Spanish community thoughts - 9th Age issues

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!

  • Mad 'At wrote:

    I'm curious. In Spain, are there no fluffy tournaments? From this thread I get the impression that every tournament is a hardcore training session for the ETC. 4500 pts, default scenarios and map pack terrain.

    Are there no tournaments with unique scenarios or terrain? Different point sizes, tag team, side boards or special rules and restrictions?

    In Sweden I'd say we have about a fourth or a third of the tournaments going against the norm and do fun things. Some do a lot, other just change a detail or two. I myself host probably one or the more ambitions such tournaments every year, and its fairly popular. Personally I find that that kind of approach do more to keep things interesting than any amount of point tinkering and minor changes could accomplish.
    Fluff tournament in spain disappeared, and fluff players don't dare to touch competitive tournaments.

    Once you get in the competitive mindset and playing-style is hard to go back or enjoy the game in the fluff mode. And the majority of players of t9a are competitive players. Fluff players isolated and in stayed 6th, modified 6th or even 8th editions of GW. They play with their friends and their homes and have had bad experiences in tournaments.

    Fluff players that tried t9a at their early stages fled due to constant changing. Now some will try it with the stability of the rulebook and FAB books or they may just be hooked with others games who knows.

    The thing is if you are a event organiser and do a t9a competitive tournament you will probably do it competitive where you are sure that a lot of people will come. It's very risky to make a fluff choice and get no support.

    Hell we even get yelled at to admit auxiliary armies in one of big single tournaments...as if a fluff player had any chance to win it even if the army were broken
    Visit our blog, Escribas del Viejo Mundo!
  • Kratos wrote:

    Fluff players that tried t9a at their early stages fled due to constant changing.
    I'de be inclined to suspect the complete lack of any background lore was a bigger cause than the amount of changes being made, something that's still an issue today as most armies haven't got a legendary book.
    That and the game was and still is very tournament ("balance") focused which makes creating a fluff list quite tricky unless you are completely willing to disregard what the models rules were, at which point you could just use the rules from any game.

    Kratos wrote:

    Hell we even get yelled at to admit auxiliary armies in one of big single tournaments...as if a fluff player had any chance to win it even if the army were broken
    I'm sure many so called top tournament players would suddenly realise that deep down they were fluff players all along if it let them use a broken auxiliary list. :saint:

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

  • Kratos wrote:

    Mad 'At wrote:

    I'm curious. In Spain, are there no fluffy tournaments? From this thread I get the impression that every tournament is a hardcore training session for the ETC. 4500 pts, default scenarios and map pack terrain.

    Are there no tournaments with unique scenarios or terrain? Different point sizes, tag team, side boards or special rules and restrictions?

    In Sweden I'd say we have about a fourth or a third of the tournaments going against the norm and do fun things. Some do a lot, other just change a detail or two. I myself host probably one or the more ambitions such tournaments every year, and its fairly popular. Personally I find that that kind of approach do more to keep things interesting than any amount of point tinkering and minor changes could accomplish.
    Fluff tournament in spain disappeared, and fluff players don't dare to touch competitive tournaments.
    Once you get in the competitive mindset and playing-style is hard to go back or enjoy the game in the fluff mode. And the majority of players of t9a are competitive players. Fluff players isolated and in stayed 6th, modified 6th or even 8th editions of GW. They play with their friends and their homes and have had bad experiences in tournaments.

    Fluff players that tried t9a at their early stages fled due to constant changing. Now some will try it with the stability of the rulebook and FAB books or they may just be hooked with others games who knows.

    The thing is if you are a event organiser and do a t9a competitive tournament you will probably do it competitive where you are sure that a lot of people will come. It's very risky to make a fluff choice and get no support.

    Hell we even get yelled at to admit auxiliary armies in one of big single tournaments...as if a fluff player had any chance to win it even if the army were broken
    what a sad situation

    Playtester

    DL-Comunity Support

    Master of the Coins

  • First off, @Villon, @clorens and @Kratos, hugs to you guys, that sounds terribly stale :girlinfant:

    Secondly, do try out some of the supplements, you might be surprised that you like it. And try to get TOs to host something a bit different, maybe just starting off with something small like 5000 pts games or at least terrain set up in different ways.

    Lastly, because I couldn't resist (and I'm sorry about this):
    Display Spoiler

    Kratos wrote:

    Once you get in the competitive mindset and playing-style is hard to go back or enjoy the game in the fluff mode.

