Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 257.

  • Quote from Omarcomin: “xoxox gossipgirl ”

  • Quote from Cortrillion: “I have a question. Is the version BRB we have now balanced? If yes, then why would there be a reason to change it? If there is no reason to change it, why “Freeze it”? ” There are some visual identity stuff that needs to be done as well as adjustments to some rules and mechanics that are believed can be improved. Quote from Megusta: “Quote from Omarcomin: “We're just the usual suspects and never-contents. Our opinions, expertise, or dedication to the same project don't m…

  • Quote from Omarcomin: “Would it not make sense to have a small team that act as custodians of the current version and make small bi-monthly balance tweaks here and there mostly related to point costs... meanwhile in the background the team at large works on 2.0 which will ultimately be a completely new version? Or is that too logical? ” No it isn't logical because people that would be have to review these bi-monthy balance tweaks are the people that need to work on the 2.0 If it was that simple …

  • @Archeron not freezing now means the definite rules set that is going to be frozen for several years would be pushed even further in the future and we want to avoid that.

  • Quote from Dziedzic: “Guys, you realy need to set up one version and then try to defend it. Once there will be no other things than 2.0 after 1.3, now there will be 1.99 before 2.0...and if 2.0 will be in august, when 1.99 will be realased? WTF? Why we have to play 1.3? Give us 1.99 and start testing so 2.0 can be in august! ” 1.99 is the 2.0 - so that we can have a clear round number which we will freeze. It would rather ugly to have version 2.1.1 frozen as a rules set. We can't give you 1.99 n…

  • Quote from Archeron: “Or you mean the Beta version which is only for testing? ” 1.99 is the 2.0 given to the community to test and proofread. So that when 2.0 is released there is no need for 2.1 changes to the main rulebook.

  • That is why there is going to be 1.99 2.0 to do the testing and check for potential problems as far as the Rulebook goes, but individual AB can continue to evolve after that.

  • Quote from Poisonblade: “That's what i said. I think it's compatible the creation of 2.0 and the full armybooks at the same time, because there won't be major changes in the rulebook. But it's only my opinion. ” Agreed, but not in the volume we were doing at the moment the strain on the staff was becoming to much so we decided to slow down to save people from burning out. Also even if the changes aren't major there is quite a lot of work which consumes time before they are made. Guys you really …

  • @Poisonblade cosmetic means there will not be major changes to the rules, the game will still feel and play the same. What will be done is to improve the things we still find lacking and to ensure our rules set in as airtight for all aspects of this project.

  • Quote from genoveffo89: “On the other hand this project has a bad relationship with deadlines. No one wants to put a deadline and stick to it. ” It is quite the opposite. All of our troubles up to this point have largely been related to sticking to deadlines. So we have decided on a different approach.

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “What IS the RT? No, seriously. It's not actually the official name of any group I could find. ”

  • Is this for me or @IoRi78 ? From experience in the previous period it goes into thousands of work hours when all is combined.

  • Quote from IoRi78: “All book should be done by the same team and all in one time, with out the weight of stuff like fluff ” This is not possible because the background that was built and is still being expanded is what is driving the rework so that all the armies we support in our game are really ours while still maintaining the same feel and theme.

  • Quote from Drakkar: “1.0 was released earlier because of the ETC and 1.1 was rushed for the same reason. 1.2 was released earlier because of the Masters. Saying "it has nothing to do with the ETC" is just weird to see here, especially from someone who is so invested in ETC like you. ” As has been mentioned by and RT member earlier in this topic we do not deny the reasons why 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 were released when they were. This delay is not attached to the ETC and I will suggest the announcement t…

  • Quote from 9thageAwesome: “I also vote for holding all the army books until they are all ready. There is almost no way to balance books when you release them 4 at a time or a few at a time. The character and fluff will cause power creep in the rules. Just by making units different is allows more ability to strategize and more combos/synergy. This ruined the old game. The best thing about 9th age is that all the army books get updated at the same time. Which makes it mostly fair. ” From a timesca…

  • Quote from DarkSky: “So instead of getting the reworks for DL, WDG, ID and DE in four months, we now have to wait until August, just because the ETC is happening there? ” No. Because the relevant teams need time to work on the 2.0 Rulebook and don't have sufficient time left to participate in the creation of the AB. We want to avoid the ABC scenario where a lot of work was lost because the material they were working on was not properly supervised so when the review phase came a lot of it had to …

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “My join date (end of 2015) represents roughly the moment when I first became aware T9A existed. Takes a bit of a run-up from there to be willing to sacrifice a big chunk of your free time to help out the project, no? ” I wasn't implying that you could have made an application than just pointing out there was one since you have joined the site Quote from WhammeWhamme: “So *currently* the policy appears to be "discourage people from applying to help with rules-writing, de…

  • Quote from F.Caccia: “and change your recruitment criteria. ” I trust our HR as they do that in their real life and the criteria that are being used. Just being good at the game is not enough. Quote from WhammeWhamme: “... ” They were before and according to your date of joining the site there was at least one since you were here

  • Quote from F.Caccia: “Perhaps sometime soon you'll also realise what that really is. ” That people have lives outside 9th Age Quote from F.Caccia: “Then maybe get more people involved? I know plenty of good players with better experience and understanding than the ones currently working on the books, who have never, or rarely, been involved in the design of this game. Something I still have to understand after almost two years. ” We had several recruiting campaigns why have not these people appl…

  • Quote from Omarcomin: “should have kept the old ABC structure. ” Not possible if we wanted a unified approach to design and as impartial designers as possible. Also it would put even more pressure on the RT to manage all those teams.