Pinned DE General Discussion

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • And then we'll see you next month when you have something more to say.

    You do you, but if you've no intention to commit to the message you want to send, which I assume is 'T9A has failed me badly enough that I will quit', a rather powerful message all told, then I fail to see the point of doing it in the first place, it's just petty showboating.
    Life is hard when you're a skeleton
  • (not commenting in staff role)


    DarkSky wrote:

    ...
    It is also kind of an anti-thesis to the teams efforts to promote rank and file units and tone down on the units with unlimited free reforms. It can be very frustrating to play against such a list, because you get into a "I can't do anything" situation. The playstyle has been described as "non-shooting" avoidacne list, bascially the CC version of an extreme SE or Skink Cloud list.
    Leaving character issues aside for a moment, it does seem to me that Darksky has hit the nail on the head here:
    It seems to me that the main repeated problems in terms of "what the book has lost" (in a big picture rather than detail sense) revolve around lists/playstyles where core infantry play only a token role, whereas any lists/playstyles that see core infantry as a substantial or important part of the list are broadly fine in the new book.


    @Eol
    I think this kinda ties in to what we were discussing as well, right?
    List repository and links HERE
    Basic beginners tactics HERE
    Empire of Dannstahl HERE
  • Thomashkis wrote:

    There are decisions that are really strange and offputting toward most people that are explained by fluff (which doesn't exist yet) or by some murky preconceptions envisioned by a couple of people (called guidelines), but I would like to remind you that T9A is a game.
    How do you know? Do you have some data on player sentiment? Was my opinion sampled to gather said data? Was a random sample of players drawn from a wider player population including me?
    Sunna is not with the big battalions, but with the ones whose parts move with the best coordination.
  • Going back to the magic issue, I think that it should be approached in the context of all the three eleven factions.

    DE (the bad guys) get access to cosmo, Evo, occultism and thauma

    SE (the forest/nature guys) get access to Shama, druidism and witchcraft

    HbE (the good guys) get access to divination, pyro and alchemy

    All of them (elves) get access to cosmo.

    Or any other combination, in case the background/balance elements suggest differently. But this should be the scheme to follow, IMO.
  • Seeing how having a powerful spellcaster lead the army is something a fair number of players seem to like, maybe it would indeed be warranted to reconsider the lack of access to "legitimate" wizard masters from respectable Dread Elven society. I say that as a player with no particular attachment to said trope, just trying to be conciliatory.

    If wizard master generals are something the game design tries to move away from, that priority would be somewhat served by the suggestion to just let wizard masters have Dis 8. Then, having them as generals would save on characters, but they'd be generals-almost-in-name-only, with just harpies to actually benefit from their Commanding Presence.

    If cosmology is supposed to be *the* elven path of magic, it seems dissonant that only daeb outcasts have access to it. A temple master-level spellcaster who is Dis 8 and has no combat abilities to speak of. Path access would be cosmology, divination and alchemy (because temples already have the two latter as their domain). Heck, even if the package would come with Not a Leader, that would still be less wrong than there being no legitimate cosmologists.
    Sunna is not with the big battalions, but with the ones whose parts move with the best coordination.
  • lol.lobest wrote:

    Going back to the magic issue, I think that it should be approached in the context of all the three eleven factions.

    DE (the bad guys) get access to cosmo, Evo, occultism and thauma

    SE (the forest/nature guys) get access to Shama, druidism and witchcraft

    HbE (the good guys) get access to divination, pyro and alchemy

    All of them (elves) get access to cosmo.

    Or any other combination, in case the background/balance elements suggest differently. But this should be the scheme to follow, IMO.
    I Agree 200%
    I used to be Suddenwind... :)
  • Someone mentioned earlier how this topic has a lot of negative posts because people who like what direction LAB is taking don't want to post for some reason. This motivated me to post and show there are at least some people who don't want to post even though they have opposite feeling. Reason I see no point in posting is because most negative feedback gets shut down with responses like "you can't have that because backround/fluff reasons" or "this is against guidelines and/or project vision". I mean you can use those responses to shut down literally any argument made, because backround/fluff is not published and the project vision is murky ( it seems you can break the guidelines if they suit your vision, but not when someone else thinks it is suitable or makes more sense ).

