2.1 Beta - Feedback

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!

  • Hi! To this date I've played somewhere about 20 battles with UD 2.1. As a UD player I have few conclusions:

    1. Increasing points on shabti archers, tomb reapers, sacred hourglass, architect +1

    Comment: Everybody knows that these are very good units for such points so this nerf is very obvious


    2. Increasing points on cataphracts, chariots, banner of entombed -2

    Comment: chariots are now mainly a chaff unit (3/4 models in unit) because big unit is extremly expensive especialy with heroes f.e Pharaoh and Harbinger) and realy risky to take (big footage, a lot of counters etc.); cataphracts are slowly going back to times when they were not in usage, but their situation is not very bad; I don't understand the meaning of increasing point value of banner of entombed

    3. Decreasing points mainly +1 but...

    Comment: Still there are better options to take in our rosters than skeleton cavalry, mass skeleton units, sand stalkers, necropolis guards etc.

    4. Changing healing mechanism -2

    Comment: In my opinion healing nowadays is very expensive and not as good as it should be for these points. Vampires and Druidism is much better in healing than army which STANDS ON HEALING! +2 casting value definitely killed master divination. I'm playing with evocation master with hourglass and divi adept with book of arcane mastery and I only have one or two chances to raise some wounds. For example in my rosters where I have mainly large infantry and cavalry units I can heal from 2 to 4 wound per round. I even tried not to heal my units and the effect was mainly the same as I used Hereditary spell. So I'm afraid the healing mechanism is now a crap.

    5. Changing the models amount in chariots units -2

    Comment: Realy? 10 or 8 chariots were such a OP option that it needed changes? What about legion charioteers special rule then? Fighting in extra rank is now completly useless.


    6. Heroes and their mounts -1

    Comment: There are still some hero builds that are completly useless for example: pharaoh on Sha guardian, mage on arc of ages etc. Pharaoh could now be worth it only on foot or on horse! His chariot is such an expensive option that for somewhere about 500 to 600 points we have mediocre warrior which cannot even try fight with other heroes on such level in other armies (with some exeptions of course)

    7. Book of the dead -1

    Coment: Still useless and not worth taking

    The post was edited 1 time, last by G@lahad ().

  • After something like 15 or 20 games with UD 2.1, I think the nerf of the attribute is acceptable. It requires to change the way we think our magic builds and we drive our magic phase but it's ok.

    I also agree with nerfs of architect and ensouled statues.

    Multinerf of the chariots was a bit too hard in my opinion (new 3-7 models limitation was really unnecessary) but we will see other core choices now.

    All these nerfs are ok but they have to be compensated with bigger points decrease on underperforming units of the book: skeletons, archers especially but characters too (pharaoh and harbringer) and scarabs, catapults, stalkers and colossus. So I hope the next update will finish the job on this point. ;)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Ezekiel57 ().

  • G@lahad wrote:

    5. Changing the models amount in chariots units -2

    Comment: Realy? 10 or 8 chariots were such a OP option that it needed changes? What about legion charioteers special rule then? Fighting in extra rank is now completly useless.
    Do not completely agree. Whilst I accept that the reduction in numbers was to say the least unfortunate, you still have the option of increasing the horses on the Character Chariot to 4 thereby increasing base size to 100 x 100. With the limit of 7 Chariots you can still field a unit in 3 full ranks.

    G@lahad wrote:

    6. Heroes and their mounts -1

    Comment: There are still some hero builds that are completly useless for example: pharaoh on Sha guardian, mage on arc of ages etc. Pharaoh could now be worth it only on foot or on horse! His chariot is such an expensive option that for somewhere about 500 to 600 points we have mediocre warrior which cannot even try fight with other heroes on such level in other armies (with some exeptions of course)
    Strange, I find that I am fielding Wizards on Ark of Ages far more often than in the past.

