9th Age Saurian ancients - 0.99 Discussion

[NIGHTBRINGER]

"Because it's always been that way" isnt valid in terms of game balance.

My point is that the Hellcannon was not overpowered in 8th Edition, so I feel that game balance plays no major role in this discussion. Of course you are free to disagree about the Hellcannon's power level.

"Because it's always been that way" is justification along a different pathway (independent of balance). 9th Age has be criticized by many as already looking too different from Warhammer. Changing things for the sake of change (going on the assumption that an unbreakable hellcannon is not overpowered) is going to annoy people. A Saurian Ancient army can be made perfectly balanced without having core skirmishing poison shooting skinks, but that doesn't mean that people will like or accept it.

Balance is not the only factor that should be considered. Fluff/history/precedence also have a role to play in my opinion. If this was a totally new game then the story would be different, but as a continuation of a game, historical precedence should only be altered in order to rectify a substantial power imbalance. For the reasons I listed earlier, I don't think the Hellcannon fits into this category and as such should be left unbreakable.

Let's look at this another way. How does an opponent deal with an Unbreakable Hellcannon sat at the back pounding their army each turn?

• Ignore it and get into combat where it can't hurt you and is effectively a waste of points
• Send something more potent to dispatch it
• Tie it up with something
• Magic it to death
• Shoot it down

 

[GCPD]

Change for balance purposes can't be change "for the sake of change" by definition. Nor does questions of balance only come into play when a unit is overpowered.

What thing that is "more potent" can get past the whole WDG army to deal with the Hellcannon, like Scouts/Fast Cav can deal with normal cannons? What shooting do the likes of Elves or SA have to counter it?

If it's a waste of points in combat, why not argue to make it more potent instead of Unbreakable?

Again, how does being Unbreakable help it be a better monster or artillery weapon, other than to neuter a particular vulnerability those units usually have? Bearing in mind that having a ranged weapon already accounts for a monster weakness (being zoned out of the game by avoidance), and being a monster already makes it survivable against the things that would usually kill regular artillery.

 

[The Red Devil]

@Pinktaco First, I can only imagine the amount of work you (and others) put into 9th Age, and we are all appreciative of that. While it might not look that way in the heat of the moment... I am certain that all of us want a good and stable gaming system to move on to.

The SA army have suffered several blows that basically culminated in what we have now, a mess. Balance wise I can accept it, but there are many inconsistencies and weird,things going on.

What looks odd from a bystanders point of view, is that the balance is applied different across the armies. Both in regards to balancing on points and changing the way the army behaves/should be played. People play an army due to the enjoy the play style, if that is changed too much it could be a deal breaker for that person.

Looking over the other army books, I can only sit back and shake my head on some of the changes that was applied to us and wonder why that was an issue when it came to us, but not for other armies. As it is not, the entire balance part seems to be out of sync, where the same level is not enforced across the board.

I do not know how it is decided that a army, unit etc. need to be balanced/nerfed, but there might be some flaws on that part. At one point you could start believing that if just enough people "yell" that X has to be nerfed, then it is done just to please the masses.

What I find strange with our latest update, is that the viable builds actually got smaller. Which have me worried if we will get another hit, due to "too many, play with X" down the road.



For 9th Age, I think one of the issues is "growing pains". The organization has grown too fast, and instead of taking a step back and slowing down, a higher gear was chosen.

This is very common in the business world, and believe it or not, it is not a few companies that has gone bankrupt due to they were too successful, and kept expanding instead of taking a step back.

I find it admirable that steps has been taken to improve the logistics and the update process, though with this issue in mind, it might be an idea to delay the release of 1.0, until the latest changes has been reviewed (across all armies) according to the new regulations.


@Pinktaco I have a specific question regarding our Army Book, is it correct that there will only be potential more nerf's until 1.0? And no changes to the structure etc. before next version release in September?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Change for balance purposes can't be change "for the sake of change" by definition. Nor does questions of balance only come into play when a unit is overpowered.

In my opinion change for balance purposes only needs to be done when a unit is either overpowered or underpowered... period. Since in this case a beneficial special rule is being removed, the only logical reason to change the Hellcannon for balancing purposes would be if the Hellcannon was too powerful.

I've stated many reasons why the Hellcannon was not overpowered in 8th edition. Do you refute those points? Do you feel that the Hellcannon is in fact overpowered? I've spent a lot of time on the WoC forum before I migrated here and I can tell you that most WoC generals did not field Hellcannons because they were too slow and suffered from a stone throwers unreliability. There of course were some of us that disagreed and thought of it as a worthwhile unit (myself included), but it rarely made it into ultra competitive lists. So the point is, if it is not too powerful, then it should be left alone.

What thing that is "more potent" can get past the whole WDG army to deal with the Hellcannon, like Scouts/Fast Cav can deal with normal cannons? What shooting do the likes of Elves or SA have to counter it?

Obviously the shooting option would only apply to certain armies, I was naming solutions across all armies. In it's weakened state (5+ armour save instead of 4+ and the loss of its second ward save in the form of its crew) poison will bring it down... so skinks and camo skinks or Wood Elf archers. Not as fast as they would bring down a regular warmachine but it is 2-3 times more expensive.

As for a "more potent" solution, a well built cowboy should do the trick. If you could manage to engage it with Kroxigor (harder task I know) it would be a massacre. As for getting by the WoC army... that's where generalship comes into play. For the most part WoC armies are quite elite and small so it can be done.

If it's a waste of points in combat, why not argue to make it more potent instead of Unbreakable?

People would cry foul if it was more potent it combat... have you ever seen the original stats it was released with during the Storm of Chaos campaign? . To make something better in combat you can either increase its offense or its defense. In this case, unbreakable augments its defense... which is just as viable.

I like that fact that Unbreakable made the Hellcannon unique within the WoC army (remember that it was unbreakable long before the DP gained that status). It also made it fairly unique amongst monsters. I don't want to see everything streamlined to the point that the whole game lacks flavour and individuality. Just because traditional anti-warmachine tactics don't work on it, doesn't mean that it should be changed. That just adds an interesting wrinkle to the game that a player must adapt to.

 

[Pinktaco]

@The Red Devil I think we're all aware of the danger, but ETC deadline is right around the corner. Once the game is established and we're off to a hopefully good ETC we'll likely/hopefully see a more relaxed staff who can take their time.

As of right now there have been no mentioning of further nerfs. I could be wrong, but I'm confident that the SA army hit the desired powerlevel.
I hope we'll see the following two things happen:

• Weirdness and dumb decisions fixed (BP back to carnosaurs and things like that)
• A better internal balance

I don't see anymore nerfs, but you never know. I wouldn't cross fingers for any redesigns or similar. We might see a change with the javelins, but I don't know.

I think we'll go from "rough" to "okay" in the next update. From here it's a matter of testing things. If things go to shit at ETC it's clear that something needs to Change. So in that regard I'm not worried.

My main worry is that the army changes too much, which it shouldn't. Fix what we have now, tweak it after ETC. Perhaps add new things in 2017 post ETC.

 

[Haemoglobin]

Ok guys if you check out the 9th Age forums you will see that I put up several threads including a big Feedback thread that will be used to gather feedback for the ABC. We would greatly appreciate it if as many people as possible would fill in the thread. The more feedback we get, the better!

 

[protector]

In my opinion change for balance purposes only needs to be done when a unit is either overpowered or underpowered... period. Since in this case a beneficial special rule is being removed, the only logical reason to change the Hellcannon for balancing purposes would be if the Hellcannon was too powerful.

... but it is 2-3 times more expensive.

I like that fact that Unbreakable made the Hellcannon unique within the WoC army (remember that it was unbreakable long before the DP gained that status). It also made it fairly unique amongst monsters. I don't want to see everything streamlined to the point that the whole game lacks flavour and individuality. Just because traditional anti-warmachine tactics don't work on it, doesn't mean that it should be changed. That just adds an interesting wrinkle to the game that a player must adapt to.

I think that WoC should never have had access to the hellcannon to begin with and it needs to be nerfed with more than removing unbreakable. For an army that loves to flaunt how their units need to be better in close combat than anyone else because they don't have a shooting phase and are weak in magic they actually have quite decent options in both. The problem being they have been so over buffed that some units don't seem competitive because others are even better, doesn't mean that hellcannons aren't the single best catapult in the game, just that WoC were already so overpowered that having the best catapult didn't help them much.

And it is no where near 2-3 times more expensive than its counterparts, take the closet example, a dwarf catapult with the upgrade so that it has the same strength and AP. that is 140pts and the hellcannon is 190pts, barely over 35% more expensive, trivial compared to the greatly increased stats, causing panic, being able to move and fire etc.

The hellcannon is and has always been just another cheap way for WoC to overshadow the other army books because GW has always favored them over others. I also own 3 of them with my WoC army, and I can certainly attest to the fact that WoC badly needs the nerf bat to hit them in literally a dozen ways before they will even approach the power level of other armies. The hellcannon doesn't need to be unbreakable, what it needs is to go down to strength 3(9), always move or fire, 4 wounds, and no ward save.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

For an army that loves to flaunt how their units need to be better in close combat than anyone else because they don't have a shooting phase and are weak in magic they actually have quite decent options in both.

WoC should be more powerful in close combat than most armies... man for man. They have to pay for those superior stats however, so while they are more elite, they are able to field less bodies. That is the definition of an elite army... greater stats compensated by fewer numbers.

just that WoC were already so overpowered that having the best catapult didn't help them much.

I do agree that WoC were overpowered in 8th Edition; no doubts there. Tournament statistics place a couple of other armies above us, however we sat very comfortably as a top tier army. However, the Hellcannon (in very close to its current [8th edition] form) pre-dates 8th edition by a very large margin. WoC (and Hordes of Chaos) were not top tier in either 6th or 7th edition. They were good armies, with some really good choices, but not top tier. In 7th edition for example, the kings were easily Daemons, Dark Elves, Skaven and possibly High Elves. Even in those times, the Hellcannon was not an overwhelming "go to" choice among Chaos generals. Some people employed them while others did not. Definitely not what would be defined as overpowered or an auto-include... even within what at the time was a mid tier army!!!

And it is no where near 2-3 times more expensive than its counterparts, take the closet example, a dwarf catapult with the upgrade so that it has the same strength and AP. that is 140pts and the hellcannon is 190pts, barely over 35% more expensive, trivial compared to the greatly increased stats, causing panic, being able to move and fire etc.

In this case you are flat out (mathematically) wrong! To begin, my 2-3 times more expensive estimation was made to establish its place in 8th Edition. In essence, to effectively establish its place among its compatriots and as part of my rationale as to why it wasn't overpowered in 8th Edition (and thus not needing a nerf). As such, lets take a look and compare the other Stone Throwers to the 210 point WoC Hellcannon...

• Field Trebuchet (Bretonnia) = 90 points [Hellcannon is 2.33 times more expensive]
• Mortar (Empire) = 100 points [Hellcannon is 2.1 times more expensive]
• Goblin Rock Lobber (Orcs & Goblins) = 85 points [Hellcannon is 2.47 times more expensive]
• Screaming Skull Catapult (Tomb Kings) = 90 points [Hellcannon is 2.33 times more expensive]
• Grudgethrower (Dwarfs) = 80 points[Hellcannon is 2.63 times more expensive]

Are there some outliers?... admittedly yes, I've found two (though there might be more). The Gnoblar Scraplauncher (Ogre Kingdoms) weighs in at 130 points, while the Cygor (Beastmen) comes in at a whooping 275 points. I don't have much experience against the Gnoblar Scraplauncher because I have never seen it played due to the fact that it competed against the ever popular Ironblaster. The Cygor however, is probably one of the worst units in the entire game of 8 edition Warhammer; so most definitely not an ideal choice to make comparisons against.

I would say that my estimation is very accurate indeed. It holds perfectly true across 5 stone throwers from 5 different armies (with the aforementioned outliers detailed above).

The hellcannon is and has always been just another cheap way for WoC to overshadow the other army books because GW has always favored them over others. I also own 3 of them with my WoC army, and I can certainly attest to the fact that WoC badly needs the nerf bat to hit them in literally a dozen ways before they will even approach the power level of other armies.

I agree with you that coming off of 8th Edition WoC did need to be nerfed heavily (along side of a couple of other armies that were equal to or even worse offenders). However, the Hellcannon is not the component of the army that needed to be nerfed. The Hellcannon was not the reason why the WoC were overpowered. I could detail which units/choices were the real culprits, but this post is getting pretty long already.

The hellcannon doesn't need to be unbreakable, what it needs is to go down to strength 3(9), always move or fire, 4 wounds, and no ward save.

At that point you might as well remove it from the game entirely rather than sully its good name (and model) with the abomination that you are creating. At least that way I won't be tempted to bludgeon the author with it.

 

[Mr Phat]

So eehm....magnets, how do they work?

 

[protector]

At least the forum is seeing increased activity

 

[Pinktaco]

So eehm....magnets, how do they work?

I just magnetized 3 pteradons. It's working beautifully. I'm about to cry haha. Seriously though, my birds have given me nothing, but trouble in terms of transportation. I think all my guys were broken before I started my repaint process.

 

[The Red Devil]

I think we'll go from "rough" to "okay" in the next update. From here it's a matter of testing things. If things go to shit at ETC it's clear that something needs to Change. So in that regard I'm not worried.

Thanks for clarifying this.

Ok guys if you check out the 9th Age forums you will see that I put up several threads including a big Feedback thread that will be used to gather feedback for the ABC. We would greatly appreciate it if as many people as possible would fill in the thread. The more feedback we get, the better!

@Haemoglobin I know this is more work, but you will get a lot more feedback if you also post those threads here. I am certain there is a lot of members here who have not created an 9th Age account yet, and possibly do not have the time to frequent multiple forums. This also means you would get feedback from people not playing 9th Age at the moment, on their thoughts regarding the topics.

I just magnetized 3 pteradons. It's working beautifully. I'm about to cry haha. Seriously though, my birds have given me nothing, but trouble in terms of transportation. I think all my guys were broken before I started my repaint process.

Sounds like you might need to reconsider your means of transportation

After I switched to KR Multicase, I dont think I have had even one damaged model, even after managing to drop the boxes from the table.

 

[Pinktaco]

@The Red Devil

I already have, everything is much more protected now. One other good thing is that they'll take less space. Once I move on to 2x5 rampodons I'll probably appreciate it

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

@Haemoglobin I know this is more work, but you will get a lot more feedback if you also post those threads here. I am certain there is a lot of members here who have not created an 9th Age account yet, and possibly do not have the time to frequent multiple forums. This also means you would get feedback from people not playing 9th Age at the moment, on their thoughts regarding the topics.

That's a good point!

 

[GCPD]

At least the forum is seeing increased activity

Nothing like a bit of WoC criticism to get a lively debate going Now if we could just start one up about how Lightning Reflexes are OP to get the Elf players in here...

 

[Haemoglobin]

as requested, a link to the 9th Age Feedback report, round 1. You need to register as a member and have an account to see this link:

http://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?thread/9178-feedback-thread-sa-first-round/

We are getting a good amount of replies, but again the more the merrier

I am attempting to give the community an insight in how the balancing will occur (what units will be on the table etc) but I am not entirely sure how much I will be allowed to show.

 

[The Red Devil]

as requested, a link to the 9th Age Feedback report, round 1:

To view the thread you need to create an account at the forum, it is not public available.

 

[Haemoglobin]

Ah I was not aware of that. I will edit my OP.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

So eehm....magnets, how do they work?

It would seem that the level of discussion in this thread has slowly ground to a halt. But since you asked, here is a little superconductor + magnet fun...

Nothing like a bit of WoC criticism to get a lively debate going

The dark gods shall not stand for it. Blood for the blood god!

 

[Mr Phat]

Speaking of. Is there a half life for magnets? Or are they as the name suggests permanent?