SE Price Update: Three Concerns over the price update

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

  • Hello there.

    SE players have always felt as a second or third category in GW editions against other armies. Their army books have been always the lasts ones, and had editions with no books, having to play with old books, fewer new units or options than other armies, etc... Then, fewer players play this army because it has less love than other, and then the wheel never ends. Like the uroboros.

    We thought that would be something that could change in T9A, but it is not happening. Obviusly the actual slim book is far better than GW editions for internal and external balance.

    But the sensation of being a very secondary army has never gone, han that is frustrating after so many years. For SE community little things have changed in T9A if we compare its situation with the one we had in GW editions, and I think that is why we are so disappointed.

    T9A SE community do not need a LAB book, someone has to be the last, but it needs some love from the project time to time. If not, you will see what its happening, frustration, disappointment and impotence.

    The only SE players that play this army are because they love it, no because it is more factible to win (something that happens in other armies, just see tournament armies).

    Kind regards
  • Sequias wrote:




    T9A SE community do not need a LAB book, someone has to be the last, but it needs some love from the project time to time. If not, you will see what its happening, frustration, disappointment and impotence.

    The only SE players that play this army are because they love it, no because it is more factible to win (something that happens in other armies, just see tournament armies).

    Kind regards
    Totally agree with you and I will like to highlight this part.
    I only main SE and SA since years (maybe started 16 years ago?) and it is because I love the miniatures, the play style and also I have a GW army and another one alternative army of Illidary for SE and Naga for SA.
    The frustration comes when year over year you see that solution for SE is a correct pricing and no one is doing it, doesn’t matter if you use 55 bow cap if no one can pay them (at least if you want to play with everything, pair of blocks, bsb…, master adept)
    The INTERNAL BALANCE of the book is good, it is only a thing of points for improving the external balance but staff is stubborn and will reduce 5 points every year the cost of units. And ofc WH, bldedancers, thickets… are going to be played because they are not badly designed but have a non-sense cost.
    SE does not need a LAB as DH, BH, KOE, SA which have one good list and that’s all or previous VS (verminlord dependant)DE(altar dependant) as our design is good in almost all the points, our weaknesses are well defined and our strengths are well defined too (but not costed accurately) and our list variability is good enough.
    Problem is when you want to fight against other armies, you tend to spam the unique unit which is not over costed (now treeman avatar and rangers), 3 years before (thickets and maidens with elk)…
  • Bogi wrote:

    I don't think people realise just how much a new lab changes the book...

    zqn365 wrote:

    To me the book is not bad, I actually like a lot of the stuff in there, and even though my 6th ed wood elves experience is limited i like this iteration of the treehippies much more. A bit of mobile shooting but with the emphasis on CC and mobility are what im looking for and this book does it much, much better than 6th ed elves. Which if you're honest was all about the mobile shooting and not much else. Whats anoying are these glaring mistakes/oversights that keeps on being there because everything is frozen, when some simple changes really could revitalize the book.
    ...
    The main offenders are kindreds, items, and some pricing principles. Id like to keep the bowcap and even lowering it if need be, just make the damn bows worth taking. Such that mixed arms list are more feasible, instead of now where its maxed shooting or virtually none. Also a ranged answer, from kindreds magic items, against the high armor toughness stuff would really go along way(As a redesign of units is too much).

    Some small tweaks and i believe a lot of the SE community really would be fine for a couple more years!

    Sequias wrote:

    SE players have always felt as a second or third category in GW editions against other armies. Their army books have been always the lasts ones, and had editions with no books, having to play with old books, fewer new units or options than other armies, etc... Then, fewer players play this army because it has less love than other, and then the wheel never ends. Like the uroboros.
    ...
    T9A SE community do not need a LAB book, someone has to be the last, but it needs some love from the project time to time. If not, you will see what its happening, frustration, disappointment and impotence.
    ...
    The only SE players that play this army are because they love it, no because it is more factible to win (something that happens in other armies, just see tournament armies).
    Some of us fear a LAB because it could break many of our flagship units.
    Others believe that the direction the project took clashed head-on with the Sylvan style spirit years ago, and we have acted as if nothing had happened. But the perfect crime does not exist if there are witnesses.

