What are the most internally balanced books? What are the least internally balanced books?

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.

  • Disciples are an abberation in vs army. Never ever vs playstyle should be based on them as main fighting force. They should be support unit a 'hammer armed egg' to deal final blow to units fighting slaves monks or R@A. Not a grinding chainsaw.

    IMO there is a design flaw in their concept. They are frenzied and frenzied egg becomes smashed egg fast. So they were given some protection loosing some if their fragality. And became all purpose unit with option to moonwalk...

    I should say nerfing them without boosting other units is no way to go...
    StormRider Games
    StormRider Facebook
    _____________Report your battle results using mobile app: T9A Magic Flux!
  • lawgnome wrote:

    @Zamo

    Please stay on the topic of the thread. If you do not wish to participate, you do not have to.
    Dont worry, I will as you should have done since the begining . I'll respectfully keep reading the thread, which I find very interesting too. ;)

    End of offtopic.
    Xhoka Lizards player - Spain

    Guardianes del Sur
    Youtube --> Guardianes del Sur
    Facebook -->Guardianes del Sur
    Instagram --> Guardianes del Sur
  • from the armies I play:
    Ogres - strong internal, strong external
    O&G- decent internal, decent external
    WotDG- meh internal, awful external
    Dwarven Holds - decent internal, average external
    Daemon Legions (my main)- horrid internal, decent-ish external.

    I could type for miles on the last one... but we re in line for a whole new AB so, all good.
    Goblin, Daemon Legions and Empire of Sonnstahl Player and 9th Age Staffer
    Follow my journey through the world of 9th Age HERE
  • My views on the armies I own, and based on my own meta:

    BH great internal balance.
    DE not a fan of their Internal balance. Or external as a result.
    DL better than most people give credit for. I even find Pestilence fun to play.
    DH decent internal balance with some stand out units.
    EOS Hate the balance here. Internal and external seems to be off, making this a book where I like the vibe but not the army.
    HB : Even though I have the army I havent played enough with them to judge. Pyromancy is hurting their external balance though like the other elves.
    KOE: Needs more units. If I dont like a unit now because of X I'm screwed. Like filthy Peasants.
    iD: Good internal, bit ott external.
    OK: Good Internal balance in units, less in equipment (magic and non magic).
    OG : One of the best. I see players here use everything in the book and even my Spider themed list works.
    VS: Hmm. Its good external, bad internal.
    VC: Same as VS, although I might see it as having a better internal balance.
    UD: Not played them a lot. I miss the monster Mash list option compared to MSU or deathstar... making me play the army less and less.
    SE: Internal balance feels off to me with the current %selection, making some units more worthy for bringing more bang for their points.
    SA: Pretty decent internal balance except for characters.
    WDG: Euh. Find it hard to judge since my WDG army is all mounted...
  • lawgnome wrote:

    Do the plague disciples provide a unique role to the army? Something that could not be provided elsewhere if there were strategic buffs/nerfs to other units?

    Is the plague disciple central to a key VS play style? Does their current status as being the most desirable unit in the book prevent other play styles from being used?
    Currently, yes, they do provide a unique roll to the army. They are one of the only units in the book that can win a combat consistently, The pendulum being the other but it's 'spensive.

    Yes, that role could be filled by other units if they got buffed, but the toning down of VS shooting, followed by the heavy magic overhaul, that stripped VS of it's lore whose entire purpose was basically make rats fight better, has left big combat blocks (what used to be this armies bread and butter rather subpar).

    Vermin hulks could fill a similiar roll if they didn't essentially auto break when losing combat.

    Your second set of questions is all backwards. The lack of other viable playstyles is what has given rise to the disciple spam, the grenadier spam etc. If you can't take big blocks and have them be effective, then spamming the glass cannon options becomes the only other viable strategy.

    Add in that the ONLY scorign comes from core, and MSU is essentially forced upon the army. you can take 2 scoring units that can't stand on their own, or just spam MSU for lots of scoring units, that are just as ineffectual in combat.
    “You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyways.” -Lan Mandragoran, EotW


    Dovie’andi se tovya sagain.
  • Inner balance is responsible for the character of the army. If competitive armies are far away from feel and look of an army then inner balance is not what we would like it to be.

