Discussion thread for the v1.2 of The 9th Age.
First few posts copied from another thread.
First few posts copied from another thread.
Last edited:
The 9th Age v1.2 9th Age
- Thread starter Mad 'At
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
Disclaimer: I haven't played 1.2 as of yet, and haven't gone over everything in the rules and armybook.
However, one thing sprang in my eyes with our new armybook: the must-take of stubborn on the Dark Coach when playing as Von Karnstein. This seems wholly unnecessary to me, and might discourage the use of one of the iconic vampire-pieces in our list. I don't think it was an autoinclude before, and do not understand the need to limit the use even further. Stubborn might be very good, but the 'must' is a limiting factor when choosing the army.
A minor thing, admittedly, and there seems to be much more to deal with concerning magic and characters, but there you have it.
However, one thing sprang in my eyes with our new armybook: the must-take of stubborn on the Dark Coach when playing as Von Karnstein. This seems wholly unnecessary to me, and might discourage the use of one of the iconic vampire-pieces in our list. I don't think it was an autoinclude before, and do not understand the need to limit the use even further. Stubborn might be very good, but the 'must' is a limiting factor when choosing the army.
A minor thing, admittedly, and there seems to be much more to deal with concerning magic and characters, but there you have it.
Honestly, I get the vibe from t9a that the problem comes from their starting point: ETC. I don't have hard proof that this is so, but designing a game for team-style tournaments is very different from designing it for single games. Stuff that is too strong in the ETC gets nerfed, even if it wasn't a problem for generic all-comers lists, which leads to discontent from the (I imagine very large!) playerbase that does not attend ETC-style tournaments.
People that I can get games in with on a regular basis are playing t9a, so I'll probably play it from time to time. But my (quite limited) gaming time will be spent on Necromunda, a horribly unbalanced, random and highly entertaining game.
People that I can get games in with on a regular basis are playing t9a, so I'll probably play it from time to time. But my (quite limited) gaming time will be spent on Necromunda, a horribly unbalanced, random and highly entertaining game.
Aranei
Ghoul
Honestly, I get the vibe from t9a that the problem comes from their starting point: ETC. I don't have hard proof that this is so, but designing a game for team-style tournaments is very different from designing it for single games. Stuff that is too strong in the ETC gets nerfed, even if it wasn't a problem for generic all-comers lists, which leads to discontent from the (I imagine very large!) playerbase that does not attend ETC-style tournaments.
People that I can get games in with on a regular basis are playing t9a, so I'll probably play it from time to time. But my (quite limited) gaming time will be spent on Necromunda, a horribly unbalanced, random and highly entertaining game.
I agree with you on this. I even wrote something like it in an another thread:
...
...
https://www.vampirecounts.net/threads/the-9th-scroll-and-the-preview-within.30600/
Good point @Aranei, while striving for balance is admirable, it can get in the way of the fun parts. As I mentioned, I enjoy Necromunda a great deal, and always enjoyed the more quirky parts of WHFB. It was fun! Although you sometimes had run-ins with WAAC players, and I guess this is the reason the tournament crowd wants balance. Because it certainly takes the fun out of the game, meeting 4-5 power-net-lists during a tournament. So I understand the desire for balanced armies.
Maybe I can find others to play 7th or 8th ed. with...
Maybe I can find others to play 7th or 8th ed. with...
QuothTheRaven
Zombie
I had such high hopes for T9A but it has become apparent that it is wholly aiming for tournament play and the fluff and fun is getting stripped out along the way.
At the moment it just seems... joyless.
As for VC in 1.2, they're so drastically nerfed (terrible ethereal rule, weak vampire counts, overly diluted magic phase) that it doesn't feel like a terrifying army of the undead.
At the moment it just seems... joyless.
As for VC in 1.2, they're so drastically nerfed (terrible ethereal rule, weak vampire counts, overly diluted magic phase) that it doesn't feel like a terrifying army of the undead.
All replies copied into a new thread since it was al off topic. Old thread was just information about the feedback collection that was going on. Lets use this thread to discuss v1.2.
This may not come as a surprise to you but I like it. To the whole game has become a lot fluffier with these changes. All the armies that I face feel much more aligned towards the idea that I have of them, which helps greatly with immersion. Facing a Highbron Elves Monster mash list never felt fluffy to me, and while that was largely impossible in v1.1 too it was not a very elegant restriction. There are still some tinkering to be done for sure, and hopefully some change to bring down the amount of monster mounted characters that some armies can field (looking at you ID), but overall I think it is a massive step in the right direction. The same I think about the Path. While not overly happy with all of them (I soooo wish Occultism had more synergy with VC), I like that they are all more unique. I also very much don't like what they've done to my beloved Wizard's Hood, but I'll live.
About being aimed at tournament play. It is, partially, as they say in their goals. But there is so much more than that to it.
@MedMos: Necromunda is a very different kind of game though. I play a lot of Mordheim (or rather 9th Heim) and greatly enjoy some of the very random elements there. I personally feel it is less fitting for a game such as 9th Age though and am glad that they removed so much of it. The Charmed Shield for example. Only discarding the first hit on 2+ meant that every once in a while you would loose your super expensive dragon to a cannon ball just because of that roll of one. No fun for anyone. Automatic it becomes so much more strategic.
@QuothTheRaven: How could you say that the fluff is stripped away when they keep releasing all these awesome fluff books?
Moving away from GW fluff is only natural and fully necessary for the survival of the game. Could you be more specific about it feeling joyless? It is a valid concern certainly and certainly nothing that the project strives to create.
This may not come as a surprise to you but I like it. To the whole game has become a lot fluffier with these changes. All the armies that I face feel much more aligned towards the idea that I have of them, which helps greatly with immersion. Facing a Highbron Elves Monster mash list never felt fluffy to me, and while that was largely impossible in v1.1 too it was not a very elegant restriction. There are still some tinkering to be done for sure, and hopefully some change to bring down the amount of monster mounted characters that some armies can field (looking at you ID), but overall I think it is a massive step in the right direction. The same I think about the Path. While not overly happy with all of them (I soooo wish Occultism had more synergy with VC), I like that they are all more unique. I also very much don't like what they've done to my beloved Wizard's Hood, but I'll live.
About being aimed at tournament play. It is, partially, as they say in their goals. But there is so much more than that to it.
@MedMos: Necromunda is a very different kind of game though. I play a lot of Mordheim (or rather 9th Heim) and greatly enjoy some of the very random elements there. I personally feel it is less fitting for a game such as 9th Age though and am glad that they removed so much of it. The Charmed Shield for example. Only discarding the first hit on 2+ meant that every once in a while you would loose your super expensive dragon to a cannon ball just because of that roll of one. No fun for anyone. Automatic it becomes so much more strategic.
@QuothTheRaven: How could you say that the fluff is stripped away when they keep releasing all these awesome fluff books?
Moving away from GW fluff is only natural and fully necessary for the survival of the game. Could you be more specific about it feeling joyless? It is a valid concern certainly and certainly nothing that the project strives to create.
QuothTheRaven
Zombie
Caveat: Firstly, let me just say that I do like most of the way the main rules are now in1.2 - it's not perfect but there are not many things dreadfully wrong. The team are putting a lot of work in, but the direction it has taken is not how many would like it to go.
What is putting me (and a lot of others off) is that the Army Books took massive hits across the board and a great many of the changes make no sense fluff-wise, changes appear to have been made solely in response to ETC tournament data that do not translate well to casual players.
There's an awful lot of math-hammer and not much accounting for hobbyist's creativity.
Prime example: the ethereal rule. This was reportedly changed in response to ethereal spam appearing in a tournament. Ethereal units got a heavy nerf, no price reduction a new rule that makes little sense fluff-wise. Why can you now easily kill ghosts with arrows?
It makes wraiths poor and phantom hosts unplayable.
Banshees are ridiculously expensive now.
This ethereal spam would never be seen in 'casual' play but the change was made to the detriment of casual players.
Other things like the removal of unit weapon/upgrade options, or the auto-include of other options were made to streamline play so tournament players knew what unit did/had what. While that might shave seconds off a tournament game, it removes the ability to tailor your units and army to your own vision or story of your army, e.g. varkolaks can no longer have fly, Monstrous revenant now auto-includes fly (with associated points cost).
Vampires are pathetically weak in combat and not particularly great spellcasters which just doesn't match most people's concept of what a vampire should be.
