ETC 2019 UD Lists

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!

  • Palmu wrote:

    Indeed, the quest for the ultimate balance would be a pointless quest, allowing change to keep things fresh is where it's at.

    Change is good, is my opinion on things.
    Well, if that's the goal...

    -Stop defending it as balance updates
    -Stop collecting data (it's irrelevant)
    -Set up a program which takes 10% of prices, tweaks them up or down a bit, and run it annually.
    Just because I'm on the Legal Team doesn't mean I know anything about rules or background in development, and if/when I do, I won't be posting about it. All opinions and speculation are my own - treat them as such.

    Legal

    Playtester

    Chariot Command HQ

  • Because people who want changes also want balance.

    It is just the scale of the number of the played games that causes a very different perspective.


    For example one of my opponents at the ETC played over 200 games just with the list he was using in the prep period. I can certainly see how to them game can become stale if the rebalancing is done annually.


    The above example does not mean I support balance updates at a higher frequency.

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    Art Team Coordinator

    Team Croatia ETC 2019 Captain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HEROES AND VILLEINS OF THE 9TH AGE
  • Giladis wrote:

    Because people who want changes also want balance.
    I guess part of my point is that these two desires are fundamentally incompatible. Forcing change to happen frequently (and make no mistake, annual is very frequent) necessarily means sacrificing balance for the sake of change.

    If balance was really the goal, point changes should get farther and farther apart, both because the game is closer to balanced, and because it takes longer to collect the necessary data to demonstrate any continuing imbalance (since all the major offenders get whacked early). The changes should also get smaller in scope as time goes on (because the degree of imbalance in any offending army or entry is smaller).

    If they're playing 200 games / year with the same list, that's not a problem T9A can or should fix. That's on them.
    Just because I'm on the Legal Team doesn't mean I know anything about rules or background in development, and if/when I do, I won't be posting about it. All opinions and speculation are my own - treat them as such.

    Legal

    Playtester

    Chariot Command HQ

  • @Squirrelloid
    Can I ask that you talk with the actual decision makers internally, rather than shouting about project decisions on the public forums please?

    It seems to me that you are arguing with people who aren't responsible for the decisions, and may not understand or know the actual reasoning and goals.

    I think the only things that will be achieved are to
    (A) Confuse the community
    (B) Waste a lot of everyone's time
    (C) Generate a lot of negativity
    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
  • Squirrelloid wrote:

    If balance was really the goal, point changes should get farther and farther apart, both because the game is closer to balanced, and because it takes longer to collect the necessary data to demonstrate any continuing imbalance (since all the major offenders get whacked early). The changes should also get smaller in scope as time goes on (because the degree of imbalance in any offending army or entry is smaller).
    I agree with sentiment.


    You also have to understand that unknown number of people who request more frequent changes in search of balance do that because they think the Project is incapable in their view to produce the balance they would agree with so more frequent changes means more opportunity for the game to get closer to what they think should be.


    Squirrelloid wrote:

    If they're playing 200 games / year with the same list, that's not a problem T9A can or should fix. That's on them.
    Agree as well. The two of us agree does not stop people from asking the project to cater to their wishes.

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    Art Team Coordinator

    Team Croatia ETC 2019 Captain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HEROES AND VILLEINS OF THE 9TH AGE