    At the precise moment of the swerve and the violent turn against the avoidance and flying circus (we agreed with), Sylvan Elf body flew out the window, leaving a nice corps on the road as we drive away.
    We quickly replaced him with the handsome and beaten first cousin trying to convince us that nothing had happened while the body moved further and further in the rearview mirror.

    Many of us have not even noticed the change, others have forgotten and forgiven, convinced that it is for the better, but some of the entciants are still haunted by ancestral spirits at night.
    There is a strong feeling that something stopped working inside us but at the same time, we are still alive and handsome.
    I would personally say that the keyword is distinctive "playstyle" or "mechanic".
    A jackal, O Karna, residing in the forest in the midst of hares regardeth himself a lion till he actually sees a lion.
  • archon_sammael wrote:

    I think we can all agree that SE woes can be fixed with some small-handed tweaks compared to other "low tier" armies but in the current development situation those can only happen in a LAB, or so I understand.

    No matter how small the rework we want, this principle stands. So that just adds to the frustration of the SE player base.
    100% agreed. it wouldnt be so hard to make SE quite an awesome and fun army. but RT is too stubborn.
  • Sequias wrote:

    Hello there.

    SE players have always felt as a second or third category in GW editions against other armies. Their army books have been always the lasts ones, and had editions with no books, having to play with old books, fewer new units or options than other armies, etc... Then, fewer players play this army because it has less love than other, and then the wheel never ends. Like the uroboros.

    We thought that would be something that could change in T9A, but it is not happening. Obviusly the actual slim book is far better than GW editions for internal and external balance.

    But the sensation of being a very secondary army has never gone, han that is frustrating after so many years. For SE community little things have changed in T9A if we compare its situation with the one we had in GW editions, and I think that is why we are so disappointed.

    T9A SE community do not need a LAB book, someone has to be the last, but it needs some love from the project time to time. If not, you will see what its happening, frustration, disappointment and impotence.

    The only SE players that play this army are because they love it, no because it is more factible to win (something that happens in other armies, just see tournament armies).

    Kind regards
    Very true and very sad!
  • @Hachiman Taro SE have been in the final selection step alongside the OnG for the last 2 LAB picks. Unfortunately for SE players one of the two "lost" this round as well. The Project is very keen to work on the SE and will select SE at the moment circumstances allow it.


    To those who are dreading the SE LAB process, I would like to give a word of assurance. The SE LAB will be starting from a different position from almost any other LAB because the Slim book has been made to be T9A setting compatible and major elements of the background relating to the faction and individual units have been shared with the wider community so there shouldn't be major surprises on that front. The SE LAB when it happens will be dominated by ensuring mechanical compatibility of the army with the game rather than balancing between that and delivering the transition from a Slim influenced by legacy to LAB based on T9A setting.


    Furthermore, to help understand how the choice of which LAB will be next is made I will share with you my post I made a couple of days earlier in the general staff area. Please keep in mind the process of selecting a new LAB is one that happens over several months of discussions before the final decision is made.


    Giladis wrote:

    While it is far from a determining factor OnG were the last remaining army from the initial Top 5 in need of an update due to IP reasons.

    DL and WDG topped the list
    VS, SA and OnG jostled for 3rd place with VS maybe being slightly ahead.


    When determining which book will be selected next these are the parameters that are considered. The list is given in no particular order and I am probably forgetting some.




    How playable is the Slim iteration of the faction?


    How setting compatible is the Slim iteration of the faction?


    Which members of the RT are unassigned at the moment and can be assigned to the book?


    Which members of the BGT are unassigned at the moment and can be assigned to the book?


    Which members of the GDT are unassigned at the moment and can be assigned to the book?

    Are the momentarily available GDT members the right choice for the book in question?



    Is the lead background designer of the faction available?


    How much art is already available?


    How motivated are the artists to work on a particular faction?


    What is the perception of the wider community which faction needs attention from a rules perspective?


    What is the perception of the wider community which faction needs attention from a background perspective?


    What is the assessment of the Legal Team which of our factions is in greatest need to be made IP compliant?

