Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

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.

  • Giladis wrote:

    I am really curious why the Frosty Aura is rated so low. I would say that at the current price Frosty is too expensive for what they provide the army. But if the ability is viewed on it own it the the right tool to tip the balance where necessary. To push 4+ to 5+ or 5+ to 6+ or ensure out already high Agi units strike before certain high Agi opponents like units with Spears, other Elves or Warriors.

    -1 to be hit is a simple 16% chance difference -2OS and -2DS can give you a 16% chance difference in two departments as well as ensuring to strike first.
    Three problems with this assessment:

    1) if you are using the Frost Phoenix’s effect, you are charging. So MOST of our book is Agi6 when charging, with FW, SM, and KoR at Agi7. Literally the only things going first besides some characters are Elven Spears. The only thing going simultaneously are the three elven Super Elites. “Ensuring we strike first” doesn’t require the Frost Phoenix. It requires getting the charge. Often even THAT is not a requirement, as plenty of books cannot reach Agi5 with just charging momentum.

    2) 5+ to 6+ cannot happen without additional investment. Either a Divination mage with Scrying (225 to 350 extra points), Grey Watchers (165 points minimum), or Navigator’s Banner (75 points, but only one unit can do it). So that’s out for consideration because the Frost Phoenix can’t manage it on its own.

    3) 4+ to 5+ requires either a) Sword Masters vs non-elven OS4 or lower, or b) OS3 or lower vs our elites, or c) Additional investment for our Core. So you either luck out into specific matchups (and it IS luck. Zero skill involved in THIS one), or pay additional points to support your support piece into doing it’s job.

    That’s why it’s rated so low: it’s a support piece that cannot do its job unless you spend more points to support it.

    Peacemaker wrote:

    Or HBE could get parry to replace martial discipline. Maybe get an item, or another way to get similar effects.
    That’s STILL a bad idea. For starters, it wouldn’t lead to a points drop. Heck, for several units it might lead to a point HIKE because now there’s a more tangible benefit that’s easier to quantify. It’s also a rule that often CANNOT provide benefit but is still paid for. So that’s a bust.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

  • I just don't see how you guys think Parry is so bad. On it's own, ya it's pretty useless, but once you have some synergies then a good player can take advantage of it. Or possibly a Parry type rules with some extras or conditions like others have suggested.
    Off the top of my head: Model gains Parry. Gains an additional +1 Defense Skill if unit has more ranks then opponent.
    This really encourages battleline. Tweak other units, rules, items, etc... as needed of course.

    If you want a complex army that requires a high skill set then you need conditional rules like parry that combines with other synergies in the book to make effective use with it.
    If you want an easy army then just toss distracting on everything.

    As for martial discipline - I know it's good. But it is a guerilla tactic.
    High Elves will never be battleline elves that can also run around fleeing with guerilla tactics and have good shooting. And High Elves can't just have extra armour AND -1 to hit, and 6+ aegis on everything either.

    And if High Elves are slated to be a guerilla playstyle army, then maybe give it a new name.
    Call then Hunter Elves
  • Eldren wrote:

    To add insult to injury, it's not even an actual "aura" :p. At 380pts, it's probably the most insanely overpriced thing in the game when considering price/performance.
    I don't disagree that the Frosty is a bit weak since it need the opponent to have pretty specific stats to matter.

    But I can come up with a few things more overpriced like a Cadaver Wagon or a Wriath on Revenant.. or how about Trolls?

    Cheer up :)
  • One thing I'd love to see is T9A take the approach the new edition of LotR has and make High Elven heroes the absolute beat sticks they should be, one thing that always frustrated me was how you'd have these descriptions of Aenarion and co. (ok, extreme example) in the old fluff being unstoppable combat monsters, and then having this measly slightly better than human profile to work with in game. I'd like to see the QC honour be reworked to be more of an extreme fighter, maybe even make the AD contingent on taking that honour, which might allow them to restore it to it's rightful place as the daddy of monsters.
  • @My_Kin:

    I would love that too, but sadly that won't happen.

    Giladis wrote:

    @WhammeWhamme I did not say cheap. I said not inefficient. Why would that automatically be read as cheap?

