What genious designed druid mounts without light troops?

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

  • What genious designed druid mounts without light troops?

    I have been playing these units illegally it seems... I had been hyping up to convert some centaur mages and then a veteran SE player enlightens me on my folly. Like really? Where is the common sense in druid mounts not having light troops? While all combat characters on the same steed has it? Who else here wanna pay 30 or 50 points to make your units WORSE in the one aspect that is supposed to excel at?

    Not really a helpful thread I know, but I need to vent the frustration over this senseless design... :thumbdown:
  • As one of the people involved I can tell you the decision was made to reduce the effectiveness of avoidance ranged play. Combat characters need to get into combat to earn their points, wizards do not and allowing them to be both extremely mobile and protected creates the kind of negative experience many people did not enjoy and was thus removed.

    I hope this helps :)

    Advisory Board

    Background Team

    Dread Elves LAB TT

    Art Team Coordinator

    Layout Assistant Coordinator

    Moderator

    HEROES AND VILLAINS of the 9th AGE
  • looking forward to Pyro and Swordmasters being nerfed from the game in the same way. Both are completely unfun regardless of what army you draw against them.
    "It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."
  • Giladis wrote:

    As one of the people involved I can tell you the decision was made to reduce the effectiveness of avoidance ranged play. Combat characters need to get into combat to earn their points, wizards do not and allowing them to be both extremely mobile and protected creates the kind of negative experience many people did not enjoy and was thus removed.

    I hope this helps :)
    Mobility and ranged damage are the two aspects the army is supposed to excell in. By this logic we better remove cannons and make shooting useless for the dwarves when they get their LAB because people dont like playing against that kind of army. Also people dont like to lose in combat against WotDG or in magic against DL.

    With this sort of decisions you limit the way the army can be played. This lack of variety really shows as well. When was the last time you saw a druid not on foot in a serious tournament list? The only place you can reasonably stick a druid mage these days is in 20 so archers from core. This is quite litteraly the only place they can be put safely. They could also stay with forest guards that few if any people play or a 10 man 350-450 pts unit of pathfinders or sentinels that are just begging for a fireball to the face followed by the wiping out of your mage.

    The decision to reduce effectivness of avoidance and ranged play seems to have worked well. SE gets regularly out shot by most other shooting armies and they seldom seem to do well in tournament settings.
  • @Arienai I get the vibe you are angry. You asked a question, and one of the actual designers who made the decision, gave the backing behind their decision. Whether you believe that reason is valid or not, is a different matter, but he did come by and answer it truthfully and transparently.

    Back to Druid bunkers. Our skirmishing Archers are also fantastic wizard bunkers for foot Druids.

    Eagle Kings are great mounts for wizards that wish to be highly mobile. Dragons also see a fair amount of play, moreso now than before it seems.

    On the direct issue of non light troops Horses and Unicorn. It is difficult, especially when you look at cross army comparison of Goblin Wizard master's getting light troops wolves and spiders. But the intent is sound. If you want to get a feeling of light troops, try running 2 or 3 different non melee cavalry units, ie 2 heath hunters and a briar maiden unit, and you can bounce between them on a movement 20 unicorn for psuedo light toops. I've done that before, and it requires more brain power, but it produces the same effect.
  • Yeah, we mostly feel that way in some kind. The things in what SE historicaly excel where nerfed or removed due to the opponent not being bored or frustrated. But hey, what it is boring or frustrating for SE to play against, that does not matter.

    Then, SE are in a nobody place, they do not excels in almost nothing, so the result is years of being low tier, feeling as a marginated army as always SE have been. Look that most armies have new units in the Slim 9th Age book compared to 8th Warhammer edition. SE that are one of the armies with less units, does not have any.

    Anyways, we are few but we will continue playing this army because we love it. The SE players that remains are like the sports fans that support their team always, either it wins or it loses. We do not change to the team that always wins.

    But, it is fair to complain that something has not worked externaly in this book for so many years.
  • Alexwellace wrote:

    @Arienai I get the vibe you are angry. You asked a question, and one of the actual designers who made the decision, gave the backing behind their decision. Whether you believe that reason is valid or not, is a different matter, but he did come by and answer it truthfully and transparently.

    Back to Druid bunkers. Our skirmishing Archers are also fantastic wizard bunkers for foot Druids.

    Eagle Kings are great mounts for wizards that wish to be highly mobile. Dragons also see a fair amount of play, moreso now than before it seems.

    On the direct issue of non light troops Horses and Unicorn. It is difficult, especially when you look at cross army comparison of Goblin Wizard master's getting light troops wolves and spiders. But the intent is sound. If you want to get a feeling of light troops, try running 2 or 3 different non melee cavalry units, ie 2 heath hunters and a briar maiden unit, and you can bounce between them on a movement 20 unicorn for psuedo light toops. I've done that before, and it requires more brain power, but it produces the same effect.
    Eh. It robs Heath Hunters of Feigned Flight, restricts your movement, require extra march tests and the Druid doesnt get to shoot her bow if marching

    And to achieve… what really?

