HE armybook re-done

    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.

    • SmithF wrote:

      It's also worth noting that I've always enjoyed a good challenge of making good use of the underdogs.
      That explains a lot :D .

      Sry had to make that joke ;) .


      @Furion:

      What do you think about the Ancient Dragon as a mount option for a mage?
      Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
    • Aegon wrote:

      SmithF wrote:

      It's also worth noting that I've always enjoyed a good challenge of making good use of the underdogs.
      That explains a lot :D .
      Sry had to make that joke ;) .


      @Furion:

      What do you think about the Ancient Dragon as a mount option for a mage?
      I don't think it's a desirable design avenue. Def not for OotFH. For normal mage... maybe? But he would needed to be differentiated from prince on SD
    • @Furion:

      Yeah I was talking about a regular /non-OotFH mage.

      You're right, there needs to be a clear differentiation between them.

      The prince offers:

      1.) way more offensive capabilities through weapons echantments

      2.) more LD

      3.) the option to buy the Starmetal Alloy

      If that is not enough, you can always balance the rest via points cost.

      Anyway thanks for your response :) .
      Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
    • The problem here is that T9A team for some reason doesn't consider buffing underperforming units to desired performance bar a valid solution to improve internal balance.

      There is also inability to provide meaningful buffs coupled with nerfhammer approach.

      Both are in total opposition to the changes that are proposed here.

      I salute Furion for the work he did but I have absolutely no confidence that any positive change will be result of that.
      My gallery: Adam painting stuff (HbE, VC and lots of terrain)
      My battle reports: Adam Battle reports
      Sea Guard homebrew: Sea Guard
    • Keeping an eye on this one, @Furion , just in case. :)
      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!
    • Very interesting read @Furion, definately many ideas that could be taken from it. I enjoyed the read

      I share your frustration in why does it take that long to fix some of the obvious stuff. Although I could give youdifferent reasons, you probably have already better access to first hand sources and will likely end up reaching the same conclussion.

      There is things in there that make a lot of sense, like giving Hard target to Griffons and remove Glittering Laquer. That was the preferred option in 2.0, but the design “buckets” constraints meant it was not possible to add it in the profile and only option was through magic item. Unfortunately, it has been priced at a value ( as well as other HbE enchantments) that it doesn’t help it being used.

      Something similar occurs for the OotFH, where background prevented from boosting the mage stats (that’s why instead we went instead for the dragon getting more attacks on cast). Or on Vanguard for Sea Guard, which was against ASAW. Or Reaver chariots in core was proposed, but it is very unlikely that core chariots will be allowed. At least those were the design constraints.

      I also very specifically like the extra march on Gigantic mounts (why are Griffons slower than Manticores?), the RH character extra movement and the third attack on eagles. Even if eagles could not hold characters, I believe with 3 attacks (and maybe +1 AP on charge or lightning reflexes) could be a thing in units.

      Many other stuff from the HbE book I believe could be fixed by point costs, as a less radical change. I personally still believe Sea Guard could work in current design if it had been given a more attractive price tag to allow wider testing of it (like many ither things), and the same applies to many other units and >50%% of our enchantments

      If I were to highlight some of the things I would not agree from your proposal, likely the removal of the Queen’s cavalier and loss of Fae Miasma would be high in my personal list. Maybe some tweaks in price/minor rules updates, but in my opinion its concepts are sound and they could be made to work well without defaulting to remove them.

      All in all a very interesting read and definately highlights many of the issues of the current book (including those caused by the nerf-fixes).

      Unfortunately, to know what the issues of an army are, so you can balance it properly, you need to play it. And that is the main issue of HbE. It’s been long time since I realised there’s no hope and nothing’s changed since then

      Griffons, Glittering Lacquer, Nova Lance..where’s the love for you?
      Always a Highborn Elf, here or somewhere else
      The HbE Hotfix- My view

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

    • Just skimmed it.

      Frost Phoenix. Stubborn on a flying monster is insanely Brocken unless you reducere its leadership to below goblin levels.

      Seaguard without bows is tough on peoples models. Also hitting unmodified on anything in LOS? Talk about abuseable...

      HBE still isnt chariot-centric, so Reavers in Core...

      Rest is minor buffs and nothing special or interesting. If it makes people happy..sure why not
    • There seems to be a huge difference about the identity of our army between the view of certain staff members and the community. Personally, I don't want our HBE book to be like the 5/6 th edition of Warhammer-High Elves.


      Wesser wrote:

      If it makes people happy..sure why not
      We can finally agree on something ^^ .
      Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
    • Aegon wrote:

      There seems to be a huge difference about the identity of our army between the view of certain staff members and the community. Personally, I don't want our HBE book to be like the 5/6 th edition of Warhammer-High Elves.
      Well, I am unsure about your exact meaning with this sentence, but 5th edition was an overpowered book during its time.
      6th edition book lacked internal balance, but it wasn't bad (except Intrigue at Court, boy was that a dumb rule).

      I shouldn't steer the discussion to the past, but seriously, 5th ed HE was one of the best army books in terms of external power level.
      "It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was Us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things."
      Terry Pratchett, Jingo!
    • @elendor_f:

      Fair enough, but only during the meta of that time.

      The powerlevel has risen since then (across the board), wether one like it or not :) .

