KoE General 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!

  • and wouldnt the blessing or other rule work better than a plain boring heavy srmour

    What if

    Serfs.
    The model gains a X if is under commanding presence of a non-character model with oath of fealty

    Where X could be: Parry, aegis 6+, The blessing or even plain boring +1 armour.
  • I agree with @Klexe in that the vassal rule doesn't seem to help the actual problem. Yeah knights won't flee because of peasants bleeding CR... but, they still lose, and will most likely lose by more the following round with weaker attacks

    I like @Kratos idea.

    However, what about a different approach. instead of buffing the peasants in the same combat, what about buffing the knights to do more damage? Knights in the same combat as a unit with insignificant gain rerolls to hit
  • Seems like you are expecting too much. If the Knights and the peasants don't flee due to bleeding CR it is still a powerful ability (better than the current situation anyway). @Klexe you listed 3 possible negative scenarios for Knights and Peasants fighting in the same combat, and this removes 2 of those 3 without increasing the chance of breaking the enemy. The goal isn't to make the combo more effective at breaking an enemy unit. The goal is to make Knights charging into a Combat with Peasants already engaged a situation which doesn't result in the Knights breaking from combat and fleeing as a result of peasants bleeding CR.

    Army Design Team

  • echoCTRL wrote:

    The goal is to make Knights charging into a Combat with Peasants already engaged a situation which doesn't result in the Knights breaking from combat and fleeing as a result of peasants bleeding CR.
    the only way to do that and the other with one stone, is remove enemy models. Otherwise our knights turn into losing tarpits by default in the following round
  • Peasants buffing knights in any way is a bad bad idea.

    We want knights we the main thing and peasants an optional support( with their pros and cons)

    If you make the peasants buff the knights in any way you are making the peasants a must take, because knights will be more optimal with peasants nearby.
  • Kratos wrote:

    Peasants buffing knights in any way is a bad bad idea.

    We want knights we the main thing and peasants an optional support( with their pros and cons)

    If you make the peasants buff the knights in any way you are making the peasants a must take, because knights will be more optimal with peasants nearby.
    How would that be a must take?, right now they're 100% either a tarpit, or liability. Using them together is a horrible idea, unless its vs a unit that the knight themselves could handle on their own anyway.

    Improving Knights offense when in combat with Peasants is simply a way of balancing the peasants bleeding of CR while actually encouraging them to be used in combination with the knights
  • I disagree that peasants cannot be used with knights right now.

    You have to be smart and know when you can enter and when you cannot.

    Hand weapon and shield peasants are ok. Other ootions are worse because they are more expensive and bleed more for a marginal gain in offense. Thats what have to be fixed
  • infamousme wrote:

    I use a full.lance of grails with BSB (renown, heroes heart) and it just destroys anything I charge with it..... when it gets charged however... :(
    ? I just plain move them forward. There are not many enemies which can break them in one turn. Use wrymwood. Imo it is better then heroes Renown because the burst is great exactly for that Szenario and you counter stuff with high R and regeneration

    Kratos wrote:

    and wouldnt the blessing or other rule work better than a plain boring heavy srmour

    What if

    Serfs.
    The model gains a X if is under commanding presence of a non-character model with oath of fealty

    Where X could be: Parry, aegis 6+, The blessing or even plain boring +1 armour.
    Then it will go back to peasant storm. One lord with 18" bubble buffing 4 blocks of peasants.
    Also it feels right that peasants don't have a wardsave. It could be helpful but I am against it.
    A "boring" solution is the best solution.

    Knights should be fun to use and provoke new lists. Not peasants!

    echoCTRL wrote:

    Seems like you are expecting too much. If the Knights and the peasants don't flee due to bleeding CR it is still a powerful ability (better than the current situation anyway). @Klexe you listed 3 possible negative scenarios for Knights and Peasants fighting in the same combat, and this removes 2 of those 3 without increasing the chance of breaking the enemy. The goal isn't to make the combo more effective at breaking an enemy unit. The goal is to make Knights charging into a Combat with Peasants already engaged a situation which doesn't result in the Knights breaking from combat and fleeing as a result of peasants bleeding CR.
    Plain and simple.
    No it is not powerful and no one will use it.