    No, while I get that why the game dont want Briar Maiden bunkers I gotta agree Druid Horse and Unicorn arent worth playing and would be overcosted even if they were free.

    Its something to keep in mind for LAB. Can we design Druid mounts that limit Druid Avoidance and actually leaves Them options for joining units
  • Fleshbeast wrote:

    looking forward to Pyro and Swordmasters being nerfed from the game in the same way. Both are completely unfun regardless of what army you draw against them.
    Swordmasters being res 3 with a 5+ save? How on earth will you ever deal with them...
    Age of Sigmar - Ossiarch Bonereapers.
    Horus Heresy - World Eaters.
    Marvel Crisis Protocol - Avengers & Brotherhood of Mutants.
    Middle Earth Strategy Battle Game - Isengard.
    The Ninth Age - Highborn Elves.
  • I understand the frustration, but the expression is quite harsh. It is an example of a few where the project seemingly blithely broke something by just crudely taking a piece of it away, without really caring to consider the fairly easy-to-understand first order consequences of doing so.

    In an army where almost all the mounted units are light troops, making a character mount not light troops breaks it a bit. Like, it doesn't fit together well. You can still make it work as a kludge, but IMHO It's embarrassingly bad design for the game. Especially when other armies are allowed the same thing that was taken away from here, and the SE spell caster is also made hard to defend (eg not allowed to have armour). Well of course you want to avoid combat with it then. Other wizards can be quite hard to kill, and functionally light troops to boot, even our own Ancient. Or a Vampire Count on a Dragon that hides behind a hill all game (taking up many ungettable points) unless it can fight something it auto wins against. Also a 'negative play experience', but perfectly allowed. It's tellingly selective where these things get taken away.

    Sure avoidance might be a bit difficult to play against, like a lot of other things that haven't been taken away. Like Pyro for SE, or monster mash, or gunlines etc. SE players have generally been fairly understanding and even helpful over time at moderating avoidance but those kind of concessions should come with reasonably well thought out working solutions in return, and just to make the game work as a decently designed one.

    If you want a game that works well, when you take away something that breaks something, please replace it with something that works.

    My suggestion for a partial compromise since the Apprentice changes has been: Make the Sylvan Unicorn Apprentice only (only for the magical and innocent), and light troops (probably along with reverting it to MR like the KOE one or Channel(1)). That way it at least has more of a use case but you don't have powerful wizards in cav light troops bunkers still. I guess crotchety older wizards on horses just don't get around so well.

    I do find a Shamanism Apprentice on a Unicorn with Talisman of Shielding and Potion of Strength fun still in spite of this tho. Even though everyone else seems to hate the Unicorn entirely. So like I said, you can make it work.

    The post was edited 9 times, last by Hachiman Taro ().

  • Wesser wrote:

    No, while I get that why the game dont want Briar Maiden bunkers I gotta agree Druid Horse and Unicorn arent worth playing and would be overcosted even if they were free.
    I mean I get it and they could be strong but also, other armies are allowed strengths that are hard and not particularly fun to deal with. The problem is Briar Maidens are basically designed TO be a Wizard bunker, but not allowed to be. So you basically just blithely (partially) break the design by leaving the custom-fit pieces there but not allowing them to be put together. It's not a good look for the projects game design.

    Not sure why it's particularly worse than the VC Count avoidance wizard on a Dragon that only fights when it suits her either.
  • Alexwellace wrote:

    @Arienai I get the vibe you are angry. You asked a question, and one of the actual designers who made the decision, gave the backing behind their decision. Whether you believe that reason is valid or not, is a different matter, but he did come by and answer it truthfully and transparently.

    Back to Druid bunkers. Our skirmishing Archers are also fantastic wizard bunkers for foot Druids.

    Eagle Kings are great mounts for wizards that wish to be highly mobile. Dragons also see a fair amount of play, moreso now than before it seems.

    On the direct issue of non light troops Horses and Unicorn. It is difficult, especially when you look at cross army comparison of Goblin Wizard master's getting light troops wolves and spiders. But the intent is sound. If you want to get a feeling of light troops, try running 2 or 3 different non melee cavalry units, ie 2 heath hunters and a briar maiden unit, and you can bounce between them on a movement 20 unicorn for psuedo light toops. I've done that before, and it requires more brain power, but it produces the same effect.
    I dont mean to spread bad vibes but it is hard to when I see illogical stuff like this. To me its a typical of overbalancing from T9A team and its confusing to see for an army performing below meta standards. SE is bottom 3 tier at best. Giladis reasoning behind the design is sound but still rubs me the wrong way in terms of logic (why cant a mount act like all other mounts in the army) as well as power level aspects (why limit something that is not a probem). Usually you counter a build because it is deemed too powerful. The limited unit size of Briar maidens already make them vulnerable to shooting and magic. The limitations placed on druid mounts seem overly forced and forces players away from even considering taking them in a serious tournament setting. The design is made to avoid a certain playstyle but unintentioanlly pushes you to play only one vuild: druids on foot in big units.

