after ETC thoughts on SA

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!

  • after ETC thoughts on SA

    New

    Hi guys,

    i'm the United Nations SA player.

    I wanted to speack a little about my SA experience at the ETC this year.

    first of all, my heart army is VC so going from VC to SA was a bit tough but hell, i could attend the ETC anyway :)

    next lets talk about the SA army as a whole. As i see it, the army is very good but has huge problems as well. It seems to be a very elite army but it clearly lacks in diversity of real playstiles as well as scoring units.

    lords: i played a cuatl and an alpha carnosaur. both those guys are good. But two things come in mind when i played them.

    Cuatl: this guy is a very good choice to take. The problems with him are the following: it cannot have stand behind while in a unit of saurus and has to be the general to get bodyguard in the temple guards. While i can totaly understand the fact that if he had the stand behind rule in units of saurus, temple guards would never be taken, i still don't understand why he has to be the general to get the bodyguard effect. if i had the chance to change that, i would change the bodyguard rule of the temple guards to be "bodyguard (cuatl)".


    Alpha carnosaur: this guy is a huge beast! nothing to say or change except that it is a little too expensive for my taste (mabe 10 or 15 points) but that's it.


    Core: i played a a block of saurus ( serpents, spear,) and a small unit of bare skinks


    saurus: the problem with those guys is that they feel VERY expensive! They have a lot less than chaos warriors and are almost the same price! I think that they could have a bit of help on that part and could use a little price reduction. The marks are very expensive as well or really useless. exept for that, they are nice units but they really feel expensive for what they do.


    Skinks: the fact that skinks are R2 is a huge debuff compared to other units! they are not cheap and are very fragile. I would like to see them come back to smaller units of 10 and maybe up to 2 of them getting a way to have light troops (with max 10/12 models/units). they are too expensive for what they can bring on the table and skrox units are a nogo fo the same reason.


    special: i played 1 unit of 20 temple guards with S,M and rending banner.


    As well as what i wrote on the Cuatl entry, i think that temple guards are hugely overpriced! they are somehow fine for what they do but they lack the rules other elite units get and are more expensive than most of these units. i feel that for their actual price, they should get DWS 5 or 6 OR get parry. Strengh 6 is very good, don't get me wrong but the lack of AP is a huge drawback as well as the lack of parry for a 32 points model. if you want to get a good unit of them, thier price skyrockets to more than 600 points (20 models is not a lot...). i would suggest to reduce a bit their point-cost or give them parry.


    jungle guerrilla: i played 2 units of 3 terradons and one unit of 5 ramphos with shields.


    terradons: they are very good as they are now! maybe 10 points too expensive for the unit of 3 but that's it.


    ramphodons: they are too strong at the moment! they can take on huge units by temselves pretty easely. i think the should go up in price!


    monsters: i played a taurosaur with engine.


    Taurosaur: very good, nothing to say.


    Overall, the army is very fun to play! BUT, it clearly lacks on the point of cheap (and usefull) scoring units. In my opinion, you should be able to take 2 units of 25 saurus without getting over the 900 points quota, or get more variety on the core section. i still feel that the monster section is still a little low points wise, i mean this army should be a monster mash army, so you should be able to get more monsters. I think that the taurosaurs should be limited to 2 per amry but i also think that the monster section should be around 40% instead of what we have now (if your general is a guy on alfa carnosaur, you get 40% for example).


    I think that we should also have access to unridden monsters in the army (giving them frenzy but NOT battle focus), which would be awsome as well.


    That's it for my experience with SA for the moment, feel free to comment !!! :)
  • New

    Hi,

    feedback/ suggestions from ETC players are always welcome :thumbsup: Most of your thoughts are well known and already discussed hundred of times. The thing is we all know that no changes (besides pointadjustments) will be made in the post ETC update and we have to wait until the FAB process (which will hopefully include community feedback, like ID and DE FAB progress). I hope we can find a basis of discussion until then, instead of repeat the same issues again and again and again...(This not directed agains your post, just a general remark).

    To your thoughts in detail:
    i totally aggree with all your points, exept the pointreduction in coresection and the feral dinosaurs in SA FAB. I think we should get more (not cheaper) core options and outsource the feral monsters in an auxiliary AB (preventing to overload of the basic FAB book). I guess the rest of your thoughts are totally plausible.

    Keep on going.