Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

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.

Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

  • the question of mandatory BSB really depends on the army I think.

    T9A already has 4 armies that literally do not need a BSB - wdg, vc, ud, dl.

    I think there should be a good spread of armies that need a bsb, sorta need it, and don't need it.
    We already got the armies that don't need it.
    EoS, dwarves, KoE etc... Are armies that should need it.
    Elves probably fall within the scope of armies that sorta need bsb since they are supposed to be elite.
    HBE synergize well with a BSB due to have bubble spells. So its not that bsb is mandatory for hbe, its just that its worth taking due to synergies so why not combine it with a magic user?

    Again, just shows that there are various reasons why people take certain builds.
  • On foot honors for fighty commanders should be 5 pts if you want to see non-bsb options. A kitted mundane and magic items fighty char should be roughly the same as 5-7 swordmasters or smth.
    my ETC 2019 roster
    750 - High Prince on Dragon, Dragon, Great Weapon, Obsidian Rock
    565 - Mage: Asfad Scholar, Master, Divination, Book of Meladys,
    485 - High Prince: Queen's Companion, General, Spear, Sliver of the Blazing Dawn, Destiny's Call, Longbow, Moonlight Arrows
    280 - 20x Citizen Spears, MC
    190 - 5x Elein Reavers, Bows
    662 - 27x Sea Guard, MSC, Banner of Speed
    360 - 5x Knights of Ryma, M
    180 - 3x1 Sea Guard Reaper
    663 - 21x Lion Guard, MSC, Banner of Becalming
    4500
  • So is it the concensus that HBE Charecters' main role is force concentration?

    If so should this be coming from vanilla charecters, whilst honours and mounts only function as further boost in the umpf?

    And would the army need this many honours in that case?

    All this Commander, Prince, Honour discussion needs a decent guidance.

    @elendor_f @Vespacian could it be possible to create a User Requirements Document (URD) for the lab? Would there be any benefit for the hbe community to agree on a consolidated URD? This could then be discussed with the project internally through you.

    There's a lot of ideas in the forum, we can channel this in a more constructive way. Also this will inform the T9A decision makers so that they can advise what the delta is between their view and ours, why there's a delta, would they tweak a few things to close the delta...

    But even the forum engagement needs to be well structured (some sort of Q&A) to avoid side tracking etc.
  • Creating a repository of ideas can definitely be useful (I will first check whether somebody had collected some in another thread). Perhaps there should be different threads for different topics (characters, core, elite infantry, mounts, etc), or a GDoc to keep the list of ideas clean.

    However calling a consensus what the 10-15 people who post in this thread regularly agree on is stretching it a bit. For example, I disagree that HE character's main role is force concentration (and that it should be) and I disagree that there is a consensus about this as a result of the recent discussion.

    The idea is definitely good @matrim, we just need to find the right format I believe.
    'He opened the battered book. Bits of paper and string indicated his many bookmarks.
    "In fact, men, the general has this to say about ensuring against defeat when outnumbered, out–weaponed and outpositioned. It is..." he turned the page, "Don't Have a Battle."
    "Sounds like a clever man," said Jenkins.'
    Terry Pratchett, Jingo!

    My humble Highborn Elves army blog:
    Elendor's HE army
  • Unless the project stance on individual power level of elven characters changed from the times of HWotF nerf ("elves cant have Prince as powerful as Chaos/Vampire/Orc lords"), force concentration is not a viable option. Remember, Sliver is a crutch, imagine such a weapon in SA/WDG/VC book - the world would burn. I can only see the following paths for them:
    1. Magic/shooting bearers.
    2. Unit buffers. Yes, we were told that HBE have weakness in Unit Synergy but may be this has changed since then?
    3. Mounts.
    I do hope, option 2 will be used too.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by AlexCat ().

  • Marcos24 wrote:

    Well I hope the difference between each tier of character power level is actually not very much so we can see some epic combats between characters instead of “well stay away from him no matter what” every game
    as long as there exists a disproportionate scaling between hard stats and soft stats, we will always have a wide imbalance between those that can and those that cant.