    VS have already been mentioned. Became msu centered around plague duscuples.

    KoE most competitive builds are based on horde serfs with knights serving secondary role.

    EoS became army of foot knights (ig) supported by some soldiers snd knights.

    I have the feeling that neither of those armies is now what I would expect it to be. Looks a bit like those armies swaped their platstyles. Is it intended and we'll see it in the background or inner balance is crap in all those cases? Other armies like that?
    StormRider Games
    StormRider Facebook
    _____________Report your battle results using mobile app: T9A Magic Flux!
  • I agree VS could use attention but to me the others are fine.

    KoE - should a faction based on a feudal society field a lot of peasants? Seems legit.

    SoE seems landsnecht / black army era and this playstyle doesn't seem out of character for them either.

    I will accept that there is a lot of disagreement on playstyle though. There is some consternation on the OnG boards that they have become a shooting army - mass goblin bows seem very thematic to me but not to others.

    On the other hand I saw BH as one of the most magical races but the vision of others disagreed.
  • I agree on EoS - Imperial Guard can be a real political power in Empire. A way emperor controls his nobles and knightly orders. His elite soldiers are not only there to guard his palace but they are garrisoned in every mayor city and strategically located fort. A very centralized and oppressive empire it would be, very different to GW but very fluffy. Second power also controlled or at least used by emperor would be free companies - mercenary bands with emperors letters roaming the countryside when on leave and keeping nobles occupied. Ragtag bandits really more then soldiers.

    But KoE? No feudal armies ever led peasants for other reasons then tend the camp. There were professional soldiers and mercenaries but no peasant crowds unless there was an uprising and then feudal armies were fighting peasants not leading them. Arming masses of peasants was against interest of nobles...
    StormRider Games
    StormRider Facebook
    _____________Report your battle results using mobile app: T9A Magic Flux!
  • lawgnome wrote:

    yrtomin wrote:

    Could we do a vote on this, would be intresting to see.
    I'm not sure I can set up polls, but that is the point of the thread. I want to see what people think of armies that they play and use regularly, as they have the most personal knowledge of the matter.
    For me, I play OK, SA, and ID. I would rank them as OK>SA>ID. I can find a place for any unit in an OK army (depending on the list type I want to play. I'm not bringing a kin eater in a rush list, but it would be awesome in a shooting heavy list, etc.) With ID, most of the units are useful, but there are some that are consistently outshined by everything else (blunderbuss, volcano cannon, and disciples, for example). With SA, I think a lot of units are useful in certain instances, though there are some that are less desirable (ramphodon riders and raptor riders for me).

    But I don't know about other armies. I hear that HBE has some problems with frost phoenixes and sea guard being undesirable, for instance. I am hoping to get more information from players as to what they feel about their army (because I feel there is a big difference between something being desirable and something being competitive. Just because something doesn't show up in the most competitive of lists doesn't mean that it is a bad design, it could just be that it doesn't fit the current meta
    Yup, frustrating you can't make polls on this forum. Because I LOVE polls! :/

    Question: there is a lot of data available from various tournaments. Also the Community Managers of each individual army could give you a list of units - and upgrades, magical items - and their use and appreciations. Wouldn't that say a lot more and more reliably than what some individuals in this thread tell you?

    In any case. I have/play HbE, SA and DE. I'm not that good a player that I can say 100% sure what's viable and what is not and why.
    But I can provide you with statistics. For example:

