Pinned 2.0 BH Beta Discussion Thread

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!

  • Quite the same here, I resumed EoS as of late and am (was) looking forward for this update to play BH again.
    Particularly, I found elves to be unmanageable (HE particularly) and I felt like I had much more uphill battles with this army than my others (WDG/EOS).

    Now as youngseward said BH may not only get nerfs while elower tier armies may get some, but given the tier difference I won't hold my breath.

    Regarding the tier list, I'd be interested in seeing the details (criteria, sample size, team/single events, source): that wouldn't change the outcome, but at least help understand where lies its deviation from my own experience.
  • Part of the problem might be how one-dimensional Beasts are? Limited armour, charge range, leadership, shooting - just about everything a "balanced" force uses. Instead, all we have is toughness and re-roll hits and combat, combat, combat!

    I know I can't stand to play against elves. When all you have is combat, anyone who can swings first just sucks to face. However, my resident ogres/orc/dwarf players probably think similarly about beasts? Slower armies are much easier to surround and mulch in multi-charges. It probably makes the optics of the overall beasts power level difficult to place.

    I really hope they don't nerf the mongrel spears. They're already so expensive for a T3/S3 model but man, are they one of our rare tools for dealing points-effectively with cavalry and elves, and core to boot!
  • Doug_L wrote:

    Part of the problem might be how one-dimensional Beasts are? Limited armour, charge range, leadership, shooting - just about everything a "balanced" force uses. Instead, all we have is toughness and re-roll hits and combat, combat, combat!

    I know I can't stand to play against elves. When all you have is combat, anyone who can swings first just sucks to face. However, my resident ogres/orc/dwarf players probably think similarly about beasts? Slower armies are much easier to surround and mulch in multi-charges. It probably makes the optics of the overall beasts power level difficult to place.

    I really hope they don't nerf the mongrel spears. They're already so expensive for a T3/S3 model but man, are they one of our rare tools for dealing points-effectively with cavalry and elves, and core to boot!
    OG, OK and dwarves have tools against BH but I hear what you are saying and agree 100% that BH along with some (most?) other armies cannot be easily assigned to a tier.
    The issue here is that the update is influenced by said tier list, while a number of tough matchups are ranked lower: this indicates that not only those matches won't become easier, but will actually tend to become much harder.

    The way I understand it is that, hypothetically and to use your last paragraph, instead of boosting WH or HW mongrels to be attractive this will be levelled the other way around through spear mongrels nerf. Expect the same with mino, gortach, gargoyles, mino lord PW and razortusk chariot mount, with little to no boost for other entries.
  • Other than the tier list, I think the project hasn't yet released any precise details about how the update will be done.
    That news post is everything that has been announced as far as I can tell.
    So I wouldn't get too far ahead of yourselves until we know :)
    Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
    Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
  • Well, it would be propably same as always => gortach will finally hit 500pts and Briar beast will stay useless on 115 pts ... :)

    It is of course irony and I hope that i will be different. At the end We do not have too many entries in our book and some of them need some love in order to be usefull. But according to tier list it seem that it would be done by "nerfing minos and others" instead of making "longhorns and briars better" which makes me little bit sad...
  • I’m surprised that army what doesn't shoot, has poor magic(just good patches) with weak boosts, isn't fast, is really paper, has no funny tools to play with is rated so high. Even our things that supposed to be major strengths as ambushing and cc are only little above average. Every elf hits better, strikes first, has shooting, haras us with magic.. It's possible I don't understand t9a well because I'm new but in my experience BH is army that sees "no go zone" in some other armies, just has no answers. I'm afraid of nerfs we don't deserve :D...

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Projekt: Mistake ().

  • I am sure that the project constructed their tiers in a sensible, rational and fair manner.

    I guess that the aggregated tournament results played a fair role: if an army does well in tournaments then it is hard to tell its opponents that it is low tier.
    Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
    Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
  • IMO putting BH in 2nd tier is correct judgement.
    I just hope that the incoming nerfs will not be like blanket bombing of whole book, but clinical strikes (spears on Mongrels should cost something, shields on minotaurs are ridiculously cheap - should be expensive, not sure what else). Also some costs, like extra models of wildhorns (or maybe PW on wildhorns?) and longhorns should go down in price.
    Team Belgium ETC 2006 O&G & 2007 Skaven
    Team Canada ETC 2010 & 2012 O&G
    My Beast Herd Gallery
    My O&G Gallery
  • Given all the data entry requests, and the community internal balance surveys, it would be a sensible guess that these things will be the main guide to which things are stronger and weaker internally in each book.