    With Barrow Legion I ALWAYS field a Pharaoh on a Chariot, Niche build - yes - Completely useless - No

    Do agree with your other comments.
  • wombat wrote:

    Strange, I find that I am fielding Wizards on Ark of Ages far more often than in the past.
    With Barrow Legion I ALWAYS field a Pharaoh on a Chariot, Niche build - yes - Completely useless - No

    Do agree with your other comments.
    The ark has good use (grant a line of sight for archers over large models, spell range boost)

    UD Community Support

  • setepenmentou wrote:

    wombat wrote:

    Strange, I find that I am fielding Wizards on Ark of Ages far more often than in the past.
    With Barrow Legion I ALWAYS field a Pharaoh on a Chariot, Niche build - yes - Completely useless - No

    Do agree with your other comments.
    The ark has good use (grant a line of sight for archers over large models, spell range boost)
    There is two problems with your statement.

    First, the ark isn't tall, so it doesn't offer LoS over large.

    Second, even if it did, it's still worthless to archers, since volley fire doesn't let them shot over large, only models of their height or smaller. So only other standard sized models.
    “You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyways.” -Lan Mandragoran, EotW


    Dovie’andi se tovya sagain.
  • oh, i agree it's still a good mount, and not being tall means you can hide from cannons behind large models. But it sadly can't fix the problem the volley fire rules create :P
    “You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyways.” -Lan Mandragoran, EotW


    Dovie’andi se tovya sagain.
  • 2/3 of our book is large. When volley fire was turned into it's current form, our archers went from being able to shoot over anything in our book if someone in the unit could see, to having 2/3 of the book stop them from shooting.

    The change took a unit that was already use minimally and saw it's usage drop even further. And being undead, we don't have the option other armies can make use of to put shooting in front of large units and then fleeing through.
    “You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyways.” -Lan Mandragoran, EotW


    Dovie’andi se tovya sagain.
  • I dont know if this can be in this post( sorry for my english im spanish)

    i already post this message if you consider deleted, but i post again here because i want to know what do you think about these changes

    I have compiled the information in this forum about the recommended changes to this army, and added my own, as I consider the way in which the changes have been made a nonsense.Of course, some things had to be nerf, but it has only been costly overpriced (the case of the scorpion golems, what need was there?) And left things that had to be lowered by force, (our skeletons for example) I think the team Responsible for these changes do not know what to do with the army and have taken the scissors and point, without considering anything else.If an army depends on magic you can't nerf this if you are looking for balance, unless you compensate for other things.That said as I do not come to impose anything but to make clear my dissatisfaction with the current state of the army, and incidentally give a possible solution in the following message I present ideas that can help, please analyze them before commenting on whether their inclusion is possible or not, let's not become the lizards that unfortunately is also an army that needs an urgent change, but hey ... I do not explain myself more, in a little while I leave comments about what we could change.

    First, we can leave the army dependent on magic, which is something that seems to dislike the team in charge of the changes, this would forcefully reduce the healing, a possible solution as the colleagues say is that the constructs only heal once turn, the number of wounds of his resurrected value. The other is to add +2 in case the buff objectives are constructedFor the rest of the army, notice standard infantry reduce -1 healing every time you use it.The sacred hourglass should be left with the same capabilities as before not applying greater restriction that only one spell can be per magic phase, or the first spell for example, is lost a lot if it can only be used with cosmology.lower the cost of skeletons at the same price as the goblins (if they dont fight better, why pay more?) the cost of the improvement given by the nomarch already you pay with the character that for practical purposes is an enhancer.

    What utility do you find the guard with halberd or shield and sword? they are not useful in general terms they are expensive and they do not contribute anything that shabtis cannot do, it is only worth it with two weapons, this must be fixed, I propose that the halberd make an extra wound to the monstrous units, and those that have a weapon hand and shield , (this may be an exaggeration of my part only take it into account as something experimental) to be equipped with a special banner that once per game forces to check the enemy unit that charges the unit frontally with this banner an initiative check and if it fails it happens to have the first round of combat -2 off -2def which practically would give you the first round of combat making it very solid in the defense