The drastic reduction of magic effectiveness is a heavy hit to a magic-heavy army like ours and the hobbling of the ability of VC to raise troops has impacted gameplay and isn't fluff-compatible.
This sounds like a big moan, but you asked for examples and these are just a few off the top of my head.
Removal of customisation options might makes things faster, but it makes things cookie-cutter and restrictive. (That's what Kings of War is for)
This hobby is imaginative after all, and it just doesn't sit right.
A big problem is that the character of the armies was not considered when they hit everything with the nerf bat and it upset a lot of people. It's difficult to get people enthused about it now.
If/when character-considerate army books are released it might be a different story but as the game stands in its current incarnation, it just lacks the fun of a personal story-telling element.
What is putting me (and a lot of others off) is that the Army Books took massive hits across the board and a great many of the changes make no sense fluff-wise, changes appear to have been made solely in response to ETC tournament data that do not translate well to casual players.
There's an awful lot of math-hammer and not much accounting for hobbyist's creativity.
Prime example: the ethereal rule. This was reportedly changed in response to ethereal spam appearing in a tournament. Ethereal units got a heavy nerf, no price reduction a new rule that makes little sense fluff-wise. Why can you now easily kill ghosts with arrows?
It makes wraiths poor and phantom hosts unplayable.
Banshees are ridiculously expensive now.
This ethereal spam would never be seen in 'casual' play but the change was made to the detriment of casual players.
Other things like the removal of unit weapon/upgrade options, or the auto-include of other options were made to streamline play so tournament players knew what unit did/had what. While that might shave seconds off a tournament game, it removes the ability to tailor your units and army to your own vision or story of your army, e.g. varkolaks can no longer have fly, Monstrous revenant now auto-includes fly (with associated points cost).
Vampires are pathetically weak in combat and not particularly great spellcasters which just doesn't match most people's concept of what a vampire should be.
The drastic reduction of magic effectiveness is a heavy hit to a magic-heavy army like ours and the hobbling of the ability of VC to raise troops has impacted gameplay and isn't fluff-compatible.
This sounds like a big moan, but you asked for examples and these are just a few off the top of my head.
Removal of customisation options might makes things faster, but it makes things cookie-cutter and restrictive. (That's what Kings of War is for)
This hobby is imaginative after all, and it just doesn't sit right.
A big problem is that the character of the armies was not considered when they hit everything with the nerf bat and it upset a lot of people. It's difficult to get people enthused about it now.
If/when character-considerate army books are released it might be a different story but as the game stands in its current incarnation, it just lacks the fun of a personal story-telling element.
@QuothTheRaven: The Ethereal change was not because of ETC, they were not a problem there. I think it was done to try and make Ethereal units easier to balance, because the problem of them being spammed is very real one. Using too many of those is not fun for anyone. Making them only 3++ vs mundane and 5++ vs magic mean they are less extreme, and should therefore be easier to balance. Atm they are underperforming a bit so they will most likely see a point reduction. I they would still have 2++ the risk then would have been that they would be taken too much and some armies simply can't handle that. That is the idea at least I think. However. The change to 3++ did not some with v1.2, that was before this. What did come in v1.2 is the new army composition and the new category The Suffering. This means they have a specific tool limit spam of Ethereals. I am hoping that this will mean that they can change it back to 2++ because as you say, it is more fitting. Ethereals has been one of the most complained about topics in the VC book so I think it is likely that we will see some change.
To some extent I can agree with you that the removal of options is a shame. I do very much understand why they did it though because it was getting a bit ridiculous. Options are good but only if they are interesting, and most of those that were removed were not if you ask me. Fly on the Varkolak is one of the few that I really miss (even though I never used it), and I think it is a shame that it was removed. It offered some very nice modelling opportunities. Having Vanguard, better Vampiric and higher Stomp as upgrades though was quite bad, as there is no obvious way to represent it. Fly is quite easy though, just add wings
I don't agree with you about vampires. They are in a pretty good spot I think. Might need a small buff (like 4 wounds for the Count), but nothing too bad.
Magic is not that ineffective I can tell you. I ran a very magic heavy list to a tournament recently and did alright. I finished in about the same place as I normally do (around the middle).
One of the main reasons for the v1.2 change was in fact the flavour of the armies. The previous versions had a lot of armies staring to feel very similar. When all armies get options to do everything it all starts to feel the same. By reducing options and limit army build I personally think they make the game much more fluffy, since when building the army now you get a much better idea of what the army is supposed to represent on the battlefield. We might loose a bit in personalisation (but there is still a lot to choose from) but the majority of armies that we see on the tables become more flavourful.
To some extent I can agree with you that the removal of options is a shame. I do very much understand why they did it though because it was getting a bit ridiculous. Options are good but only if they are interesting, and most of those that were removed were not if you ask me. Fly on the Varkolak is one of the few that I really miss (even though I never used it), and I think it is a shame that it was removed. It offered some very nice modelling opportunities. Having Vanguard, better Vampiric and higher Stomp as upgrades though was quite bad, as there is no obvious way to represent it. Fly is quite easy though, just add wings
I don't agree with you about vampires. They are in a pretty good spot I think. Might need a small buff (like 4 wounds for the Count), but nothing too bad.
Magic is not that ineffective I can tell you. I ran a very magic heavy list to a tournament recently and did alright. I finished in about the same place as I normally do (around the middle).
One of the main reasons for the v1.2 change was in fact the flavour of the armies. The previous versions had a lot of armies staring to feel very similar. When all armies get options to do everything it all starts to feel the same. By reducing options and limit army build I personally think they make the game much more fluffy, since when building the army now you get a much better idea of what the army is supposed to represent on the battlefield. We might loose a bit in personalisation (but there is still a lot to choose from) but the majority of armies that we see on the tables become more flavourful.
@Mad 'At I only mentioned necromunda as an example of an unbalanced game that was a lot of fun. And WHFB used to have some wildly random elements as well, but people still loved it. It's totally fine that the 9th age team wants to cater to the tournament crowd, for "the rest of us" (can't speak for everyone, of course) it just seems like the nerfbat is out to kill the fun.
As for ethereals, it is true that some specific armybuilds might not have a good answer, but then again others just treat them as free VP's! Making ethereals able to be dealt with fairly easily by all armies makes them obsolete. But as you rightly said, they've been moaned about extensively, and will likely see changes.
As for ethereals, it is true that some specific armybuilds might not have a good answer, but then again others just treat them as free VP's! Making ethereals able to be dealt with fairly easily by all armies makes them obsolete. But as you rightly said, they've been moaned about extensively, and will likely see changes.
QuothTheRaven
Zombie
@Mad 'At , I have to disagree on the Magic point.
It's really weak now except one or two spells, which your opponent will always dispel while letting other weak spells through.
The high points cost of casters coupled with the low reward-high risk (harsh miscast table) has really crippled magic in the game. A good few lists are now appearing without casters as they're not worth the points anymore and that's a massive loss to the game.
Some spells are ridiculously situational and only a few lores have attribute spells, meaning you can't swap out the crap ones. It just doesn't make sense and seems like it wasn't thought through. Evocation lore is particularly weak sauce, and we pretty much have to have it.
It's really weak now except one or two spells, which your opponent will always dispel while letting other weak spells through.
The high points cost of casters coupled with the low reward-high risk (harsh miscast table) has really crippled magic in the game. A good few lists are now appearing without casters as they're not worth the points anymore and that's a massive loss to the game.
Some spells are ridiculously situational and only a few lores have attribute spells, meaning you can't swap out the crap ones. It just doesn't make sense and seems like it wasn't thought through. Evocation lore is particularly weak sauce, and we pretty much have to have it.
@MedMos: I was certainly never a fan of the super random and unbalanced things about WHFB, so I guess we see it differently. Random stuff in itself is not the problem, but it is not okay when it results in very unbalanced games. The old Wizarding Hat for example was very random, but very seldom did it have a massive impact on the game. That kind of random I like, and it is shame that 9th Age has removed it in a few places. It still remains here and there, which is good, and overall I think the reduced randomness is good for the game.
Though were Ethereals ever free VP really? Against Daemons you simply didn't use them (letting them sit backfield all day), or if you did you used them as any other chaff (Spirit Host still being quite cheap for that). Against Skaven they could certainly be shot to death, but that meant other stuff survived and got to do some killing. But as said, they are in a tough spot right now and hopefully it will be sorted.
