Get Rid of Hell Maw!!!

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!

  • Get Rid of Hell Maw!!!

    Not a fantasy unit.

    Removes fantasy movement and strategy.

    Movement spells belong in the magic phase.

    Can we take a poll about who thinks Hell Maw should be removed from 9th age??? I am sure over 90% of players would vote to remove this unit from 9th age.

    Worst idea to ever make it to a fantasy table top game. Most unfun non-fantasy unit to play against.

    Automatic teleporting units goes against the entire point of playing a fantasy battle game. We place our units and then move them across the table top strategically.

    Why does the community put up with this garbage? I have yet to see someone having fun playing a game against Hell Maw. The players just shake their heads saying this is really stupid.

    Thank you for making 9th age a much less fun experience for almost everyone.
  • Well... I find it to be a pretty cool unit. Understanding your arguments, with the wish for streamlining it, maybe integrating it into the magic phase, as it seems to be something out of line, I still don't want it to work like "everything else". So I think it is very fitting that almost every army could get at least one unit, that is maybe a little "gamechanging" (if you allow me to use the term like this). And when I take a look at the maw, I see the potential of... let's say a DH anvil, that isn't just a plain bound-spell caster. I want it to work in a unique way as well, and have a somewhat special impact into the game and dynamic of the army. I can see that they found a delicate way to design a close-combat army while conserving old models, and giving them something unique and fitting in character. The whole army becomes so much more different this way than the other CC heavy factions.

    So I think, you could argue, it being too strong, or the army depending too much on it (also when it comes to point costs of other units) or that it is unfitting for the models, representing it in most armies ... or I can even see that demons would integrate the concept of teleportation better into the army feeling. But completely taking away the functionality, just because it is uncomparable with tools of other factions or the basic rules is hardly the way to go. I think the army design team did a great job and I want them to be creative without destroying the entire possibility to imagine the warhammer world, plaing these factions. (even though thats only a personal argument).
    :DH: :OK: :O&G: :DE:
  • King Kazador wrote:

    Not a fantasy unit.

    Removes fantasy movement and strategy.

    Movement spells belong in the magic phase.

    Can we take a poll about who thinks Hell Maw should be removed from 9th age??? I am sure over 90% of players would vote to remove this unit from 9th age.

    Worst idea to ever make it to a fantasy table top game. Most unfun non-fantasy unit to play against.

    Automatic teleporting units goes against the entire point of playing a fantasy battle game. We place our units and then move them across the table top strategically.

    Why does the community put up with this garbage? I have yet to see someone having fun playing a game against Hell Maw. The players just shake their heads saying this is really stupid.

    Thank you for making 9th age a much less fun experience for almost everyone.
    I would totally agree with you if not for the bad tones of the post.
  • So, the thing is the Hellmaw - a beast(? monster? construct?) that makes portals for crazy evil warriors to run through - is a very fantastical thing. It's the sort of thing that gives character to an army or a faction in a huge way. It's wholly unique compared to everyone else when it comes to movement and magic which is important to have in a game.

    There isn't any randomness to it; there is a very intentional tactical approach you've got to take to placing the portals, whether you purchase some at the start or not, and so on. Since it's SO counter to how every other army approaches movement then it's understandable people are uncomfortable with it or find it just plain hard to read. Part of that is also practicing against it - if you don't have any chance to play against warriors lists regularly, the first time you see a bunch of dudes popping out is going to feel pretty bad because you left a flank open or something.

    Could it maybe involve some re-balance? Maybe. That's possible.

    Should it be taken out? If it's removed from Warriors, then it HAS to go to Demons or Cultists (or both, please)
  • I think its kinda cool, but you need to practise against it.

    Also, it is strong when it starts the game with two portals in the game. If you want to do something, just make it slightly more expensive to start the game with 2 portals instead of redesigning the whole thing.

    I don't play it, but have played many games against it. It takes some time to figure out.
  • I played a 5 game tournament this weekend where 3/5 games I played against the hellmaw (and 4/5 games vs warriors).

    I had an all-rounder SE army which is very mobile. Usually Warriors is a good matchup for SE because I can run around him and pick my fights.

    However,The warriors with hell maw were able to:

    Out fight me.
    Out maneuver me.
    Out magic me (out shoot me).