    Saurian Ancients



    - All Characters except the Caiman Ancient have their uses, some more than others. The Caiman Ancient is absolutely FUBAR and need a re-design (BSB option, Ld8, +1A, better/more buffs) or point adjustment.
    - Skinks and Saurus Warriors are both taken a lot, which doesn't say a lot as they are mandatory (20% Core). Except that they are both taken in about equal measure, which seems to indicate they are both about equally viable - and SW aren't considered a bad core unit. SW mostly use hand weapons over spears (cheaper, parry) and don't use any of the 4 available totems, except an occasional Jaguar. I guess Crocodile (-1AP) will be either very popular or nerfed after 2.0. Totems being mandatory for all your SW if you take them definitely doesn't help making them more popular (too expensive).
    Skinks seem to use all weapon options (bows being picked least) - which seems to be quite balanced.
    - None of the Special units is considered very good. Caimans offer a can opener option so they are used for that - and also see regular use in skink units but they aren't very strong compared to other Monstrous Infantry and a.o. really lack a Magical Banner option (compare Bruisers for 15 ppm less). Temple Guards miss any protection against misfires (for Cuatl Lord bunker) and aren't that good defensively. Snake Swarms are FUBAR. Raptor Riders aren't considered much better (M7 and stupidity doesn't help).
    - In Jungle Guerillas Skink Hunters and Chameleons are used very regularly, almost always with blowpipes (90%). Of the weapon beasts, Spearbacks are the preferred choice as they do decent damage and Saurians lack middle/long ranged offensive options. And Spearbacks are 30pts cheaper than Salamanders.
    The flyers are considered subpar. They lack decent defence (T3), unreliable with only Ld5 (1 less Ld than all other skink riders/elites - while they operate outside Ld bubble) and with a mandatory 3 models they are very expensive as chaff/redirectors (compare 100pt Ld8 Eagles). Thus they are hardly ever taken.
    - Of the Thunder Lizards The Stygiosaur and Taurosaus are both good options; they have decent defense, buffs and attack. The Thyroscutus though lags way behind and is never taken.

    OPTIONS

    Magic paths: of the Cuatl paths, Evocation is never used. The other paths see regular use, especially Fire and Alchemy.
    Skink Priests use Druidism by far the most often. Shamanism sees some occasional use.
    Cuatl Disciplines; 50% of the options are never used (Master of Magic (160 pts), Wandering Path (80 pts) Higher State of Mind (70 pts) Shielded Soul (50 pts), not even in Spanish/Italian TC. They should get a re-design or points adjustment.
    Mounts: most mounts are in a bad state. (regular) Carnosaur, Palanquin, Pteradon, Ramphodon are (almost) never taken. Taurosaur and Alpha Carnosaur see some occasional use. Only the Raptor sees a lot of use.

    So how is the internal balance? I'm no specialist but below table should approximately tell it:

    ok/goodsubparbad
    Characters51
    Core2
    Special31
    Jungle Guerrillas33
    Thunder Lizards21
    Cuatl Disciplines422
    Mounts331


    What internal balance score should this give?
    You could make this analysis for every army book to find out about internal balance.
    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..

    The post was edited 7 times, last by Teowulff: typos; elaborations ().

  • I play HBE and find their internal balance to be all over the place. IMO All the core units apart from Sea Guard are pretty balanced against each other. Some subgroups within categories such as the Elite Infantry options and Bolt Throwers/Sky Sloops are also balanced exceptionally well, with each choice having clear but distinct pros and cons. After that, internal balance goes out the window. The Ancient Allies and Elder Service categories have acceptable internal balance, but Characters have very definite good and bad options. Then when you compare units across categories, everything gets much worse. Core choices lose to their Special, Elder Service and Peacekeeper counterparts on everything accept wounds per point. Most fighty character options feel worse in combat than equivalent points of special units because the special choices can bring many times more attacks and wounds. Finally, some units such as Sea Guard, Grey Watchers, Sky Sloops of the bound spell version and Reaver Chariots simply don't have a place in the army.
  • I play 4 armies:

    HbE have good internal balance. I can find a place in a list for just about every unit. Some of the costs are off, but there is nothing in the army that is downright bad.

    DH I play the least, but similar to the Elves most of the units are useful at worst and pretty great at best. Except for the Golem things.

    VS is a mess. I get tired of playing a plague list, I get tired of playing against plague lists. The last time I had an opponent who tried to not go plague I tabled him by turn 4.

    But my beloved OnG, I can't see how people are saying they are balanced! So many units you will never see in a competitive list, and even in a thematic list because they are kinda boring. Common Orcs, Orcs on Boars, spider raiders, gnasher herds, Bridge Trolls, Skewerers, Wyverns, Mounted "eadbashers... Pretty much most of the book underperforms for their costs. The things that are good, like the Big Spider, Git Launchers, Mad Gits, Feral Orc 'Eadbashers, you see in nearly every list. Yeah, we have tons of options, but I'd rather have fewer that are good than alot that aren't

    Now, that said, I said screw it and run nearly all Orcs. But trust me, the boyz need help. I would nominate O&G as the army with the worst balance.