    Scourge of Wrath is expensive as hell but it is not inefficient.


    elendor_f wrote:

    Is this a roughly correct tier list in the background?

    0. Daemon characters, Exalted Heralds
    1. Chosen Lords, Vampire Counts, Doomlords
    2. Saurian Warlords, Ogre Khans, Iron Orc Warlords
    3. UD Pharaohs, Elf Lords (Dread, Highborn, Sylvan), Dwarf Kings, ID Overlords, KoE Lords, Common/Feral Orc Warlords, Beast Lords
    4. Vermin Tyrants, EoS Marshals and Knight Commanders,
    5. Goblin Kings
    Very roughly yes. It would probably be good if a few more tiers are there to separate some. Also Large and Gigantic characters slightly make such a list difficult to make.
    But roughly speaking and if we are only looking at the Standard Sized characters Chosen Lords and Brotherhood Vampires should be top dogs.

    Now this has not yet been fully crystalised and is open to changes as we move into FAB creation but the list I present bellow is more or less correct on how from a background perspective and from in game rules perspective (attached eventually also to point cost - though keep in mind taking into account if the pricing is spot on, not temporary situations where characters are overpriced/underpriced for what they do).

    In addition I will just include ex-Lord Level characters because introducing ex-Hero Level characters makes the list very complex.

    1. Chosen Lord, Brotherhood Vampire Count
    2. Saurian Warlord, Iron Orc Warlord, Strigoi Vampire Count
    3. Pharaoh, Vampire Count (other), Elf Prince (Dread, Highborn, Sylvan), Dwarf King, Infernal Overlord
    4. Common/Feral Orc Warlord, Beast Lord, Duke, Knight Commander
    5. Vermin Tyrant, Marshal, Goblin King

    Now as we move forward specific modifications of these characters such as Grail Characters, SE Kindreds, HE Honours etc may go up and down this list.

    :)

    Here you can see the overall "powerlevel" among the different races.

    So an elf is above average, but below an equivalent iron orc, chaos warrior or lizardmen. And I talk about the best equipped versions of those races of course.

    No "Aenarion fought against 4 greater daemons of chaos" anymore.
    Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"

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

  • @Aegon unfortunately I think you're right. Unless I'm mistaken an HBE Lord atm isn't near those others at that power level, certainly not a dwarf king who can be an absolute monster. Personally while I don't think we should be anywhere near as durable as those top tier characters, I do think we should be getting close in damage output, if elves are going to be glass cannons, they do need the cannon part.
  • @My_Kin:

    Unfortunately, I was talking about the overall powerlevel, so both offense and defense.

    Personally, I would like to see our characters on top of that list; among vampire, chaos lords and lizardmen.

    In that category, we shouldn't shine via toughness or a big HP pool, but through evasion = being hard to hit (5+ and 6+).

    Our current OS/DS skill system doesn't grant you the base to achieve something like that, sadly.

    I don't like this "humans with pointy ears" approach; there should be something mythical and awe-inspiring when you think of elves.

    A dwindling race of super-humans, who can still maintain an powerful empire, despite the fact that they are so low in numbers.

    I have the feeling that the future powergap (fluff-wise of course) will be more like the difference between Westeros and Valyria (for those who watch Game of Thrones :) ).

    Anyway, there is nothing official out, so I will wait and see.
    Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
  • cptcosmic wrote:

    not having an aura is fine but then then the model needs to be able to stick with serious combat units in CC and have a meaningful effect aswell.
    Exactly this.

    I have tried and think of some things the Frosty could give to represent this, and here is one suggestion:

    "Friendly units engaged in a combat with a Frost Phoenix gets +1 Armour."

    Not an aura, so does not count as a buff wagon. Could be added with a - to enemy agi if more *umph* is needed.

    This could support both characters and units in an aggressive list but still gling on to the defensive nature of HBE that some ppl want to see.
  • DanT wrote:

    Trains_Get_Robbed wrote:

    I feel that there was one list: Colins. That was “different” at the most recent tournament in England.

    Sweden had “different” lists compared to 2.0, but were mainly largely protect the castle lists.