    I.E - as long as the team has it in their heads that its ok to be wounded logically, but not to be hit logically at the same scale, some entries will always be no go zones for others.
    Once a Highborn, always a Highborn.
  • AlexCat wrote:

    Unless the project stance on individual power level of elven characters changed from the times of HWotF nerf ("elves cant have Prince as powerful as Chaos/Vampire/Orc lords"), force concentration is not a viable option. Remember, Sliver is a crutch, imagine such a weapon in SA/WDG/VC book - the world would burn. I can only see the following paths for them:
    1. Magic/shooting bearers.
    2. Unit buffers. Yes, we were told that HBE have weakness in Unit Synergy but may be this has changed since then?
    3. Mounts.
    I do hope, option 2 will be used too.
    I don't like it as a design decision, but I thought it was fixed that HBE are to have a weakness in synergy? It isn't strictly true atm due to QC honour QTF and the cover fire rule (anything else??). But if it were carried through to LAB and for example we lose QC QtF, I really don't see what niche's can be available for fighty characters *other* than force concentration. Especially as this is the flip side of not being a synergy buffer.

    If this is the LAB direction for HBE and synergy is the LAB direction for DE, then I suspect I'll end up taking my HBE models and porting them over to DE rules and using HBE fluff (old fluff in the absence of adequate public T9A fluff) if I want the army to feel how it does in my head. But that's just my 'feel' for army background and is probably quite idiosynchratic.
    Join us on Ulthuan.net
  • matrim wrote:

    So is it the concensus that HBE Charecters' main role is force concentration?


    Wasn't this something that was discussed when the 2.0 updates happened? HbE characters would stand on their own in terms of output, while DE and SE characters would bring synergy through rules and items as part of their "eliteness/cost"? Or was that a misunderstanding/no longer valid?

    At any point, I thought that the point of differentiation where HbE characters stood was that they would excel through their own rules/output, rather than by buffing the army directly to perform better (magic excepted, obviously).


    If so should this be coming from vanilla charecters, whilst honours and mounts only function as further boost in the umpf?


    Vanilla elf characters are Trash Tier for their price. Just look at DE. Last I'd read, their only frequently used characters at this point were Oracles and Altar mounted Cult BSB's. If elves are supposed to be on the same level of "eliteness" as dwarf characters, then we need MAJOR buffs to be in the same ballpark (Res5 = a 4++ compared to Res3).


    Honestly, if our characters are supposed to be "as elite" as Dwarf characters (which I have always heard and considered accurate), then they need some pretty big improvements. It doesn't matter WHERE these are from, as long as they are there (mundane armory, base profile, upgrade options). Personally, I'd want some of the upgrades to go to the base profile and be generic improvements (e.g. +1A, +1DS, etc.), and then some to come in the form of Honors geared towards specialized functions (e.g. Grind Attacks at S4 AP1 for High Warden of the Flame to specialize it towards killing hordes of low quality models like Empire heavy infantry or rats). This would make our characters easier to design, allow us to avoid "OP" items as a means of compensating, and allow us to create more focused characters (which to my understanding was a goal for LAB for HbE).


    And would the army need this many honours in that case?


    Honors should not be predicated off of "how to buff characters" but from "do they fill an interesting design and meet a need in the army?" The main issue with our army book is that elven characters (in all factions) start in "pretty close to bottom tier" levels, requiring some hardcore compensation through other rules/items to be competitive. The first step in making elves actually viable in combat is to buff the baseline profile.
    I agree with @elendor_f, the people on this thread are not a "consensus" by any means. Even having everyone on all the forums (even other armies) vote/discuss would not be a true consensus. Further, "consensus" is not always a good idea when designing an army. The army should be designed for those playing it and balanced for those playing against it.

    One thing I would ask of our ACS is if they could tell us if the idea of "highborn elf characters must NOT provide any synergy/buffs to their own units or debuffs to enemies" still stands. That would definitely change the game in terms of what we would have to do for our characters to be valid. . . though it would probably end up as a bad thing because our army has somewhat specialized elite units meaning that our characters directly compete against them for a spot on our lists. Having said that, I will stick to my guns. The baseline profile of elven combat characters is trash, and needs to be improved for them to see play at a high level.

    Marcos24 wrote:

    Well I hope the difference between each tier of character power level is actually not very much so we can see some epic combats between characters instead of “well stay away from him no matter what” every game
    I would consider the tiers to be thus, for baseline characters:
    Tier 1: Res5, S5, AP2, A5 (Warriors, Vampires, Saurians, Ogres)
    Tier 2: Res5, S5, AP2, A4 (Orcs, Beast Herds, Dynasties)
    Tier 3: Res5, S4, AP1, A4 (Infernal Dwarves, Dwarven Holds)
    Tier 4: Res4, S4, AP1, A4 (Rats, Empire, KoE)
    Tier 5: Res3, S4, AP1, A4 *elves are here. . . along with Goblins and Skinks

