Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 1,000. There are more results available, please enhance your search parameters.

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.

  • Quote from Giladis: “Quote from Klexe: “I disagree here ” You can't disagree on this point. This is what the Project has put down in its scale guidelines. The 30" range was equated to the range of the longbow and from there other distances were extrapolated. ” Yeah but this doesnt make sense when crossbows are 30 and handguns are 24 then So perhaps you did an error?

  • Quote from Giladis: “30" Longbow already takes into account the maximum effective range of the "english" Longbow. ” I disagree here Quote from Peacemaker: “My guess at what would happen with 38" longbows would be a Rock/paper/scissors effect. Tough armies that shrug off S3, Ap 0 shots would just charge up while armies like elves(R3, low model count) would go castle up and go for a tie. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying it's very difficult to force an opponent to march into range of c…

  • Quote from Peacemaker: “with dread elf range getting reduced to like 18" but stats still at R3, 5+ saves - I don't see KoE longbows getting 38" range. This isn't the only changes in other books that would multiply the effect of 38" longbows. The general trend of restricting special deployment in most books means 38" longbows would be strong. oh, and I'm pretty sure 38" longbows would come at the cost of hedge knights. ” When we (I?) first had the idea old RT was quite fondly of it. It suits KoE …

  • Quote from McBaine: “I take them in core. Others do as well. Source: You ” not picked enough! Cheaper is almost not possible in fear of spamming/chafflike abilities Quote from McBaine: “Yeah, stats don't lie. Therefore your proposal to move the Bowmen to special and letting them hit better and buff them seems not to be the big solution you think it is. The Brigands are more mobile and can scout (and so have a better reach than 30" by being nearer to their intended targets). How can they not alre…

  • Quote from McBaine: “Quote from Klexe: “perosnaly (and that is really only my opinion)Core 1. realms (elite jack of all trades. hammer) 2. aspirants (flanker, anti wm, anti panic) 3. new knight unit (massing knights, breaking knights, can work as anvil vs certain enemies) What do you mean with breaking knights? Can the other knight units not break? And if they break others, but can also act as an anvil, aren't they not specialised enough? Would their task be both? It means they are cheap. This a…

  • Quote from McBaine: “Quote from Klexe: “Quote from McBaine: “My problems with Peasant Levy as they are now (without looking at background or personal liking as much as I can): - They have really low Dis, therefore are easy to panic and easy to break if no fealty knights are close - They have a hard time keeping up with the knights to keep the better Dis and March rate - Even if they keep up, they can't really support the knights and might make things more difficult, due to dying very easily. - T…

  • Quote from McBaine: “Quote from Klexe: “But if all competative lists do NOT pick them it means there is something wrong with this unit. Competative lists are mostly powerplay and thus are taking units to win. ” What's wrong is, that you want peasants to be good and viable, when the background and design stated until now that they are notorious for being bad... so, if background informs rules, you better hope for better background for the peasants. As it is now the levy can barely work as a tarpi…

  • Quote from Wes456123: “Thanks for sharing @Klexe. I'm very surprised by the lack of Brigands - even more so that they're picked less than core Bowmen. What is it that people don't like about them? Light Troops, Skirmisher, Quick to Fire, and Aim (3+) always felt a winning combination to me, even when compared to elves considering how damn cheap they are. ” What other already said: a normal koe list ist 40% chars 25% core = 65% Adding yeomen and scorps and 1 bus of your choice (grails, questors) …

  • But that is perhaps a nice topic guys: what % of core points find you acceptable for peasants?

  • just edited my stats 2 post before. Quote from McBaine: “I would be interested in the stats, so if you have time to share the pick rates, that would be great. ” My conclusions stands Last patch peasants = trash (my words, you can have different words) this patch currently = still trash

  • Quote from Sir_Sully: “Quote from Klexe: “Why you think s5 ap2 would be op? Espcially with relic 3+as and 5+ aegis the s6 ap3 at agi0 is way better. ” I think it would be because this unit has no real disadvantage. It can stirke at Agility 4 (or 5 if charging) and has easy access to 3+, 5++ and alot of bodies. That's a lot to get through. As the unit currently stands, it removes charge bonues from the enemy so no lance bonuses, etc and as you point out they can deal with pretty much anything on …