    Even Dans list maintained largely static elements, with one or two units that consisted of high mobility -though it doesn’t push any charging zonal threats.
    I don't understand the sentence "though it doesn't push any charging zonal threats".
    But I disagree with the first bit; my list was not largely static. And the way I played it, the high speed and lateral manoeuvrability of many of the elements was important. I rammed the entire list down my opponents throat in one tournament game and several practice games.
    The queens guard were fairly static of course, but with march 10, a relatively small footprint and swift reform+adv5+qtf, they are hardly static in the sense that it means for most armies.
    My list could be proactive and exploit mistakes in ways that a castle type list simply can't.
    Note that Thomas and Furion's lists at ETC didn't look like castle builds either...
    But no-one believed Thomas either from what I recall from earlier discussion in this thread.


    Dan deserves credit for his win. However, his RnG inn swiss matchups was choice, and after hearing other AAR for other HBE his list would have struggled against other HBE player opponents.
    Dno what you are referring to here. I guess it might be the slannrat radio podcast? I disagree with a not insignificant amount of the analysis there. And I know the guys who put it out quite well :P

    As I’ve said before you have to be lucky, and good to do well at tournaments.
    This is for sure a true statement, and is true independent of the army one uses.

    Yes I the one sentence I was referring Slannrat.

    Your list has 6 Ryma Knights as your lone real force projection.

    The mage is nice, but isn’t a “real threat.” And cannot go up against anything more than middling threats such as low DS, MMU, MSU, low DS, A based Monstrous unit’s.

    Against threats such as (single) concentrated elite units. Your list doesn’t have a answer for it.

    Your list has 4 static elements.


    If you ran up against the opponents Fnarr, or other army types that had similar amounts of force projection, or shooting I don’t think you’d come out with a similar result (regardless of tournament games or normal).

    UD, and SE, or other armies that like MSU, or are slow, and not skilled, or doesn’t put aforementioned hard to kill high concentrated threats in the board can be danced around and picked apart like a surgeon with scalpel.

    VC with Throne, and SA, and DL would cause issues.

    I guess that’s why we play the game right? Good players find a way to win.
    I type on mobile so my spelling mistakes can hide that English is my native tongue. :write: :HE: :KoE:

    Evershade Gaming on YouTube
    youtube.com/channel/UCKjjkWnXanizMuTh5obkxpA

    theforgottenturtle.com An Awesome Painting Blog
  • Trains_Get_Robbed wrote:

    DanT wrote:

    Trains_Get_Robbed wrote:

    I feel that there was one list: Colins. That was “different” at the most recent tournament in England.

    Sweden had “different” lists compared to 2.0, but were mainly largely protect the castle lists.

    Even Dans list maintained largely static elements, with one or two units that consisted of high mobility -though it doesn’t push any charging zonal threats.
    I don't understand the sentence "though it doesn't push any charging zonal threats".
    But I disagree with the first bit; my list was not largely static. And the way I played it, the high speed and lateral manoeuvrability of many of the elements was important. I rammed the entire list down my opponents throat in one tournament game and several practice games.
    The queens guard were fairly static of course, but with march 10, a relatively small footprint and swift reform+adv5+qtf, they are hardly static in the sense that it means for most armies.
    My list could be proactive and exploit mistakes in ways that a castle type list simply can't.
    Note that Thomas and Furion's lists at ETC didn't look like castle builds either...
    But no-one believed Thomas either from what I recall from earlier discussion in this thread.

    Dan deserves credit for his win. However, his RnG inn swiss matchups was choice, and after hearing other AAR for other HBE his list would have struggled against other HBE player opponents.
    Dno what you are referring to here. I guess it might be the slannrat radio podcast? I disagree with a not insignificant amount of the analysis there. And I know the guys who put it out quite well :P

    As I’ve said before you have to be lucky, and good to do well at tournaments.
    This is for sure a true statement, and is true independent of the army one uses.

    Yes I the one sentence I was referring Slannrat.
    Your list has 6 Ryma Knights as your lone real force projection.

    The mage is nice, but isn’t a “real threat.” And cannot go up against anything more than middling threats such as low DS, MMU, MSU, low DS, A based Monstrous unit’s.

    Against threats such as (single) concentrated elite units. Your list doesn’t have a answer for it.

    Your list has 4 static elements.


