New HbE Book!! Some modification to make our army great Again !

    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!

    • New HbE Book!! Some modification to make our army great Again !

      Here is the Book corrected by me. I am not an expert in balancing points, so you will maybe find some costs too high or too low.

      First Version : drive.google.com/file/d/1Zhdgh…u8-dM6w3/view?usp=sharing
      2d Version : drive.google.com/file/d/1b4pAA…FlhhiQHp/view?usp=sharing
      3rd Version (22.05.2019) : drive.google.com/file/d/1HQeXt…l2ks00YK/view?usp=sharing
      4th Version (23.05.2019) : drive.google.com/file/d/1xsEn-…kR7rKN85/view?usp=sharing
      5th Version (24.05.2019) : drive.google.com/file/d/1JdO88…4w6Xny1Q/view?usp=sharing
      6th Version (24.05.2019) : drive.google.com/file/d/1OCqeL…kDWz9Cyz/view?usp=sharing
      7th Version (29.09.2019) : drive.google.com/file/d/13ERVm…vKcy1v7a/view?usp=sharing

      This project aim to give ideas of the future lab that will work on our next book update so every feedback, critics or ideas that make sense are welcome :)

      In the last version, the book aim to give the feeling of being the defensive elf army based on the theme of Ice and Fire

      Thanks in advance for giving me new feedbacks guys

      The post was edited 8 times, last by Edhelnaur: Added the new version ().

    • First I want to say I think the Ruleteam is doing a tremendous job! Noticed 9th Age half a year ago and I think its much better then any of the WH-Editions I have played. [Playing since ~25 years with some breaks in between.] I think we should give them the time they need to make one new AB after the other and well... some have to be made later then others. So please don´t take my activity here as a criticism of the Team or the rules we use right now.

      After that said I took a short look into your book and noticed a few problems I want to point out. [Never brush away new ideas before taking a look.]

      - Armor of Cainrag Tower with a Essence of Mithral would be something like a 0+ armor save [2+ but you need AP3 to make it worse]. Should have a maximum of arm 4 or something like that.

      - The Hereditary way to strong to protect something like a Dragon of a Deathstar from any kind of warmashine. Maybe put the reflect to a set strength and only let every successful save get reflected.

      - Flamewardens with FieRs and RR to wound would smash quite a lot of enemys without breaking a sweat. [Combining the Martial Discipline with the Honour.]

      -Star Metall Alloy maybe rounded down but at least 1. It already sucks enough to only do 1 wound if you hit with your expensive multi-wound weapon and mess up the multi-wound roll.
    • Darock wrote:

      First I want to say I think the Ruleteam is doing a tremendous job! Noticed 9th Age half a year ago and I think its much better then any of the WH-Editions I have played. [Playing since ~25 years with some breaks in between.] I think we should give them the time they need to make one new AB after the other and well... some have to be made later then others. So please don´t take my activity here as a criticism of the Team or the rules we use right now.


      I agree with you. The purpose of this thread is not to criticise their work (they did an incredible job) but to suggest some ideas for the next lab that will try to balance our army (that is behind actually)

      After that said I took a short look into your book and noticed a few problems I want to point out. [Never brush away new ideas before taking a look.]

      - Armor of Cainrag Tower with a Essence of Mithral would be something like a 0+ armor save [2+ but you need AP3 to make it worse]. Should have a maximum of arm 4 or something like that.


      Hum i didnt thought about the combination of Essence of Mithral... indeed the combination of both make the new armor too strong. A good way to balance it would be :
      The total armor of the model bearer can't be increase beyond 4. (that is 3+)


      - The Hereditary way to strong to protect something like a Dragon of a Deathstar from any kind of warmashine. Maybe put the reflect to a set strength and only let every successful save get reflected.


      You are right, it seems too powerfull atm, but the alternativ you propose is a bit weak and not disuasiv enough in my opinion. An other alternative could be : all the attacks that has wounded the target (before using any save) are reflected

      - Flamewardens with FieRs and RR to wound would smash quite a lot of enemys without breaking a sweat. [Combining the Martial Discipline with the Honour.]


      Haaha you are right, it seems realy op on paper atm. I should definitely remove at least hit on an extra rank since it is now included in our hereditary rule.

      -Star Metall Alloy maybe rounded down but at least 1. It already sucks enough to only do 1 wound if you hit with your expensive multi-wound weapon and mess up the multi-wound roll.


      You are totally Right, i forget to add the "but at least 1".
      Thanks for your feedback :) i will note the changes as soon as possible
    • Grand frere wrote:

      The initiative is good, it should look more precisely but at first reading, I think sometimes you go too far too strong.

      But it's not bad to have done it. What software do you use to edit pdf? I'm looking for a free software because I did the same job as you.
      I use Adobe Acrobat Pro, but i am sorry it is not a free software :(

      Adam wrote:

      Sorry to bring you down a bit but what you wrote is utterly broken. Honor section changes itself would make the book most overpowered of all, and you went on and buffed items and units too + added ridiculously powerful equipment to boot.
      I don't know if it will make our book the best of all, but better that certain ;) . But i agree, the things i added are maybe too strong and i will change it a lot of time don't worry. What are your proposition to replace mine ?

      Archeron wrote:

      Idea okay , KoE for example collecting ideas in same way but your suggestions are too strong.
      I agree, it is a first attempt i will be glad to take in account your feedback like i did with @Darock
    • The last update as been done and the link of it is in the first message of this thread.

      I have taken in account the maximum of the return i received.
      The martial Discipline is fine atm by a lot of players, so i let it like this for now.
      Silver Arrows was fine in point but make some person fear a castle strategie for Hbe so i decrease the restriction to 20 models
      The Armour of Canreig Tower seems fine on SM but too strong on a MoCt with an enchant like Essence of Mithril for exemple. This is true, so i maxed out the total armor of the model to 4 (3+) -> maxed out it will be still worst than a 1+, equivalent to a 2+ and better than a simple 3+.
      Protection of Meladys was too strong, i changed it to keep the same spirit but minimized the dmg output of it with S4.
      I increase the cost of the new Warden of the Flame to take in account the realy strong new one rule.
      the new Fleet officer was realy too strong, i propose something new.
      Glittering Lacquer seems too strong if we remove "the Cavalry models only" no matter how many point we put on it... I don't know what to do with that item.
      Added a rule to Baleig Highlanders. Let me know what do you think about it.
      Nerfed a bit the new Reaver Chariot. Some of you has been worried of seeing our army chariot oriented because of that new rule.
      The lion riders seems good, i haven't got complaint about them atm ^^
      The changes of the cost of the Frost phoenix seems to be appreciated.

      Don't hesitate to propose what you have in mind guys i am all ears
    • For silver arrows, Average is 1 or 2 wounds at AP3 per turn from 20 shots, are they even worth it...

      I can't see HBE having 2 types of special arrow, that's SE territory.

      But I think having a generic HBE longbow in the armoury could work, as someone else mentioned I think, AP1 at long range to represent a disciplined volley of arrows.

      That way, the 3 elves are all different, each with access to a different type of longbow/crossbow.
      death is lighter than a feather, duty heavier than a mountain
    • interesting effort, Edhelnaur! i have a methodological question (for @Archeron, @Vespacian and others too):

      what's the best way for the community to contribute new ideas and designs?

      i think that writing an entire book might be counterproductive, and that the ACS and rulesteam will rather prefer to consider revisions for individual designs, without having to sift them out of a whole book. if this is the case, it might be good for Edhelnaur and friends to know, so they can focus their efforts (creativity & balancing) on individual proposals, rather than squandering their energies in putting together a whole book.


      click the logo and reach the KickStarter page!
    • piteglio wrote:

      i think that writing an entire book might be counterproductive, and that the ACS and rulesteam will rather prefer to consider revisions for individual designs, without having to sift them out of a whole book. if this is the case, it might be good for Edhelnaur and friends to know, so they can focus their efforts (creativity & balancing) on individual proposals, rather than squandering their energies in putting together a whole book.
      individual designs should be seen in a whole context of a full book imho. In this case the creativity (unit/ army fluff) and balancing (army powerlevel / OP combos) will be easier and more productive.
    • Two comments to help you out.

      T9A doccuments can be modified for personal use or distributed, but both is not allowed at the same time so please use the Homebrew Template to produce your document > the-ninth-age.com/index.php?th…mebrew-guidelines-and-hi/


      Second thing is MoCT and Sword Masters are not culturally linked though they share a similar skill :)

      Advisory Board

      Background Team

      Art Team Coordinator

      Team Croatia ETC 2019 Captain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HEROES AND VILLEINS OF THE 9TH AGE
    • Ignoring balance issues, my biggest problem with it is I don't see a cohesive vision of what the army is from your modifications. You might as well just be making individual suggestions at that point. If you're going to remake the book, remake the book, from concepts up.

      I agree with @sonny1086 that a fully reworked book can be valuable, but it's because it fleshes out army-wide identity and concepts rather than just tweaking units. I don't feel like you've really done that.
      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

    • Evaenarion wrote:

      after reading the book i must say i hope the changes to the hbe will be different. Some things do seem too strong (the armour and reflection of meladys dor example) but mainly because it does not solve many issues and creates unnecessary/inadequate bandaids.

      I am also against creating new units/mounts. We have enough trouble balancing making competitive) what we have now.

      Vespacian wrote:

      I like the silver arrows! That’s a nifty idea to improve CA.

      sparkytrypod wrote:

      For silver arrows, Average is 1 or 2 wounds at AP3 per turn from 20 shots, are they even worth it...

      I can't see HBE having 2 types of special arrow, that's SE territory.

      But I think having a generic HBE longbow in the armoury could work, as someone else mentioned I think, AP1 at long range to represent a disciplined volley of arrows.