    Else people would already use crusader with Relic and flanking grails or anything .... They don't


    It is too much to work.


    It is plain and simple. Cavalry needs to be useful when charging!

    Every rule which promotes prolonged combat is bad and shouldn't be used

                    

    Product-Search

    KoE Community Support

    Lord of the Hobby

    Follow my games here: the-ninth-age.com/community/in…%C3%BCnchen-und-umgebung/
  • echoCTRL wrote:

    So we go from Peasants bleeding CR being cause for Knights not going into Combat with them, to Peasants needing to provide CR in order for Knights to join Combat with them. And, you are just discussing how peasants should provide that CR to the combat, i.e. buffing Knights, receiving their own damage buff, etc.
    Well dude its either buffing peasants byt not bleeding CR, or bleed CR and provide CR by Static CR, or by Causing Wounds. I'm in favor of Causing wounds, because thats only thing that affects the following rounds of combat assuming the unit doesn't break.

    Don't forget i also, a while back suggested the opposite, Knights buffing peasants in the same combat by making them distracting, with the nerf of peasants not attack or soem other offensive buff (because its not like it would make a big difference anyway in terms of the killing power..)

    @Kratos Yeah of course, but most of those same combats (if not all) aren't anything knights can't do themselves
  • Whatever changes occur, they should require the combination of knights AND peasants for two simple reasons: 1) to not allow for peasants to be useful on their own, such as buffing peasants independent of knights proximity or to even prevent strong all peasant lists. 2) to encourage knights and combats fighting together, and not simply use peasants at purely tar pits
  • Klexe wrote:

    infamousme wrote:

    I use a full.lance of grails with BSB (renown, heroes heart) and it just destroys anything I charge with it..... when it gets charged however... :(
    ? I just plain move them forward. There are not many enemies which can break them in one turn. Use wrymwood. Imo it is better then heroes Renown because the burst is great exactly for that Szenario and you counter stuff with high R and regeneration

    Kratos wrote:

    and wouldnt the blessing or other rule work better than a plain boring heavy srmour

    What if

    Serfs.
    The model gains a X if is under commanding presence of a non-character model with oath of fealty

    Where X could be: Parry, aegis 6+, The blessing or even plain boring +1 armour.
    Then it will go back to peasant storm. One lord with 18" bubble buffing 4 blocks of peasants.Also it feels right that peasants don't have a wardsave. It could be helpful but I am against it.
    A "boring" solution is the best solution.

    Knights should be fun to use and provoke new lists. Not peasants!

    echoCTRL wrote:

    Seems like you are expecting too much. If the Knights and the peasants don't flee due to bleeding CR it is still a powerful ability (better than the current situation anyway). @Klexe you listed 3 possible negative scenarios for Knights and Peasants fighting in the same combat, and this removes 2 of those 3 without increasing the chance of breaking the enemy. The goal isn't to make the combo more effective at breaking an enemy unit. The goal is to make Knights charging into a Combat with Peasants already engaged a situation which doesn't result in the Knights breaking from combat and fleeing as a result of peasants bleeding CR.
    Plain and simple.No it is not powerful and no one will use it.

    Else people would already use crusader with Relic and flanking grails or anything .... They don't


    It is too much to work.


    It is plain and simple. Cavalry needs to be useful when charging!

    Every rule which promotes prolonged combat is bad and shouldn't be used
    Wyrmwood goes on my Hippogryph Duke. That burst helps him one shot units.
  • I don't really read the fluff of KoE, but, men, what did you expect from peasant ? Seriously ? Really seriously ???
    They should be at the same level as VS slave or skeletton if not zombies !! They don't know how to fight, have little equipment (if not nothing) to protect them and for weapon, some farmer tools... (Or smith, or carpenter).
    5+ peasant or 6++? No, no, no ! Never ! :D
    Men at arms, yes, fanatics yes. But not some peasant...

    the idea to give them the same rule as daemon / undead to loose models if lossing fight seems to me really realistic as they will flee at the first occasion to survive and come back to their family. :huh:
    Except when near some brave and charismatic knights. :thumbup: like "don't worry peasants, show no fear ! Fight for the Lady ! CHAAAAAAAARGE !!!"
    (Hum... Sorry... I've got a little bit carried away... :D )