    Over 3 games I managed 19 points (perhaps should have gotten 22 as one of the opponents played the scoring rules incorrectly). All were against ETC level players.

    It makes for a tactical and enjoyable game, but my personal opinion is that it is too powerful.

    i like the mechanic but there needs to be some changes. I suggest:

    • Units can leave a portal as is now, but if an enemy or friendly units unit boundary is on top of the point where the portal is located, that portal is blocked.
    • 1 portal can be closed and one opened each magic phase.
    This allows for the same mechanics but means that portals can be blocked. Your opponent has to use (waste) a unit to cover the portal. If it is a small chaff unit, that unit runs the risk of the portal closing and taking hits.

    Background Team

    9th Scroll Editor

    Ammertime Podcast Host
    soundcloud.com/ammertime-podcast
    Team Ireland ETC 2019 :HE:
  • First of all, the tone of OP is really off. Do you think hate-posting helps get your wish through?

    About the hellmaw itself, I don't like it. It takes practice to use as it is pretty vulnerable to range damage (mundane, artillery and magic), it has a huge base (100x150), it gigantic (more easy to shoot over other units) its slow.

    Yes the teleporting is powerful IF its has time to set up. at least 2 portals are needed and then 1 hellmaw can open 1 portal each phase.
    As WDG has no meaningful shooting at all, the hellmaw is a handy and powerful tool...but I personally would prefer the cannon.

    I play WDG, tried the hellmaw my opponents and I weren't very impressed. Might have used it wrong.
    :UD: :WDG: :DE:
  • Once again a typical topic: "Remove stuff I do not like, because I do not want do learn how to play differently!"

    I do not play WoTG but I find hell maw mechanic interesting and refreshing and I would wholeheartedly welcome more of such interesting and creative designs in the game.
    My gallery: Adam painting stuff (HbE, VC and lots of terrain)
    My battle reports: Adam Battle reports
  • Henrypmiller wrote:

    I played a 5 game tournament this weekend where 3/5 games I played against the hellmaw (and 4/5 games vs warriors).

    I had an all-rounder SE army which is very mobile. Usually Warriors is a good matchup for SE because I can run around him and pick my fights.

    However,The warriors with hell maw were able to:

    Out fight me.
    Out maneuver me.
    Out magic me (out shoot me).

    Over 3 games I managed 19 points (perhaps should have gotten 22 as one of the opponents played the scoring rules incorrectly). All were against ETC level players.

    It makes for a tactical and enjoyable game, but my personal opinion is that it is too powerful.

    i like the mechanic but there needs to be some changes. I suggest:

    • Units can leave a portal as is now, but if an enemy or friendly units unit boundary is on top of the point where the portal is located, that portal is blocked.
    • 1 portal can be closed and one opened each magic phase.
    This allows for the same mechanics but means that portals can be blocked. Your opponent has to use (waste) a unit to cover the portal. If it is a small chaff unit, that unit runs the risk of the portal closing and taking hits.
    Crazy that you ended up playing vs WDG 4/5 games. I mean, I know they were the most popular army at the event (I played at the event as well fielding WDG! :D no hellmaw, though), but it was 6 of 38 armies.
  • Hellmaws break too many inherent game mechanics, and are begrudgingly a pain (to statistically impossible) to remove at range (if two are on board forget it statistically won’t). It’s an auto pick for WDG (and not because of necessity ala Bolt Throwers in DE/HBE non-circus lists, artillery in Dwarves etc . . .). WDG Feldrak lists also feature tons of infantry units, and it’s not “broken” or mental gymnastics to play against. So that’s a farcical argument that “they’re needed for infantry lists.

    Traditionally (yes this a superlative, but it’s been true in T9A as well as GW last) units, or rules that break game mechanics are either garbage, or ‘broken’. The Hellmaw is the later.

    Instead of mental gymnastics, token upkeep, and billion rules it currently maintains; cleaner version using clearer rules that already exist like Ambush, ambush from a terrain piece like a ruin, an effect that occurs before the game once that’s a hard set effect that doesn’t change would make it less of a pain to play against, and not a Rules Book adventure every time your opponent uses one.