      That way, the 3 elves are all different, each with access to a different type of longbow/crossbow.

      sonny1086 wrote:

      piteglio wrote:

      i think that writing an entire book might be counterproductive, and that the ACS and rulesteam will rather prefer to consider revisions for individual designs, without having to sift them out of a whole book. if this is the case, it might be good for Edhelnaur and friends to know, so they can focus their efforts (creativity & balancing) on individual proposals, rather than squandering their energies in putting together a whole book.
      individual designs should be seen in a whole context of a full book imho. In this case the creativity (unit/ army fluff) and balancing (army powerlevel / OP combos) will be easier and more productive.

      Giladis wrote:

      Two comments to help you out.

      T9A doccuments can be modified for personal use or distributed, but both is not allowed at the same time so please use the Homebrew Template to produce your document > the-ninth-age.com/index.php?th…mebrew-guidelines-and-hi/


      Second thing is MoCT and Sword Masters are not culturally linked though they share a similar skill :)
      Sorry about the homebrew document, next versions will be made with that template.

      Squirrelloid wrote:

      Ignoring balance issues, my biggest problem with it is I don't see a cohesive vision of what the army is from your modifications. You might as well just be making individual suggestions at that point. If you're going to remake the book, remake the book, from concepts up.

      I agree with @sonny1086 that a fully reworked book can be valuable, but it's because it fleshes out army-wide identity and concepts rather than just tweaking units. I don't feel like you've really done that.
      I will try to summarize what we are discussing about :
      1. The changes does not fix the balance issue we are facing with our book
      2. The changes proposed are too strong/weak
      3. Creating new units/mount will be difficult to balance
      4. Maybe it is better to adjust units one by one instead of the whole book at once

      So i will respond the best i can to all of that:
      1. Ok, so if we want to fix our book, we need to know exactly which aspect of our book/which unit/which rules are responsible of that, and fix that exact thing. Here is my thought. Our biggest weakness is our resilience, T3 and low armor for the entire army make us realy weak to any units having access to shooting and to pyromancy for exemple (this seems to be a Pyro meta ;( ).
      (This is why i wanted to tweak Favour of Meladys in Protection of Meladys)
      In that context Sword Masters are way too uneffective and rarely picked because of that specific reason (Imagine Enveloping Embers on a big unit or Pyroclastic Flow on a small unit of SM... Ashes :thumbdown: ). Even a small unit of 20 goblins with bow are very threatening to SM, which is maybe one of the only Elite unit fearing it...
      Citizen Archers are also a problem S3 AP0 is weak.... very weak. In fact it does nothing, serve only to protect a mage and that is done... If we compare this unit to any other shooting unit, it is one of the weakest. Too expensive, does no dommage ! (even the majority of chaff can't be killed without some boost).
      Our Citizen spears face the same problem of the SM BUT does hit weakly in addition to that (without boost)... Not realy worth it taking, but has scoring so we take it anyway.
      The SG are fine... i guess, i don't realy know, this unit seems to have success played in conjunction with a QG character with the spear and the flaming swords boost, but i feel that without those addition the unit combine the problems of both CS and CA
      The Elein Reavers is a good unit that does not need a modification/option to balance our team, i agree, but it was a fun idea.
      Finally the HL seems fine atm.
      The Reaver Chariots are ... mhe something is unattractive about this unit. We will often take a lion chariot instead of a Reaver so we need to distinguish more the two and make it a viable unit (maybe replace the crew with QG) ?

      And finally Martial Discipline is weak comparing others elves main rules and that contribute to our weakness in my opinion. Tweaking/completely redone that rule could directly balance the whole army if done correctly in my opinion.

      2. We need to debate, to discuss about that and find something balanced and can make sense in our book. @Vespacian and @sparkytrypod are interested about a balance solution bring to CA. I'am also interested of the idea of having a new long bow specific to our army instead of new arrow, but new arrows is not a problem for me neither. we already have 2 and that is an argument to say that our smithing repertory can include those type of weaponry. The 0-20 restriction for the silver arrow or the silver arrow itself seems too weak... 1.5 wound instead of 0.75 for 20 archers is not realy worth it for 2pts/models. But only 1AP at long distance seems better, but also a bit weak comparing to other shooting option the other army can access. Maybe adding arrow OR long bow that has a bonus if the unit hasn't move to symbolize the extreme accuracy of our army ? like so : AP1 at long range. In addition to that If the bearer of the Silver Bow has not move during his turn, his shooting attacks are done with +1 to wound. This is strong, and should be calculated properly. And that could be integrated in the unit in the form of an option. Or maybe Add the bow and the arrow as option. (like The bow for the +1 to wound, and the arrows for the AP1 at long range). Maybe bow = 3pts/model and arrow 1pts/model ?? What do you think about it ?

      3. It will be, but we have time. Lion riders could be a realy fun unit to play and permit players who want to play an army exclusively composed with Chrace unit to be done. This unit make sens in my opinion, we only need to find a good way to balance it and to make the lion guard more attractive if this unit exist one day.

      4. I agree with @sonny1086 on this. Every changes does need to be seen in regards to the whole context.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Edhelnaur: Correcting a word (attractive to unattractive) ().