LAB spoilers Discussion Thread

    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!

    • I'll say this now and get it off my chest.

      You guys really don't get how spoilers work. That much is evident.

      Vague posting is fine on some level, but when it has been pre-Christmas that things first got mentioned and it has essentially been two months that it has been in 'internal playtesting' without anything more solid to show for it is telling. Bits and pieces of single lines and cryptic descriptions is not satisfying to read and doesn't really generate honest discussion - without something even a little concrete it's hard to talk about it.

      Today, a post was made on the Warhammer Community site. It's kind of a good example of where to start.

      warhammer-community.com/2020/0…bolismgw-homepage-post-2/

      In the post they pick a unit, give a little bit of fluff on them, and show off some very nice models. It's enough to hang an article on certainly. There is proof of an idea that has been realized and suggests more to come. This is kind of the baseline to shoot for. Since 9th really has miniatures to speak of, you can make do with 200 words about the purpose of the unit and a statblock or a special rule or whatever.

      warhammer-community.com/2019/0…-golemgw-homepage-post-4/

      In this one they speak specifically about a warband where they touch on fluff and mechanics briefly to give a pretty good overview of the faction. It has examples of the rules and stats in full. Here you can get a sense of design intention and how pieces fit together. This is probably the far end of the 'spoiler' territory in how much it outright it tells you.

      the-ninth-age.com/IMG/pdf/issue_19_final.pdf

      On page 4 and 5 there's.... a little info you can gleam about things, but only in the most broad strokes. The meat of the information that really helps generate discussion is in this very thread, at least in terms of mechanics, and even still it's done in a sort of clumsy way. I don't think that it's for a want of trying that it comes off like that but just experience and a miscommunication (or no communication at all) of player expectations for what ought to be spoiled.

      If the book is at a stage of internal playtesting, I take that to mean you've got the redesigns down more or less fully. Points and specifics of stats might move around as needed but nothing as sweeping or dramatic as adding a new unit entry or giving an army-wide rule on a regular basis, but to try and tinker and tune things. If you're playtesting though the impression is you have these things worked out to a degree they are functional, and that is very relevant information to show off. With the caveat of 'this is something we have so far and are comfortable sharing, but specifics might get tweaked by release', I don't think anyone is going to get their pitchforks.

      Maybe I'm wrong about what that means and you're still on step 1 of design. It's not very clear.

      I hope that in the future someone a bit more savvy in terms of media can lead spoilers for books. At the moment it's pretty disjointed and people could probably benefit from a 'spoiler guy' who has the sole job of just getting this kind of thing ready for the incoming material - not just the army books, but projects in the community as well. If the plan really is to get up to four books rolling a year, then they'll have enough on the plate to kind of keep interest at a reasonably high clip rather than these really small peaks and deep troughs of engagement.

      I say this as someone still relatively new to fantasy and with very little experience with chaos dwarves; I played all of two games with them and enjoyed it, and I can see a lot in the book I like as it is. Call it a distant side-project I hope to work on. Every time I see a post here it's very much a 'huh' and a shrug on the wait for things to be rolled out in full.

      tldr: going forwards put a little more out there. theres no reason for a quarter of the posts to be "when is it out," and i think a part of that genuinely comes from how spoilers are handled not only for this book but others.
    • Thank you for your critique,

      I'd like to adress a couple of points, though only shortly for the time being, as I'm under some time constraints yet want to answer you.


      Pigtails wrote:

      You guys really don't get how spoilers work. That much is evident.
      That might be a bit harsh. PR is one area the project did lack manpower but the project is aware of it and is trying to do more.
      @Tyranno for example does a phenomenal job writing articles for the 9th scroll and including his own models.
      Also see here:
      the-ninth-age.com/community/in…creating-the-siege-tower/

      Of course, there's always room for improvement.


      Pigtails wrote:

      Today, a post was made on the Warhammer Community site. It's kind of a good example of where to start.

      Pigtails wrote:

      This is kind of the baseline to shoot for.

      We won't compare ourselves to an actual company. This is a volunteer project. The people do spend their free time on it, sometimes even their own money. Receiving nothing.
      The standard of a profit-company are others.


