Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 992.

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.

  • Well, the advantage of the architect is, that you can still regen Something else after the Sphinx has perished.

  • Well, KoE territory that others should avoid (some area can happen but should be limited) to step on is imho: Ward save nearly army wide Special formation for heavy cavalry Specialized heavy cavalry for different purposes Flying heavy cavalry Cheap infantry being inspired by cavalry units Strong fighter characters by additional perks Hiding wizards in second rank

  • I don't see UD in the mad scientist corner. If anything, they are careful and foreseeing.

  • This deserves probably still some fine tuning.

  • Patch 2.2 Feedback

    arwaker - - Vampire Covenant (VC)

    Post

    Quote from Wesser: “Just need separate pricing for Counts and Courtiers on powers ” That would probably be the better solution regarding internal balance, sure. But I don't know whether the current situation is considered as dramatic enough to justify such a change in not only price, but pricing structure.

  • You consider UD underpowered without even knowing the other armies? Underpowered compared to what are they then?

  • Seems like you are just a tad too late. Half a yea ago UD was widely considered as the strongest of all 16 armies. Whether the latest point changes in November were too much or too few, the community opinions still differ. Time will tell the truth. At least the consensus is, that UD is now closer to the desired mid power level than before.

  • Patch 2.2 Feedback

    arwaker - - Vampire Covenant (VC)

    Post

    Some thoughts from my side: Powers are more worth if put on a strong and survivable model. Hence no surprise that counts see them far more often than courtiers. Unfortunately pricing structure forsees same price, so it is not possible to make counts with and without, as well as courtiers with and without power, all comparatively attractive. I think it is no problem to not see any counts without power. But I think it is at least a bit sad to see only few couriers with power. But that's the situat…

  • Wow, pleeeese can we come back to the topic?

  • VS Brainstorming for LAB

    arwaker - - The Vermin Swarm (VS)

    Post

    The bell has an effect similar to the Piper of Hameln?

  • 2.0 BH Beta Discussion Thread

    arwaker - - Beast Herds (BH)

    Post

    I think Longhorns is not the best unit to put a Lord inside. They are strong on their own, putting an expensive character inside is overkill. Wildhorns are the better unit for a Lord.

  • I don't even think vermin invent such steampunk things on their own. They've stolen the basic principles of technology from EoS, DH and ID, just to make it "better". And better means more like dangerous. Romans also hardly invented many on their own. A lot of the things we consider as inconic Roman were in reality copied from other cultures around, Greek, Celts, Etruscans, Persians...

  • I liked the GW Skaven background when I was a teenager. But growing up, all the exaggerated GW Background felt more and more stupid. It made no sense as a consistent world that could function in its own rules. I like 9th age approach to make it more logic, with some thinking about what happens outside the battlefield. I very much like the new Roman feeling and I even would like a bit of this red army touch. Keep on going BGT, I love your work.

  • Well, at least Panic is not as a problem when your unit is cheap and large.

  • Sure, Questing Swords could be magic swords and have some unique rules. That is definitively a possibility. But such decision should be a result of a background decision, not gameplay. Background first. Do not try to find a background reason for a gameplay desire. Try to find a gameplay solution for a background decision. Background first, rules second. I could live with Questing Knights having a unique magic sword, as long as there is a valid background story behind. But this story should be de…

  • 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).

  • Quote from Peacemaker: “Quote from arwaker: “May I ask the root cause of this "Claimor / Bastard Sword" desire? What is the purpose of this thing? I'm pretty sure that there is some kind of underlying purpose thing thing should fulfill. But in my opinion transferring this purpose to special rule attached to a weapon is a bad approach. A weapon that is only available to KoE but not to other armies just feels wrong to me, because KoE should not be a people of extraordinary weapon developers. I thi…

  • May I ask the root cause of this "Claimor / Bastard Sword" desire? What is the purpose of this thing? I'm pretty sure that there is some kind of underlying purpose thing thing should fulfill. But in my opinion transferring this purpose to special rule attached to a weapon is a bad approach. A weapon that is only available to KoE but not to other armies just feels wrong to me, because KoE should not be a people of extraordinary weapon developers. I think whatever the exact purpose is, it can also…

  • EoS models should not be invalidated, therefore such demigryphins and Steam Panzers need some room. But I have no problem with them becoming less important in LAB.

  • Is there already a LAB guideline document for VS? Does anyone know when community can see it?