Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

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

  • AlexCat wrote:

    Cross-army comparisons are generally a good starting point(IMO) - but when someone claims something army A pretty much never takes is undercosted compared to the thing army B takes in most of their lists, you need to take a look at the bigger picture.
    ... And then you get biased as soon as it comes to your army. When comparing two alien items (book of meladys and ancient plaque) you found two small advantage one has over another (completely not worth the point difference imho) and concluded that the cost gap is ok.
    When it came to your own army (arcane knoweledge against asfad) with your "item" being clearly better and cheaper than the other, you took another approach and explained at length why it is justified. I could try and find the faults in your reasoning or come up with my own, leading to completely opposite conclusions. But in the end, we will both stay where we started, right?

    Kinda assuming SA isn't one of my armies there bud. They are, actually. :)

    And as a SA player, I could really get outraged at how much better Book is (seriously, 1-dicing is normally not viable... but with the Book? Yeah, you can do it)... but I also know how bonkers the Cuatl is, so it's fair that HBE get a stronger version of Plaque, HBE need some magic strength too.


    I'm not defending Arcane Knowledge because it's something I'd ever consider taking for more than a millisecond. I'm defending it because this like you seeing someone ranting about how overpowered and underpriced Sea Guard are.

    Seriously, it is just not an upgrade I'd consider taking, ever. The only worse Blood Power is the OTHER Nosferatu "general" Blood Power (Forbidden Path is both inaccurately named and also actively makes the model you take it on worse. I wouldn't take Forbidden Path if it cost NEGATIVE 25 points).

    Like, I'd happily accept jacking it's price up to 150 just to make this argument go away, because that would be taking it from "unplayable" to "unplayable".


    (It doesn't help that on a Nosferatu, Arcane Knowledge is strictly worse than Asfad, as they already know the hereditary. Seriously, Arcane Knowledge gets worse and worse the more I think about it.)
  • Not sure. wrote:

    Cross-army comparisons are generally a good starting point(IMO) - but when someone claims something army A pretty much never takes is undercosted compared to the thing army B takes in most of their lists, you need to take a look at the bigger picture.
    And then you find out that when you look at the big picture, it isn't just an oversight, the whole design is actually very bad because you might as well go play an entire different army that does the same themes and playstyle that your army should do but doesn't.
  • @ninepaces
    1) That's BullSpit and not relevant to "their goal of getting the army balanced". It may play into "it takes longer because they don't understand the army quite as well", but it has NO bearing on whether they cost things fairly or not. If something is priced the way it is, it is because BLT has decided after a reasonable discussion that the price given accurately reflects the potential of the entry.

    1a) Anything that is overpriced (or underpriced) initially will have its price adjusted after confirming whether there is an index of suspicion of incorrect pricing. The right price takes time because "huge slashes" lead to terrible imbalance internally and potentially externally as well. So they go through things carefully.

    2) A lot of our issues are DESIGN issues, rather than balance issues. So something to take up with RT rather than BLT. Blaming BLT for all the game's evils is a fairly bad position. If you have issues with the direction of the game, then become staff and try to change it. Heck, I started as a ranty ACS on the Daemons forum, and am now one of the assistant heads of PT. So it's not impossible to work your way up to help 9th Age be closer to what you think will make it the best game possible.

    PS. Looking at our paths of magic for a master: Fireball, basic cascading fire, basic pyroclastic flow, targeted Know They Enemy, Fate's judgement (low level form), scrying (target), stars align (target) basic unerring strike, Altered Sight, Truth of Time, Ice and Fire, Touch The Heart, Word of Iron (basic), Quicksilver Lash, Molten Copper, basic silver spike.

    All of those need "5" (or lower in a few cases) on a master with a single dice and book of meladys. So slightly above 50% chance to cast with a Master and the re-roll available.


    @AlexCat

    I agree with you that the argument of "It's taken, so its cost is fine" is wrong. That discounts the possibility that something is taken because nothing else in the army can provide that same effect or because every other option is a poor option. There are quite a few things that are "popular" without being well costed or overpowered.

    HOWEVER, there is a point where you start to hurt yourself. Example being, the whole Ancient Plaque vs. Book of Meladys. Yes, the two advantages actually DO warrant a 15 point difference. Because getting any 1's back when you re-roll into a success is BIG. Say you roll "2, 2' 1" and needed a 7. Re-roll the "1" into "2, 2, 6", and now the spell goes off on 11. Plus, you get that dice back into your pool anyway! Add onto that that if the whole magic phase goes your way "I cast, you fail to dispel, I cast, you fail to dispel and lost your dice" or "I cast, you dispel with all dice, I cast and cast and cast", then you can always try to one dice a last small spell to get something off (e.g. Word of Iron basic form). The potential of keeping an additional dice from a cast spell is probably worth 5 or 10 points. The ability to potentially cast a minor spell on 1 dice is probably worth 5 points. SO that means that AT MOST, Book of Meladys is 5 points over what it should cost. And I'm not really convinced that it IS overcosted by those 5 points.

    This falls into the whole Arcane Knowledge point. It's very aggressively costed in Vampires because it is actively dysfunctional with the general theme of the army "Cluster Around BOB!" (speak in zombie voice for full effect) as well as the more efficient magic phase that powers the army. Comparing it to just Asfad without taking into account that it makes your vampire stink in combat (bad for a hybrid punchy mage dude), doesn't actually help an effectively built army (which will cluster around Bob), and is detrimental to your chances to win the game is disingenuous.

    I'm not saying that Asfad is perfectly made and costed. Frankly, I don't understand why it went up 10 points, but rarely suffer from those 10 points being there. I suffer far more because it was decided to nerf it into being "Master Only". But that is NOT a BLT issue, but a design issue (task team and RT). Take it up with them if you disagree.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

  • Errrrr, just a quick question, how do you ecactly expect to get a dice back with Meladys after a succesful cast? :D
    Used to be a Vampire ABC member... then an Elf lass bit me... nowadays I have this insatiable craving for cheese, whine and fancy dresses... 8| The Dawn Host of ArchangelusM

    Army Design Team

    Draecarion, may the Lord grant eternal peace to your soul, my Friend!
  • I'm not defending Arcane Knowledge because it's something I'd ever consider taking for more than a millisecond. I'm defending it because this like you seeing someone ranting about how overpowered and underpriced Sea Guard are.

    Seriously, it is just not an upgrade I'd consider taking, ever. The only worse Blood Power is the OTHER Nosferatu "general" Blood Power (Forbidden Path is both inaccurately named and also actively makes the model you take it on worse. I wouldn't take Forbidden Path if it cost NEGATIVE 25 points).



    If you look at WTC Herford lists, you will find 1 Asfad mage in the team somewhere in the bottom 3. And double Arcane Knowledge in the team from the 1st (nonPoland ^^ ) place. I guess I can trust this scarce statistics more than your words, cant I?
  • HOWEVER, there is a point where you start to hurt yourself. Example being, the whole Ancient Plaque vs. Book of Meladys. Yes, the two advantages actually DO warrant a 15 point difference. Because getting any 1's back when you re-roll into a success is BIG. Say you roll "2, 2' 1" and needed a 7. Re-roll the "1" into "2, 2, 6", and now the spell goes off on 11. Plus, you get that dice back into your pool anyway! Add onto that that if the whole magic phase goes your way "I cast, you fail to dispel, I cast, you fail to dispel and lost your dice" or "I cast, you dispel with all dice, I cast and cast and cast", then you can always try to one dice a last small spell to get something off (e.g. Word of Iron basic form). The potential of keeping an additional dice from a cast spell is probably worth 5 or 10 points. The ability to potentially cast a minor spell on 1 dice is probably worth 5 points. SO that means that AT MOST, Book of Meladys is 5 points over what it should cost. And I'm not really convinced that it IS overcosted by those 5 points.
    You must have read it wrong, man. The Fizzle works only if the casting value was fail. So, I need to reroll this 1, get me a failed attempt still (but without rolling another 1, cuz it would be the same as for Plaque!) and only then I will get the dice back. For me its a too rare an ocassion to pay points for. Because I try and cast spells with 80% chances of success to get my plan working and not gambling on dice. That is also why your list of spells where one-dicing with the book is possible because its 55% of success is not a valid argument in my eyes either. I consider only 3+ worth onedicing as its 89% success, even 4% with 75% isnt good for me. So, the number of spells I where I really benefit from this spell is:
    • Fireball
    • Basic Cascading Fire
    • attribute boosted Altered Sight
    • Truth of Time
    - is not enough for me to justify the points cost difference. Same as with Drain Magic, I dont want to pay without a discount for the abilities I will very rarely use.