    Not saying I think all is bad, personally I am convinced by the "fluff" explanation why DE can't have Occultism. But then I also wonder how does Evocation fit in that same "fluff" ? Same goes for Blades of Darag. Someone suggested Shamanism instead of Evo, and I tend to agree it makes much more sense ( I mean come on, there are many beasts in this army it makes 100000 more sense than Alchemy for example as Alchemy is explained by DE favoring the Smith god but this is not represented at all in their army as they have shittiest and most basic weapons and armor possible so this connection to Alchemy exists only in fluff, connection to Shamanism exists in the units, the theme and the feel of the army ).
    Mist leviathan is in the game just because someone really important in T9A team though it is a cool idea and forced it into the book. Idea was stupid from the start, but this shiet is staying because this person wants it to stay. And he can't accept he is wrong. We will have 50 iteration of this unit if needed before release, resources will be wasted, but we will have Mist leviathan in the book. Yay.
    Instead of wasting resources on Mist leviathan, you could've made developed Beastmaster theme more. It is half baked right now IMO, and as such it should probably be dropped from the main book and rolled into a supplement. Or work harder to develop it further, but this seems unlikely this far into the Alpha as it would require adding more units and options to the book.
    I mean I could add more criticism, but since I read most if not this entire topic, I think everything I disliked was already mentioned by people smarter and more eloquent than me, and most of it was shut down with those two responses I mentioned earlier.
    For the end I will say some nice things I liked at the start of this process with the new book, so that I don't seem all negative. I liked the project merged two naked girls units into one and I liked the reduced R on chariot mounts.
  • lol.lobest wrote:

    Going back to the magic issue, I think that it should be approached in the context of all the three eleven factions.

    DE (the bad guys) get access to cosmo, Evo, occultism and thauma

    SE (the forest/nature guys) get access to Shama, druidism and witchcraft

    HbE (the good guys) get access to divination, pyro and alchemy

    All of them (elves) get access to cosmo.

    Or any other combination, in case the background/balance elements suggest differently. But this should be the scheme to follow, IMO.
    Several that make no sense in your argument regarding T9A world building:
    • DE are not "the bad guys"
    • HE are not "the good guys"
    • Evocation, Occultism, and Thaumaturgy are not "the evil magic paths"
    • Witchcraft is not tied to forest/nature in any way (outside of the classical evil witch lives alone in the forest fairy tale)
    • Divination, Pyromancy, and Alchemy are not "the good magic paths"
    Comments on your rule proposal:
    • "The magic issue" - I have yet to read a compelling argument, why the current path association is so bad it needs drastic changing like above (i.e. cutting three paths and adding two)
    • Why should the overlap of three factions with strong ties together be only 25% of the magic paths? Why is that number better than anything else? (e.g. having two shared paths overall, or having one shared overall and each elvish factions shares one with one other?)
    • How does that improve the game or the Elven factions overall?
    • Why do all three Elves have to have the exact same amount of magic paths available?


    The best arguments I have seen so far are about the background of Cosmology and how it isn't available to Temple Exarchs, when in background it probably should be. Additionally there is feedback about Occultism vs Evocation, which I personally don't share, but is well argued and could be made a case for (Evocation being redundant, the fear of sniping spells with IW being too good, the lack of magic missiles).

    Tool Support Battle Scribe

    DE Community Support


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

    Wesser wrote:

    You are entitled to your opinion ofc, but all I see is someone who have ALL the options he used to have just with different restrictions that he refuses to adapt to because..I dont even know why
    1.- Because raider theme was my main theme before.2.- Because after the first unit of corsairs they are useless (the first one is the mage bunker) if you go full melee.
    3.- Because after the 2nd unit of SpearElves they are useless if you want to go faster than a Dwarf.
    4.- Because the only thing you can do is spend the points making the spear elves unit bigger and this broke my "raider" preference.
    5.- Because if I spend the special points in Fast Cavalry, I need to fit minimum 3 expensive characters because not a leader wizard master I can only break with love and kisses and DE are supposed to be an aggressive army
    6.- Because core is supposed to not be a Tax and defines the "core" of the army, my core (raider) that is gone because potatoes. Leaving only to spend points in a units I dont like.

    (Some admin can speed the "deletion account" countdown of 7 days...?)

    Well i see again a lot of pure power arguments in my opinion. Nothing of these has something to do with playstyle.

    In fact, there IS a fast cavalry option in core. You dont like it because it is expensive. Fine. Take the cheaper version from special. But you dont like that too, cause now you have to invest in other units in core, that arent cheap throw away units like DR.

    So your main problem is, that now you cant fill your core with super cheap, mobile and expendable fast cavalry troops from core. Ifn that is not a power argument, i dont know what it is.