  • Here are the stats i currently have finished: 85.500 possible points - 3x20 crusaders h+s - 1x 3levy h+s - 2x24bowmen - 1x bowmen 15 - 3x20 crusader h+s - 1x31 levy h+s - 2x30 levy h+s - 1x31 levy h+s - 1x33 levy h+s - 1x60 levy h+s - 1x30 levy h+s So that are the stats! btw ONLY ONE trebuchet picked ZERO Brigands (trololol at the "experts" who reverted the buff for them... stats dont lie) So lets check core shall we: we have 21375 core points We got overall 48 bowmen = 3x170 + 18x8ppm = 654 poi…

  • Quote from McBaine: “You admitted that they are some peasants used from time to time, I know I use them (the archers), you even say we should ignore those who use them, because it is not done often. Stats don't lie, but you're not entirely honest by flat out stating "Archers are never used". ” I count a pickrate of sub 5% as never used. Let me check the math okay?:D I come back later for our peasant options all of them minus yeomen

  • Quote from Sir_Sully: “Quote from Stygian: “I realize much of this is probably a hangover from being squated in that former game but I'm starting to think @Sir_Sullys idea of cavalry orders is better than I thought! ” For anyone who hasn't seen it the idea was something I called Shouts. A Duke (or the leadership character) can confer a Shout to the unit he is a part of when he is in combat. The Shout is declared at the start of the combat phase (or before that unit is chosen to fight). The Shout…

  • Quote from arwaker: “There are examples of unnecessary unique mundane weapons in some slims books, correct. EoS, SE, EoS for example. Those weapons should imho vanish in LAB because there is imho neither a convincing background reason not a real gameplay reason for them. But there are other examples, where such unique weapons make sense, because of the existing models, that have weapons which significantly look different than normal (blunderbuss, repeater crossbow for example). ” Fun fact. Many …

  • Quote from Marcos24: “I take them or crossbows, but if they move to special I 100% won’t because I’m definitely not going to pick them over units that are already there ” If we talk about a complet rework and they move to special they obvious should have rules which make them desireable. I have no problem with Bowmen in core but I see no way to get suitable core bowmen with rules to support cavalry in core. 38" range unwiedly longbowmen even with 4+ hitting? Well sure it could work but then agai…

  • Quote from Marcos24: “I think all ranged units in special is a bad idea ” Why? Current bowmen in core arent taken since the begnning (minus the time where peasants storm was avaiable) I would also reduce core to 20% with only 1. rabble peasants 2. realms 3. aspirants 4. new cheap knights without blessing in core Quote from Peacemaker: “Quote from Klexe: “Personally i think a plain +1s +1ap weapon is fine and what KoE needs and doesnt step on toes of lance as anti armor weapon ” Quote from Klexe:…

  • Quote from Stygian: “I must of had the wrong impression. @Klexe how would you change forlorns and serf infantry? I am really hung up on using these lately. ” Forlorns are fine. The problem is more with claymore as weapon. 1. Grail oath and non oath needs access for it too. Or questing oth uses this as crutch 2. Spear part is never used (or should never be used only in some rare situations) 3. It is a band aid for questing knights as 3+ as was just bad 4. many people dislike the agi 0 part.(mysel…

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “What makes Forlorns not suitable as the "elite" infantry unit you're talking about there? (I'm sure there's a problem, but I'm equally sure I don't know what it is). ” They are suitable. They are used. Nothing wrong with them really. I personally dislike the claymore. The spear part is never used really. For an anvil they are a tad too expensive as they are a unit themself and not a support piece to cavalry if you understand the difference Quote from Stygian: “I'm curio…

  • Quote from KeyserSoze: “Quote from Klexe: “Quote from KeyserSoze: “Prolbem is tha some koe armies are a little difficult to distinguise units. Ok, all my opponents so far are doing their best to keep them as different as possible, so an addition of huskars would be quite welcome. ” ah say that to DL players or even dwarfs...^^ ” Well DL is an unfair comparison due to the book having gone through a complete redesign. Again, don't take me wrong, it's not players' fault but a limited model range is…