Dispatches from the front V: Drill Sergeants Update

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

Wondering how the new magic phase feels like? Try it yourself! The Behind The Scenes blog gives you enough to playtest it, including spells of four paths of magic, all hereditary spells and the Dwarven runes!

  • I use my crossbow peasants on the flank next to the board edge or right in the middle of my army.
    As they are just weaker EoS light infantry and I am still happy with them deleting dreadmills Phoenix and other nasty t5 stuff left right and center I am happy to use EoS light infantry as soon as I get my EoS army.

    For me the shot in extra rank is a huuuge

    Having 2 units of 15 guys right now = 8 wide = 16 wide for both.
    Now I only need 10 wide for EoS. That is a reduction of 37.5%!!! That is plain awesome.

    Better movement.
    Better firing arcs.
    Better ability to move units around them. Etc pp

    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”
    Benjamin Franklin


  • IF I can deploy the light troops near my combat blocks. Often not the case, because most of the time I prefer to build a strong infantry center with my army, rather than splitting it up. So I have room for shooters more on the flanks, ending out of parent support very easy.

    As mentioned, it depends on the pricing. Is the 3rd rank, that only comes near a parent unit, priced in basic costs of light troops, they will propably end in not beeing viable without the parent support. (the same is true for the accurate order, but this is at least a bit easier to get, because of the possible 12" range for the orders)


    Of course it is fine to be able to get a less wide front and shoot the same amount. But if this makes the single shoot more expensive, I prefer the cheaper unit.
  • WildcatHendricks wrote:

    @DanT @Fthunder Because everyone is discussing about light infantry, i want to ask my question about the command group again:

    WildcatHendricks wrote:

    I think somewhere was mentioned, that command groups for light infantry will become more viable. Is there already some info about it, or is it meant because light infantry now has a better formation in close combat? (shoot&fight in three ranks)

    I have said nothing about command groups I believe, this may have been some wishful thinking by someone.
    This is fundamentally a core rule issue, as is often the case with EoS.
    There is at least 1 magic banner which will work well on light infantry, so in that sense maybe standards will be more popular.
    Champions and their equipment is a points problem. Maybe I can convince BLT to price them better, we will see...



    Cortrillion wrote:

    Trains_Get_Robbed wrote:

    You all don't know all the new rules and they are secret! The game is totally different and everything changes, but you know... Secret. Your dumb, you don't know the full set of secret changes. You all need to l2p, Epeen Epeen.
    Fixed it for you.

    Now let us leave this long a pained back and forth. Almost all of us don't have the relevant information to make an accurate(pun..) judgment on the power level or tier level of the EoS or light infantry.

    The architects behind the changes say that they are sound, maybe even a little or even a lot on the strong side. @DanT and @Fthunder are both very competent people/players and even though this thread is full of other equally competent players and me, we all, as opposed to DanT and FThunder, lack the entirety of the information needed.

    Yes, the new EoS tweaks look lackluster to say the least. Yes, EoS was an underplayed and mostly (hard to say from statistical data so this is just a feeling) under performing army. And yes, if we take some of the other spoilers for some of the other armies, in a vacuum, the EoS rules look very subpar. I think this is close to the opinion of 80% of the none-play-testers and none-ACS people in here. However, all the Playtesters and the two ACS can't get their hands down over how good the new changes are and how strong the 2.0 EoS book is going to be.

    So lets give them the benefit of support for the good jobs they are all doing and trust that they are right in their expert opinions.

    Cort
    Thanks Cort.

    I should be clear, I am not saying that light infantry are now super powered crazy models.
    But I can see myself using them and them having a useful role, both of which are untrue statements in 1.3.
    I disagree with the playtesters that they are superpowerful, because I think they have kept clear weaknesses (whether this is a bug or a feature is down to personal preference...).


    I do agree that the changes to the EoS book are typically smaller than some of the changes in other books, but this is partly because (as discussed many times before in this forum) one of the biggest problems with EoS is points costs (rather than bloated models with unclear rules or options that are not worthwhile).
    My hope is that the changes the task team made (the task teams have no control over points) have helped the internal balance and maybe made a few units a bit more fun to use.
    Then it is up to the BLT to cost EoS fairly to make them competitive.

    Balancing team

    EoS Community Support

    "Two things gamers hate most is change and the way things are" - Stygian
  • DanT wrote:

    I have said nothing about command groups I believe, this may have been some wishful thinking by someone.This is fundamentally a core rule issue, as is often the case with EoS.
    There is at least 1 magic banner which will work well on light infantry, so in that sense maybe standards will be more popular.
    Champions and their equipment is a points problem. Maybe I can convince BLT to price them better, we will see...
    Thanks for the answer @DanT.

    If i may make a suggestion:

    The Championupgrade from Handgun to Long Rifle OR Repeater Gun should be free.
    Thoughts behind this suggestion:
    1. It would achive a better balance between crossbow- and handgununits.
    2. Because the chamption doesn't hit better than his companions, we would pay 20 points for upgrading a single shot to more range, +1 strengh an +1 ap. Thats fair i think.
    3. Repeater gun was never an option, because if you buy a champion with it it costs 14+20+20=54 points, but for 56 points you get 4 models of light infantry. They have 1 more shot, 3 more wounds and they hit better.

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

  • WildcatHendricks wrote:

    @DanT @Fthunder Because everyone is discussing about light infantry, i want to ask my question about the command group again:

    WildcatHendricks wrote:

    I think somewhere was mentioned, that command groups for light infantry will become more viable. Is there already some info about it, or is it meant because light infantry now has a better formation in close combat? (shoot&fight in three ranks)

    There are currently no changes to the command groups. Points for weapon upgrades may go up or down though.

    Playtester

    EoS Community Support


    Best in Race: Empire of Sonnstahl - Cardiff GT 2016: Dawn of a New Age 2016: Reading Warfare 2016: The England Championships 2017
    Team Wales ETC 2017 - Beast Herds
    Team Scotland ETC 2018 - Captain

    Twitter - @Fthunder89
  • Jackginger wrote:

    I hope the brb grants +1osdsbs for Champions. Overall commander seems too expensive.
    As an KoE player... Nope a champion can be game deciding.


    Problem is that a stupid champion in 6+ light infantry models can hold a 900+ points dragon lord in check for 1 round.

    As long as this is possible champions will be expensive and this results into being over costed for other units

    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”
    Benjamin Franklin


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

  • Well something has to be done to make command groups viable for Light Infantry. I suppose one could either wait around for the main rules to fix the problem, or just make an EoS solution. It could be:

    Repeatergun, Longrifle and repeater pistol all gain +1 to hit in addition their current stats and pricing. This would make the champion worth while but definitely not OP.

    The inclusion of both standard, champion and musican in a Light Infantry unit increases the support-parent unit range from 6" to 8".
    An alternative could be that a full command group = cancels the effects of unwieldy.

    Both options would be pretty cool fluff wise and very much in EoS style. Trained soldiers, responding to fife and drum, sergeants yelling out commands etc. It would underline the fluff that EoS in not about super fighters, but synergies and battle drills. It would certainly not be OP, since you would pay 60 points for it per unit. But it would be fun and give us a reason to include our beautiful command models :)

    What do you think DanT?
  • I think there is a brb fix to the specialweapons. As every weapon option comes with its own to hit profile. This will obviously be made so that the champion will hit as if he had bs4 with special weapons.
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Bloody MIsfire wrote:

    Well something has to be done to make command groups viable for Light Infantry. I suppose one could either wait around for the main rules to fix the problem, or just make an EoS solution. It could be:

    Repeatergun, Longrifle and repeater pistol all gain +1 to hit in addition their current stats and pricing. This would make the champion worth while but definitely not OP.

    The inclusion of both standard, champion and musican in a Light Infantry unit increases the support-parent unit range from 6" to 8".
    An alternative could be that a full command group = cancels the effects of unwieldy.

    Both options would be pretty cool fluff wise and very much in EoS style. Trained soldiers, responding to fife and drum, sergeants yelling out commands etc. It would underline the fluff that EoS in not about super fighters, but synergies and battle drills. It would certainly not be OP, since you would pay 60 points for it per unit. But it would be fun and give us a reason to include our beautiful command models :)

    What do you think DanT?
    Sure, but I think this is all stuff that is best tabled for the full army book rework, where the structural issues can be better addressed and all addressed together.

    Remember that we only had a limited number of redesigns this time around.


    But yes, I think there is lots of scope to tie command models into the parent/support rules in very nice ways.
    We should brainstorm this as a community once the dust has settled on 2.0.
    Then we can fight for it for the full rework.

    Balancing team

    EoS Community Support

    "Two things gamers hate most is change and the way things are" - Stygian
  • Well i think simply get a better price for the special weapon (should be 0 or 5 points in my opinion, to encourage to take 1 champion instead of additionall troops) shoudl be enough for the moment.

    And on the same level, there is an issue with reiter champion (repeater pistol + champion overpriced, and no possibility for repeater gun champion .. what about long rifle, would be so cool). But this is mainly pricing issue. So this is not the discution here.
    cas-p.net / graphic & web designer.
    SE - VS - O&G - EoS / 9th age player.
  • Oh that is true....

    The weapons now have a fixed hit value.

    So if a light infantry gets the profile from a Reiter we can assume the champions gets +1 to hit.