    Your playstayle is still viable. Maybe it is not that effective anymore and you have to adapt your list a bit. But if you like to play that playstyle solely because the playstyle is fun, it shouldnt matter how effective it is right? Everything else will lead us again to the point, that you want your playstyle to be more effective and so you are asking for more external power of your playstyle and the LAB in general.

    A lot of WDG players were mad, because a lot of playstyles were scrapped. Something like chariots in core and 5 man horsemen units and so on.
    But for the sake of general balance and fun level of the whole T9A project, it was a good thing that some playstyles were disabled or made less effective than before. It is hard to accept in the first time. But im pretty sure you will survive that time and find another effective army list, if you really are that kind of competitive player, as you mentioned earlier.
  • Ok if DE are not "the bad guys", HE are not "the good guys" and with Slyvan elves happens the same. Why not fuse the three elves books in a generic one? and afther create a auxiliare books with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Elf

    I think this is simple to understand if I choose play with DE is because are the bad guys.
  • setrius wrote:

    Ok if DE are not "the bad guys", HE are not "the good guys" and with Slyvan elves happens the same. Why not fuse the three elves books in a generic one? and afther create a auxiliare books with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Elf

    I think this is simple to understand if I choose play with DE is because are the bad guys.
    But DE are seem to be dreadfull by the lesser races - arent they? So kind off Bad Guys?
  • LeXincerta wrote:

    setrius wrote:

    Ok if DE are not "the bad guys", HE are not "the good guys" and with Slyvan elves happens the same. Why not fuse the three elves books in a generic one? and afther create a auxiliare books with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Elf

    I think this is simple to understand if I choose play with DE is because are the bad guys.
    But DE are seem to be dreadfull by the lesser races - arent they? So kind off Bad Guys?

    We're waiting for your call
    Whatever you're going through, a DE Samaritan will face it with you. We're here 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
  • LeXincerta wrote:

    setrius wrote:

    Ok if DE are not "the bad guys", HE are not "the good guys" and with Slyvan elves happens the same. Why not fuse the three elves books in a generic one? and afther create a auxiliare books with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Elf

    I think this is simple to understand if I choose play with DE is because are the bad guys.
    But DE are seem to be dreadfull by the lesser races - arent they? So kind off Bad Guys?
    Any race is afraid of serious competitors and likely adversaries) And usually use propaganda to denigrate them.
  • Good/bad

    WHO decides this definition. In the eyes of the DE guy their way of life is perfectly fine. And he sees himself for sure not as a bad guy.
    In his eyes others who oppose the way to life of DE are the bad guys.

    So I am glad that these overdone comical "badness" is taken away from background. In the eyes of modern people slvery is bad. But in the past some economic was based on slaves, and this was the norm for the people back then. They never saw themself as bad guys. (The slaves propably did). So it depends from the perspective you are looking at the good/bad thing.

    Even if it is somewhat in the background, the distinction who is good or bad should be way more grey than the old black / white. And for sure no "bad" faction sees itself as the bad guys.
  • DarkSky wrote:

    The best arguments I have seen so far are about the background of Cosmology and how it isn't available to Temple Exarchs, when in background it probably should be. Additionally there is feedback about Occultism vs Evocation, which I personally don't share, but is well argued and could be made a case for (Evocation being redundant, the fear of sniping spells with IW being too good, the lack of magic missiles).
    If I understand correctly, my argument is not sufficient (DE General Discussion). So I allow myself to add:
    - Pyromancy allows you to do damage that can protect us from shooting damage, which would give us a kind of protection while being 100% in the directives (offensive magic, not direct protection), more interesting than alchemy.
    - The thaumaturgy allows a game just as technical as divination but more dread (hex, divine judgment exercised by the exarc).

    I will play the exarc adept a lot more willingly than I do now. (fortune telling and alchemy don't make me feel Dread elve)
    I'm ready to lose the darag blades (or see another, even simpler version). Nice concept but not very dread (hex, etc.).

    I think the subject has been discussed enough. I personally would not come back to it anymore. I look forward to the update. (I have a match this weekend, I would like to have alpha 5 to test things).

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

  • T9A has always been about that contextual morality, everyone considers themselves the heroes of their own stories after all, and even the darkest races have reasons for what they do, that make perfect sense. But just because something may be the correct thing to do, does not make it the right thing to do.

    So DE are cruel slavers, raiders and conquerors, but also a race that stood on the front lines in the rebellion against the overlords of the entire world in the ancient days, and it's easy to see why they became what they are from there, even if it's hard to agree with the moral correctness of their methods.
    Life is hard when you're a skeleton