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

  • Regarding the idea that peasants (speaking just about peasant levy units) don´t deliver to the combat results: why would it be (in which ways) too strong if actual losses and (inflicted) wounds wouldn`t count to the overall combat result?
    Let´s say e.g. that a enemy unit inflicts 7 wounds to a peasant levy unit (which inflicts 1 wounds back) , a knights unit involved inflicts 3 wounds and losses 1 knights in the process
    at current what would be 7+1 = 8 vs. 4 (3+1) ...Equitaniens loss by -4 ...both the units would have to test and there is a high chance that both would flee.
    If peasants losses /inflicted wounds woudn`t count , that would be 3 -1 = 2 (enemy unit losses by -2 )

    Of cause thre would be static combat resuts to be counted in...and here lets say peasant levy has still 3 ranks (+3) and a banner (+1) = +4 and the knights unit involved hwould deliver the +1 banner bonus ., so that wouldbe a combat result of 3+1+1 = +5)
    The enemy unit has also rank bonus of +3 +1 banner = +4...so Equis would gain a solid (5-4) = +1 static combat res. (as current would be already).

    Currently in that example the result would be - 4 (combat losses) +1 (static combat res.) = -3 break test for both equi. units...
    if changed accordingly that would be instead a - 3 break test for the enemy unit.

    I am full aware that other armies do have similare problems ...this seems to be a basic (rules/mechanic) problem :whistling:
    Veteran of the Chaff Wars
  • @Phosphorus
    Would that mean that peasants with legión banner automatically draw or win all combats?
    It also invalidates all weapons aside from HW&S. :(


    I think reducing the CR levies generate to half is a much simpler and balanced rule than fully negating the CR from kills by and to peasants.

    It also means that the damage peasants do matters, which makes weapon choice much more interesting.
  • Folomo wrote:

    @Phosphorus
    Would that mean that peasants with legión banner automatically draw or win all combats?
    It also invalidates all weapons aside from HW&S. :(


    I think reducing the CR levies generate to half is a much simpler and balanced rule than fully negating the CR from kills by and to peasants.

    It also means that the damage peasants do matters, which makes weapon choice much more interesting.
    And this opens these questions
    1. Do we want to invest special rules budget into peasants?
    2. What will other armies think about it? Vs,id, EoS, skellton etc
    3. Is it even possible to have such a rule in core?
    4. Why make all this if an easy option would be just increasing their equipment?



    Having

    Peasants as roadblock. (worse then now. Rabble unit)
    Man at arms as anvil/Road block
    Crusaders as extra upgrade if X or own unit entry

    Is quite feasible imo for a full rework. You could even do it in ONE entry

                    

    Product-Search

    KoE Community Support

    Lord of the Hobby

    Follow my games here: the-ninth-age.com/community/in…%C3%BCnchen-und-umgebung/
  • TADA!

    Crusader's Banner 30 pts
    0 -3 in the army
    The unit gains Frenzy and Fearless while Engaged in Combat. Rank and File modelparts without Harnessed gain Devastating Charge(+1 Att ) ( or BattleFocus )

    Blessed Banner 50 pts
    The unit gains The Blessing. If it already had the Blessing it gains Lighting Reflexes. Characters are not affected.

    Serfs
    The model gains Fight in Extra Rank and Shoot in Extra Rank when his unit is under the effects of Commanding Presence from one or more models with Knight.

    levy.png

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

  • Folomo wrote:

    @Phosphorus
    Would that mean that peasants with legión banner automatically draw or win all combats?
    It also invalidates all weapons aside from HW&S. :(


    I think reducing the CR levies generate to half is a much simpler and balanced rule than fully negating the CR from kills by and to peasants.

    It also means that the damage peasants do matters, which makes weapon choice much more interesting.e
    Err, no, it would just mean that such mechanic would be in place IF both a units of Knights AND a unit of peasant levy would be involveld. If there would be no knights unit involved, then of cause use the normal procedure.
    Veteran of the Chaff Wars