9th is great, but the points are still off. MarshGriff and BarbChim comparison.

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.

  • 9th is great, but the points are still off. MarshGriff and BarbChim comparison.

    9th is a great game. But the policy on making slooooooow points adjustments, reasonable as it may be, may be hurting the game.

    To make my point, I'd like to compare the EoS Marshall on Great Griffon with lance and shield and the WDG Barbarian Chief on a Chimera with light lance and shield. Very similar units, only the Marshgriff is slightly better in nearly every single aspect. They both got fly 8/16, res 5 and 4 HP. The BarbChim has got 8 instead of 7 attacks. However, the MarshGriff has better discipline, armor save, combined offense, combined str and combined agi. The Barb has got battle focus, but the Marsh can give orders. The marshall on great griff is obviously the better unit. But the barb chief ticks in at 400 pts. Versus the marshall's 325. That's a 75 pt difference. So, WDG pay 75 pts or 23% more for a worse character.

    The irony is that the MarshGriff isn't even a super popular choice in the EoS army.

    The marshall is fine, I guess, but there's something severely wrong with price and/or design on the BarbChim, and probably the WDG chimera in general. The chimera is very rarely fielded and never with wings, and the BarbChim is just completely absent from all lists. The discrepancy between the prices is so big that it cannot be explained with army synergy with other units or similar. (Or? If you've got a reasonable explanation, I'm all ears).

    Which leads me to my point: This cannot be solved with small changes in price. It's just never gonna happen. I'm sure there are other examples of obvious problematic pricing out there, but this was the best example I could find.

    Now, I acknowledge that pricing is hard, and I don't wont to take away from balance teams work on 9th so far. Small price adjustments is probably a reasonable rule to have. But it should be a rule that you can break from time to time.

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

  • Hahahahahahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    I literally just came from yet another discussion in another thread about us making too many changes too quickly, and this popped up in my feed.

    I officially surrender
    :pursuit: :pursuit: :pursuit: :pursuit:


    For what its worth, the next update is being handled a little differently. What precisely this will mean for the final outcome I'm not sure yet, but we will know soon enough.
    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

    Check out my new ID blog
    Dan ventures into the lands of smoke and fire

    And some basic tactics for beginners (I should develop this properly at some point)
    No 'tactics for beginners' thread?
  • Clangeddin Silverbeard wrote:

    9th is a great game. But the policy on making slooooooow points adjustments, reasonable as it may be, may be hurting the game.

    To make my point, I'd like to compare the EoS Marshall on Great Griffon with lance and shield and the WDG Barbarian Chief on a Chimera with light lance and shield. Very similar units, only the Marshgriff is slightly better in nearly every single aspect. They both got fly 8/16, res 5 and 4 HP. The BarbChim has got 8 instead of 7 attacks. However, the MarshGriff has better discipline, armor save, combined offense, combined str and combined agi. The Barb has got battle focus, but the Marsh can give orders. The marshall on great griff is obviously the better unit. But the barb chief ticks in at 400 pts. Versus the marshall's 325. That's a 75 pt difference. So, WDG pay 75 pts or 23% more for a worse character.

    The irony is that the MarshGriff isn't even a super popular choice in the EoS army.

    The marshall is fine, I guess, but there's something severely wrong with price and/or design on the BarbChim, and probably the WDG chimera in general. The chimera is very rarely fielded and never with wings, and the BarbChim is just completely absent from all lists. The discrepancy between the prices is so big that it cannot be explained with army synergy with other units or similar. (Or? If you've got a reasonable explanation, I'm all ears).

    Which leads me to my point: This cannot be solved with small changes in price. It's just never gonna happen. I'm sure there are other examples of obvious problematic pricing out there, but this was the best example I could find.

    Now, I acknowledge that pricing is hard, and I don't wont to take away from balance teams work on 9th so far. Small price adjustments is probably a reasonable rule to have. But it should be a rule that you can break from time to time.
    the barb chinera character is in an army with independant strong units, so he is free to roam the board and can be a part if a monster mash army.
    The marshall on griff. Takes a way from a narrow character budget, and has to work together with an infantry based army that needs synergi to work, and thus have to stay close to his troops.
    I think that is why they are costed differently.
    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!!
  • Smythen wrote:

    the barb chinera character is in an army with independant strong units, so he is free to roam the board and can be a part if a monster mash army.The marshall on griff. Takes a way from a narrow character budget, and has to work together with an infantry based army that needs synergi to work, and thus have to stay close to his troops.
    I think that is why they are costed differently.
    ... I sort of hear you, but that would perhaps - perhaps! - justify why the marshgriff is better. It doesn't justify why it's better AND way, way, way cheaper.