    I mean, this was explicitly done for a previous WotDG update this year, so it wouldn't be much of a surprise.
    Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
    Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
  • Personally don’t think the placement in the tiers is all that out of place.
    The gap between tiers will differ and the gaps are no where near as big as they were in the past.
    We cannot do everything, and don’t have an answer to all problems, but nor does anyone else, that’s what create the imbalances and make the game interesting.

    When the price changes come through, we will see what tweaks are applied. There probably won’t be massive changes, the fact we identified outside the major concern brackets suggests little major reworking is needed. (While we all have personal opinions and perceptions of power levels/books the project has to accumulate all that feedback and data and crunch for the average.) We are where we are, but as things in the top and bottom tier change the middle tiers will too.

    Example:
    UD are a menace currently.
    But we are the kind of book that present them issues, Ambush near their frail unprotected bunker it a major risk to them. (Scissors to their paper)
    But as UD change and lose some of their steamroller ability, they will protect said bunker a little more, becoming more like a rock than paper. Which although this makes the match up worse for our Ambush, it will prevent the UD reach and spread meaning we can bear threats into a tighter space and start hitting combination combats for greater success. (We become the enveloping paper to their rock in that head to head, changing roles from small change to the books.)

    This is just one, oversimplified way to describe it, but apply this to all the books at the same time and you create a meta change across the whole project, shaking up options/builds.
    I already explained on the forum the list choice of my “different” BH list at the ETC this year, it served a different purpose for my team than If I had od used a ‘standard’ BH build, rightly or wrongly.
    Every army can be played multiple ways no matter their internal balance, although it’s easier to cover weaknesses in Teams events, where as in singles players prefer sticking to identified tried and tested ‘better’ choices.

    Don’t get me wrong, would I like our book to be better, yes, would I like more balance in the options, yes, do I want to pay 500 points for a Gortach, no. Do I think we could drop down a tier if shields cost more on minos, no. Would we drop a tier without our decent spear blocks in core, probably. Combine mongrel spears change with the mino shields and a point hike on the ever popular Gortach, yes we would drop at least a tier in everyone’s perception. (But I suspect the take up BH would drop as a result, before other builds are looked at, which is the shame.)


    Until then we have a good book to use and don’t have the woes some of the others do.
    A good time to try out new things within the book.
    For more from me : @Enchantedbytim on twitter.

    Hemel Hempstead/Milton Keynes, UK

    ETC 2020 - Scotland XX Player
    ETC 2019 - Scotland BH Player
    ETC 2018 - Scotland VC Player
    ETC 2017 - Scotland OK Player
  • I think that upward or downward adjustments to the simple fact that one unit or monster is more or less used than another, is not the right solution !!!

    It's a really really bad and unfait idea !!!

    In some armies you have entries that are more played than others NOT because they are too strong, but simply because the other choices are void !

    So, we will gladly use minotaurs, gortachs and mongrels with spears rather than briar beast, cyclops, jabber, etc.

    Compare our Gortach to other monsters ... I prefer an arachnarok, I prefer a Kadin Titan, I prefer flying monsters just for an example ... Many monsters have T6 and a better armore saved and hit before.
    Compare our mino to other tall units ... I prefer Ogers, I prefer Yeti, I prefer Kadim, i prefere Ogre rat, I prefer Ghast and vargheist ... just for an example ... Shield or PW Mino without blackwing totem aren't really good. They are even bad ... !!! T4 and no save ... For an army based on our toughness, it's a shame. The same toughness as wildhorn and longhorn ...

    It's good to do price adjustment, but i hope it will be done wisely !!!
    Casual french player who want the success of the 9th age in the whole world ;) !
  • Darkwise wrote:

    I think that upward or downward adjustments to the simple fact that one unit or monster is more or less used than another, is not the right solution !!!
    Suggest a better one that is data based and isn't substantially more work for the project then.


    It's a really really bad and unfait idea !!!
    Pretty harsh and strong words.
    If you were a staff member who had put a lot of time, effort and thought into this (for free), how would you react to someone declaring this?
    Particularly with the lack of data backing your view and lack of alternative suggestion.



    In some armies you have entries that are more played than others NOT because they are too strong, but simply because the other choices are void !
    This is why the tier list:
    Upwards and downwards in general do internal balance.
    Amount of each skewed by tier list as per the news post to improve external balance.
    Win win for everyone. Seems pretty fair and sensible to me.



    It's good to do price adjustment, but i hope it will be done wisely !!!
    My default assumption is that it will be done well, because I think the current t9a is a great game and I don't think it was arrived at by accident.
    I presume that since you are on this forum and presumably like t9a, your default assumption is also that it will be done well?

    Being supportive & giving useful criticism aren't mutually exclusive.
    Are you supportive of the project? Do your posts reflect that?

    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE