Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

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.

  • Reducing incoming damage on units that with old rules already killed everything they touched? Seems not to be a very good idea to me.
    In addition I don´t share the opinion that infantry based lists were not competitive in tournaments. They were not the safest approach when ypu aim at top placings, but they were not unplayable.

    With distracting banner you just make the elfes less vulnerable to oponents in CC (I think distracting this is stronger than the swiftstride banner on most of the special units).
    In CC they get even stronger with it, while it get´s even more important to max out the things that kill the elfes on range.

    There is not an easy solution to solve the elfen problem. Solve it would mean you have to adjust all the things. Damage output, resilence etc.
    It will not work to just add resilence or any special rules on top. You would just make all units without those special rules weaker in comparison and to be worth anything need also additional benefits.

    I don´t think beta testing a power creep makes any sense. (and in my opinion the sum of the things added were power creep, and claiming that all other armies should do the same....) A lot of these things (also in other books) should have been delayed until the new base rules and magic is stable. What do you test for, when in the patch suddenly some basic rules change.
  • berti wrote:

    I don´t think beta testing a power creep makes any sense. (and in my opinion the sum of the things added were power creep, and claiming that all other armies should do the same....) A lot of these things (also in other books) should have been delayed until the new base rules and magic is stable. What do you test for, when in the patch suddenly some basic rules change.
    You say "Power Creep" .. yet there still is no evidence from small or bigger tournaments that the banners or whatever other HbE update has made them more competitive. As a matter of fact they haven't won a single significant tournament.
    Why insist on acting like it's a given fact - when it's not?
    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
  • I'm not really interested in Hbe nerfs, I'm used to it since the beginning of the T9A project.
    I wonder about other armies doing everything at top level and cheap price.
    take the Empire of Sonntal, things like a supercheap ta1 bsb giving BATTLE FOCUS to the unit they lead, in addition to 2 or 3 Orders. That unit that is also HATING everyone with the supercheap ta1 priest.

    And this roster shoots you out of the battle, still fielding about 9 demigriphs and 3 warmachines and engineers and muskets, alongside with 50 halberdiers and relative supporting units.
    And a super Cosmo-master that can pick up other useful 1 spells.

    All cool things, aren't that?
    @berti can you explain how you 'touch and vanish' anything from the above list with elves? Touch and kill, as you said?
    "Le donne, i cavallier, l'arme, gli amori,
    le cortesie, l'audaci imprese io canto"

    Ludovico Ariosto
  • So, first of all, I would like to give my sincere thanks to the people listening to my feedback and my concerns (like @PapaG, @Emgies, @Casp, @ferny or @Just_Flo did).

    It think, it is necessary to say "Thank you, that was really positive to me. I appreciate this" in the same way, as it is to say "Guys, this was really bad".

    @Caledoriv: I really don't blame people - that are NOT getting payed, creating this game entirely honorary! - for not discussion every change in rules or the army books like: "Ok, this unit should be up by 1ppm" or "Ok, we think it could be a good idea to reduce the number of attacks from 4 to 3".

    But as stated before, if there are bigger changes, I want them desperately to be discussed. My anger and my bad feeling with all this procedure is ultimatively related to the point, that there was a lot of (ALSO! positive) feedback from the community. Especially the poll regarding performance! It feels like, we were honest showing some problems and tried to provide help and solutions, just to get knocked down by our own initiative to provide feedback. Also it feels(!) like the upcoming nerf is totally out of proportion, to what is going on - or what is shown by the data, that is available for "outsiders" like me.

    On the other hand I have to say, that I always felt treated well - and also quite well informed - by the HBE Community Support. @Calcathin was always on point presenting and discussing the earliest updates in his thread. This also applies for the culture of discussion taking place in this thread.

    So it is necessary to differentiate which communication is bad!

    @berti I totally share your point of view. I am quite aware of the fact, that there are a lot of points to take into consideration when discussing the "hotfix" (also like you mentioned the lack of time). But I have to say, on the other hand, there IS NO NEED to rework things in a manner like this and rush them into our books!

    As stated out clearly - and I think you are aware of this fact as a player, that is active on an international level - there is no real evidence in competetive play (despite hereditary spell/WBoR Limitation where I am with you as a HBE player!) for especially!GAMEBREAKING! issues. You can prove me wrong, if I have biases or was mislead by wrong information.

    The better way for this entire "fixing think" would have been to take a deep breath, let the meta develop for at least 4-5 month, take a look at the data and THEN debate relevant points. Whats beeing done now is leading the "BETA" totally ad absurdum, as it is defined as a period of time for checking out how thinks tend to work.

    Last but least: As mentioned before, I really think, the actual HBE armybook is amazing and the people developing it did an awesome job. I never before had that much fun creating different list always having the feeling, most of the units and combinations can be useful. So this is why I will stand up for this state of armybooks. Not because I want my book shinig like a star and beeing better than everything else but to make it the benchmark in fun and versitality.

    Edit: The picture above says everything that is needed to be said.
  • berti wrote:

    I think distracting this is stronger than the swiftstride banner on most of the special units).
    I would not say better but definately easier to play, deployment and getting the charge is less importent then. attacking and wiping out the opposition is stronger than taking less casualties imho.

    distracting banner could be better in some cases, e.g. if you actually want to benefit from cover fire because then you want to receive the charge. not competitive way to play but for sure a bit different. I got much better results with spears + archers combo though, first I have a Becalming carrier unit and second I get better scores on all units with Ryma.
  • The empire unit...with all those additional things must be a core unit of spears, hand weapon/shield or halbard with WS 3 and a 5+ (or6+ halbard) AS.
    The prelate and the BSB are also not supercheap. Each empire charakter bare 1 (who pays for great tactican) has 1 single order. There is a banner that allows you to give a second order to a support unit nearby.

    I know that the whole EoS package is rather good. I see it proplematic that all the support units can become steadfast with ranks of parent unit nearby. I also posted it in EoS part of the forum. :)

    I don´t think that any HbE should complain about the magic abilities of other armies. (current status)
    Battle focus means about 3-4 additional hits St. 3/4 for the unit the BSB who doesn´t realy benefit from his weapon is inside. Is it realy worth it? I would always take the heroes heart instead. Because there are simply so many things in the game that don´t care for St. 3/4 attacks.
    (St. 3 on spears/sword/shield units...St. 4 on halbards). And no, I don´t take the +1 St. spell into account, because you can dispell it, you can have such spells yourself etc.

    Take a comparable costed SPEAR and you will see, that the empire units also suffers a lot. (that would be about 35 HbE spears)
    Sure....it is propably not the best plan to charge in small to medium special units.
    Halbards will dish out in round one (depending on width of the unit, I assume 7 wide because empire wants static CR) and with fight in extra rank order 21 attacks hitting nearly everything on 4+, wouding elfes on 3+ with a 6+ AS left => including hatred 8,6 wounds. (5,8 without it).
    Going into line formation would increase this to a max of 10 wounds without hatred and to 15 with hatred. (but then you propably should just not charge in 7 wide)
    HbE spears without any support would do per round 5 wide (and this formation is questionable if you have 35 models against empire) 20 attacks hitting on 2...wounding on 4 with no AS left on halbards = 8,33 wounds each turn.
    Beeing HBE spears 7 wide would do 11,66 wounds per turn.
    EoS has an included prelate in the unit and the benefit of an order. (model just has to be near the unit) So this are about at least 200 additional points. (5 more spears and the distracting or swiftstride banner.....)

    So...sure HbE can do a clash front on. More so when the additional benefits for the halbards are needed to do comparable damage like the HbE spears. And no, I did not take any of the banners or magic.

    Why should the HbE unit win this combat easy? Not all units are reliable to charge into it. I would not do it with swordmasters, lions are a risk, flame wardens should be able to take on it. But you should also take into account the EoS synergy for countercharging.
    In fact this EoS unit is a bus containing charakters and staks synergies. I would instead taking head on the CC with it redirect it (eagle...) and take on those supporting units nearby.


    An empire army like this has some proplems when you are able to make the game wide. There is a lot of force concentration in one unit and the surrounding 6-12". The rest is not realy so strong. In addition a lot of synergie only takes place for the one bus unit. (like hatred or prelates blessings (if he is inside the unit). So dont fight it, just redirect it and charge the units around it. Easier written than done on the table. But you should in most cases not charge a hero bus front on.
  • Concerning our Hereditary (or any other spell by the way), what percentage of chance to succeed do you consider a RELIABLE cast ?
    1 - 50% to 60%
    2 - 60% to 70 %
    3 - 70% to 80%
    4 - 80% and over.

    Two reasons for this question:
    A - I would like to estimate how much I need to pay for magic (Mage/MoCT, Master level, Book of Meladys, Spellcrafting...) and expected return on investment.
    B - I'm afraid it may show our choices were drastically reduced by the oncoming changes. Just some input for calculations.
    :HE: If you want to conquer the world, you best have dragons. The sky itself would dream of dragons.
    :SE_bw: Enter the woods if you think it's a game. In my forests, remember you are the game...
    :KoE: Fair fasce
  • At what time of the day can we expect the hotfix tomorrow?

    Since i have a game in the evening and a tournament on saturday, i need as much time to adapt to the changes as possible.

    Trying already to play without our H-Spell (since its pointed out it will be pretty situational and rather useless after the changes).
    And somehow i really hope they get rid of the 1+ 4++ Spearprince and nerf the MoCT as well pretty hard. In that case i dont need to explore any new lists and stick to the old 1.3 avoiding shooty lists we had. More points so for Sloops and double phoenix left. :)

    And no, this isnt sarcasm, just a try to find something "positiv" in the upcoming changes. It was nice as long it lasted, but well....time to go back to the roots.


    So can we expect the hotfix in the early morning or rather late in the evening CET?

    o/

    P.S.: Had a final game with our current rules yesterday, and although i won, i could calm my opponent down and assured him that everything that he saw today, he wont have to face anymore: no H-Spell, no MoCT, no Banner of Becalming, no Spearprince (even though the prince never saw combat the whole game). :D
  • weltenspringer wrote:

    At what time of the day can we expect the hotfix tomorrow?

    Since i have a game in the evening and a tournament on saturday, i need as much time to adapt to the changes as possible.
    Don't know about exact timing, but since there are points changes and everyone probably already sent his list for the tournament, I doubt you will be playing that one with the hotfix. ;)
  • @berti you made a fair analysis, I fighted it on the board and the solution is avoiding.
    But please stop writing things like 'elves turn fhe table' because in the real game this is most far from the truth with almost every unit from other armies.
    I don't want to mention wat rats do with cc units.
    I find quite reasonable that elven people should start in advantage when fighting most of other units, beeing for most of the times in numeric disantvantage. We field al lot of small medium units
    Just please stop come here and write that we touch and destroy things because this brought to a probably horrible hotfix that satisfies no one
    "Le donne, i cavallier, l'arme, gli amori,
    le cortesie, l'audaci imprese io canto"

    Ludovico Ariosto
  • Isn’t the discussion about HBE 2.0 being overpower is rather similar to the evergoing discussion about fake news.


    Person X: Has an opinion about a certain subject, he thinks that: Spears are better than an axes. It’s just his opinion, he don’t really have that much empirical or statistical fact that spears are actually better then axes. But he really feels that they are.


    Person X: Tells this opinion to all his friends, his friends don’t really have an strong opinion in that matter but his opinion does makes sense. Spears are longer then axes and a bit pointier so, fair enough. Spears are perhaps slightly better than axes. It’s so much harder to prove opinions wrong with facts than to express an opinion. So instead of trying to convince person X about his opinion and debunking his claim from the start. We now have a bunch of people thinking mildly that spears are better than axes. So from persons X personal claim there now is an open opinion that perhaps, spears are better than axes?


    The manufacturer of spears and axes eventually hears this opinion. Some people are claiming that spears are better than axes and axe-people think this is unfair. The development department at the manufacturers office starts an internal discussion about the subject and starts to think that they perhaps did falter in their initial design about the weapons. They don’t want unsatisfied customers so they tells the manufacturer to dulls the tip a bit and shorten the shaft a bit. Satisfied customers don’t express an loud opinion, so there isn’t a strong counter voiced argument regarding the subject.


    Now the people that prefers spears over axes gets angry, and this whole pop throwing contest that we are in at the moment starts.

    If HBE now are overpowered pre the hotfix shouldn’t there be rather large quantity of actual facts that points in that they are overpower? Shouldn’t there HBE domination in the tournament scene? I’ve followed this thread since it started, and haven’t seen an post that show’s this. (I’m still human and can ofc have missed it :) )
  • Kopistar wrote:

    Dear friend, you ask about casting probability wihtout asking about dice number.

    Casting reliable on 2 dice ain't the same as casting reliable on 3 or 4 dice.
    I don't ask about dice number yet precisely because I wish to estimate how many dice I need to throw to obtain this "reliable" success.
    I already said long ago that not everybody is taking a Wizard Master + Book + ... + ... +. Or is there only one available build left to us ?
    My most regular opponent plays lots of ambushing Beast Herds (real plague for us). What if I prefer to protect my wizard ? Do I really have to 4/5-dice every attempt because I didn't buy him/her all possible casting bonuses ? Seems weird, at least...
    Is our H-spell even worth 4 or 5 dice ? What if I fail ? My opponent has so many dice left he can dispel everything I have in store. Why should I invest so many points from the beginning ?
    :HE: If you want to conquer the world, you best have dragons. The sky itself would dream of dragons.
    :SE_bw: Enter the woods if you think it's a game. In my forests, remember you are the game...
    :KoE: Fair fasce
  • Teowulff wrote:

    berti wrote:

    I don´t think beta testing a power creep makes any sense. (and in my opinion the sum of the things added were power creep, and claiming that all other armies should do the same....) A lot of these things (also in other books) should have been delayed until the new base rules and magic is stable. What do you test for, when in the patch suddenly some basic rules change.
    You say "Power Creep" .. yet there still is no evidence from small or bigger tournaments that the banners or whatever other HbE update has made them more competitive. As a matter of fact they haven't won a single significant tournament.Why insist on acting like it's a given fact - when it's not?
    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
  • AEnoriel wrote:

    Concerning our Hereditary (or any other spell by the way), what percentage of chance to succeed do you consider a RELIABLE cast ?
    1 - 50% to 60%
    2 - 60% to 70 %
    3 - 70% to 80%
    4 - 80% and over.

    Two reasons for this question:
    A - I would like to estimate how much I need to pay for magic (Mage/MoCT, Master level, Book of Meladys, Spellcrafting...) and expected return on investment.
    B - I'm afraid it may show our choices were drastically reduced by the oncoming changes. Just some input for calculations.
    It may differ per person but I'd only rate 80%+ as "reliably".
    For heriditary 8+ that means:

    1 dice2 dice3 dice4 dice
    no bonus*
    -41.7%83.8%97.3%
    +1 bonus
    -58.3%90.7%98.8%
    +2 bonus
    16.7%72.2%95.4%99.6%
    +3 bonus
    33.3%83.3%98.1%99.9%



    * using wizard's hat with hereditay spell book.
    This forum need polls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
  • Arrahed wrote:

    Teowulff wrote:

    berti wrote:

    I don´t think beta testing a power creep makes any sense. (and in my opinion the sum of the things added were power creep, and claiming that all other armies should do the same....) A lot of these things (also in other books) should have been delayed until the new base rules and magic is stable. What do you test for, when in the patch suddenly some basic rules change.
    You say "Power Creep" .. yet there still is no evidence from small or bigger tournaments that the banners or whatever other HbE update has made them more competitive. As a matter of fact they haven't won a single significant tournament.Why insist on acting like it's a given fact - when it's not?
    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
    These kind of posts doesnt help at all. To date, noone has any proof shown or explained in any way that supports the claim "HBE in 2.0 are OP!".

    Noone. Not a single flaged person, not a single individuel, not a single tournament data.

    Yet the hard nerfs are incoming and people still wont change their mind.

    So what does this really proofs?

    I really wish someone from the T9A team would come here and answer this simple question:
    Where is the proof?

    And i can try to "foresee" the future: if the hotfix arrives with no explaination....well, how do i phrase it in a polite way? Maybe....no, i just cant. Better stay hidden where you are, and hope PapaG and Masamune will take the beating thats meant for you. And be happy and proud that you are just "better" than all the rest of the subhumans here in the HBE community. I mean, if i have the power to do what i like, and dont have to take any consequences....who cares what the peasants are saying or screaming.


    L’État, c’est moi!
  • Arrahed wrote:

    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
    So, but that is exactly what is needed in my opinion to make a rational decision! Maybe it is only one tournament, but it is data. And I am glad to see, that it was won by HBE :) Btw, the winner is a really experienced player known in the german HBE scene ;) Of course it is not a huge database, but each base is starting with the first result. So I think it is necessary to check each tournament available!


    nengstrm wrote:

    Isn’t the discussion about HBE 2.0 being overpower is rather similar to the evergoing discussion about fake news.


    Person X: Has an opinion about a certain subject, he thinks that: Spears are better than an axes. It’s just his opinion, he don’t really have that much empirical or statistical fact that spears are actually better then axes. But he really feels that they are.


    Person X: Tells this opinion to all his friends, his friends don’t really have an strong opinion in that matter but his opinion does makes sense. Spears are longer then axes and a bit pointier so, fair enough. Spears are perhaps slightly better than axes. It’s so much harder to prove opinions wrong with facts than to express an opinion. So instead of trying to convince person X about his opinion and debunking his claim from the start. We now have a bunch of people thinking mildly that spears are better than axes. So from persons X personal claim there now is an open opinion that perhaps, spears are better than axes?


    The manufacturer of spears and axes eventually hears this opinion. Some people are claiming that spears are better than axes and axe-people think this is unfair. The development department at the manufacturers office starts an internal discussion about the subject and starts to think that they perhaps did falter in their initial design about the weapons. They don’t want unsatisfied customers so they tells the manufacturer to dulls the tip a bit and shorten the shaft a bit. Satisfied customers don’t express an loud opinion, so there isn’t a strong counter voiced argument regarding the subject.


    Now the people that prefers spears over axes gets angry, and this whole pop throwing contest that we are in at the moment starts.

    If HBE now are overpowered pre the hotfix shouldn’t there be rather large quantity of actual facts that points in that they are overpower? Shouldn’t there HBE domination in the tournament scene? I’ve followed this thread since it started, and haven’t seen an post that show’s this. (I’m still human and can ofc have missed it :) )
    The point is, that DECISIONMAKING shouldnt be influenced by points like the ones you made. Decisions should be based on hard but boring facts. More than that, there is a rule in scientific research, that I find really applicable for processes like the one happening atm (including discussions like you made up in your post).

    The rule is: You can bring up a proposition but YOU are the one in charge to prove its is correct. And if you can't, then your proposition is wrong and you have to discard it!


    Its not the other way around like it tends to be in different threads like "Are HBE 2.0 being overpowered", where often someone is stating the thesis: "HBE are overpovered" without showing evidence but expeciting the opposing party to prove him wrong.

    Exactly that is why I want data like @Arrahed showed. It is a small missing peace in a larger picture.
  • ferny wrote:

    Celegil wrote:

    This is to the people that are in charge of communication to the community. Pls be so kind to take your time to read my post and answer my questions.

    Hi everybody,

    I am following this thread for quite a while now reading the different posts regarding the nerf incoming as a "hotfix".

    I have some serious questions about this entire procedure and would be really happy, if someone with some insight might respond to my questions.

    But before asking, I will try to explain what are the main reasons for my lack of understanding for the upcoming nerf.

    So let's start:

    After reading that a huge nerf is incoming, because there are "some gamebreaking tools for HBE", I was wondering, where this "state of knowledge" came from. I was especially confused, because of the following points:

    1.) I always thought, the period of time till May was planned as a beta version, that should be used, to see, if there are items/units/etc. that need a redesign or an adjustment. So, if I am right, the beta is less than 2 months up and running. There were few tournaments to gather data from (as they are a more competetive sources of play).

    My first question is though: Why are we fixing things after not even 2 months of testing in the middle of a beta, that should be a time for testing?

    So, I said to my self: One might answer, that there are obviously "gamebreaking things" that dont require further testing to know there is a huge issue.

    But than I was wondering again:

    2.) If there were these "gamebreaking things" wouldnt you expect to find them in most of the competetive lists? Or wouldnt you see tournament results, that are highly above everage?

    And so, I started checking tournament lists and results. I gathered all lists (that were available to me) and checked them for which units where used, which charakters, which banners etc.

    And guess what: There was a huge variety. Yes, some choices where more often to find than others, but "gamebreaking"? No, I couldnt find these highly urgent issues...

    So what next? I began to check results (if there were some available for everybody). Wanna guess again?

    Right! No huge statistical outliers.

    3.) Wouldnt you expect either that HBE are a) using all the same overpowered items in their builds b) be highly overperforming in results or c) be highly overrepresented in tournaments (what they arent btw)?

    So, if you dont belive me, I will provide my list of checked tournaments as an excel sheet in the upcoming days. But belive me, it isnt that difficult to find this information by yourself, you only have to check the T9A forums.

    So, if competetive play isnt the main issue - as it cant be by taking into consideration the data of the last bigger tournaments - I was thinking about more casual gameplay.

    The next step was, to check more lists of a higher variety of players. So I checked the "Show us your 2.0 lists" thread, that can be found subsequent in this forum.

    Of course, there is no way for me to get information about results, but that wasnt the point for me. What I did was checking every list shown in this thread to see, if there are some issues.

    And yes, there were some significant results: In ~80 lists I found a high usage of MoCT Commander, HWotF Prince using SotBD, a significant use of either SM with WBoR or LG with NB. Also a lot of lists used Citizen Spears with WBoR or Citizen Archers with BoB.

    But there were also a lot of other builds used AND (and these are the most relevant points for me) a) a much wider usage of units compared to 1.3 b) much less avoidance orientated lists c) much more versatility in total.

    I will provide my gathered data, if one wont belive me also as an excel sheet.

    So:

    4.) If competetive play isnt the point, why do you force players back to maybe 2 or 3 lists by nerfing a book, that obviously provides a huge variety of stiles (but that has of course some elements working out better than others)?

    I cant see the point. I really cant.

    HBE players are happy with their book, competetive play isnt the real issue. It provides more variety than ever before, there is much less msu, there is more infantery played than before, there are a lot of the units used that are in the book, it seems not to be performing highly over the top (there are points I see - - > pls check my opinion below!).

    Why do you guys really force the issue if there is none (or better: if there is some, but it isnt a dramatically deal)?

    I played myself 10 games in the last weeks (all with different HBE lists). I had 4 wins, 5 losses, 1 draw. I cant say things are extremly "gamebreaking". Not at all.

    I think, there are some things, to be considered in the future (like a adjustment in casting value for our hereditary spell e.g or the WBoR limitation for Special/Core).

    But that is no new recognition. We had a poll for this, where mostly HBE players confirmed: ok lets put the value up to 9+/10+ or lets make a limitation for WBoR.

    I ask myself: Why the **Edited by Grimbold Blackhammer - please do not bypass the language filter** am I investing time in testing, providing feedback, investing my time in making this game better, if the result is an obviously dramatic nerf incoming to a point of time, where it isnt needed in that way not considering anybodys feedback?

    I really really really would appreciate some answers. I dont want to be mean or blackmail somebody but maybe you can see my following point: Why should I play tts, when the energy i am investing in it is useless time to making it better. For real guys: there are alternatives for players like us. Maybe you should take this into account.

    And at last: not every player in ur community is playing ETC or something like this. Have you ever thought about the point, that there are more players not playing International tournaments that just wanna enjoy cool lists, where everything is useful to a certain point?

    Kind regards

    Celegil
    If data collation of the type you describe might be useful to one of the teams, might you be interested in signing up? I'll tag the relevant people if you might be :)
    Could someone from HR pick this up please? @ForsetisMuse @Pinktaco @destroyem @Windelov - have a read through @Celegil recent posts...I think @Just_Flo may have already been in touch? Looks like some serious work has gone into collating and interpreting data posted on the forums here, I'm sure there'd be at least one team (ACS, TS, DA) which could make use of the talent and energy here :).
    Join us on Ulthuan.net