    Rules Clarification

    Lord of the Hobby


    Empire of Sonnstahl Blog, including links to my other blogs
    The 9th Wiki, a community wiki for the official 9th Age background
    T9A: Skirmish Campaigns
  • I do find that to be so true. Cookie cutter lists and games won on set up and/or a dice roll.
    Fluff is fun! Should be our new motto. LoL!
    Here in the USA, the “auxiliary” lists are taboo, but a few events are starting to kick the tires on them. Once we get the train rolling in these, then they will proliferate like they are doing in other areas of Europe.
    B. "MF’ing" Jones - Member of the CGL .

    DL/ADT - TT

    Campaign Design-Broken Isles

    Freelance Design

    PT Team-Mid Atlantic USA

    CGL 2018 Worst Player Winner

    CGL 2019 3rd Place

  • New

    this explains a lot, setrius, thanks for packaging it so clearly and briefly.

    from what i've read, it seems that this problem could be solved by the ETC enforcing bolder and more variable formats.
    ETC-endorsed scenarios changing every year. so even the hardcore competitive players have to stir up the meta from within. we play an ETC, then one month later we announce the scenario/map/objectives/teamstructure that will be used in the ETC 11 months later.


    click the logo and reach the KickStarter page!
  • New

    I'll speak as a Spanish player who plays T9A in a different country and homebrew WFB when I am in Spain.

    There is definitely a sharp divide in Spain between competitive players, who went to T9A, and non-competitive players, who have mostly remained in other editions of WFB. The overlap between the two groups is quite small, and non-competitive people usually play their own homebrew of WFB (several have been published online and have become relatively popular).

    The main problem is that T9A is perceived in Spain to be too focused on the competitive scene, and particularly its players (they are perceived from the outside as too focused on winning and too little on having fun). So I fear there is very little interaction between T9A players and old GW editions players. There's some nice things like the blog (escribasdelviejomundo.blogspot.com/) who did the Battle for the Gates of Kislev (there was a thread in this forum somewhere) and I think they plan to do one of their massive battles using T9A.

    @Zamo You keep repeating how it is laughable that "the balance patch took a year". The project released more things (off the top of my head, Scenarios Pack, Map Pack, Terrain Pack, updates to WDG and DL, full DL book, the Scroll, the Flux Cards supplement). They also went through a major restructure and started work on DE and ID LABs. You only seem to be complaining that you don't get enough things for what you care about, which is, if I understood correctly, the competitive scene.
    However, you manage to sound quite demeaning while at it, and it looks like you are trying to push what you want under the impression that it is what would be the best thing for everyone, while dismissing a lot of the reasons people offer to you on the other side.

    Besides, you are asking to reinstate BLT, but the project has not had enough time to show the results of the big restructuring, so why would they go back now to an old structure? I don't know which method is best, but you can't expect a project to change course twice without creating even more delays.

    Finally, you say that Background is less important than playing the game for you. Ok, so what about the people for whom background is more important than playing the game? We tell them to get lost?
    'He opened the battered book. Bits of paper and string indicated his many bookmarks.
    "In fact, men, the general has this to say about ensuring against defeat when outnumbered, out–weaponed and outpositioned. It is..." he turned the page, "Don't Have a Battle."
    "Sounds like a clever man," said Jenkins.'
    Terry Pratchett, Jingo!

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

  • New

    If enough people volunteer, than a lot of things will get more smooth and faster.

    Advisary Board Member

    Workfields: Tournament Analysis, Army Community Support, Playtesting, Community Engagement, Translation/ United Nations Blog: Inside TA. Admin of the biggest german Tabletop Board: tabletopwelt.de We want you to join the project and apply to staff.
  • New

    elendor_f wrote:

    I'll speak as a Spanish player who plays T9A in a different country and homebrew WFB when I am in Spain.

    There is definitely a sharp divide in Spain between competitive players, who went to T9A, and non-competitive players, who have mostly remained in other editions of WFB. The overlap between the two groups is quite small, and non-competitive people usually play their own homebrew of WFB (several have been published online and have become relatively popular).

    The main problem is that T9A is perceived in Spain to be too focused on the competitive scene, and particularly its players (they are perceived from the outside as too focused on winning and too little on having fun). So I fear there is very little interaction between T9A players and old GW editions players. There's some nice things like the blog (escribasdelviejomundo.blogspot.com/) who did the Battle for the Gates of Kislev (there was a thread in this forum somewhere) and I think they plan to do one of their massive battles using T9A.

    @Zamo You keep repeating how it is laughable that "the balance patch took a year". The project released more things (off the top of my head, Scenarios Pack, Map Pack, Terrain Pack, updates to WDG and DL, full DL book, the Scroll, the Flux Cards supplement). They also went through a major restructure and started work on DE and ID LABs. You only seem to be complaining that you don't get enough things for what you care about, which is, if I understood correctly, the competitive scene.
    However, you manage to sound quite demeaning while at it, and it looks like you are trying to push what you want under the impression that it is what would be the best thing for everyone, while dismissing a lot of the reasons people offer to you on the other side.

