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.

  • Quote from Ungrik: “The cap additional models to 50% works great. You have even played tournaments with that comp and cried like a baby about it ” Ah that terrible rule! Now I can fully appreciate it. Quote from Ungrik: “As for the suggested set of rules, seems fair to me. ” Cheers Sooooo .... who tries to write a game breaking 3k list to test 'em? Sure someone can write a list that grosses everyone out

  • Quote from Idum: “Quote from Pellegrim: “Yes, def. warband rules plus the flux supplement cards. And yes def. masters as they are quintessential to Fantasy Battles imo. @Idum If someone wants to field 2 x 6 flying chickens + plus a flying might lord, should that be prohibited? I dunno man. To me it sounds kinda cool. But I fear that player will mostly face castle deployments. ” The issue is that it can quickly become unmanageable if the flying category is maxed out: where in 4500pts one will usu…

  • Yes, def. warband rules plus the flux supplement cards. And yes def. masters as they are quintessential to Fantasy Battles imo. @Idum If someone wants to field 2 x 6 flying chickens + plus a flying might lord, should that be prohibited? I dunno man. To me it sounds kinda cool. But I fear that player will mostly face castle deployments.

  • Perhaps 35% of characters would be fine too? Allowing 1.050 of characters; still not enough to go full on Warlord + Full Master + Beefy BSB. What ya think?

  • @RobertR to test the OK vs other armies discussion a bit more, let's see what's possible with the cap on 30% characters. Also an example why I feel we should avoid a list of changes per army book, cause you get into discsussion as to why one army would need more then the other. example (Hidden Content) It's practically the same output, in other words, all armies need to make the same choices, to get to field the same models. Sure, the Orges pay a little more, and can't make shortcuts like fieldi…

  • How about the adjustments in post 45 @berti? They aim to prevent going in to detailed, but do adress the issue you mention

  • I was going to say ' I agree with both of you Bas and Ungrik, but arguably O&G have an advantage over OK cause they have cheaper characters then OK, so the can more easily field the general + wizard + bsb...' BUT THEN ( ) The OK character have certain very clear advantages over de O&G ones, namely that a OK wizard already has Res5 and 1 wound extra, plus he stomps and can not be stomped and is considerably faster, plus he has an attack more. So I agree there really isn't an issue. This kinda poi…

  • Quote from RobertR: “Quote from Pellegrim: “Quote from RobertR: “This list breakes the character rules for OK but I don't think it's game breaking: Ogre Khans 415 - Great Khan, General, Light Armour (Destiny's Call), Paired Weapons (Shield Breaker), Spinesplitter 385 - Shaman, Wizard Adept, Shamanism, Light Armour, Iron Fist, Magical Heirloom, Gut Roarer 350 - Khan, Battle Standard Bearer, Plate Armour, Halberd, Paired Weapons, Iron Fist, Great Weapon, Ogre Crossbow, Talisman of Shielding, Hoard…

  • Think magic is handled pretty good with the supplement (first set) in comparison with the second set (last set). the-ninth-age.com/community/in…99b06d3d8776d2b8b22008381

  • Quote from RobertR: “This got me thinking. Could armies with really cheap characters also be a problem? As in, they can spam them and thereby getting lots of spells and channels? ” Can def. be a thing yes, though I hope the flux supplement caps available magic power. Otherwise it be smart to test this and maybe introduce a max channel or something

  • Quote from RobertR: “This list breakes the character rules for OK but I don't think it's game breaking: Ogre Khans 415 - Great Khan, General, Light Armour (Destiny's Call), Paired Weapons (Shield Breaker), Spinesplitter 385 - Shaman, Wizard Adept, Shamanism, Light Armour, Iron Fist, Magical Heirloom, Gut Roarer 350 - Khan, Battle Standard Bearer, Plate Armour, Halberd, Paired Weapons, Iron Fist, Great Weapon, Ogre Crossbow, Talisman of Shielding, Hoardmaster 433 - 6 Tribesmen, Iron Fist, Standar…

  • Quote from Ungrik: “@Pellegrim if with these tweaks you are limiting the really nasty or big stuff, then that is a simple adjustment. Keeping it simple is key. Another route might be limiting a gigantic to 0-1 on a 3K build instead of adjusting the percentages. Combining it all with the warband rules off course. ” Indeed, keep it simple, using the good rules that are in place already. Yes, combine with warband rules, + combining with the warband magic rules from the flux supplement, toning down …

  • Here the sheet for anyone interested docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…bLwj5juk/edit?usp=sharing Its a full editor link, so you can change everything etc.

  • The setup Caledoriv provided is good in the sense it adressess some skews; with this in mind, and the fact that Warbands and army categories already adress certain issues (like @Tonko concludes), I think we can do with an adjustment of the character category and the adjustment of the beasts category. Check out this scheme; i setup it up te prevent the most dirt, but allow some freedom in list building, as I feel flavour is very important too. the-ninth-age.com/community/in…99b06d3d8776d2b8b22008…

  • Quote from RobertR: “Most games need different restrictions at different levels. I think a lot of the ideas here are really good but some armies might need separate types of restricitons to retain their "feel". A wdg lord should be really powerful of course, even in a 3000 point game. This goes with vampires and greater daemons as well. I think separate rules for how you can build those characters would be necessary in a homebrew. ” I have the feeling you are right with this statement. It would …

  • Quote from Caledoriv: “Over here in Germany we played 95% of all 7th edition games with the "Akito Comp" (2150 points), which said e.g. that dragons (and greater daemons) are not allowed. The number of allowed magic dice was restricted as was the number of flying units, war machines, and a lot of other stuff. I've had the best games during this time, which is why I'm more on the "do not allow too strong single models" side. And while these models have been turned down a lot in T9A I still think …

  • @Caledoriv those are some solid balancing points that will create a more level playing field no doubt; however, it does also slice off alot of cool things that I feel should def. feel should have a place in 3.000 point 9th Age (also because we saw that is basically the normal size it was during 6th edition with 2.000 points). Greater demons, for example. Also I feel there is defo room for a 500 point other character If I take my list as an example, I would have to lose the warlord, the master ma…

  • Good to see the conversation on balance issue going, and please continue, I'm just posting a little price comparison hereunder. Small post hereunder with point examples about how power creep (also implemented as point discounts) from 6th -> 9th actually makes that 2.000 in 6th edition might even be closer to 3.000 points currently then it is to 4.000 point. (Hidden Content)

  • Quote from Tonko: “Quote from Litoperez: “In 6-7th edition tournament list were at 1500 points (currently 3000) that made the game more accesible and shorter to play. I wish we come back there ” to me, 3000 games are very viable and fun, especially in a non-competitive environment! In legacy WFB, most of my games were 1500. even though tournaments at the time moved from 2000 to 2400 ” This quote interested me, as I did not know what the main points total were in 6th edition (as I stopped during …