Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 20.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Do we have an ETA for this release?

  • Had another idea. How about the following as a means to mitigate shooting. Academy rule: When shooting at a DE unit, up to half (rounding up) of the successful hits on the intended target can be allocated to a academy units if they are 1) within 6" of the intended target 2) the same troop type as the intended target The enemy should roll to hit as normal against the intended target before the DE player redistributes the successful hits. I believe this rule would really help DE get their main blo…

  • Quote from duxbuse: “Quote from TowerGuard712: “I could imagine that allowing units to effectively borrow ranks (not just rank bonus) for steadfast and disruption might be a bit too strong. Maybe I'm wrong here but the mechanic gets much more complex. For example a Hydra could flank and borrow a rank to cause disruption, etc. I feel that might break the core mechanics a bit too much. ” except hydra doesn't have academy training so would not need to worry about that. This would work when 10 corsa…

  • Quote from Uthegen: “Quote from KiRaHyuU: “How does this apply to Steadfast, Disrupted and Rank Bonus? ” You may put as you like into the rules - and how it matches the balancing needs. The idea has a lot of potential and also a lot of regulation options. @TowerGuard712 gave the "weakest" option.I could also imagine to have the controling player choose which units adds the ranks to which unit. Most times it would be just two units. My prefered option would be to give the player control which uni…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “Quote from TowerGuard712: “I don't think I ever suggested that the project was incompetent or unreasonable in any way for not changing sooner. I understand that the Gold version will be around for some time. I simply made a brainstorming suggestion for a change to Parry for any future update and like the discussion. Also I did not mean YOU personally were too scared of change but I can see how some people, in general, might take the don't rock the boat approach. That was not in…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “Quote from TowerGuard712: “Just because the rules froze does not mean they are frozen forever afaik. I could see a main rules update down the line a couple years from now but you never know, you may be right, if enough people are too scared of change. But on the flip side if enough people agree to it then we can make a change. I've been playing for 25 yrs and I'm enjoying this game more than the other square based ones. Doesn't mean it can't improve more. ” Sure, but the implic…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “Quote from King Kazador: “A good rule would equally apply to all shield infantry whether elite or non-elite. A new parry rule can be easily crafted. It just won’t be. Because 9th age. ” For the record, I quite like the current parry rule, and the interplay with paired weapons.I don't find this to be problematic in any of my games, there are no units that I don't use because of parry, and if anything it makes me ponder more different things at list selection. Regarding it not ch…

  • Quote from KiRaHyuU: “Quote from TowerGuard712: “Acadamy units: Can cumulate and add their rank bonuses to combats they are involved in up to maximum of +3 total combined (including non-academy rank bonuses). Example 1: Unit of executioners with 1 rank bonus is together in combat with an academy unit with 3 rank bonus. You can add +2 of the academy unit's rank bonus to the executioners to a maximum of +3. Example 2: Two academy units and 1 TowerGuard unit, each with 1 rank bonus, are fighting an…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from Ciara: “How about simple +2def? Always, no matter the off of atacker, def of defender etc, simple as that. ” I actually kind of like this. It puts a normal Def 3 unit up to elite level Def 5 which makes most elites need 4+ to hit them. It can really boost an elite Def 5 up to a Def 7. This would make normal Off 3 units need to hit the elites on 5+ and most characters would need a 4+. It somewhat deters a really low Def 2 unit from taking Shields like ferals, gobs if other options exis…

  • Quote from Ludaman: “Just a suggestion on Assassins and “Hidden” rules from someone who used to enjoy playing against hidden assassins in WHF: What if you bought academy or Cult units “assassin options” (fluff guys decide what they think is more appropriate), like buying extra portals for WoTDG. If you buy even a single “assassin option for a unit” your assassin can pop up in said unit at the beginning of any turn (yours or your opponents) rather than being deployed at the beginning of the game.…

