Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 945.

  • Quote from LeVil1: “Can someone tells me why the Hell horde = no rank ? It was nearly already the case, no ? (Because for combat result 5*8 is much better than 10*4. Even if nowadays hordes are 8 files wide.) ” To disincentivize hordes of normal troops and give an extra buff to elites, one can only assume. Theo

  • Maza's was good because it made archers better, without volley fire most people won't take an archer unit where the Zappin' Bow is worthwhile. Theo

  • Quote from Sperber: “It was a well known mistake of GW to not adjusting the old unbalances with a new edition but to start again from scratch every edition anew, and thus improving nothing. T9a seems to copy this GW mistakes a bit in my opinion. ” Quote from Sperber: “This is a psychological thing: Why should this stuff be worthwhile this time if it will change anyway in the near future - because this is what it has always done despite of all the arguments in the actual situations, now all forgo…

  • The Doomwheel- Concept

    Theorox - - The Vermin Swarm (VS)

    Post

    Quote from KeyserSoze: “Well, it works both ways. If the project tries to satisfy fluffy players, it will lose all the competitive players who will search for a more stable and strategic game. ” Hardly. When those people got into the game not a thought was spared for tournament players. Quote from KeyserSoze: “Also a sidenote: background and design teams do not base their designs upon existing models of any manufacturer, but on other things like playstyles and strengths of an army. ” That ain't …

  • The Doomwheel- Concept

    Theorox - - The Vermin Swarm (VS)

    Post

    The Dreadmill is supposed to be a wacky unreliable unit with high damage potential, not a super-consistent and rather weak CC unit with a lame cannon. Power level isn't relevant, the basic design is boring. Theo

  • Quote from Kolata: “O&G sucked in cc, everyone cried for buffs. Now cc got buffed, but instead of being happy and going to kick axs in combat, everyone cries for lost volley fire It's ridiculous. Go play the game guys and then come back with some worthy feedback. ” I'm sorry, but removing the rule that made non-elven archers worth taking and brought O&G up to only being the weakest army by a narrow margin was never going to be a popular move. Nor was it motivated. The CC buffs we got wit…

  • Quote from JimMorr: “IMO: the day all Full Army Books are published and frozen will be the first day of T9A dying. ” I don't even mean constantly changing rules, I'm fine with that. Redoing the whole ruleset, magic paths and army books from the ground up when we were already playing the best version of the game ever is what I'm opposed to. Theo

  • Quote from Ney: “And yet it still more balanced than a certain other game ever was ” 1.1 was more balanced than a certain other game ever was but since then there's been change after change after change, many of which have been unfocused, unfun or in some cases even invalidating peoples' themed armies and even individual models. Since 1.1 we've lost army specific magic, had to adapt to a new army composition system, new names for tons of special rules and other things that didn't need it, lost h…

  • Quote from ramesses2: “Beta=not finished. You are asking for a finished and polished product. The idea is to start with a rough draft and iteratively improve on that. In my opinion the beta actually didn't go far enough and was too conservative, and should have allowed more and stronger changes. Either that, or preferibly define more testing phases in which you'd incrementally test the changes. ” We've been playing a rough draft since T9A started. For some reason we're now getting a second editi…

  • It's very odd that volley fire went the way of the dodo so quickly. O&G was the army that used it the most and got the most out of it, and we were still the weakest or among the weakest armies with it. So what was the problem with the rule exactly? That a shooty O&G build could outshoot non-shooty elf builds? It's not like goblin archers were so good that people took more of them than to fill the core percentage. I'm sure I've seen it stated somewhere that O&G archer spam was one of …

  • Quote from berti: “They are faster in movement but lack the resilence and sturdiness to keep the speed on longer marches. ” If Dwarfs had the same march rate as humans they would still be better at marching relative to their walking speed. That more than represents dwarven endurance. Theo

  • Quote from KeyserSoze: “On what basis humans should march longer than dwarves? ” They're...faster? Theo

  • Dwarfs marching faster than humans is ridiculous. I'm very surprised that they weren't given a march value of 8" in the beta book. Theo

  • Quote from Warboss_R'ok: “Well we could start by streamlining away the Ricochet (X) rule to just use sweeping attacks. That would remove more than half a page from our book. ” That's actually... really smart. Quote from Warboss_R'ok: “Mammoth stabber and venomous fangs could both also go - they are holdovers from Warhammer 8th edition are aren't worth the amount of space that is dedicated to them. ” I don't think those are very complicated at all. No need to get rid of them. Theo

  • Quote from sgu97bjd: “Overall I like the rules changes but my problem is going to be getting my gaming group to actually read them. I am the only one in the group who ever plays tournaments, the rest all just play for fun. For that target audience the rules are just not fit for purpose. My recommendation would be to deal with the rules that cover off 90% of situations as the core rulebook and leave the 10% of unusual situations either as an advanced rulebook or my preference would be an FAQ docu…

  • Of Knights and Time Periods

    Theorox - - General Discussion

    Post

    Instead of having Handgunners be late-era musketeers, shorten their range and give them AP 3. They should be arquebus-style muskets, not Napoleonic-style. This would also help separate them from crossbows and give both weapons different roles. I might even be tempted to change crossbows to Str 4 AP0 if I had my finger on the button...perhaps it's best that I don't. Theo

  • Mad 'At's EoS Blog

    Theorox - - User Blogs

    Post

    Håhååå....! Theo

  • Quote from sgu97bjd: “Quote from Superorko: “Warmachines can still have the upgrade and been tall makes them a still good choice. ” What upgrade is that? From my first look I thought that our catapults had got worse due to line of sight changes but their points had not come down. I'm happy if I have got that wrong. ” Orc Overseers do that now. Theo

  • Mostly good changes, for sure! Some of them could even be game changing. The new Giant, special equipment, Hereditary spell and Str 4 boars are all really cool. I do however have a few niggles, some of which seem to be part of a bigger trend at the moment: - New BTF is a buff, but with how wordy and conditional it is I would almost rather have the old one back. If you win combat and have the most ranks...there'll rarely be a second round of combat. - 'Eadbashers up to 35 is good, but there is st…

  • Quote from Ney: “But footprint means something else ... you don't have a footprint that is larger than what you touch ... I thought the ideas was the make the rules easier to understand ... not harder ... ” Well, I'd expect anything called a boundary to circumscribe the unit exactly, not sure it's easier to use a made up term like "boundary rectangle" than going slightly off of the common usage of "footprint". Theo