    Example:
    Currently bf 3 champions using the repeatergun hits 1 worse then your other models because of multi shot Malus.


    With new rules normal infantry stays the same. Hitting value is 4+

    BUT:
    The to hit value of repeater gun will most likely be take from the Standard unit. Which means a to hit value of 3+ which is 4+ then with multi shot.


    In conclusion the new profile values will MOST LIKELY buff the champion if he takes other weapons

    “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”
    Benjamin Franklin


  • Klexe wrote:

    I use my crossbow peasants on the flank next to the board edge or right in the middle of my army.
    As they are just weaker EoS light infantry and I am still happy with them deleting dreadmills Phoenix and other nasty t5 stuff left right and center I am happy to use EoS light infantry as soon as I get my EoS army.

    For me the shot in extra rank is a huuuge

    Having 2 units of 15 guys right now = 8 wide = 16 wide for both.
    Now I only need 10 wide for EoS. That is a reduction of 37.5%!!! That is plain awesome.

    Better movement.
    Better firing arcs.
    Better ability to move units around them. Etc pp
    Can it be true that you don't actually have an EoS army, haven't played the army and haven't tried light infantry, e.g. in a tournament?
    Garm glammer ved Gnipahulen!

    Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey. A kiddley divey too, wooden shoe.
  • DanT wrote:

    Bloody MIsfire wrote:

    Well something has to be done to make command groups viable for Light Infantry. I suppose one could either wait around for the main rules to fix the problem, or just make an EoS solution. It could be:

    Repeatergun, Longrifle and repeater pistol all gain +1 to hit in addition their current stats and pricing. This would make the champion worth while but definitely not OP.

    The inclusion of both standard, champion and musican in a Light Infantry unit increases the support-parent unit range from 6" to 8".
    An alternative could be that a full command group = cancels the effects of unwieldy.

    Both options would be pretty cool fluff wise and very much in EoS style. Trained soldiers, responding to fife and drum, sergeants yelling out commands etc. It would underline the fluff that EoS in not about super fighters, but synergies and battle drills. It would certainly not be OP, since you would pay 60 points for it per unit. But it would be fun and give us a reason to include our beautiful command models :)

    What do you think DanT?
    Sure, but I think this is all stuff that is best tabled for the full army book rework, where the structural issues can be better addressed and all addressed together.
    Remember that we only had a limited number of redesigns this time around.


    But yes, I think there is lots of scope to tie command models into the parent/support rules in very nice ways.
    We should brainstorm this as a community once the dust has settled on 2.0.
    Then we can fight for it for the full rework.
    The thing is that for each update we're told "Sure there might be internal problems in EoS, but for now lets focus on the core rules and then we can look upon the army books next time. This approach makes sense of course, but due to the constant changes in the core rules it de facto means that even easy-to-implement fixes are stalled and the book continues to be in imbalance.

    I totally understand that we cannot have major changes that might have consequences that we didn't foresee. But a lot of the most popular changes and fixes proprosed on this board are surely so minor that we could in fact implement them without any negative consequences. So why don't we?
  • Bloody MIsfire wrote:

    The thing is that for each update we're told "Sure there might be internal problems in EoS, but for now lets focus on the core rules and then we can look upon the army books next time. This approach makes sense of course, but due to the constant changes in the core rules it de facto means that even easy-to-implement fixes are stalled and the book continues to be in imbalance.
    I totally understand that we cannot have major changes that might have consequences that we didn't foresee. But a lot of the most popular changes and fixes proprosed on this board are surely so minor that we could in fact implement them without any negative consequences. So why don't we?
    The task teams had strict limits.
    In fact, I think the process as originally envisaged was only to make the army books work with the core rules changes, but then it was decided to tweak the books a little at the same time.

    My default approach is to play by the rules (the spirit as much as the letter), because in my experience the outcome is better that way.
    An alternative approach would have been to demand special treatment for EoS. Maybe that would have been better... :/

    Balancing team

    EoS Community Support

    "Two things gamers hate most is change and the way things are" - Stygian

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

  • I think a lot of players are judging the changes wrongly since the public only sees them in a bubble, lacking the possibility to see the changes in the bigger picture because the bigger picture is not spoiled yet. There still has to be the public testing and afterwards, when the 2.0 rules are set in stone, the army book revamps.

    Playtester



    Empire of Sonnstahl Owner - "Three things make the Empire great: Faith, Steel and Gunpowder." #nowagonsbetterorders
    Undying Dynasties Owner - "From beneath the Sands we will rise and rebuild our Kingdom." #nomandatoryevocation
    Dread Elves Owner - "The call of blood is answered in sundered flesh." #freekillerinstinct