I too am of the deep opinion things should not continually change significantly.
Unless it's to re-balance major mess-ups that were made by T9A. It's great to think armies like Beasts & Woodies will become viable again, however I believe perspective has been lacking and a new army (the "Swarm") is now in that spot.
I want to talk about this to both point out a deeper thing: the issue of losing perspective, and to of course bring attention to the need for adjustments to be un-made.
Seeing what got done to that army is disappointing. While it may have been viewed as broken before, the pendulum definitely swung much too far in the opposite direction.
When you look at the army, it is supposed to be the *most numerous army* with cheap infantry, and a couple risky crazy hitters.
Yet the defining unit (for giving this army its strength/flavor) slaves- were downright hated on by the Beta. I don't think you could neuter them any more and pretend they're a viable unit. I wonder if they weren't the race defining unit for the "Swarm" to actually look /play like a swarm army.
YET you look at Ogre Kingdoms with their cheap infantry unit - and despite them being filler to the gaps of large infantry units - they put Slaves to shame!!
It's mind-boggling how this could just be done to an army, than of course they grossly underperform. What is the point of having armies like the Vampire Covenant have amazing infantry prices (infantry that are steadfast & resurrect) when the most mass-infantry race is being hated on to the point where the army is ruined?
Did ANY changes to that unit even need to be made?
CAN'T AN ARMY HAVE SOMETHING UNIQUELY STRONG? Does Vermin Swarm have flying, cavalry, [ethereal], etc? So why do the rule makers feel the need to completely castrate the *most* race-defining unit? ... Swarm?!?
Was this thought of when Slaves went up in price? Little adjustments to a mass unit are actually massive, not little. Especially when it defines the race.
But it didn't stop there did it? Somehow (despite being able to be shot into more accurately - which is a compete red-herring in this discussion) they also:
- lost the ability to get significant combat resolution, even if they do win (ie against other weak infantry)
- no champ
- slightly more expensive
- larger minimum size
While some changes are understandible/arguble, it simply didn't stop there apparently.
- lost the ability to take shields!(!) Not only is this significant on the battlefield (imagine [Chaos Mauraders] having this change made!?!? Of course it wouldn't be acceptable to other standard infantry), AND it's highly annoying for people to remodel!!).
Somehow there's still more:
- they lost the ability to have shooting. Ok.... Let's just take away any unique way to play the backbone unit?
- than they had unit sizes capped. Some Swarm guys.
They are pathetic now.
What's the most underper
[This is rhetorical - because I'm not really interested in your answer] How is this considered a positive achievement to a fundamental unit?
I assume the goal wasn't to make it so that the army can't be played the same way. I.e. With the "Swarm" being crippled, into an inferior version of many other armies. Which results show. Ogres have better light infantry!
I know you rules guys are trying, but things have gotten so out of perspective - that some Ogre Kingdoms players didn't bring *ANY * Ogres in competitive lists!!! (save characters of course). Lol - yet their light infantry is awesome compared to Slaves - which is supposed to the backbone of a mass infantry army!
When the Swarm army isn't a swarm, and Ogre lists don't take any Ogres (but they do take that competitive light infantry) than friends, it is time to re-tale perspective. People planned these armies, bought these armies, painted these armies- with a spirit that lived what they were about.
I fear the rules makers appear more like the Council of 13 vying for things they want, vs guardians of the aura of fantasy, that make this hobby special & what it is supposed to all be about.
I Encourage Sincere Consideration:
- stop trying to homogenize armies- DIFFERENT ARMIES ARE GOING TO HAVE DIFFERENT STRENGTHS, and Ogres should look like an Ogre army, and ratmen should look like a ratmen army. It's already been done, just undo the careening changes that have been made.
- balance NEEDS to incorporate the race-defining nature that these armies were originally intended to have!! Some will have stronger light infantry, some stronger large infantry. Some will have more knights, some will have more monstors.
Finally, whatever led the rules committee to do this to begin with... - the main example being slaves which are now maybe the worst budget infantry- is quite discomforting in itself: *I think when people see that that can happen- than no matter what army they play - they subconsciously realize that if that can happen, anything can happen
I don't intend on being around here any longer this year - but if I check back next year and this great fantasy game feels like it's supposed to, I'll reconsider following & supporting.
Hopefully there is no massive penalizing to race-defining units- so it can look, play & feel like it was intended to, with each race's key trait defining their strengths, and showing it on the tabletop.
I predict some will be justifying all this with inferior logic. Which is why I don't intend to stick around, because some people are lost in the forest & can't see its being turned into something else - the very reason we started this project to begin with.
So I'll leave this with my detractors: you can say whatever you want, but when someone looks at a table and sees cats & goblins & asks: "what race is that?" and we are sullenly forced to say "it's Ogre Khans, the race of ogres", or when we have to explain why anyone would play the Swarm when their swarm-factor is not remotely impressive - it defeats the purpose of having changed anything AT ALL.
Chess is the game for people who want both sides to exactly mirror each other? I appreciate the cart, and sincere amount of work that had gone into the attempt at making a singular, PERMINANT, balanced wargame, with only ever very minor adjustments. May T9A keep the spirit of uniqueness & let some sides have more rooks, some have more pawns, and some have more bishops, with the work being done to make sure all the peice values add up - all the whole understanding that it will never be 'perfect' but it CAN surely be TRUE TO HEART.
The post was edited 7 times, last by Onlurker: *This post is primarily about: - a race-defining unit taking half-a dozen negative blows, than going up in cost which was followed by: - than the race getting spanked at tournaments (by the last measures I saw), being distinctively worse than all the other races - that it may not be the only race which doesn't seem to stay true to it's spirit - that we may ask need to be humble & (without that of criticism) open to the possibly that while rounding the corners off the old block (good intentions), it may have started to look more like a circle than a block. ().