    If you ran up against the opponents Fnarr, or other army types that had similar amounts of force projection, or shooting I don’t think you’d come out with a similar result (regardless of tournament games or normal).

    UD, and SE, or other armies that like MSU, or are slow, and not skilled, or doesn’t put aforementioned hard to kill high concentrated threats in the board can be danced around and picked apart like a surgeon with scalpel.

    VC with Throne, and SA, and DL would cause issues.

    I guess that’s why we play the game right? Good players find a way to win.
    I beat SA at the event.
    And I had a win and draw vs DL in practice games, both ex England ETC players.

    But, I think there is nothing that I can say that will convince you if you truly believe that my list is short of threat projection and is static.

    My general description of how I used the list hasn't convinced you.
    The brief battle reports I posted in the other thread haven't convinced you.
    My direct statements disagreeing with you haven't convinced you.
    I mean at this point you either think I am a compulsive liar or am so incompetent that everyone else in the UK can barely point their troops the right way.

    I'm gonna go spend my time somewhere where it might actually do some good.
    Ask not what the project can do for you, but what you can do for the project :)

    Don't forget that however convinced you are of your opinion on something in the project, or something it should/shouldn't do, there is someone out there holding on to the opposite belief just as strongly :D

    Or, as Wasteland Warrior says, "Can't please any of the people any of the time!"
  • cptcosmic wrote:

    not having an aura is fine but then then the model needs to be able to stick with serious combat units in CC and have a meaningful effect aswell.
    Shouldn't our Dragons supposed to fill the role of a flying combat monster?

    How about an aura (I know I said it :D ), that grants a 5+ Aegis save against ranged attacks to all friendly units within 6" ?

    Wouldn't that help us with:

    1.) getting more sm into combat

    2.) making a griffon build more useful

    So a simple, but nice buff that synergizes well with elves in general.
    Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
  • My_Kin wrote:

    One thing I'd love to see is T9A take the approach the new edition of LotR has and make High Elven heroes the absolute beat sticks they should be, one thing that always frustrated me was how you'd have these descriptions of Aenarion and co. (ok, extreme example) in the old fluff being unstoppable combat monsters, and then having this measly slightly better than human profile to work with in game. I'd like to see the QC honour be reworked to be more of an extreme fighter, maybe even make the AD contingent on taking that honour, which might allow them to restore it to it's rightful place as the daddy of monsters.
    Okay, TBF,
    Aenarion was literally a living Avatar of an elven god, and rode on the eldest and most powerful living dragon of his time. This is someone so powerful he could swat Archaon AND Nagash simultaneously (after all, he fought four of the strongest greater demons to exist simultaneously and WON (barely, but he won)).

    I don't think that we'd need to be absolute combat monsters. The main issue is that our PURE FIGHTERS need to actually be able to COMPETE on a level with those combat monsters. They don't need to be guaranteed a win or even 50/50 chance of winning. But we gotta have SOMETHING that has a chance on its own (even something like 40/60 against the HbE). If they REQUIRE magic to be able to fight on a level (e.g. odds are <10% on its own and magical buffs for any chance), there's a good chance we won't get them because our units will do the job better while being cheaper (e.g. 5x KoR for hunting down monsters as opposed to a Chariot RH).

    In short, when designing a PURE FIGHTER, one must ensure that they can compete at a level with the top dogs IN SOME WAY (either via focus on certain enemies, unique rules, or straight up stat power). Otherwise there's no point in taking them because when coming up against those top dogs, the pure fighters are dead weight. This becomes even MORE pronounced on "On Foot Only" options (e.g. High Warden of the Flame) that cannot pick their fights.

    Aegon wrote:

    @My_Kin:

    Unfortunately, I was talking about the overall powerlevel, so both offense and defense.

    Personally, I would like to see our characters on top of that list; among vampire, chaos lords and lizardmen.

    In that category, we shouldn't shine via toughness or a big HP pool, but through evasion = being hard to hit (5+ and 6+).

    Our current OS/DS skill system doesn't grant you the base to achieve something like that, sadly.

    I don't like this "humans with pointy ears" approach; there should be something mythical and awe-inspiring when you think of elves.

    A dwindling race of super-humans, who can still maintain an powerful empire, despite the fact that they are so low in numbers.