    Any army needs pros and cons. SEs bad sides are a severe lack of saves and expensive elf models. The positives are mobility and ranged damage. Any SE investing heavily into shooting will fall behind on scoring, combat and the ability to contest objectives and I have yet to see a build that works strongly with this approach.

    It is quite often that I face opposing armies that can do what I cannot. Points that attract interest in a army is the uniqueness of what that army offers and this difference shoudlnt always be shunned for breaking the norm. T9A often surrender this uniqueness in order to achieve absolute balance at all costs. If we wanted to play a completely fair game we would be playing chess. All Im saying is that let SE be good at what it does. And let other armies be good at their specialities.
  • Alexwellace wrote:

    @Arienai I get the vibe you are angry. You asked a question, and one of the actual designers who made the decision, gave the backing behind their decision. Whether you believe that reason is valid or not, is a different matter, but he did come by and answer it truthfully and transparently.

    Back to Druid bunkers. Our skirmishing Archers are also fantastic wizard bunkers for foot Druids.

    Eagle Kings are great mounts for wizards that wish to be highly mobile. Dragons also see a fair amount of play, moreso now than before it seems.

    On the direct issue of non light troops Horses and Unicorn. It is difficult, especially when you look at cross army comparison of Goblin Wizard master's getting light troops wolves and spiders. But the intent is sound. If you want to get a feeling of light troops, try running 2 or 3 different non melee cavalry units, ie 2 heath hunters and a briar maiden unit, and you can bounce between them on a movement 20 unicorn for psuedo light toops. I've done that before, and it requires more brain power, but it produces the same effect.
    Also, I didnt really ask a question. I was simply expressing my frustration with certain balancing restrictions while being fully aware that it does not add too much in way of discussion :D

    Honestly my first thought was to get two briar maiden units and bounce between them. But that just pushes me more towards an avoidance approach and I play SE to get into combats (mobility giving me the option of choosing my fights) :P The eagle king doesnt really work for me. Its a little like the horse or the unicorn. Its extremely mobile but cant stand anywhere (except behind impassable terrain). 5+ save is the best we can do and any serious shooting and magic will obliterate any bunker we can field save 20+ archers.

    I will still try and play my centaur approach but have a sinking feeling that it like the rest of the army will perform sub par.. :(
  • @Arienai keep your head up, there's a patch update coming, and there's a rustling in the leaves that tells me Sylvan Elves will come out of it in a pretty good state, largely in the ways you want to be able to play.

    I fully recommend a unit of 9/10 sentinels as your wizard bunker. They want to stay at the back, due to 30" and poison. They are mobile, and thus very hard to shoot down, and the wizard brings obsidian rock to make them hard to magic down. Best mage bunker we have in my opinion.

    I agree that the druid 4 legged mounts do have clear and inconvenient issues. But it's also something we cannot change until the LAB, because light troops wizards would simply be too powerful due to the *quality* of fast cav we have. I'm sure the LAB will fix it. My suggestion is to try out our alternate magic set ups. Support your foot druid with a shamanism eagle king apprentice, or a druidism adept matriarch, or briar Maidens, or crown of the wizard king + lightning vambraces. Or even go big with a Druid Dragon or Treefather ancient. Or just suck it up and have a few units to jump between. Or build that one silly expensive Unicorn build, and go sit it out in combat with a 4++ and the shamanism attribute. There's quite a lot of options if you look for them.
  • T9A does not have the OP destructive spells that had the 8th edition of warhammer that caused terror of mounted light troops for wizards protected in bunkers. I think the panic to repeat that situation caused removing this option, but perhaps, with the magic like it is in T9A, and specially the paths for the druids, mostly focussed in support, it is no longer necesary to having so much fear to give the druids this option.

    There are lot of things that can be tried if you want to mitigate the impact (although I really think that the option should be there with no restriction):
    - Light troops as a quite expensive option for unicorn/horse
    - Limit it to apprentice/adept, not allowing it for master
    - Limit units of Sisters to 5-6 models/unit to avoid big bunkers
    - 0-1 option

    As I said, I do not like any of these option to limit, but they are better that removing it completly, and then have options of mounts like Wesser said before, "they arent worth playing and would be overcosted even if they were free." Being priced, plus many other things in the army, makes a very bad feeling that it is very bad designed, and there is no interest in correct it, something that at last is the worst of all. So, that finally transforms into frustration.

    I do not now if there will be important changes in the right direction soon, or we will stil remain more or less in the same postion for the next 4-5 years, just like the last ones. If I had to bet money, I surelly would do for the second one.