New HbE Book!! Some modification to make our army great Again !

    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.

    Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

    And on December 24th, Father Chaos brought us... A brand new army book for Daemon Legions!

    • @DanT - My only problem with removing LR for OS/DS modifications is parry. The elves which get the OS end of the stick (mostly DE) get shafted, because any punk with a shield and a hand weapon just ignores it.

      And with the base rules locked, you can't do anything about parry, so you'd have to do something inelegant like give DE a free 'ignore parry' special rule army wide.

      (Also, HbE with super defenses might find GW useable, but I doubt super-OS Executioners would be playable if they can't attack at initiative).
      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

    • I just drop that here because I don't know how to pin a post to be the first element at each page

      LIST OF THINGS THAT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE ATM

      1. Highborn Armour (+1 save vs S4 or less)
      2. Lion's Fur (suppression on foot restriction)
      3. Nerf of MoCT (increase points + interdiction long bow)
      4. Modification HWOTF (two option : Flaming and magic for unit or Frost effect)
      5. Modification FO (Fier for unit, decrease points)
      6. Royal Huntsman (decrease 5 pts)
      7. Queen Cavalier (decrease points on dragons)
      8. Nerf QC (increase points)
      9. OoFH (decrease dragons points)
      10. Nova Flare (increase points, +1 A)
      11. Eclipse (enchant that lower the opp. OS)
      12. Protection of Dorac (delete "on foot only", decrease the armor by 1, increase the DS by 1)
      13. Star Metal Alloy (decrease points by 5, rounded down)
      14. Diadem of Protection (increase point, Flat 4+)
      15. Ring of the Pearl Throne (decrease points)
      16. Amethyst Cristal (decrease points)
      17. Sky Sloop Mount Integer the +2 accuracy on the Sky Reaper artillery weapon (only for character)
      18. Citizen Spears (increase cost, option to HA)
      19. HbL (increase cost)
      20. CA (decrease cost)
      21. SG (increase cost)
      22. Elein Reavers (exchange bow and light lance)
      23. Sword Masters (Increase cost)
      24. Lion Guard (increase cost)
      25. Flame Wardens (increase cost)
      26. Knights of Ryma (increase cost)
      27. Reaver chariot (decrease cost)
      28. Lion Chariot (increase cost, Mar -> 12)
      29. Queen's Guard (increase Cost, Max model -> 25)
      30. Grey Watchers (increase Cost)
      31. Frost Phoenix (decrease Cost)
    • Adam wrote:

      @Edhelnaur if you want so see some of my proposals you can check my sea guard book linked in my signature
      Their is plenty of good ideas indeed :) . But which one will make sense to be integrated in the HbE AB. Here are some of the things i like the most :

      Banner enchantments
      0-2 Banner of Avant-Garde 75pts

      The unit is stubborn for the first break test they have to pass.
      Artefacts

      Black Pearl50 pts
      User gains Hard target and Parry.

      Harvested from the darkest depths of the sea this small pearl seems to repel light tricking the eye of the onlooker

      0-2 Sea Lord Pennant 75pts

      Successful charge rolls at the bearers unit front are subject to minimized roll.

      0-2 Horn of battle 30 pts

      Once per phase a single unit can reroll Dis test.

      Fleet officer (60 pts) Command: Marching Drill, at the end of movement phase target unit can perform a reform. (this actually looks like one of my previous version of fleet officier, i like it)

      Master of Arms (60 pts)

      Engineer (1+)

      Command: Entrench, after deploying Master of Arms, deploy a standard wall touching front rank of target unit.

      Bravo for your imagination, i realy like this homebrew ;)

      Those are the rules/object that i found interesting to bring in the thread. They are Defense-Compatible with the direction our army is taking
      So which of these could be integrated in our AB ?
    • 1. Good solution. Goes toward making HbE more armored, without going into Plate armor territory. Just be careful who gets this armor. Don't just give it to every unit. There are plenty of units in HbE that are working alright and don't need to be made OP.
      Also, giving 1 extra point of armor to characters is quite significant.
      2. So now Lion characters can reach armor 6/8 with no magical gear (2/3 from HbA, 1/2 from cloak, 2 from the chariot, 1 from shield)? Seems really easy to abuse. :/
      4. Not a fan. This invalidates Frost phoenix.
      Also, combined with the new Eclipse weapon, being hit on 5s and 6s will be the norm. This pushes the already elite HbE into Elite + synergy territory. In general, a faction should have one or the other. both combined makes the units unassailable by too many factions. :thumbdown:
      5. FieR for this army pushes the army toward glass cannon-es. Is this the idea behind this rule?
      24. 2+ AS Lion guard X/ . Why did you improve them? They seem to be working well.
      26. Knights of Ryma seem to be working well right now. Increasing their armor by 1 more can be problematic. :/
      28. 2+ AS Lion chariot... X/


      In general:
      Any reason why you added indiscriminately the +1 AS to all models?
      On some this is needed, but on others (specially those that have already access to armor 4 or more) this is too much. Specially since those models already work well.