    I'm not saying that Asfad is perfectly made and costed. Frankly, I don't understand why it went up 10 points, but rarely suffer from those 10 points being there. I suffer far more because it was decided to nerf it into being "Master Only". But that is NOT a BLT issue, but a design issue (task team and RT). Take it up with them if you disagree.
    And I think its totally a pricing issue. I dont thinkg either Asfad or the Book are bad designs. They are just a wee too expensive in my eyes, I felt it when trying to fit them in the roster and when cross army comparing.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by AlexCat ().

  • Caledoriv wrote:

    @AlexCat:
    Theoretically, the oaken throne can also be worth it to be one-diced. That's probably the most benefitial spell when it comes to this.
    The big downside of that is that Elves have a special penalty in Master of Spellcrafting: When rolling casting rolls with a single Magic Dice, a natural roll of ‘1’ or ‘2’ on the Magic Dice is always a failed Casting Attempt, regardless of any modifiers.

    So this totally undoes any one dice advantage HbE has: whatever the CV, HbE always fails in 33% of the Casting Attempts. And that also works negatively for the usefulness of the Book of Meladys.
    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..

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

  • Theoretically, the oaken throne can also be worth it to be one-diced. That's probably the most benefitial spell when it comes to this.
    TBH, I never ever considered using the book on MoCT. Thats why I missed it altogether.


    So this totally undoes any one dice advantage HbE has: whatever the CV, HbE always fails in 33% of the Casting Attempts. And that also works negatively for the usefulness of the Book of Meladys.
    89% rate of success for 3+ rerollable is not enough for you?
  • AlexCat wrote:

    So this totally undoes any one dice advantage HbE has: whatever the CV, HbE always fails in 33% of the Casting Attempts. And that also works negatively for the usefulness of the Book of Meladys.
    89% rate of success for 3+ rerollable is not enough for you?
    Right, now I see. You can actually re-roll 1s and 2s. My bad. :S
    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
  • AlexCat wrote:

    TBH, I never ever considered using the book on MoCT. Thats why I missed it altogether.
    This is because the book costs 100pts. So it will use up all your BSB magic allowance. If you take it on the Prince, then the spear is auto include for a foot Prince. So you now have 0 protection for your expensive general.
    ...you could give the prince a great weapon but now you are better off just putting the book on a mage.

    poor incentive design in the HBE book.
  • New

    AlexCat wrote:

    Theoretically, the oaken throne can also be worth it to be one-diced. That's probably the most benefitial spell when it comes to this.
    TBH, I never ever considered using the book on MoCT. Thats why I missed it altogether.

    So this totally undoes any one dice advantage HbE has: whatever the CV, HbE always fails in 33% of the Casting Attempts. And that also works negatively for the usefulness of the Book of Meladys.
    89% rate of success for 3+ rerollable is not enough for you?
    Kirk to Spock, "Never tell me the odds!"
    Failure is not an option.
  • New

    AlexCat wrote:

    That hybrid combat mage character does not have room for expensive arcane items does not mead a bad design. The item may cost a little more than we think is right cost but lets not be over dramatic about that.
    When the Strength of the army is "magic", and there is no cheap arcane item alternative, or a unit with wizard conclave, or a unit that casts a bound spell, etc... Then yes, that expensive arcane item is bad design.