      Therefore I don't want want to go back to that standard, while the rest keeps the same.

      Why do I write this you might ask?

      Because I don't buy statements like "You have heavy cavalry in core!" or "Your archers hit on 3+!" ect.

      Maybe Silverhelms could do something in 5.th edition and S5 attacks were really great during that time.

      But in the current meta Highborn Lancers are just crap if you want to use them as heavy hitting shock cavalry.

      Hope you understand to point I want to make ;) .
      Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
    • 5th edition was way more over the top on powerlevel than anything that has come after it.
      All things wargaming. My super entertaining hobby blog where anything wargaming related can happen.

      "I heard a television interviewer once suggest that the use of dice made battlegaming on par with Snakes and Ladders and such like games of change. Well, he was being just stupid, or trying to take a rise out of his guest. It is in fact the imponderable which does give reality to 'Battle' and, as we shall see, does cause the players to make proper allowance for the unlikely or even seemingly impossible, which, as we read, did happen surprisingly frequently in the annals of war."
      -Charles Grant
    • If s5 would be considered good along side with 3+ armour save there wouldn't be this ever-growing need to bloat books with rules that up the powerlevel upwards all the time.
      All things wargaming. My super entertaining hobby blog where anything wargaming related can happen.

      "I heard a television interviewer once suggest that the use of dice made battlegaming on par with Snakes and Ladders and such like games of change. Well, he was being just stupid, or trying to take a rise out of his guest. It is in fact the imponderable which does give reality to 'Battle' and, as we shall see, does cause the players to make proper allowance for the unlikely or even seemingly impossible, which, as we read, did happen surprisingly frequently in the annals of war."
      -Charles Grant
    • Uhm, what about Highborn Lancers with War Banner of Ryma? I know cavalry buses are widely considered to be lacking in power, but is this because of the lack of FiER (an 8ed rule)? Because the Nova Flare is too expensive to allow a 1+/4++ build for the Prince? Because Steadfast is a rule very sensitive to the casualties and thus breaking a unit in the charge is very unreliable?
      "It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was Us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things."
      Terry Pratchett, Jingo!
    • elendor_f wrote:

      Uhm, what about Highborn Lancers with War Banner of Ryma? I know cavalry buses are widely considered to be lacking in power, but is this because of the lack of FiER (an 8ed rule)? Because the Nova Flare is too expensive to allow a 1+/4++ build for the Prince? Because Steadfast is a rule very sensitive to the casualties and thus breaking a unit in the charge is very unreliable?
      You can do Nova Flare with a 1+/4++ on horse, it's just silly expensive.

      630 – High Prince,Queen's Cavalier, Nova Flare lance, Diadem of Protection,dragonforged armor, shield, on Elven Horse

      Edit: Sorry, that's a 2+/4++. Still, not bad, but silly expensive.
      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

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

    • We also have to remember that WHFB game itself changed drastically over 5th,6th and 7th
      http://www.bugmansbrewery.com - The largest most informative Fantasy Dwarf website on the net, covering every dwarfers needs from forum to tactics, balls to ships!

      Advisory Board

      Head of Public Relations

      Bugmans Brewery Owner (Dwarven Holds)

    • I want to play with a decent cav lord, but i cant justify 630 on him. if u want any magic other than MOCT its a crazy amount of points.

      Squirrelloid wrote:

      elendor_f wrote:

      Uhm, what about Highborn Lancers with War Banner of Ryma? I know cavalry buses are widely considered to be lacking in power, but is this because of the lack of FiER (an 8ed rule)? Because the Nova Flare is too expensive to allow a 1+/4++ build for the Prince? Because Steadfast is a rule very sensitive to the casualties and thus breaking a unit in the charge is very unreliable?
      You can do Nova Flare with a 1+/4++ on horse, it's just silly expensive.
      630 – High Prince,Queen's Cavalier, Nova Flare lance, Diadem of Protection,dragonforged armor, shield, on Elven Horse

      Edit: Sorry, that's a 2+/4++. Still, not bad, but silly expensive.
      death is lighter than a feather, duty heavier than a mountain
    • Great work 'Furion', there are a lot of great ideas and I think just having these discussions is very helpful for everyone.

      Here are my thoughts / questions:
      - Why can't a High Prince without Honors take a Griffon?
      - Bow of Seafearer: a bit OP? for 90 points you have a bolt thrower that hits on a 1+ ( on a High Prince ) and 2+ ( on Commander ) at 15-30 inch range. And he can do that every turn. I dont know either give it range 24'' and call it a harpoon or just S5 instead of S6?

      - The MoCT is becoming too popular to the detriment of other mages. Maybe it's a side effect of how magic is structured but I personally don't love it. Can we add an artefact ( only for mages no MoCT ) that gives them +1 veil token for each successful spell cast? What do you think? Maybe this is not enough but I just want something that pushes to make HBE mages great again :').
      - Frost Phoenix: Stubborn does seem a bit OP given also the extra HP, what about Stubborn only against models that cause Fear ( or just Terror ) ?

      As for the rest of the changes, I think they are a step in the right direction in the short term to at least see some of those models that are just sitting on the shelves gathering dust ( my griffon has rarely seen the table ).

      I do wish HBE got some more synergies / flavor, but that's for another thread.

      Thanks!