    I have the feeling that the future powergap (fluff-wise of course) will be more like the difference between Westeros and Valyria (for those who watch Game of Thrones :) ).

    Anyway, there is nothing official out, so I will wait and see.
    Elves in 9th Age aren't super human (e.g. Vanyar/Noldor). Faster naturally, more skilled by nature (because they get longer to practice things), but not inherently superior beyond speed and experience. I agree that there should be a sense of majesty/awe about them (after all long lived, inhumanly beautiful creatures SHOULD be inspiring/terrifying), but don't think that elves need an INCREDIBLE combat prowess. The biggest issue is that a lot of the things that would FEEL right and be mechanically viable have been vetoed in R&D for various reasons. Unless that changes, there will continue to be issues with elven design. That is something to look into for the FAB redesign. IMO, the three elven books should be done simultaneously (sorry, DE boyos).

    My_Kin wrote:

    @Aegon unfortunately I think you're right. Unless I'm mistaken an HBE Lord atm isn't near those others at that power level, certainly not a dwarf king who can be an absolute monster. Personally while I don't think we should be anywhere near as durable as those top tier characters, I do think we should be getting close in damage output, if elves are going to be glass cannons, they do need the cannon part.
    So my opinion is that Highborn Elves don't NEED to be absolute combat monsters IF they have the mobility for it. Anyone who can mount up on a flyer or have an M9/10 horse can at least pick their fights and kit themselves out for advantage. HOWEVER, anyone stuck on M5/On Foot DOES need to be on par with those combat monsters. The main idea being that if they cannot pick and choose their fights, they need to be able to hit HARD or survive HARD, like a Dwarf King. Right now we fit into the "hit hard" on foot with the Spear of the Blazing Dawn. . . but "Survive Hard" is not quite there.

    Note that this applies ONLY to pure fighters (Royal Huntsman, High Warden of the Flame, Queen's Cavalier). Entries that provide benefits OUTSIDE of combat (Queen's Companion, Master of Canreig Tower) to carry their weight do not need to be able to punch above their weight class because they carry their weight in other ways.

    PS. Fleet Officer needs to figure out what it wants to do. There's room to explore discipline benefits in the future, but as things stand they aren't very useful or relevant. It needs to either be useful as a support piece for units in the army (ala QC) or be a viable "pure fighter".

    PPS. The Spear of the Blazing Dawn is a bandaid that muddles things because it was made to make On Foot broskis viable, but makes ALL On Foot broseidons the same. As long as every prince is both A4 and has access to the spear, our Honors are going to continue to be messed up. This is one thing that should be seriously looked at during FAB (tbh, almost all of our magic item section needs to be revamped).

    PPS. Not access to the spear, but the spear enchantment itself! Simply slapping a forced great weapon on MoCT and Royal Huntsman and forced Halberd on high Warden would be a HORRIBLE idea.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

  • Fnarrr wrote:

    @DanT has got discipline 11 coldblooded, bur you guys made him roll enough tests for him to break eventually :D
    Yea, @Trains_Get_Robbed and a few others can have that effect on people. :D
    Used to be a Vampire ABC member... then an Elf lass bit me... nowadays I have this insatiable craving for cheese, whine and fancy dresses... 8| The Dawn Host of ArchangelusM

    Army Design Team

    Draecarion, may the Lord grant eternal peace to your soul, my Friend!
  • Aegon wrote:

    Shouldn't our Dragons supposed to fill the role of a flying combat monster?
    dragon also has "a bit" more offense AND defense.

    sticking in CC = not dying and not giving the enemy additional combat score.

    Marcos24 wrote:

    @Aegon That would actually make a lot of sense, like a blizzard around the frost bird disrupting projectiles
    We had ideas like these in the past already but I bet you can guess what the answer was :)

    Aegon wrote:

    Here you can see the overall "powerlevel" among the different races.

    So an elf is above average, but below an equivalent iron orc, chaos warrior or lizardmen. And I talk about the best equipped versions of those races of course.

    No "Aenarion fought against 4 greater daemons of chaos" anymore.
    anyone remembers how we were told, not so long ago, that HBE characters are not supposed to provide synergy but be stronger than their cousins? nothing but lies :)

    The post was edited 3 times, last by cptcosmic ().