      Pigtails wrote:

      If the book is at a stage of internal playtesting, I take that to mean you've got the redesigns down more or less fully. Points and specifics of stats might move around as needed but nothing as sweeping or dramatic as adding a new unit entry or giving an army-wide rule on a regular basis, but to try and tinker and tune things.
      That is actually were you are wrong.
      Even army wide rules can still be changed right now and have for the last iterations. Hence we only do spoilers if we're sure these concept WILL stick. We don't want to hype something up for some people, only for those to find out what they were looking for has been changed for something else.
      The level of changes you're thinking about is something which will be done once we're in public beta (this is as far as I know, I can't guarantee the 100% accuracy of the last sentence).

      However ths does not mean:

      Pigtails wrote:

      Maybe I'm wrong about what that means and you're still on step 1 of design.
      The whole process is done in agile form, everything is worked on simultaneously, so it's not at step 1. Step 1 is long done. But everything will be reviewed in every iteration again to not lose the big-picture. What one would think is a small change (lets say a weapon option for a unit) can cascade to several other units aswell so the overall book makes sense in itself.


      Pigtails wrote:

      I hope that in the future someone a bit more savvy in terms of media can lead spoilers for books. At the moment it's pretty disjointed and people could probably benefit from a 'spoiler guy' who has the sole job of just getting this kind of thing ready for the incoming material - not just the army books, but projects in the community as well.
      See my above statement about PR :).


      Pigtails wrote:

      I say this as someone still relatively new to fantasy and with very little experience with chaos dwarves
      Infernal Dwarves. This is quite a big difference which will be clear once the LAB is out with all the background!
      There's no point in denying that CD were the basis back when the project startet, nobody would argue here, but the project long ago became its own game and want to develop this further.



      Pigtails wrote:

      tldr: going forwards put a little more out there. theres no reason for a quarter of the posts to be "when is it out," and i think a part of that genuinely comes from how spoilers are handled not only for this book but others.
      Again, I want to genuine thank you for your post and critique.
      This is the first time a LAB is being done with the new design and the project has learned from it and will continue to do so.
      Thank you.
      This post has been brought to you by Zhanta Claws little helper.
      Click here for more information about Zhanta Claws and the ID LAB
    • Pigtails wrote:

      Today, a post was made on the Warhammer Community site. It's kind of a good example of where to start.

      warhammer-community.com/2020/0…bolismgw-homepage-post-2/

      The 'spoilers' you use as your examples are finished products. They have undergone months of development, fluff writing, rules crafting before getting to this point. They even have the model sculpted, finalised and pro painted for the pictures you see. The post is merely announcing it too the community as something that is about to be release, ie they need time to print there book copies, make and package all the minis, and get them out to countries they ship too.

      I understand your frustration but 9th is managed and created completely differently to standard tabletop games, and our expectation on delivery should reflect that. And if the other books that have been re-released (DL + WDG) are anything to go off, the wait will be worth it!

      In saying that, I am also constantly checking the forums for the announcement, that day can't get here fast enough, so excited :D
    • Kasocles wrote:

      I think you should compare this to the GW rumour engine. You get a vague picture of something that is coming in maybe six months three years.
      Corrected for you. ;)
      This said, they are very good at hyping us regularly with old WH teasing.

      Social Media Team

      UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

      - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
    • Calisson wrote:

      Kasocles wrote:

      I think you should compare this to the GW rumour engine. You get a vague picture of something that is coming in maybe six months three years.
      Corrected for you. ;) This said, they are very good at hyping us regularly with old WH teasing.
      I think he means normally Cal - not just W:OH specific.

      I also think the speed which GW can work at means it may be significantly quicker than the apparent 3 years
    • Comm.Mattias wrote:

      ...The 'spoilers' you use as your examples are finished products. They have undergone months of development, fluff writing, rules crafting before getting to this point....
      The ID book has, apparently, been worked on for six months before DE according to previous posts. This is on top of two months since the announcement of the book on the dashboard. I'd say there is about an equal amount of time there to get to a similar point. Now, I understand that volunteer project and bla bla bla, but that doesn't mean that you can just shrug and not admit you're coming up short when it comes to delivery of something. Something as simple as showing off your work.

      I'm not trying to harangue anyone here, but instead offer a sincere critique of what should be looked at. And there is a whole lot that needs looking at.

      After thinking about it for a moment I decided to make a mock-up of what I am trying to get across here. I have an alternative post that is more like an 'interview' that might work better in this particular instance and tie in better with the thread about making the siege tower, but there isn't any reason they could be coupled together.