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    Dread Elves LAB TT

    Art Team Coordinator

    Layout Assistant Coordinator

    Moderator

    HEROES AND VILLAINS of the 9th AGE
  • Sequias wrote:

    Hello there.

    SE players have always felt as a second or third category in GW editions against other armies. Their army books have been always the lasts ones, and had editions with no books, having to play with old books, fewer new units or options than other armies, etc... Then, fewer players play this army because it has less love than other, and then the wheel never ends. Like the uroboros.

    We thought that would be something that could change in T9A, but it is not happening. Obviusly the actual slim book is far better than GW editions for internal and external balance.

    But the sensation of being a very secondary army has never gone, han that is frustrating after so many years. For SE community little things have changed in T9A if we compare its situation with the one we had in GW editions, and I think that is why we are so disappointed.

    T9A SE community do not need a LAB book, someone has to be the last, but it needs some love from the project time to time. If not, you will see what its happening, frustration, disappointment and impotence.

    The only SE players that play this army are because they love it, no because it is more factible to win (something that happens in other armies, just see tournament armies).

    Kind regards
    +100000000000000000 very very sad...
  • @Giladis thanks for your explanation. This creates a lot more transparency and gives us the possibility to better understand decisions.

    Besides I‘m happy for the information that our faction is unlikely to be transformed into something completely different with an upcoming LAB.
  • Agreed! at least there is no beating around the bush that the OnG being a IP issue means it needed a rework sooner rather than later, its like a "Between a rock and a hard place" situation for the whole project.

    I like the current lore in the background book and was hoping it was kept in the future LAB, its good to have that confirmed :)
    "Woe then to any that creeps uninvited under the grand canopy of the Dark Green for never shall they emerge again"
  • There are many little things that reflect all this feeling of being somewhat marginalized.

    Por example, I still do not know why units with no full comand group options like Ghouls have Swift reform due its champion (for free), but units of Sylvan Spirit do not, insted for 20 points only on a character "aspect of nature" that furthermore is limited to one, so that character can't take another.

    You can argue "well, in old 8th edition neither them did not have command group option", but then, why one army in T9A has a easy (and cheap) solution, and the other one is so conditioning? and also 0-1 in the army.

    Do not know, that are the type of things that makes one think that there are some favourite armies that recieve more love than other ones. The problem is that this is something that has remain this way for years, with no intention to give any solution. I remark, years.

    And yes, comparisons are hateful, so let us complain about this micro-marginations.

    Regards.

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

  • Art_of_War wrote:

    Sequias wrote:

    I still do not know why units with no full comand group options like Ghouls have Swift reform due its champion (for free), but units of Sylvan Spirit do not
    For a while Ghouls didn’t have this option either. But it was fixed a few years ago (outside a LAB… OMG) now they have a 10 pt champion with swift reform included.
    OMG! I can’t believe it, sure our staff didn’t notice about it during the last 5 years.
    Sarcasm off…
  • Some quick and small design changes that I think can increase playability of the army:

    -Make the kindreds cost less for chieftans.
    -Make the forrest guardian kindred able to buy vangurd.
    -Make sylvan bow shots 4 and 3 for prince and chief, price accordingly. (then adjust price of pathfinder kindred)
    -let WH have +3 armor at its current cost(LA+cloak+shield+mount). Adjust price later if needed. Keeps them not heavy armored but doesnt fall over to 15 arhcers light shooting.
    -Sylvan unicorn gives MR2 instead of the Aegis save.
    -Keep the amount of shooting we can get but heavily decrease the cost on it. So keep 55 bow cap and whatever restriction that only lets us field 2 pathfinder and 1 sentineI units(Decrease the UA limit to ensure it does not resurrect the Avoidance). I can not for the life of me understand the price of 350 for 10 sentinels(should be more in the 250 region imo).

    Hopefully these small changes could enable more builds. From the top of my head I would try some more Cavalry based lists, vanguarding rangers with a character with sacred seeds, bsb with BoW, more chief shapeshifter shenanigans(depending of price of course).

    Im aware that we still suck against RnF and Tough armored single models, theres no small changes that really can help with that, as i see it.