    Besides, you are asking to reinstate BLT, but the project has not had enough time to show the results of the big restructuring, so why would they go back now to an old structure? I don't know which method is best, but you can't expect a project to change course twice without creating even more delays.

    Finally, you say that Background is less important than playing the game for you. Ok, so what about the people for whom background is more important than playing the game? We tell them to get lost?
    it seems you havent understood a thing...even if you sre spanish and I assume you understand the video...maybe not... If you have any doubts i can gladly solve it for you by pm or even in person if we meet in spain...

    Your post shows either you havent even watched/read our statements (that I might have to repeat and remember again arent only my own because im not doing a video for my own demands haha or you have read/watched it and you didnt get a thing of it.
    Xhoka Lizards player - Spain

    Guardianes del Sur
    Youtube --> Guardianes del Sur
    Facebook -->Guardianes del Sur
    Instagram --> Guardianes del Sur
  • New

    Palomita15 wrote:

    Question here is easy, Is it gonna change something¿?
    and this is really it... If the answer to this question is clear, there isnt much more to discuss about.

    We will just come back in the future and see the statatus of the game...if is played more or less if there is more people or not or if it dying or more alive than ever...
    Xhoka Lizards player - Spain

    Guardianes del Sur
    Youtube --> Guardianes del Sur
    Facebook -->Guardianes del Sur
    Instagram --> Guardianes del Sur
  • New

    From all the comments here about the Spanish scene, I am not sure the project could or should react to this.
    The Spanish scene seems to be of a very particular subset of the broader community, and thus has a particular set of needs/wants.
    I have suspected this for a while given the typical comments made by Spanish players on this forum, and it is interesting to see this borne out in this thread.

    T9a wants to be, and should be, more than just an ETC/competitive tournament game.
    There are extensive posts on this forum by members of the community who want this game to be less ETC/tournament focussed etc, it is just that few/none of these people live in Spain.

    Perhaps the Spanish community could consider embracing the wider game, rather than the ETC focus?
    Maybe this will help grow the game in Spain by attracting a much wider player pool, and thus preventing the prophesied death of the game in Spain.
    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
  • New

    DanT wrote:

    T9a wants to be, and should be, more than just an ETC/competitive tournament game.
    Sorry to be so direct, but this is actually not the case.
    I don't live in Spain but in north of France. All the game is focused on team tournament.
    Perhaps this was not the goal, and T9A team want to make a complete game, but
    - Balance using tournament datas and claim it
    - Make incomprehensible points update, based on most used units, giving the feeling that it was just made to renew the tournament lists
    - Having such answers from the team members : ETC 2019 Lists
    - Having a forum which most threads are analysing ETC lists, tournament lists


    All of this lead to a complete different idea than "T9a wants to be, and should be, more than just an ETC/competitive tournament game." Most of the players I know are just tournament players now, and don't care about any background

    To be honnest, I don't ever know if there is a solution to this problem : It has already began during GW time, T9A just intensified it. I don't think that T9A team can produce a complete new background just because, they don't have enough people to do in, let's say two years, what GW did in 20 years.

    Anyway, here is an idea that can help to catch more 'fluff" or "beer and bretzels" players :
    Add what is already present in UD (terracota and barrows ways) : possibility to use the same army book but make different armies.
    Pros : With just a small text and 2-3 possible army ways, you give a possiblibilty to players to customize their OWN army
    Cons : This will probably give an axe blow into the balance totem.
  • New

    gundizalbo wrote:

    Our biggest fear here, is that many books could wait to many time to have an update (even 6-8 years at this step). We understand that create a new book is not easy, takes a lot of work and need time. We apreciate the work from voluntears (I have been part of the project in balance team and design team and I know all the work is behind). But we just wanted to propose not to forget "old" books while new books are written.
    Couldn't we have more stuff like « new units » to try out, as proposed in the Ninth Scroll nº9 ?
    It was a great issue, with rules for EoS War Chariot, VC Zombie Giant, KoE Black Knights, OK Magic Stew Cauldron, and so on.

    Maybe instead of giving 10 new units in one scroll, we could start a feature of giving 1-2 new (unofficial) units every scroll ? For the armies that are not getting a LAB soon.
    Those units could be unofficial or get a « beta » status so that people would be encouraged to try them out, before being possibly integrated in the LAB when it comes out.