  • So I've got a vision of what I think could make the Dread Elves really great and dreadful all at the same time. Dark Elves are an army that should excel at CC but should still retain the glass cannon feel. They are fragile, like other elves, especially to shooting. But they lack some of the tools the other elves have to deal with this. Namely armor/aegis, cover, and hard target to deal with this as it would go against the character of the army. They should be encouraged to play aggressively in a…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from King Kazador: “The rule for parry was the longest thread on this board. Virtually everyone was against it. It is a crap rule. Only crappy units with shields benefit. Good units with shields don’t benefit. Awesome rule. ” Good units (high Def units) with Shields would still benefit against Characters, etc with higher Off skills. For example, it would always be useful vs Lords, Dragons, Vampires etc. Not every rule needs to always apply or be beneficial in every single matchup. For exam…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from Vulgarsty: “I think “Parry provides a-1 toHit for the attacker if the defending model with parry has a lower Def than the attacker“ Is a simple concept. Means parry is worthwhile without making off buffs pointless. Elegant, simple, does what i think we all want it to intend. V good. ” Sounds good. I like the simpler wording. Just would need to make it clear that this rule applies after Off/Def modifiers but maybe the rules already do say that. I'd have to check. Quote from The Beninat…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    @theunwantedbeing @The Beninator I did mean less than. Meaning if Unit A has parry and a Def less than an attacking Unit B's Off than Unit B is -1 toHit since parry helps Unit A deflect the attacks. See examples below. Currently Parry makes an attacker with a higher Off always require a 4+ toHit no matter what. What I'm suggesting with my change is that if the attacker would normally need a 2+ toHit, it would go to a 3+ rather than automatically a 4+. Again to clarify I'm only suggesting a -1 to…

  • Parry proposal

    TowerGuard712 - - Suggestions

    Post

    I've found that Parry on low Def units is perhaps a little too strong vs high Off units. This is primarily vs characters/elites. In addition, in it's current form, Parry effectively acts as magic immunity to Off augments on attackers fighting a unit with Parry and Def hexes on defenders with Parry. This is because Parry generally "always sets" Def to the attackers Off which trumps any other add or subtract modifiers. So my suggestion is: D.b.7 - Parry Parry can only be used against Close Combat …

  • Ok I'll buy this interpretation which is how we've been playing it but I still think the wording of the rules is a bit ambiguous. Priority step 4 should use the same wording as Priority 1 but with the added "always". That would make things much clearer in my opinion. On a related note, as a possible rule change on parry, I would like to propose: D.b.7 - Parry Parry can only be used against Close Combat Attacks from the Front Facing. The model gains the following effect: - If the model's modified…

  • While I totally agree on your 3 examples. The last thing you mentioned is where I think the ambiguity lies. Example 4: Unit A with Def 3 and parry and is the target of a spell that gives -2 Def is fighting unit B, which has Off 5. First you check which one results in a higher Def for unit A: - applying +1 Def results in Def 4 - (always) setting it to the attacker's Off, i.e. 5 in this case, would result in Def 5 Def 5 > Def 4, so you use the second option. But what about the spell modifier? Well…

  • So I'm pretty sure I've been playing something wrong with my local group concerning Parry. I just reread a couple sections on parry and modifiers and priority. I think I have this worked out now but there is still one thing that remains kind of ambiguous to me. I'd like to clarify this for sure. Firstly let's lay out the relevant sections of the rules. 6.A Values Set to a Fixed Number When a value or a roll is set to a certain value, replace the modified value or the required roll with that valu…

  • HE player here. Here's an idea: Slave Screen: 6++ aegis vs shooting for infantry units. This could even be an upgrade for infantry perhaps so you pay for it where you want it. Cauldron could increase this aegis to a 5++ vs shooting on one unit as it's blessing or provide a 6++ aegis vs shooting to a unit that doesn't have Slave Screen. Maybe remove the cauldron 6++ aegis for cc. DE should be using aggressive blessings in combat anyways. Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  • SeaGuard problems. They never seem to know what they want to be. Bad archers or expensive Spearmen. - Their range is not great which makes them worse than archers in most shooting scenarios since they often need to move first turn or rank up prior to being charged. If I move, my shooting is worse. If I don't move them, I can shoot but am probably not using their Spears to their fullest or are not ranking up before being charged. - Since they shoot, I'm encouraged to start with ranking them wider…