@QuothTheRaven: There are still plenty of useful spells that your opponent will want to stop, if you invest a bit in magic. Evocation has some general issues though, I'll give you that. I mainly used Cosmology in my list which worked well. Only thing I missed was Aura spells, so I will probably switch to Evocation anyway. Many of the spells are good, but not all . It needs an Attribute, a Signature or some major work on some of the spells (Danse, Blades and Hasten the Hour mostly). I don't think all Paths necessarily should have a Signature, but if they don't then all the spells should be a bit less situational. Thaumaturgy for example works just fine as it is. There is not a single spell in there that I wouldn’t want and the randomness of generating them suits the Path very well imo.
Though were Ethereals ever free VP really? Against Daemons you simply didn't use them (letting them sit backfield all day), or if you did you used them as any other chaff (Spirit Host still being quite cheap for that). Against Skaven they could certainly be shot to death, but that meant other stuff survived and got to do some killing. But as said, they are in a tough spot right now and hopefully it will be sorted.
@QuothTheRaven: There are still plenty of useful spells that your opponent will want to stop, if you invest a bit in magic. Evocation has some general issues though, I'll give you that. I mainly used Cosmology in my list which worked well. Only thing I missed was Aura spells, so I will probably switch to Evocation anyway. Many of the spells are good, but not all . It needs an Attribute, a Signature or some major work on some of the spells (Danse, Blades and Hasten the Hour mostly). I don't think all Paths necessarily should have a Signature, but if they don't then all the spells should be a bit less situational. Thaumaturgy for example works just fine as it is. There is not a single spell in there that I wouldn’t want and the randomness of generating them suits the Path very well imo.
@Mad 'At I guess that's where some of the discussion points arise, as I don't tailor lists, and mostly played against all-comers lists as well. So if I were to invest heavily in ethereals and came up against deamons or skaven, as you mentioned, that would just be mostly free VP for my opponent. Part of list-building for me is considering answers for threats, and if I come up against someone with no magical attacks I consider that failing to take ethereals (and maybe deamons and treekin) into account.
Turning back to the ETC, here you could definitely invest heavily in ethereals, as you have some control over match-ups, which you simply don't have in a "regular" singles tournament.
Turning back to the ETC, here you could definitely invest heavily in ethereals, as you have some control over match-ups, which you simply don't have in a "regular" singles tournament.
Honestly now that magical attacks don't trigger magic resistance they could probably just remove magical attacks. Make it so only spells could hurt ethereal units along with a few specific things for armies that weren't taking magic. This would pretty much solve the balance issues (ethereals would be much more equally effective against armies) and simplify the now, almost meaningless, distinction between regular attacks and magical attacks.
TBH, I think one of the biggest issues with T9A is, it's trying it's hardest not to be warhammer, it's trying far too hard. I think anyone that comes across the game expecting to find a replacement for warhammer, might be disappointed. I think those who want something more like 8th, with the armies they loved would be better off trying to figure out something between themselves. I've never been a fan of how magic can affect the game in warhammer, I think T9A took these changes way too far.
I think the sad thing is, they could do something really great, they seem scared to deviate from the core mechanics of warhammer and make something truly new and exciting.
I think the sad thing is, they could do something really great, they seem scared to deviate from the core mechanics of warhammer and make something truly new and exciting.
Wolf Child
Ghoul
Well,I have played a few games of 9th now and I'm still struggling to find the love to be honest.The nerfing of our Vampire Lord is my main disappointment....Our core units are still as crap as they ever were and the powerful blender lord was the lynch-pin that kept it all together. Losing the re roll to hit often leads to the scenario where your blender lord causes no wounds and all of a sudden your unit ( and therefore your whole army) is in serious trouble.
I dunno,my last 3 games were against OK,WOC,and Demons. It seemed to me that ogres still had their devastating charge,Warriors still had everyone and their dog in full plate and demons still had their Bloodthirster flying around and rerollrolling to hit.
I feel that the watering down our blender lord and ethereal's has taken away that small but vital edge we had.
I dunno,my last 3 games were against OK,WOC,and Demons. It seemed to me that ogres still had their devastating charge,Warriors still had everyone and their dog in full plate and demons still had their Bloodthirster flying around and rerollrolling to hit.
I feel that the watering down our blender lord and ethereal's has taken away that small but vital edge we had.