      Also, is there a reason why you are increasing the elitness of the models? Is part of the plan to powercreep the book (Aka, increase the absolute power of the units)?

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

    • Squirrelloid wrote:

      @DanT - My only problem with removing LR for OS/DS modifications is parry. The elves which get the OS end of the stick (mostly DE) get shafted, because any punk with a shield and a hand weapon just ignores it.

      And with the base rules locked, you can't do anything about parry, so you'd have to do something inelegant like give DE a free 'ignore parry' special rule army wide.

      (Also, HbE with super defenses might find GW useable, but I doubt super-OS Executioners would be playable if they can't attack at initiative).
      Of course.
      Bear in mind what I'm playing with here is a line to start thinking along, it is months of work away from a complete proposal.
      And I'm not advocating removing LR, I'm just brainstorming possible directions if it were to be removed.

      Some thoughts re: parry
      (A) I proposed additional changes too, like the AP gain, partly to compensate this.
      (B) Why should elves basically ignore parry as they currently do?
      (C) There are a fair few paired weapons units in DE. Indeed, these units are some of the more iconic DE units. These units get quite a boost from the package of changes.

      Re: GW.
      One option is to just let elves use them at agility order.
      A more elegant solution would be nicer, but I'm not gonna invest that level of time into some random brainstorming.
      People want t9a/RT to simultaneously square, triangle, and icosagon the circle, whilst vehemently attacking it if there are any corners.

      ID blog
      Dan ventures into the lands of smoke and fire

      Basic beginners tactics
      No 'tactics for beginners' thread?
    • Folomo wrote:

      1. Good solution. Goes toward making HbE more armored, without going into Plate armor territory. Just be careful who gets this armor. Don't just give it to every unit. There are plenty of units in HbE that are working alright and don't need to be made OP.


      You are right and like @Teowulff as stated we should make the new armor incompatible with Dragonforged armor should be forbidden. I will even take it further and make it unusable too with Lion's Fur. This should solve the problem of 2, 24, 26 and 28.


      Also, giving 1 extra point of armor to characters is quite significant.
      2. So now Lion characters can reach armor 6/8 with no magical gear (2/3 from HbA, 1/2 from cloak, 2 from the chariot, 1 from shield)? Seems really easy to abuse. :/


      4. Not a fan. This invalidates Frost phoenix.
      Also, combined with the new Eclipse weapon, being hit on 5s and 6s will be the norm. This pushes the already elite HbE into Elite + synergy territory. In general, a faction should have one or the other. both combined makes the units unassailable by too many factions. :thumbdown:


      Maybe changing the effect of Eclipse could solve the problem of that synergy. But I don't think that this will make the frost phoenix unpick. The fact that he is a cheap support resilient Monster is pretty strong in my opinion and will let the player to choose if they want this effect bringed by the character or the phoenix.


      5. FieR for this army pushes the army toward glass cannon-es. Is this the idea behind this rule?


      This was a solution to fix the broken FO. In my sens it transform the army into a more manoeuvrable way. This is particularly addressed to list who uses 30 SG in a 3x10 formation. This honour could permit this unit to be played in a 4X7 formation, wich present the advantage of conserving the rank bonuses. And this unit is not supposed to charge, but are more likely to be charged, so it is not incoherent in a defensive way. Maybe i should reserve this effect only if he join a SG unit ?


      24. 2+ AS Lion guard X/ . Why did you improve them? They seem to be working well.
      26. Knights of Ryma seem to be working well right now. Increasing their armor by 1 more can be problematic. :/
      28. 2+ AS Lion chariot... X/

      The 3 last three are answered in 1. You are god damn right

      In general:
      Any reason why you added indiscriminately the +1 AS to all models?
      On some this is needed, but on others (specially those that have already access to armor 4 or more) this is too much. Specially since those models already work well.

      Also, is there a reason why you are increasing the elitness of the models? Is part of the plan to powercreep the book (Aka, increase the absolute power of the units)?


      I am thinking of removing the 1. From Lion guard, Lion Chariot, CA, QG and Ryma. should i remove from another unit ?
    • DanT wrote:

      One option is to just let elves use them at agility order.
      A more elegant solution would be nicer, but I'm not gonna invest that level of time into some random brainstorming.
      Well somewhat reasonable option would be to use halberds or counts as halberds weapons. And maybe add +1Ap to the profile
      My gallery: Adam painting stuff (HbE, VC and lots of terrain)
      My battle reports: Adam Battle reports
      Sea Guard homebrew: Sea Guard
    • Folomo wrote:

      4. Not a fan. This invalidates Frost phoenix.
      This pushes the already elite HbE into Elite + synergy territory. In general, a faction should have one or the other. both combined makes the units unassailable by too many factions. :thumbdown:
      I agree with you on most things, noticably the fact that a lot of units don't need extra protection. But I don't see the Wardens of the Blue Flame as a big problem. After all there's also things like Court of the Damned debuff wagons that decrease agility and def skill without even being in combat. Frosty is just very vulnerable and being able to hide in a unit is a good step forward.
      After all they're not goblins, HbE should already be the ones with highest agi and fighting skills - otherwise with Res3 they'd be dead before they can even swing a weapon to start with. It's more of an insurance than something else.

      Perhaps we could introduce a new theme "Fire & Ice" in the HbE army book: let the Phoenixes cast the Cosmo Fire (Flame) and Ice (Frosty) spell (after all unlike DE/SE we have no units with bound spells yet) and make them a bit more expensive, perhaps change the Young Dragon to an ice version of the normal dragon, but more defensive, have icy Flame Wardens ..
      ;)

      Adam wrote:

      DanT wrote:

      One option is to just let elves use them at agility order.
      A more elegant solution would be nicer, but I'm not gonna invest that level of time into some random brainstorming.
      Well somewhat reasonable option would be to use halberds or counts as halberds weapons. And maybe add +1Ap to the profile
      Whatever the solution (if needed at all), don't make all our Swordmaster models obsolete .. ;(


      Edhelnaur wrote:

      Teowulff wrote:

      .. and OOtFH on a elven steed!
      Hum but if we do that, does the mount also gain the buff from OOtFH or would this be reserved to dragons ?
      I think an extra horse attack or two doesn't really matter a lot in the grand scheme of things - so I'd just leave it as it is.
      The potential +1 advance rate for a solo mage on a horse isn't really game changing either.
      This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..

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

    • DanT wrote:

      Squirrelloid wrote:

      @DanT - My only problem with removing LR for OS/DS modifications is parry. The elves which get the OS end of the stick (mostly DE) get shafted, because any punk with a shield and a hand weapon just ignores it.

      And with the base rules locked, you can't do anything about parry, so you'd have to do something inelegant like give DE a free 'ignore parry' special rule army wide.

      (Also, HbE with super defenses might find GW useable, but I doubt super-OS Executioners would be playable if they can't attack at initiative).
      Of course.Bear in mind what I'm playing with here is a line to start thinking along, it is months of work away from a complete proposal.
      And I'm not advocating removing LR, I'm just brainstorming possible directions if it were to be removed.

      Some thoughts re: parry
      (A) I proposed additional changes too, like the AP gain, partly to compensate this.
      (B) Why should elves basically ignore parry as they currently do?
      (C) There are a fair few paired weapons units in DE. Indeed, these units are some of the more iconic DE units. These units get quite a boost from the package of changes.

      Re: GW.
      One option is to just let elves use them at agility order.
      A more elegant solution would be nicer, but I'm not gonna invest that level of time into some random brainstorming.
      The other GW alternative (at least for DE): you could always define Executioner's Blades as entirely their own weapon, and not 'counts as GW' with extra rules (ie, +2S +2AP, and etc... without the agility = 0 thing, but it's fine because it's limited to a single unit and can be balanced as such). (This just leaves DE characters in the lurch, or you can just give characters the Exec Blades too, and let them be enchanted). Whether other elves are okay with GW striking at agi 0 or not depends on what changes those other books get. A defense-focused HbE might be fine - would need testing.

      As to parry, elves don't ignore it. In many cases, elves go from 2+ to 3+ to-hit because of parry. Basically, LR gives elves a different baseline for to-hit (3+ instead of 4+), and parry reduces them to their baseline in most cases, same as anyone else. Parry causing a 2+ to 4+ shift would be huge, and while that occasionally happens (only with characters, and not always), it's very rare. (Only a few character chasses are routinely 4OS higher than their enemies).

      Of course, the whole thing might be better if parry was just +4DS instead of 'set equal to attacker OS or +1DS'. Not only would this help higher OS/DS models with parry (because it would always do something), but it would make the effect more consistent. Of course, gold rules means we can't do that.

      And the units with paired weapons wouldn't really get a boost. Everything else would get a nerf, and pw units would remain the same. (Since the +4OS = LR if you have pw).
      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

    • Here's what I was thinking about, there are some ideas of N that I found good.
      I go much less in the changes of the army because this one with its versatility is very interesting.

      In early 2018, I had the idea that the armor of the elves should be their skill and not metal. Happy to see that the idea has not crossed only my tortured brain.
      If going to more defensive Hbe is the future, I will try to bring my point of view and maybe ideas.

      dropbox.com/s/jr7xg3fz2rs15eb/…0frere%20version.pdf?dl=0
      My galery
      Lord of the Hobby: Quickstarter Highborn Elfes
    • @point changes
      Please realize that fixes with point changes turn the army more and more into one with alot of bodies. Sure you can give the commander his derserved price drop but some units, e.g. Swordmasters had alot of point reductions over the whole 9th development, this should make it clear that point changes wont fix everything and slowly turns into a bad bandaid.

      @removal of LR
      Great weapons shouldn't have strike at AGI 0 to begin with and less stats, but that is a different story. LR is nothing but a bandaid for the flawed great weapon rule, the hard stat inflation that comes with it and the worse scaling of soft stats. The weapon can be defined in the units profile though, the units dont actually have to carry great weapons, they can e.g. have longblades +1S +1AP lethal strike for a unit designed to be a R&F nutcracker which is stated in the units profile, while another unit has longaxes with +2S MW2 if it is designed to slay bigger stuff, and so on. The units profile can literally have anything you want.

      Anyway, I still think the commander should be removed and the BSB turned into a honor, this would be the best move ever. Why do we need so many character tiers in the book? Mage basically has 4+ tiers, same for the combat characters and they are all very pricey. You also will never be able to fully balance the items for all, one or another setup will always get the short stick.
    • T3 Elite infantry need to be less points, not more.

      I would reduce the point cost of the 3 elite infantry and some tweaking of rules to improve them slightly.

      Do people understand how bad T3 infantry is in this game? They have every movement restriction possible, and die in droves. One spell can easily kill 6 or 7. A solid shooting/magic turn and there are 20 dead elves.

      T3 elite infantry need to be less points, and be able to do a lot of damage to be playable.

      I agree that they also should have +1 armour.
    • cptcosmic wrote:

      Anyway, I still think the commander should be removed and the BSB turned into an honor, this would be the best move ever. Why do we need so many character tiers in the book? Mage basically has 4+ tiers, same for the combat characters and they are all very pricey.
      Funny I was just advocating more character options to be able to carry magic items - as our buffs and debuffs aren't coming from buff wagons and character buffs so everything either has to be cast or carried around. By characters. :D

      Btw I think HbE has the least character tiers of al books?
      This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
    • King Kazador wrote:

      T3 Elite infantry need to be less points, not more.

      I would reduce the point cost of the 3 elite infantry and some tweaking of rules to improve them slightly.

      Do people understand how bad T3 infantry is in this game? They have every movement restriction possible, and die in droves. One spell can easily kill 6 or 7. A solid shooting/magic turn and there are 20 dead elves.

      T3 elite infantry need to be less points, and be able to do a lot of damage to be playable.

      I agree that they also should have +1 armour.
      You can only make them so cheap before they stop feeling elite. At some point they simply have to get better. (That said, are HbE elite infantry, or any elf elite infantry, really in such a bad place at the moment?)


      Teowulff wrote:

      cptcosmic wrote:

      Anyway, I still think the commander should be removed and the BSB turned into an honor, this would be the best move ever. Why do we need so many character tiers in the book? Mage basically has 4+ tiers, same for the combat characters and they are all very pricey.
      Funny I was just advocating more character options to be able to carry magic items - as our buffs and debuffs aren't coming from buff wagons and character buffs so everything either has to be cast or carried around. By characters. :D
      Btw I think HbE has the least character tiers of al books?
      How are you counting Honors in this?

      DE gets additional separate entries (cult priest, assassin) because they don't have honors.

      It's not like there's a limit to how many of a given character entry you can bring (besides total points, which new entries wouldn't help you with).
      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

    • King Kazador wrote:



      Do people understand how bad T3 infantry is in this game?
      No, I don't I'm afraid.
      Perhaps you could explain it to me?
      I could also do with you explaining the other things about this game that I don't understand if you have a spare moment?

      Cheers :)
      People want t9a/RT to simultaneously square, triangle, and icosagon the circle, whilst vehemently attacking it if there are any corners.

