Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 217.

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

  • Right, I know this is crazy but hear me out. They get the current movement in their profile normally. But they can activate the crazy long charge range if, once they make it in, THEY EXPLODE. They don't get the impact hits, just the weaker explosion attacks. This would make them decent short range hammers for our units anvils as they wouldn't need to activate the long charge distance, and also give them a crazy zoning option, but crucially with a vermin twist. We get to bend our guidelines in ex…

  • Quote from skipschnit: “More??? 3 hp, R4, flammable, variable advance move? Everyone knows they blow up. Everyone has access to a common flaming banner. (Even DL). Being a construct, it comes with chariot, which makes DTT even worse for the unit. Many armies have access to Break the Spirit in one form or another. SE can put trees right in front. Druidism can engulf them in a forest. A cheap chaff with good armor and willows ward can really reduce them and redirect them. There are many downsides …

  • Quote from ValourUnbound: “There is some flavor missing with the special rule name being blacked out. The placeholder name was similar to "Rocket Engines". Notice there is no beast of burden on the profile. This is not your standard "cart pulled by a big rat" type of chariot. It is self propelled by some sort of combustion engine. Think of it spewing black exhaust, with soot covered drivers wearing goggles. Maybe a gas mask too. These were built to go fast first with not a thought to reliability…

  • I think the karts can work, but they need to have more risk involved. Failed charges could incur DTs, then if they failed charges and blew up from the DTs they'd also be more likely to be blowing up our own rats. These need to stay cheap and the combination of Arm 3 and S5 chassis's just feels too high. That said, flammable on the karts is a nice way to make them a bit squishier

  • The 9th AGE - Meme Thread

    heliconid - - WWW Topics

    Post

    the-ninth-age.com/community/in…7f3b27ad111415c04d8b9c1b6

  • The 9th AGE - Meme Thread

    heliconid - - WWW Topics

    Post

    the-ninth-age.com/community/in…7f3b27ad111415c04d8b9c1b6

  • Quote from Folomo: “Is the intent that players bring batteries of cannons? It seems that they are capped at 2, like most other armies with cannons. ” A major part of the guidelines focussed on vermin bolstering power through quantity not quality. These artillery pieces are fine, even without the overcharge. It feels like the base statline would make for a good overcharge. They should be worse, so that we have to bring more. I fear these aren't weaker enough compared to the slim book entries to w…

  • Quote from JeroBeam: “Great and fresh idea, can't really judge it gameplay-wise, but I'm really looking forward to it. Not a construct, but I already have one of those and I can really good imagine, how it digs those tunnels and crushes blind in the lines of the enemies to grind them down. mrm_dkl_vrs_tcw_mbs_701_000_01_large.png It's (mostly ) a pleasure to look in the forums these days. Thank you and keep those spoiler flowing! ” whilst this is an amazing model, I currently use this as an abom…

  • Overall I think these are improvements but they are still a too powerful. The overcharge range is a cool mechanic but I think it'll lead to most people always using overcharge once stuff comes in range. Perhaps a more interesting balance for the cannon's overcharge, especially if we keep d6 wounds, would be setting range of the overcharge to 5d6 and rolling for range after declaring the target. Similarly i think the overcharged catapult should lose the partial hit rule. An interesting nerf I'd l…

  • I like these. Feels like a smart way of dealing with the current dreadmill being too much of a jack-of-all trades. Slightly puzzled by the base size difference, I'm sure there's a well-thought out explanation, but it does mean that we can't use the same model as these different entries between lists. It'd be handy to use the current dreadmill (on 50x100) as either of these. I think I'll just put all of my chariot models on 50x75 bases and when I run them as doomspark devices slot in a horizontal…

  • Overcharge should definitely be a theme in the army, but I'm not sure that means all of our major units need to have it. More expendable units like weapon teams, yeah that makes perfect sense, but big 'centrepieces' like the platforms should play a bit more conservatively. They are relics of societal significance that the vermin don't need to overcharge to impress their peers, precisely because they are ancient (at least to the vermin) structures. The same way people look at the pyramids as thes…

  • Maybe worth noting as well that debasing from 75x50 to 100x50 is just a matter of slotting a 25x50 base to the left or right of the model. Once things come out people will come up with creative solutions. If the dictator can't be in a unit, practically anything that fits in a unit tray will be fine

  • Quote from dan: “Well in fairness though, part of the reason the forums explode is because they’re not seeing this stuff in context. And for an army like VS, in which units rarely act independent of one another, context really matters. I’m genuinely more concerned that knee-jerk forum responses based on that partial information are being used as any kind of rubric for unit redesigns. For instance take the bell, and the fact that there’s apparently now an internal thread evaluating whether or not…

  • Really cool to see a poll for something like this. Is the ruinous dictator the same model that was previously referred to as the Dux?

  • Quote from Eldan: “It's not just this model. Look at other models people use for the bell. THere's a bell tower or two from other companies, there's the crow demon a few people use... they ar eall just as big and impressive, especially in an army of small infantry. For example, someone built this: index.php Not a GW bell.- Still huge. ” I'm not sure I follow, are you suggesting the LAB team needs to design the platform around the dozens of conversions people have made? Making the bell gigantic s…

  • Quote from Aenarion43: “Quote from arwaker: “Maybe the platform should provide access to a single 5 or 6 spell. ” why, though? It’s unnecessary, considering how the rules work. ” People are looking to buff the bell. Maybe this is an overreaction though and wouldn't be the case if we knew more context.

  • Quote from arwaker: “Maybe the platform should provide access to a single 5 or 6 spell. ” I'd dig that if it was just for the bell and if an adept is on it.

  • Quote from rambage: “The Whispering Bell is the most forgettable war platform I've ever seen. It doesn't do anything to justify picking it. Channel 1 is meh, it no longer buffs our troops, you lock yourself off Occultism and plague monks by getting it. Really, each previews kills me a bit more on the inside. ” You're not locked out of magic paths, the plague infected upgrade for the swarm priest (update 11) enables you to take the pulpit and is separate from lore choice. You can have priests wit…

  • Lot of cool ideas floating around here, but it looks like the bell is intended to be the defensive version of the sacred platform. As much as I like the debuffs to the enemy aegis, I'm beginning to think it'd be more helpful to discuss rules that could buff the staying power of our rats or debuff enemy offensive ability. 6+ aegis works as it v clearly signposts what the platform should be used for, and especially used within 12" of our more squishy or self-hit prone units (like the weapon teams)…

  • Quote from setrius: “Friendly models within 12" from the bell get +1 Aegis. Enemy models at 12" from the bell gets -1 Aegis. That is all ” love this. The debuff aspect makes the sound of the bell ringing feel oppressive, even if it's only a small -1.