    It could be cool too, to have rules for special characters. As of now, we have rules for playing Šiva, Tsanas and Bragh.
    Why not give us rules for playing Leandra, Ilarion, Lukas, Thomas Bard, the Betrayer, Sarki, Matthias of Sonnstahl, Patzquilitli… or Sir Breslin ? (and Samuel le Pépin ^^) As well as rules for the unnamed daemon leaders in the Civissina uprising, and so on.
    Again, one special character every few months, some of them can be taken by several armies as « mercenary » (such as Samuel or Thomas).

    That was my go ^^
    GHAÂAÂAÂARN ! — The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young
    First T9A player in West Africa
  • New

    Ghiznuk wrote:

    gundizalbo wrote:

    Our biggest fear here, is that many books could wait to many time to have an update (even 6-8 years at this step). We understand that create a new book is not easy, takes a lot of work and need time. We apreciate the work from voluntears (I have been part of the project in balance team and design team and I know all the work is behind). But we just wanted to propose not to forget "old" books while new books are written.
    Couldn't we have more stuff like « new units » to try out, as proposed in the Ninth Scroll nº9 ?It was a great issue, with rules for EoS War Chariot, VC Zombie Giant, KoE Black Knights, OK Magic Stew Cauldron, and so on.
    This will not work : As this is not approved official stuff, these unit will only be marginaly used.
    I already tried such things : You are always exposed to a game refuse because you use non official unit. Units will always be to o powerfull for your opponent etc...
    T9A community is the same as the GW one for a vast majority. What has not work with GW will not work too with T9A. But what works with GW will.
  • New

    Mirdhynn wrote:

    DanT wrote:

    T9a wants to be, and should be, more than just an ETC/competitive tournament game.
    Sorry to be so direct, but this is actually not the case.I don't live in Spain but in north of France. All the game is focused on team tournament.
    Perhaps this was not the goal, and T9A team want to make a complete game, but
    - Balance using tournament datas and claim it
    - Make incomprehensible points update, based on most used units, giving the feeling that it was just made to renew the tournament lists
    - Having such answers from the team members : ETC 2019 Lists
    - Having a forum which most threads are analysing ETC lists, tournament lists


    All of this lead to a complete different idea than "T9a wants to be, and should be, more than just an ETC/competitive tournament game." Most of the players I know are just tournament players now, and don't care about any background

    To be honnest, I don't ever know if there is a solution to this problem : It has already began during GW time, T9A just intensified it. I don't think that T9A team can produce a complete new background just because, they don't have enough people to do in, let's say two years, what GW did in 20 years.

    Anyway, here is an idea that can help to catch more 'fluff" or "beer and bretzels" players :
    Add what is already present in UD (terracota and barrows ways) : possibility to use the same army book but make different armies.
    Pros : With just a small text and 2-3 possible army ways, you give a possiblibilty to players to customize their OWN army
    Cons : This will probably give an axe blow into the balance totem.

    I'm heading towards my personal second year of writing T9A background, and I'm still a "new guy" really. People grumble about "secret background" but honest to heavens it exists. What needs production isn't "the background" - it's "the stories" set in the world that's already been created (although more details continue to be fleshed out - as all authors do :) ).

    And hey. More volunteers for BGT = more ability to put out random other fluff projects.

    Background Team

  • New

    @WhammeWhamme
    Separate background from play will not lead to satisfaction (as I said, most of your players now are competitors and don't care of background. It's too late). Allow people to include background in their lists will satisfy many one.
    This is basically what GW do with chapters, hive fleets special rules.
    This is basically what is done with UD book : general army list, barrows one, and terracotta one.
  • New

    I'm just sad, that Auxiliary books do not get the love they deserve.

    From an outsiders point of view, these could (help) solve a lot of the issues (or maybe I am wrong).

    Entering hypothetical territory here, but: If auxiliary books were played more (e.g. at tournaments), you'd have three new armies to try out and shake up the meta. So it directly combats the perceived stale-ness. Additionally the fluff players might be drawn in, as the auxiliaries already are quite appealing by using one easy-to-grasp idea and driving it home in an elegant way (at least that's how I felt, when developing the BattleScribe files for them). This also means, every LAB release will not only change an existing army, but also add at least one new army to the fold. If the auxiliary books are played more, it also becomes easier for our data analysts to balance them.

    On the topic of balance: Let's be honest, even the auxiliary books are much better balanced than anything GW ever did with WHFB. I know they have the disclaimer in them, but that's just for T9A standards, which are miles above GW.

    Tool Support Battle Scribe

    Community Engagement


    My blog with battle reports and painting gallery: bleaklegion.wordpress.com/