    Furthermore:
    1) It's not like 325 pts break the EoS character budget.
    2) Marshgriff doesn't have to stay close to troops to function. At all. He'd do best as a flanker, I think. He can mainly use orders in first round, then, but for 325 pts, who cares.
    3) Nobody does monster mash lists in WDG anymore, at least not on a competitive level. WDG monsters are thought of as super weak in the WDG community. The most popular unit in WDG is the chosen knight - a unit with a very wide footprint, making it hard to combocharge effectively.
  • @DanT: I did write that it's probably a reasonable overall approach to make small changes, didn't I? :D I just couldn't bear the thought of my beautiful chimera gathering dust on the shelf for years through meticulous small point changes. And when I came across that comparison between the BarbChim and the Marshgriff my head just exploded. In this case, the points are clearly just way, way off.

    EDIT: Also, Dan, while I do see the irony and feel your pain, I'd hoped for more than laughter and vague promises; like, arguments and reasoning. But I dunno if you're the official to comment or if somebody else would be more suitable. :)

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

  • There are two ways to point games: You can point every unit in isolation, or you can point every unit in the context of their army.

    Games that point every unit in isolation generally have armies that are far better than others, simply because you either have an option in a category you need, or you don't (or all armies trend towards being identical). Games balanced with units relative to their army can have every army equally competitive, but it often takes longer to get there (with small incremental point changes).

    The 9th Age could do down the route of removing every army list and just having a list of units which you pick and mix from, but I would argue that would hurt the game far more...

    Its funny how often this comes up as a topic in loads of games. Its like saying the same sized house should cost the same amount of money anywhere in the world. Context is everything.
  • Clangeddin Silverbeard wrote:

    @DanT: I did write that it's probably a reasonable overall approach to make small changes, didn't I? :D I just couldn't bear the thought of my beautiful chimera gathering dust on the shelf for years through meticulous small point changes. And when I came across that comparison between the BarbChim and the Marshgriff my head just exploded. In this case, the points are clearly just way, way off.

    EDIT: Also, Dan, while I do see the irony and feel your pain, I'd hoped for more than laughter and vague promises; like, arguments and reasoning. But I dunno if you're the official to comment or if somebody else would be more suitable. :)
    Fair, I guess it did come across a bit dismissive, that was not my intention. My apologies.

    Aiming pricing strategy complaints at me is reasonable, as is asking for me to comment on such things, as I am on the team that votes for these things.


    But the vagueness was not deliberately obfuscatory, I am merely wary of predicting the future when I know how things have gone internally in the past (sometimes turning on a dime, so to speak). The broad strategy for the next update is to do fewer price changes but make them a tad bigger than the 5pt adjustments we have made in the past.

    WotDG is probably getting more attention, but I cannot be sure yet. We will all know the outcome in the not too distant future.
    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

    Check out my new ID blog
    Dan ventures into the lands of smoke and fire

    And some basic tactics for beginners (I should develop this properly at some point)
    No 'tactics for beginners' thread?
  • I do agree that price adjustments should be more frequent than design ones.

    I have been sitting on my hands waiting for the ID Rocket Battery to reach a price where it is not a massive handicap in even a casual game. But when I saw that last price update it dropped by a mere 5 measly points, I just lost hope in it ever being playable "any time soon".
    Grossly priced stuff just takes too long to become reasonable. And the usual updates are not overly frequent (that in itself is not an issue. But it being usually joined to the hip with price adjustments is).
  • I mean...what’s the point of having a beta (2.0) if we’re going to treat it like it’s the gold edition already?

    The minuscule 5-10pt adjustments were from what I understood it, due to ETC using the BETA(!!!) for their tournament, so BLT didn’t want to make big swings and screw up the balance for the biggest tournament for the 9th age, which I get. But then wtf do we have a beta?