      I didn't spend a whole lot of time on it. The bulk was just hunting down a few resources and copy-pasting stuff from the scroll. Maybe an hour to visualize and then rough it in before committing on things. I think this is a more meaningful spoiler for a single item than what was shown in the scroll - though I really do like the how-to-build part of the spearman. That is certainly something that could more or less stand on it's own unchanged.

      Note: all info with a cross are guesses or otherwise 'made up' to fill in a little space.
      Files
    • Pigtails wrote:

      that doesn't mean that you can just shrug and not admit you're coming up short when it comes to delivery of something. Something as simple as showing off your work.
      I think you are missing the key point of difference between our work and when someone like GW puts out spoilers.

      When companies like GW put out spoilers (i.e. companies that put out a complete project without the intention of updates or patches), they are giving a look at a completed project in advance of the release of the product. They have a set date for when the product will be released, but this date is long after the product is actually finished being designed. Those spoilers will be of the final product.

      When we are done with the product, we will release it immediately. It is much harder for us to release spoilers because the units and armies involved are not done yet. They are still being actively iterated on. And again, we don't have a period between the book being done and the book being released like GW does. When it is done, it is released.


      Here's the thing. We can't just show the work in progress. The reason being that some of the stuff will change, and people consider anything shown to be "absolutely definitely going to be in the army" because that is how they have been conditioned by companies like GW. But the truth is that there is a LOT of ideas that get made and subsequently thrown away in the course of designing an army. That happens in any design phase (yes, GW included). If we talked about an item or unit that people in general really liked, but didn't end up making it to the final product for any reason (such as crowding out other options, not being thematically coherent, etc.), then people would be pissed and we would hear a whole bunch of "broken promises" rants.


      So it really isn't as simple as you think it is. If it was, we would be doing it.
    • I'll put it this way: GW is fairly opaque about their production cycle... but Wizards of the Coast (thanks to Mark Rosewater) are not.

      Magic: the Gathering has a two year production cycle.

      That is, design work for the first set that will be released in 2022 has already begun.

      So if we worked at the same pace as the designers of Magic: the Gathering, the ID book would be coming out half way through next year.


      Games Workshop almost certainly has something similar going on - they're releasing spoilers now, but work probably began a year or two ago. They just don't TELL people that they've started work on it. They only make announcements when they've reached a certain stage in production. That's how businesses work - they don't tell people things until marketing says it's time to tell them.

      We are not slow. We are transparent. We tell y'all what we're going to be doing a year in advance and then go do it.

      Background Team

    • New

      On the offtopic of "hype management":
      GW, Wizards of the Coast etc regulary show some snipets monthly, biweekly or even every week (not always on te same system / faction but still) - be it new models, parts of models ("guess what's comming"), fluff, rules, news about new rules, campaings... Everything to have gamers talking about their proudcts regardless if people like them or not (of course it's beter if they like them and this point of view is encouraged / promoted via different tools; on the other hand negative comments in 99% aren't going to influence the final product due to production cycle)

      If I recall there was an explanation from the IXth Age project team why they don't want to publish early versions / don't want to make public process (and I agree - this is not company and it would be diffcult to ignore public pressure) but still some more info would be welcome. Even if it is like this: "Key priciples presented in articles are working. Most of units are done. We encountered issue with warmachines - curently they are overperforming / require unreasonable pricing so we're working on special rules making them more vulnerable. Now we plan 2-3 weeks of testing to verify changes - when it's finished expect another update." Of course there will be some heated discussion on forum between lovers of artilery and its' opponnents, 100 "best solutuions" etc but these can be simply ignored (99 would be total miss as you didn't give any details :) ) but people would get hyped and have something to do in the meantime :)

      Back to ID:
      This "assyrian siege tower" - should we expect it to be configurable (I mean "CC version" vs "long range version" with possible different kind of cannons/mortars etc)? Would be "fluff okeish" if I would go with my dwarf infantry in style of "dark mechanicus" (I mean fantasy style dark mechanicus and not 40k :) really heavy armour but not plate, some steam elements, dark / dirty colours, some glowing magic runes etc.)? How common may be blunderbuss and other firearms?
    • New

      wokrze wrote:

      On the offtopic of "hype management":
      GW, Wizards of the Coast etc regulary show some snipets monthly, biweekly or even every week (not always on te same system / faction but still) - be it new models, parts of models ("guess what's comming"), fluff, rules, news about new rules, campaings...
      T9A does the same, although not monthly, but bimonthly. The Ninth Scroll :)
      Also here is a campaign going on:
      The Fight for Avras - a fun campaign!


      wokrze wrote:

      If I recall there was an explanation from the IXth Age project team why they don't want to publish early versions / don't want to make public process (and I agree - this is not company and it would be diffcult to ignore public pressure) but still some more info would be welcome.
      I do agree and it's something we are working on how to improve.