    People keep saying look at SA. I'll add to just glanxe at dread elves.
    Amulet of spite 40
    wandering familiar 50
    medusa 145
    wizard conclave champ on acolytes 120

    That is a strength in Magic. The ability to actually take some magic items and units.
    Those units with magic are very important for an army to have a strength in magic because it spreads out the cost to a dual purpose unit.

    It is possible for an army to have a strength in magic and not have these units, but this would require a very hard weakness in order to justify making the Mage in HBE extremely cheap.
    WotDG is the current example - very limited shooting but their units get to be fairly cheap for their beefy stats to compensate.
  • New

    Remember, NOBODY except for Warriors (and soon Daemons) is "ASAW compliant" as desired by the RT. So the fact that our "strength" in magic isn't too strong in your perception is partly because we haven't actually been redesigned. In the same vein, Dread Elves and Saurian Ancients are a poor barometer because neither of them have been redesigned either.

    Having said that:
    1) Far too many of our "magical items" were poor attempts at bandaids by the original Task Team that failed HARD and are heavily overcosted(and many of them IMO do not HAVE a sweet spot where they are correctly costed. They will always be overcosted and be unused or undercosted and be OP). Even the ones that AREN'T bandaids are often overcosted IMO.
    2) Our Spellcasting items need a redesign from the ground up. The biggest problem we have is that we have a strength in "stopping magic" that the RT insists on making an "Opt in" strength rather than either a) an innate strength or b) Not actually a strength but a theme (e.g. "Beefy Stats" in Warriors). Unfortunately, as long as that stays in our book rather than being something intrinsic to our Mages (not necessarily all our spellcasters) our "spellcasting item" section will always be poor.


    FWIW, I'd do the following:
    1) Drop Amethyst Crystal for the original Adept Book of Power (+1 to cast for adepts only). Should be around 50 points (given the BRB one was 45 points, I don't think there's a better adept around than HbE/DE).
    2) Make Banner of Becalming Channel (1) and "bearer may cast "Drain Magic" as a bound spell with Power Level X/Y. ( @WhammeWhamme should like this suggestion).
    3) Drop Drain Magic from Asfad Scholar ( @AlexCat should like this suggestion). Keep just the range boost.
    My army has rocks, papers, and scissors. The reason you lost this war is that you thought we were playing checkers at every battle. - Anon. Highborn Elf Prince.
    Highborn Master of the Infantry and aspiring Equitaininan Champion of the Lady.

    Playtester

    DL Army Community Support

  • New

    ninepaces wrote:

    Yeah Alex, I think we all appreciate the good fight but lets be real here. HBE do not have a representative on the Army Balance Team. I don't know if there is anything more that needs to be said.
    Doesn't Slivek play HbE?

    AlexCat wrote:

    And I think its totally a pricing issue. I dont thinkg either Asfad or the Book are bad designs. They are just a wee too expensive in my eyes, I felt it when trying to fit them in the roster and when cross army comparing.
    But if this is true, it will show up in the usage stats (like WTC) and they will drop. No biggie. The cross-army comparisons work as a start point, but when you start fine-tuning things for internal balance, the same entry at X points may be great in army A and terrible in army B.

    bluu wrote:

    The problem with assuming use is a good indication of good price is that we are then assuming three things:
    1. The externalbalance is equal across books (13 out of 16 seems to be close enough).
    2. The internal balance is equal across books.
    3. The user making the choice is making a rational choice.

    People are not rational, so number 3 is going to be an issue no matter what. Thus, when taking a hard stance for use being a good indicator of price, you open yourself up to to a lot of unknowns and issues. I'm not saying it is wrong, I just think that sticking to it as heavily as I read you to have @Fnarr makes me uneasy.
    1 & 2 can be measured. 3 is iffy, but the assumption there is that players are taking whatever gets them to win, which is why the project heavily looks at stats from the big competitive events especially when they are selective entry - which also tries to account for learning curves (i.e. if X and Y are equally efficient, but X is simple to use and Y is hard, X will see way more everywhere except at the top).
    Hristo Nikolov