    If we’re going to use the beta rules for these big tournies, then we either need to treat it like an actual beta and those playing in the ETC and other big tournies, need to understand that stuff could change and be really swingy balance wise, or we treat it like gold and just don’t call it a beta. (Which I think is a mistake because it’ll take way to long to find fun and balance)

    That or ETC could’ve picked a frozen date and used those rules while other more meaningful points adjustments were instituted.(and yes I’m aware most of the staff went to the ETC, but the point still stands.)

    TL:DR
    We either have a beta, or we don’t. Pick one.

    Edit: Also, I think the OP wasn’t asking for more/faster changes. But for when we do make changes, make them meaningful. Not 5-10pts, but bigger swings.
  • I want to point out that UD also have a towering presence mount that sees no play.
    It's just so overcosted that probably no one outside the UD forum knows about it's existence. :/

    It has basically the mobility, offense and defense of a Battlesphinx (in the same army), but costs 50% more. ||

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Folomo ().

  • Omarcomin wrote:

    Internal balance vs. external balance.

    It's kind of like when your mum tells you you're smart and handsome but then no one else tells you that.
    @Omarcomin know this for a fact.
    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!!
  • tunasandwichify wrote:

    Edit: Also, I think the OP wasn’t asking for more/faster changes. But for when we do make changes, make them meaningful. Not 5-10pts, but bigger swings.
    This also has its cons, namely overshooting the target power level or price, which in a context with less opportunity for fixes (not frequently updating) can leave the book in a situation just as bad or even worse.

    This was part of the reactions for 0.99 changes of the GGI, when its design went from toughness (now resilience) 6, Armour 2+, Ward Save (now Aegis) 5+ to toughness 8, Armour 5+ :

    Rog27 wrote:

    the massive knee jerk pendulum balance changes do not create good vibes within the community. It was entirely unnecessary to nerf it's stats down like that! Much better to incrementally nerf it. Why didn't we see a transition from the 2 up armour and 5 up ward to a 4 up armour and 6 up ward for example. It baffles me instead they jump directly to no ward and 5 up armour. I'm in the same boat as the poster above where he spent money on a Model.i went some further. I scratch built it. It's sat on the shelf gathering dust as its currently worthless.

    Rog27 wrote:

    I'm against knee jerk changes in buffs or nerfs unless the unit is clearly massively underperforming and needs an initial bigger boost to get it close to where it should be. But largely we are already beyond that stage. And I'm pretty sure many of the thoughtful players on this and other army forums would all agree - knee jerk changes of large variance have no place here anymore .

    A unit is over performing. Tone it down a bit, then a bit more if necessary. People buy models and invest time in the new options that for years were not playable and then suddenly become playable.I spent the last two weeks scratch converting some of my 60 common orcs who rarely see the table in the last five years (by rarely I mean never) to have crossbows now. And I'm very happy they got a chance to go to a tournament and even did pretty OK this is a hypothetical of course but if in the next issue the option gets nerfed so hard that this unit is now unusable (like the great green idol which I scratch built was) you start to lose fans from the project.

    I work in video games and for me iteration, tweak, iteration, tweak, is the name of the game.

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

  • I didn't notice what part of the forum it was in. I just saw Barb Chief Chimera in the title and read his first post.

    But I can see how he could've just been using that as an example. I was coming at it from the view of the WDG AB. For new books, I feel like bigger, bolder changes should happen. For those ABs that were just supposed to get a point update and a few rules tweaks (not an entire redisign as it seems the GGI got) smaller tweaks would be fine. But once they've gone through the gauntlet of new AB, big swings should be fine. Again, if this truly is a beta, we should expect big changes.

    If you don't like big changes, use the 1.3 rules, which are being touted as T9A proper. Or have the powers that be tell everyone that there isn't a beta and that 2.0 is gold but with tiny tweaks.
  • Grouchy Badger wrote:

    look at Beastherds right now in popularity. They have Ambush and Hatred, some of the best rules in the game. Yet people still claim VC is still overpowered.
    yeah but they can run away. All 3 armies that cant run away are touted by the few UK top players (not me!!!) I briefly spoke to as the top armies in overall power level. Not running away and raising back or having aegis on every model in your army is probably better than a rerolling beastman with no saves.
    Take a look at my painted army so far. Feel free to share a pic of yours!

    Pics of my ever expanding warriors army

    WastelandWarrior Painting League 2018