Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 295.

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 available! You can read all about it in the news.

  • Can I just say how absolutely awesome it is that we have a whole bunch of people saying "yes, we want our infantry to be R2 so that it better demonstrates how worthless an individual model's life is"? Because it is so awesome. I am really looking forward to this book

  • I unfortunately know the answer already. Which is a shame because I love thinking about this kind of stuff. I am looking forward to seeing your guesses!

  • ID General Chat

    lawgnome - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “How much shooting is too much (too incentivised) in a given LAB? Make sure this is broadly consistent as LABs are done, which is part of RT role. I.e. the current game status/books give a rough benchmark for what level should be incentivised. ” You should also ask "how do you determine what is "too much""? Should any given army only be able to cause a certain number of wounds through shooting a turn? Should we be spending our time figuring out the math to get to that number? So…

  • ID General Chat

    lawgnome - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Villon: “But ID was good at shooting before, and i think they need to be good at in the LAB. I knwo people that loves to play ID "gunline" + support If we cripple shooting to the ground, a lot of people will be dissapointed. Both "combat" and "shooting" is needed in this army (and other armies with this kind of problems) like DH ” Keep in mind, I said "cripple shooting compared to melee combat", and it wasn't directed at ID specifically, rather at the idea of "pushing shooting too muc…

  • ID General Chat

    lawgnome - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    Quote from Tyranno: “"Are the shooting elements too pushed?" or "Are the combat elements not pushed enough?" Or if it is a mix of the two? ” This is a neat question. I also wonder if there isn't some factor where shooting, by its very nature, is inherently pushed without any design intent. After all, there is a reason that modern militaries are not wandering around with swords or spears. Being able to fight your opponent from range is a massive advantage. Is it possible that the only way to not …

  • It is a rule that allows you to have a lot of really big blocks of infantry all cramped up yet still maintaining maneuverability. Lots of stuff you can do with that if you want, and if you don't want to, you don't have to. I don't really get the complaining.

  • Quote from Eldan: “So, what is this rule actually for? I'm reading it and I can't think of any case where it would really apply? Do you ever move anything except the front rank across anything? When would that be the case? ” I think it makes it so that you can have lots of deep units close to one another without limiting their mobility. It should be visually appealing, for sure.

  • I personally want the Beta 1 version of Whispers of the Mask back. Cannot be wounded on better than 4+ is simple and it gives the unit a unique role to help them be differentiated from the other infantry.

  • Quote from CariadocThorne: “Oh and "Da-da da Da-da, da Da-da, da Da-da, charging my attack...." ” Quote from CariadocThorne: “A spell gaining power as the game progresses is an interesting idea. Cast it in the right spot early on and you save power later in the game for other spells. ” To be fair, I actually hadn't considered this. I was thinking it would be an instant duration spell. That way it actually has a different use depending on when you are using it in a battle. Having a spell where yo…

  • How about this: Building flames: To Cast: 8+ (or whatever) Range: 24" Choose a spot within LOS and range. All units within 1+Y" take 2d6 flaming hits at Str 1+Y, where Y = the game turn. At the beginning of the game (when units are grouped up), the spell doesn't hit very hard and can be used to try to clear chaff. By the end of the game, it can be used to clear out that last stubborn unit that has been evading the ID's attempts at killing them. It plays into the arrogance of ID. They are fine wi…

  • ID General Chat

    lawgnome - - Infernal Dwarves (ID)

    Post

    A percent cap also makes it harder to balance by points. "This artillery piece is not performing as something this price should. However, if we drop it any further, people would be able to fit an extra artillery piece under the limit, which would be too overwhelming. Guess it has to stay too expensive." I like the current implementation.

  • I do like the stacking spell. It is a very unique idea but is still fitting. However, it does promote a death star play style. Is that ok?

  • Quote from Jomppexx: “It's simple. We're the best army in the game. ” I mean, obviously. Quote from Wesser: “OK Tribesmen and Sylvan Archers may have a lot of special rules, but plays pretty straightforward. An ID Infernal Warrior has quite a lot going on. Shackled Slaves synergy, potential with Flaming/Oil skins, very niche ranged weapon and so on. I can certainly understand if someone Big have trouble keeping track of what Blunderbusses are realistically capable off. Infernal Brand allowing Dw…

  • I would absolutely love flaming attacks all around (and have made that suggestion a few times). One of the reasons I was given for not allowing it was the existence of high flaming aegis items like the dragonfire gem. It isn't fair for a spell to essentially make a character or a titan untouchable. So while I would love that spell, you have to do something about the 2+ save first.

  • Where do you draw the limit on what is considered too much to think about? Pulling an example from my favorite army, OK, we have this for rules from the simplest of core units: Tribesmen: Scrapling Lookout Scoring Light Armor Sons of the Avalanche Paired Weapons Iron Fist Almost half of this model consists of army specific rules. And of those army specific rules, one completely breaks a core rule (3 models instead of 5 before you can target a character), one consists of 3 separate rules (of whic…

  • I think that with the current concerns of ID shooting outstripping ID melee combat (and subsequently trying to remain a mobile cloud, which is just weird for ID), I think that any spell should have the focus of getting into combat. Please note that I don't mean that it needs to help get them into combat, because that can also be used to continue the undesired mobile cloud effect. So something that gives shooting protection probably isn't good. Something that either boosts ID in combat or makes i…

  • Quote from Jomppexx: “Quote from WhammeWhamme: “They have ghost step so they can go under anything - even battlefield-scale water (because they can dig deeper, it makes enough sense right?). Some kind of "burrow under" attack could be cool and might be the niche they need, sure, but mechanically it ends up being a lot of text, and people really wanted things simplified. ” It's a shame simplification immediately hit this unit though They really need some special rule for movement and maybe sweepi…

  • Some questions I've thought of regarding my last post: If the range of the weapons are reduced by 6" to counter the complaint about first turn shooting and overall range, how badly does this affect other play styles in the book? Can the other play styles still function with this change made? Do the changes suggested stop the SA style cloud build from functioning as well as it did before? Does it affect it at all? If a unit boosting item is put into the game, is this item still going to be desira…

  • Quote from DanT: “To be clear, I have never said that the overlord is the key problem... Frankly, the structural incentives mean that even if he was changed in the current book, if nothing else was then the battlelines would not be incentivised. Basically, if one tries to optimise a battleline with melee infantry and an overlord, the optimisation process will include removing both him and the infantry. And I claim that, because of how the pricing operates, its goals, and the available levers, in…

  • Quote from DanT: “Sure... and absolutely doing this is sensible... but I think you are doing so in a very binary way that is not so useful in this particular instance... If I am right about the "death by a thousand cuts" change, then it will be impossible to point to any single change as a "key issue". Which is how all of your responses have read, right? "There is evidence that some battleline worked without X, so X can't be the crucial piece". Is that not largely the chain of logic employed in …