: This unit can enchant their mundane weapon to be an infernal weapon and it grants +X bonus.


      ----------------------------------
      For the love of Ashuruk, no second round conditional bonus's. Either 1st round, devastating charge, or all the time. You guys keep pushing the game for MSU so 2nd round stuff is just a waste of memory.
      ....unless of course you were to make it an incremental. On second round the unit gains battlefocus on a 6+, on the 3rd round it gains battlefocus 5+, then 4+. That would be worth remembering and also help speed up pillow fights.
      And you guys gave it to Horders in DL which also goes above the 3 supporting attacks for back rank models so no one be posting this incremental battle-focus would be too OP.

      ---------------------------------

      Artillery, weapon teams, etc...
      This kinda touches on the top of the Dwarf Holds stuff. Why do Infernal Dwarves suddenly make inferior artillery with no engineering rune? But they can make infernal armour and weapons, etc... Making good equipment feels like it is a dwarf racial thing. Unless of course the ID are so corrupted that they are very different, but last I read that is not the direction T9A has chosen for Infernal Dwarves.
      Make it feel like a dwarf artillery piece. Obviously, no need to slap that +4 engineering rune on it to make it as OP as the DH stuff. But some kind of +1 or a one time re-roll or something. Just to show that it is some fine dwarf craftsmanship.
      And if it is upgraded to bound daemon then it loses this craftsmanship. ....kinda provides a pro/con to upgrading which will help mitigate the massive points costs of upgrading.


      ---------------------------------
      Tauruk and Tauruk Anointed.
      I'm fairly happy with these unit choices as they are now. You gotta pick the appropriate matchup for them of course.
      I see lots of people complain about their agility. Perhaps this is a perfect place to suggest that an infernal weapon on these guys would increase their agility? Although the True Grit rule solves all the agility problems.
      With armies that have a problem with low agility, they need a way to mitigate that. Either through being a horde army, tough so they can survive being hit first, or have a special rule like true grit, or have access to spells/abilities that can increase the agility.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Peacemaker ().

    • @ID Core team

      You know where to find my idea thread about new items and rules. Also my thread about magical artillery.
      Hope that this gets implemented in any way. :)

      Forge of the Inferno (new army book idea thread)



      Despite that I would like to see the return of the two ID side armies (artillery focus and cult of lugar) that were there for a short time. I still think that it can be done and could give some space for interesting lists.
      Maybe it could also help against the ridiculous core setup of MSU flintlocks and/or slaves spam...

      My personal main interest is still the magical/demonical artillery. Something nobody has and HAS to be emphacized.
      DH have their runes, EOS have their diverse and cheap ones - give ID the magical ones.
      Give them all access to ogres.
      Give them all access to diverse demonic infusion.
      Make us the heavy shooting faction that we have been promised to and not this ridiculous stuff that we are now.


      All other of my hopes were already named.



      Lets the flames burn higher my friends!

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Ferkinason ().

    • What are we? I think that in the core what defines us is our status of Jack of all trades army. Apprentice of all, master of none.

      What can ID army do better than all other armies? Nothing, imho, the closest one being able to deal with hordes of bad units like zombies.

      In which aspect ID are worse than all other armies? None also.

      We aren't the best at anything, we aren't the worst at anything.

      Edited: was going to do a new thread with some ideas, since nobody posted, I'm going to do it here.

      - Engineer: he deserves a special entry on his own (and a proper name: Hellsmith or something in the line). This will allow us to make him special, instead of 20 points extra rule. I would like him to be in Hail of Gods instead of Barrage. I would like him to be a caster with fixed spells, so he becomes less versatile. My proposals, Apprentice (so no generating veil tokens) with Pentagram of Pain from Occultism and Word of Iron from Alchemy. I think this two lores fit him, occultism since they are the ones who bound demons to warmachines and I guess Alchemy is needed to make the steel who envolves those demons in according way. Special weapons could be cool on him too.

      - Even if I like the current CoA, if it has to be changed, CoA giving parry is something I still like. It bosts paired and great weapons, and the ones being worsened are hand weapon and shield Citadel Guard and Infernal Warriors, which almost no one takes.

      - Core dwarves deserve more options of weapons.

      - If CoA doesn't change, Fan the Flames should give Battle Focus insteado of Hatred, since it is more consistent with the rules the army has.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Manxol ().

    • The Engineer deserves to be something special. Heis responsible for summoning the bound demons, and the repairing the war maschines.

      I think he should Not be a normal wizzard at all, but for example, he could help with Tokkens war maschines to do better. Or he can increase the range of War maschines or repair them.

      Normal dwarfs have their runes, we have the engineer.
    • ...repairing war machines/daemon machines is interesting.

      If you think about it's tactical applications it adds to the ranged vs ranged matchups. I'm assuming warmachiens wouldn't be repaired while in combat so it just helps negate enemies plunking off a wound or two with their own ranged attacks.

      Fluff wise it's fine for him to also be a wizard. Because then it makes sense that he can heal daemon infused machines. He does like a combination of repair/heal. ...which is why other armies engineers can't just do a battlefield repair.


      Now, repairing wounds on a basic war machine inst too powerful, it also contradicts occultism because you can sac wounds on your warmachines and then repair them.
      Healing/repairing the bound daemons is on the stronger side. We can kinda do that with the magic bound spell item.
      For full armybook redoo, who knows? Maybe the bound spell gets merged with engineer. Then you have to chose to baby sit warmachines or advance up with the bound daemons.