    Having units quick reform after ala Dogs going 18in and other rules disputes just makes everything a mess.

    KISS, is the best design principle.
    I type on mobile so my spelling mistakes can hide that English is my native tongue. :write: :HE: :KoE:

    Evershade Gaming on YouTube
    youtube.com/channel/UCKjjkWnXanizMuTh5obkxpA

    theforgottenturtle.com An Awesome Painting Blog
  • Adam wrote:

    Once again a typical topic: "Remove stuff I do not like, because I do not want do learn how to play differently!"

    I do not play WoTG but I find hell maw mechanic interesting and refreshing and I would wholeheartedly welcome more of such interesting and creative designs in the game.
    While I agree that the topic started in this way, it could change and be a polite discussion about hellmaw (It already is in fact).
  • Henrypmiller wrote:

    It makes for a tactical and enjoyable game, but my personal opinion is that it is too powerful.

    i like the mechanic but there needs to be some changes.
    Thats the only thing I would look at is the counter play options. There are currently very little the opponent can do to interfere, especially with the hellmaw being so difficult to shoot off. Not being able to block the portals does give free reign to wotdg.
    #freekillerinstinct
  • duxbuse wrote:

    Henrypmiller wrote:

    It makes for a tactical and enjoyable game, but my personal opinion is that it is too powerful.

    i like the mechanic but there needs to be some changes.
    Thats the only thing I would look at is the counter play options. There are currently very little the opponent can do to interfere, especially with the hellmaw being so difficult to shoot off. Not being able to block the portals does give free reign to wotdg.
    You can stand on portal to block it.
    My gallery: Adam painting stuff (HbE, VC and lots of terrain)
    My battle reports: Adam Battle reports
  • The basis of this post is to remove hellma. Lets look at your case:
    1."Not a fantasy unit."
    - Why yes it is. The "intended GW model for this is this one: games-workshop.com/en-AU/Slaughterbrute (with the mutalith vortex beast build option). The monster however encourages you to build some cool converted models and some even cooler portal markers. If you have a problem with a magical monster summoning portals fitting inside the fantasy category I wonder how you feel about the steam tank.

    2. Removes fantasy movement and strategy.
    -I think if anything it adds strategy with its unorthodox movement options. I have played about 10 or so games with the hellmaw and my average score is aprox 11 points. I have also played against it a fair few times, and the games were highly entertaining. My Infernal engine had to do some crazy sheenanigans to counter the suddenly teleported feldrak unit deep into my flank.


    3. Movement spells belong in the magic phase.
    -I dont disagree, all spells belong in the magic phase.

    4. Can we take a poll about who thinks Hell Maw should be removed from 9th age??? I am sure over 90% of players would vote to remove this unit from 9th age.
    - Not sure what it would acomplish, the governing head of T9A rarely takes this stuff into account, but im pretty sure the general concensus disagrees with you. (Worst case i think its a 50/50 or 60/40 split either way.

    5. Worst idea to ever make it to a fantasy table top game. Most unfun non-fantasy unit to play against.
    - Again this is repetetive stuff, but I still think the portal beast has more of a root in the fantasy genre than the steam tank or cannons for instance. If you dont find it fun to play with or against then your fun doesnt mean everyone feels the same way.

    6. Automatic teleporting units goes against the entire point of playing a fantasy battle game. We place our units and then move them across the table top strategically.
    - How is magical stuff happening not a part of a fantasy battle game?

    Why does the community put up with this garbage? I have yet to see someone having fun playing a game against Hell Maw. The players just shake their heads saying this is really stupid.
    - I think the majority likes "this garbage". I dont think its stupid. Especially after they drasticly increased the points for omnious gateways. I think as a wdg player you might consider picking one, i think if you invest in 2 the amount of mobility you gain doesnt give enough compensation for the punch you loose.

    I think there could be some changes to the rules for the portals. Maybe if you put one of your units on top of it you can choose to close it, but take d6 toxic hits? The same if the portals closes from the portal beast(s) death?
    Karl-Erik Hansen
    Kalerith
    :thumbsup:

    Team Norway O&G 2016 Athens
    Team Norway O&G 2017 Salamanca
    Team Norway VC 2018 Zagreb
    Team Norway ID 2019 Novi Sad