    That is a pretty good guideline to where things stand because the baseline you work with dictates your maximum potential. The biggest issue is that Res, S, AP are hard stats, while OS/DS and Agi are soft stats. Being "elite" in soft stats is much less worthwhile because the effect is much lower. As a comparison, +2OS/Agi is 25 points. +1S/AP is 50 points under the assumption it brings your total buff to +2S/AP. So the "elite" part of elves is, using the cost of magic items as guidelines, worth half as many points as S/AP at best. On top of this, Res5 is equivalent to a 4++ compared to Res 3 against S3, 4, and 5 (3++ against S3, 4++ against S4, slightly better than 5++ against S5).
  • tripple/double icon is not my thing

    If you want survive spells why stop them and get into CC turn 2 aka relentless, Binding and dispel the rest instead of gambing for 3 turns with tripple icon

    Folomo wrote:

    Maybe an option is to get rid of the commander and have just a fighting character and a wizard as the vanilla option.
    With the Honours, there are already plenty of options for characters setups.
    It also makes easier to make all honours interesting ooptions.
    this, suggested this so many times! We dont need 4+ tiers of characters.

    Other than that, everything what aenarion said, although this is nothing new for experienced players ^^

    The post was edited 1 time, last by cptcosmic ().

  • ferny wrote:

    If this is the LAB direction for HBE and synergy is the LAB direction for DE, then I suspect I'll end up taking my HBE models and porting them over to DE rules and using HBE fluff (old fluff in the absence of adequate public T9A fluff) if I want the army to feel how it does in my head. But that's just my 'feel' for army background and is probably quite idiosynchratic.
    we discused a bunch of directions in the feedback thread for DE. It included a few ideas for HBE and SE because none of us want all 3 elf armies to be too similar but we still want then to keep some stuff.
    I think the direction that might be chosen is that DE characters have lots of bubble buffs and unit type buffs. SE have almost no buffs. And HBE are kinda inbetween - so some units buffs, few bubble buffs(besides magic)? This is my opinion.



    HBE is probably going to be one of those factions where it's gonna take a while to figure out since there are so many directions it can go in.

    My advice would be for the HBE community to start formulating their vision of HBE. What draws you to the army, what directions are dealbreakers, what directions are an option, etc....
    I think it best to do this BEFORE the T9A team makes their own vision for the faction because once they got their mind made up it will be difficult to change. ....it took quite alot of feedback to change their vision of dread elf "no shooting, rush at em" WDG but elves - but with some kind of short range hard target. Feedback was overwhelmingly opposed. But we did give some technical feedback about why it was boring and problems with enemy shooting.


    Now of course, constructive feedback is best.
    And I would advise a new thread for that.
  • Is all this complaining about fighty foot heroes are taking into account that this applies to almost every other army?

    Do you ever see a fighty foot hero that is not a bsb in any other army? (Except DL for manifestations and WoDG Chieftans/KoE Castellans cause each hero is a std bearer for a very specific +8 CR)

    If anything is done to Commanders shouldnt exact thjng be done for every other army?

    Does the term relative mean anything in balance/wishlist discussion.
    I am the fat Turk that infiltrated the Norwegian Druid Caste.

    I would have been better than you if I could roll a 4 on 2D6.

    To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of ELVES.

    Sylvan Elves
    Dread Elves
    Beast Herds
    Daemonic Legions
    Warriors of the Dark Gods
    Storm Cast Eternals (WAIT WHAT?)
  • @LegioIgnatum
    I think you have a very good point. I think fighty characters (especially on foot) are an artifact from before step-up rules came around. They were rarely ever taken naked, and as a result they were harder to wound and provided precious attacks back after your whole front rank was mowed down from an opposing charge. This could mean the difference of a few precious points of cr etc.

    Since everything gained the ability to fight in 2 ranks AND step-up (and steadfast) we start to see these fighty foot characters’ functions eroded to where they are not providing something extra valuable.
    The change in font size of this post is purely accidental: my phone is stupid, and I am too stupid to fix it.
  • LegioIgnatum wrote:

    Is all this complaining about fighty foot heroes are taking into account that this applies to almost every other army?

    Do you ever see a fighty foot hero that is not a bsb in any other army? (Except DL for manifestations and WoDG Chieftans/KoE Castellans cause each hero is a std bearer for a very specific +8 CR)

    If anything is done to Commanders shouldnt exact thjng be done for every other army?

    Does the term relative mean anything in balance/wishlist discussion
    I think the issue here is that its not just the unit entry that's meh ("the guy who gets upgraded to a BSB") but there is also a chunk of rules and complexity budget that are wasted on top.