      Regarding the Siege Tower:
      Unfortunately I can't give you more information then there has been in the 9th scroll. But check out @Tyrannos thread where hes building one, that might inspire you and give you some detail to the entry ;)
      Creating the Siege Tower
      This post has been brought to you by Zhanta Claws little helper.
      Click here for more information about Zhanta Claws and the ID LAB
    • New

      While I do not agree with this "politic of secrets" while designing rules , I understand it was decided erlier and it is not up to ID lab team to decide. Yet it would be nice to hear some more info from time to time. How playtesing are going, what units looks fine, what needs more work. Some rules had to be settled already, so throwing some tiny detail or general idea would "keep the hype". But as I said thats probobly not up to you to decide.

      So how would it look when its done? Decision will be made overnight and "hallelujah" - we got the book next morning, or we will get more specyfic date 1-2 weeks erlier?


      One more question, will we retain some unique war machines - like Titan mortar with its "eartshaker" effect or all will be replaced with new ,customizable chasie/ammo system?
    • New

      hypnotic wrote:

      Some rules had to be settled already
      Probably less than you think actually, both the number of rules and how solidly they are decided.
      A new book is a network of overlapping threads... pull too hard on one (e.g. during playtesting) and it can have ramifications in places you had never imagined.


      This seems to be the key issue here from what I can tell: people don't believe the team members when they say something along these lines.
      List repository and links HERE
      Basic beginners tactics HERE
      Empire of Dannstahl HERE
    • New

      DanT wrote:

      hypnotic wrote:

      Some rules had to be settled already
      Probably less than you think actually, both the number of rules and how solidly they are decided.A new book is a network of overlapping threads... pull too hard on one (e.g. during playtesting) and it can have ramifications in places you had never imagined.


      This seems to be the key issue here from what I can tell: people don't believe the team members when they say something along these lines.

      Yep.

      True statement: "rewrite half the core section to change the intended uses of both units" was proposed just last week.

      Background Team

    • New

      Shako wrote:

      wokrze wrote:

      On the offtopic of "hype management":
      GW, Wizards of the Coast etc regulary show some snipets monthly, biweekly or even every week (not always on te same system / faction but still) - be it new models, parts of models ("guess what's comming"), fluff, rules, news about new rules, campaings...
      T9A does the same, although not monthly, but bimonthly. The Ninth Scroll :)
      Yep! There is always something in the 9th Scroll :) And there will be something for the ID fans this month ;)

      Background Team

      9th Scroll Editor

      Ammertime Podcast Host
      soundcloud.com/ammertime-podcast
      Team Ireland ETC 2019 :HE:
    • New

      hypnotic wrote:

      While I do not agree with this "politic of secrets"
      8o
      Neither do I agree with any politics of secret.
      This is why we have the opposite policy at T9A, we're informing very, very early about what we plan to do and what we are doing.
      If you have a more transparent model of information in mind, tell me which company it is, I would love to learn from them.

      The problem is not a policy of secret, it is our limited manpower which needs to concentrate on progressing the work rather than the hype.

      hypnotic wrote:

      So how would it look when its done? Decision will be made overnight and "hallelujah" - we got the book next morning, or we will get more specyfic date 1-2 weeks erlier?
      You will have the LAB literally months ahead of time before it is finished in its Gold state. Like most T9A rules.
      If you have a better model in mind, let me know which company uses that model, I would love to learn from them.

      Social Media Team

      UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

      - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves
    • New

      WhammeWhamme wrote:

      True statement: "rewrite half the core section to change the intended uses of both units" was proposed just last week
      If its literally as you have said , its hard to imagine how this process can get to
      an end . I understand that overall outcome effects single units , and some things need to be adjusted but „rewriting half cores” at this stage seems like a neverending nightmare.

      Calisson wrote:

      You will have the LAB literally months ahead of time before it is finished in its Gold state. Like most T9A rules.If you have a better model in mind, let me know which company uses that model, I would love to learn from them.
      I was asking about about LAB relese. When the work will be at final stage would we get some estimate date erlier or the process is so unpredictable that literally „its done when its done” without any predictions .

      I thought the model is „community driven project” but if you want to refere to some comercial companies , than I am probobly wrong .