    (let's think they only have one attack or the strength of the halberd or the number of attacks of the two weapons)Archers on horseback must be given a simulated escape, and any firing unit must be able to fire as a reaction to a charge, but keep the rules of the undead.The architect is crazy, for that price you put a beastly combat hero in other armies, ours is very weak, if you are not going to lower it, add rules, every army that includes one can convert your units into a choice of version of Terracotta, instead of making this option as a separate army.for now that would be the first option, then we would see the otherThe rest would not add much more, with this could be prepared
  • elite armyWe make it not dependent on magic, as follows.1 upload the attributes of skeletal infantry, archers, archer cavalry and cavalry+1 off, + 1 def, +1 ini, same price per infantry unit and in the case of cavalry the price can be adjusted as you see appropriateand for the guards+1 off, +1 def adjust the price as you see fitthe guards can be equipped with heavy armor if you include a monarch or nomarch in the unit) with all the other extras that I already said about the unit in the previous messageIn this way the army is prepared by giving better durability to the troops that are already overcrowded, if a nomarch or monarch is added to a unit it has access to become a unit of the legion of the tumuli, but without the restrictions that version of the army now has, being an extra to the normal army instead of a version of the army


    For the healing of the constructs, as before, you can only cure its resurrected value once per phase, or add +2 to cast.The nomarch could leave the price as before the rise, but not being able to give fortitude twice in a row to the same unit, having to change to another, in this way he would have to think calmly which unit to protect. The other option is as I said before leaving the highest price, but adding the option to convert the units to their terracotta version without the restrictions of this version (with respect to the latter, in the case of skeletons it would raise its resurrected value in terracotta version at 4, 1 is very little) 2 of the resurrected value for the terracotta cavalry and 1 for the rest (we could add that they could not be healed more than once per magic phase)The cavalry of archers, with the rules described above,
    shoot as a reaction to the load, autonomous and simulated flight, increasing its price, and the cavalry can have its version of barrow legion if a monarch or nomarch goes in it)


    the other option to The barrow legion version is that any unit in the army can choose this option if the commander is king, but without applying the restrictions, leaving it as an option and applying some limit to the number of units that can choose it.Undying will have to give poisoned attacks to the archers, and the unit limit should be 40 which with the new attributes gives you a decent gunline.The catapult need the Shooting Weapons’ Aim 4+ of base, because now its worst than the orc catapult, and expensive.the same to the shabtis archers, if you nerf the hourglass, they ned 4+ aim of base, because with 5+ they just hit one arrow per shabti very few wounds to a unit enemy if you thinkand the same to the archer giant, 4+To heal any unit that is not constructed, any unit within the commanding pressence or if a character goes on it, roll 1d6 for each wound suffered with 6+ heal (5+ if skeletons) the resuscitated value is the same as now, but it can only be cured if they are inside the commanding pressence or there is a character in the unit.

    For the sacred hourglass you could add the +2 to cast since it would only be an extra by not depending so much on it.In this way the kings would be an elite army with hard killing units that hits hard and improves their mobility and shooting having to choose their fights well and control their flanks to avoid a break, using healing to withstand the wear and tear of fighting, Only instead of multiple fights, focused on one or two maximum fights.


    For the crumblimg issue the best attributes would help reduce the number of casualties and increase enemy casualties, add that with any character the guards become stubborn, and all units heal within the commanding presence gives them autonomy of the magicians making them more solid , then with the scepter you turn the skeletons into stubborn ones and you have a hard block to crack, large blocks of infantry and monstrous infantry as offensive support, not to carry the full weight of the combat.After this paragraph I leave the administrators and the community who think it seems and if you can add or change something, what is your opinion?
  • I described the rule about fortitude: fortitude would still be the same, what I mean is that instead of terracotta army being an army option if the commander is a monarch, if you include an architect you can have the option of included the army of terracotta version paying the price that costs in terracotta list, example I add an architect in my army, because I can include terracotta or normal skeletons if I choose terracotta I pay the extra price they are worth as they are in the terracotta list, instead of doing this one army version ( we transform terracota army in an option to the units instead of an army option) and the rules for terracota army still the same included units limits like 25 tomb guards max,