    O&G Community Support


    "I see you are a man who likes to talk. That is good, for I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk." - Caspar Gutman
  • From ADT pov I think ID, DE have the most problems, followed by OG and VS.
    For O&G the prpblem is they have too many units, leftovers from previous editions. ID pretty much the same. We introduced some completely new units, and some mainly because community asked, and we prefered to go safe and make them a little weaker. At least internal balance was greatly improved compared to what they used to be.

    Army Design Team

    Rules Clarification

    Lexicon Team

    Oceanborn

  • beerbeard wrote:

    HbE have good internal balance. I can find a place in a list for just about every unit. Some of the costs are off, but there is nothing in the army that is downright bad.
    So you must be the one using Ryma Princes, Wardens of the Flame and Fiery Heart mages on young dragons with Gleaming Robes. With a BSB on eagle or griffon. And fielding Reaver Chariots and Grey Watchers a lot. And big Sea Guard blocks.
    ;)

    I do agree it could be a lot worse - but it depends what you understand as "good internal balance". There is a subtle difference between "better than nothing", "useful" and "competitive". I for example find it getting kind of boring to only see LC (and some AD) Princes and QC BSBs in archer blocks simply because the (many) alternatives are (vastly) inferior. Imho that doesn't really point to a good internal balance - where all alternatives are as good as another. If you say HbE has good balance that just means the rest is even worse ..
    ^^

    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..

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

  • Teowulff wrote:

    Another example (external balance): if you do the maths, point for point orcs with bows, shields and spears easily outperform Sea Guard in all aspects, both melee and shooting.
    Unit to unit comparison is not the way external balance works.
  • Armies I feel confident making an assessment of:

    DE: Terrible internal balance. Few truly viable choices. (And I've tried to make all the bad choices work. I really have.)

    HbE: Okay internal balance. Some options not useable, some useable but not really competitive. Multiple playable army types.

    ID: Poor internal balance. Whole categories ignored.

    UD: Okay internal balance. Much like HbE, but fewer playable army types.

    DL: Poor internal balance. Let's just say that half the units which see play do so only because players tend to be monotheist, and that makes your core unit mandatory no matter how bad it is, and your other unit options become quite limited.

    EoS: Okay to decent internal balance. Feels like most units are actually viable choices (with the right supporting units/characters). (Least confident in this assessment).

    Scale: terrible-bad-poor-okay-decent-good-excellent
    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

  • Teowulff wrote:

    beerbeard wrote:

    HbE have good internal balance. I can find a place in a list for just about every unit. Some of the costs are off, but there is nothing in the army that is downright bad.
    So you must be the one using Ryma Princes, Wardens of the Flame and Fiery Heart mages on young dragons with Gleaming Robes. With a BSB on eagle or griffon. And fielding Reaver Chariots and Grey Watchers a lot. And big Sea Guard blocks. ;)

    I do agree it could be a lot worse - but it depends what you understand as "good internal balance". There is a subtle difference between "better than nothing", "useful" and "competitive". I for example find it getting kind of boring to only see LC (and some AD) Princes and QC BSBs in archer blocks simply because the (many) alternatives are (vastly) inferior. Imho that doesn't really point to a good internal balance - where all alternatives are as good as another. If you say HbE has good balance that just means the rest is even worse ..
    ^^
    Ryma Princes - Yes. Flank charges into existing combats only. I pull it off maybe every 3rd game.
    I've BSB'ed on a griffon, not as often as I like. - 18" bubble, yes please. Only works when I have other big targets.
    I use Grey Watchers a lot - good for hunting war machines, with those poison shots.
    I love Big Sea Guard blocks. - I'm stupid enough to think Stand & Shoot is an effective strategy.

    I didn't say I was any good!

    O&G Community Support


    "I see you are a man who likes to talk. That is good, for I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk." - Caspar Gutman