      ID blog
      Dan ventures into the lands of smoke and fire

      Basic beginners tactics
      No 'tactics for beginners' thread?
    • Squirrelloid wrote:

      King Kazador wrote:

      T3 Elite infantry need to be less points, not more.
      I would reduce the point cost of the 3 elite infantry and some tweaking of rules to improve them slightly. Do people understand how bad T3 infantry is in this game? They have every movement restriction possible, and die in droves. One spell can easily kill 6 or 7. A solid shooting/magic turn and there are 20 dead elves.

      T3 elite infantry need to be less points, and be able to do a lot of damage to be playable.
      You can only make them so cheap before they stop feeling elite.
      I think you can only make them so cheap before the other army players start a riot? ;)

      Squirrelloid wrote:

      Teowulff wrote:

      Funny I was just advocating more character options to be able to carry magic items - as our buffs and debuffs aren't coming from buff wagons and character buffs so everything either has to be cast or carried around. By characters. :DBtw I think HbE has the least character tiers of al books?
      How are you counting Honors in this?
      DE gets additional separate entries (cult priest, assassin) because they don't have honors. It's not like there's a limit to how many of a given character entry you can bring (besides total points, which new entries wouldn't help you with).
      Unlike for instance Saurian Ancients (with Skinks, Saurus lords, Cuatls and Caiman characters), HbE characters have very much the same profile and their honours even make them overlap (like MoCT and HWoTF). We also have no cheap characters or models/units (with totally different profiles) with bound spells like DE, SE have. It makes it that everything comes down to our 3 character options (that addmitedly have a lot of flavours) and their limited points allowance. I mean: medusa's, stygiosaurs or brair maidens can cast spells but aren't part of 40% characters allowance. We also have no buff wagons in other categories like quite some armies have.
      This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
    • Grand frere wrote:

      Here's what I was thinking about, there are some ideas of N that I found good.
      I go much less in the changes of the army because this one with its versatility is very interesting.

      In early 2018, I had the idea that the armor of the elves should be their skill and not metal. Happy to see that the idea has not crossed only my tortured brain.
      If going to more defensive Hbe is the future, I will try to bring my point of view and maybe ideas.

      dropbox.com/s/jr7xg3fz2rs15eb/…0frere%20version.pdf?dl=0
      Interesting ideas in your book as well.
      You forget to translate the french part of Political Manipulation. (this come from V6 or V7 right ? I remember a rule like this).

      Fleet Officier :
      I also like the idea of having an ambush unit. This could be a solution to Long range warmachines.

      Great Master Fencer :
      Why not. But i have the feeling that he doesn't add much to the game. We already have the MoCt.

      Queen's Companion :
      I don't know if you forget to delete this custom rule, but i decided to remove it because it is more in favor of an avoidance mechanic which is something we try to avoid.

      Ring of the Pearl Throne has been restricted to non-gigantic model for a reason. I also want that restriction to be removed but it will be unhealthy to heave this. (maybe I am wrong)

      Glittering Lacquer I also tried to remove the restriction, but i finaly resigned because of the same reason i have stated for RoPT

      High Prince : Extra rule should increase points. They are not. Why ? Elven Paragon seems to do the Martial Discipline Job. I am not a fan of it

      Commander : Extra rule should increase points. They are not. Why ? The effect is way too strong to not be counted on the commander's points.

      Warden of the Flame : Same problem of the vanilla honneur, no reason to take it. The buff to the unit is too weak in my opinion.

      Giant Eagle : Hum, replacing the 1 armor by hard target (1) seems to strong to not justified an increase in point. But this is a good idea :thumbup:

      Griffon : +1 save is in my opinion not necessary. Griffon is often preferred over the other mounts in the current meta. the amelioration should increase his point or not be made.

      Ancient Dragon : this is in my sense a Nerf. I don't understand that choice.

      Reaver Chariot : Why not, they were overpriced anyway.

      Citizen Spears : Why increase their points if nothing change ? the cost of the HA is not already explained in losing FiER ?

      CA : Why not :thumbup:

      SG : Why not

      Elein Reavers : Too strong

      Special item for champions : This is a good idea ! (this also come from v6 or v7 right ?)

      Ryma : This is unnecessary i think. Ryma was already well designed

      QG : HA option. why not

      GW : Why reduce their points ?

      Phoenix : No way :thumbdown: Fire Phoenix was fine, not need to decrease his point. Only the frost needed it.

      Drakes Knights of Ryma : Good idea but same problem with my proposition of Lion's Rider. We don't need it and it would be too complicated to implement.

      Thanks for your effort ^^ , there are some ideas that could be interesting to add to our project as well. I like the idea of Special item for champion or the possibility of having an ambush unit like in v7.