    The spear doesn't synergise with either combat foot honour, BSB doesn't either, and at that point they are a complete waste of space as neither princes nor commanders want them.
  • Aenarion43 wrote:

    I would consider the tiers to be thus, for baseline characters:
    Tier 1: Res5, S5, AP2, A5 (Warriors, Vampires, Saurians, Ogres)
    Tier 2: Res5, S5, AP2, A4 (Orcs, Beast Herds, Dynasties)
    Tier 3: Res5, S4, AP1, A4 (Infernal Dwarves, Dwarven Holds)
    Tier 4: Res4, S4, AP1, A4 (Rats, Empire, KoE)
    Tier 5: Res3, S4, AP1, A4 *elves are here. . . along with Goblins and Skinks

    That is a pretty good guideline to where things stand because the baseline you work with dictates your maximum potential. The biggest issue is that Res, S, AP are hard stats, while OS/DS and Agi are soft stats. Being "elite" in soft stats is much less worthwhile because the effect is much lower. As a comparison, +2OS/Agi is 25 points. +1S/AP is 50 points under the assumption it brings your total buff to +2S/AP. So the "elite" part of elves is, using the cost of magic items as guidelines, worth half as many points as S/AP at best. On top of this, Res5 is equivalent to a 4++ compared to Res 3 against S3, 4, and 5 (3++ against S3, 4++ against S4, slightly better than 5++ against S5).
    Do this again, but add attacks in there. LR is mathematically roughly equivalent to +1 attack.
    Elves basically trade 1 res for 1 attack compared to the guys in T4, and 2 res for 1 attack compared to the guys in T3.
  • New

    Maybe honours should become a thing for princes and mages only in the LAB?

    That way we could streamline the honours away from legacy, and the honours that are now linked to units could be options in the commander profile...

    Example: a prince could choose between a damage honour, a spellsword honour (moct), a ranged honour or a defensive honour. Then, you'd have a commander who gets options to be ultimate swordmaster, huntsman, spear commander or queensguard captain with a couple of nods towards those units' profiles.

    This way there could even be space for some unit buffing things, since the types of commanders are more tightly linked to their respective units and the synergies wouldnt get out of hand.
    "You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?" -Death
    Phae's Pointy-Ear Blog: Elves in a Corner
  • New

    On a different topic, the lists for the Poland Masters team event in Krakow this weekend are out, and HE are the third most represented army (9 out of 102 armies), behind VC and OK.

    I made a thread compiling all HE lists: HE Lists Poland Masters - Krakow - January 2020

    After a quick look it seems that:
    1. Players really want to try Princes on Griffon (6 Princes on Griffon in 9 lists, one took 2)
    2. Wizard Masters are not as prevalent as in the past (2 Wizard Masters in 9 lists).
    3. Pyromancy is the most taken Path in this event for HE, mostly in the form of a BoAM Adept, but both Wizard Masters have taken Pyromancy.
    4. Sea Guard is very popular in Core, but all units are represented. Nobody took Lancer buses, but there are some Lancer darts.
    5. All choices of Elite Infantry seem to be represented roughly equally.
    6. Reapers continue to be more popular than Sloops (there is only 1).
    7. There are some Phoenixes, 2 Fire and 1 Frost.
    8. Reaver Chariots are absent, there are 2 Lion Chariots (1 Commander, 1 normal).
    Edit: I had missed the 1 Sloop in the lists, previously the post said there were none.
    Edit 2: I collected statistics of the lists here: Statistics of HE in Poland Masters January
    'He opened the battered book. Bits of paper and string indicated his many bookmarks.
    "In fact, men, the general has this to say about ensuring against defeat when outnumbered, out–weaponed and outpositioned. It is..." he turned the page, "Don't Have a Battle."
    "Sounds like a clever man," said Jenkins.'
    Terry Pratchett, Jingo!

    My humble Highborn Elves army blog:
    Elendor's HE army

    The post was edited 2 times, last by elendor_f ().

  • New

    @elendor_f

    Griffin princes are a surprise to me, I would have expected griffin commanders.

    Pyromancy prevalence is no surprise to me, but lack of meladys pyro wizard masters is.

    A big Sea Guard anvil with a QCompanion Sliver lord is no surprise, one of my chief complaints about internal core balance. That being said, surprised by the smaller units of sea guard. Not surprised by filling up core with more chaff (x2 Elein Reavers units), that is one variation technically.

    Points 5-8 I agree with.

    My favorite list is the first one.
    The change in font size of this post is purely accidental: my phone is stupid, and I am too stupid to fix it.