PDA

View Full Version : 9th age is finally out



Maetco
07-05-2016, 19:33
The unofficial 9th edition named The 9th Age is finally out with 1.0.0 version: http://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?simple-page/

Evil Hypnotist
09-05-2016, 14:50
No changes til September at the earliest now, I think they have done a great job. I'm really enjoying playing it.

Folomo
09-05-2016, 14:57
Great news indeed :)
Lets enjoy the released version, and when the time comes in September we should have a good idea how to improve the game further.

Arduhn
10-05-2016, 08:32
I've been checking it out, and it looks good so far. My only complaint so far is with the formatting. The font is very small, and of course it's only available in electronic form (though I could theoretically print it out).

I put it on my ereader, but I can't change the font size. It would be nice if it could be put into ePub format. This would allow the font size to be changed, and the table of contents could be made clickable to take the reader directly to a given page.

Anyway, great work so far! I'll be trying it out this week with a friend. Empire vs wood elves. :)

ScruffMan
10-05-2016, 12:49
Surely they have someone with an English language degree to proof read? The writing could use a lot of work.

Asensur
10-05-2016, 14:24
Looking at the rules, the armies seems lacking in personality, which is a shame.

For example, orcs and goblins lost animosity (unruly is un...inspired), which could have been combined with waaagh and green tide to make a "momentum" mechanic with the general actions and achievements during the battle.

Giants do not fall, which could have been better with D6 wounds when dying or getting a bad dice roll.

Everything seems sticked for the sake of "balance", without introducing good rules to represent the army's soul.

And that is the first armybook. I will read the rest eventually but this is a bad beginning.

First impression is: too much development, too little design. This is a system made only for the competitive player, which fails in introducing her/him within the old world.

Ronin[XiC]
10-05-2016, 14:37
well, like said in the other thread. You might not like the rule called unruly, but combined with two different kind ofwaaaghs, the armys special rules as exactly as prominent as before.
Yes, Giants do notfall down anymore.. but is that really that important? At least you'll see some more giants because theyre actually priced correctly this time.
"balance" and flavour are not opposites.

I think it is extremely flavourful to have all units balanced because only than can I field "whatever" I want and still have flavourful and good armies.


And I don't understand your last sentence. Why would you need extra lore? Use WHF lore and 9th ruleset. This is a fan made project that has just started to get started. Judge it's fluff in a year or so.


Surely they have someone with an English language degree to proof read? The writing could use a lot of work.


Where and what? But don't tell me, get an account on 9th age and have them correct their mistakes if you truely have found some.

Folomo
10-05-2016, 14:58
Hate those giants. A pair of them whooped my chariot unit :cries: :p
A pair of giants look pretty nice on the table too, striding giants and all that. A shame I had to wait until 9th to see them fielded.

But at least my archers avenged the chariots :D

Asensur
10-05-2016, 15:05
;7626902']well, like said in the other thread. You might not like the rule called unruly, but combined with two different kind ofwaaaghs, the armys special rules as exactly as prominent as before.
Yes, Giants do notfall down anymore.. but is that really that important? At least you'll see some more giants because theyre actually priced correctly this time.
"balance" and flavour are not opposites.

I think it is extremely flavourful to have all units balanced because only than can I field "whatever" I want and still have flavourful and good armies.


And I don't understand your last sentence. Why would you need extra lore? Use WHF lore and 9th ruleset. This is a fan made project that has just started to get started. Judge it's fluff in a year or so.




Where and what? But don't tell me, get an account on 9th age and have them correct their mistakes if you truely have found some.

Seems you and I are talking about different things :P

I have no major problems with the development that the project has taken.

It is just that the army has lost its identity. The difference between playing this army or another has been diluted. How does the army play compared to others? Which are the defining mechanics?

An orcs and goblins army should represent an amalgam of frenzied guys reunited around a beating boss. The boss smashes faces, the guys do better. The boss is stationary or dead, the army losses gas.

I do not see that reflected. It is not a matter of fluff, is a matter of focus.

I feel like eating premium beef meat without seasonings or sauce.

Ronin[XiC]
10-05-2016, 15:10
How exactly has the army lost identity? The defining factors? Same as before. Crazy stuff like fanatics, pump wagons, squig hoppers, giants, doom divers, waaagh spells, everything that is goblin, strong bruisers, low leadership, hard to control.

What exactly is different to 8th? I seriously don't see it.

8th O&G was a denying army to the extreme. Max artillery, max fanatics, lots of diverters and one BIG unit of Savage orcs will all charactesr inside. How is that a "amalgam of frenzied guys reunited around a beating boss. The boss smashes faces, the guys do better. The boss is stationary or dead, the army losses gas."?

Asensur
10-05-2016, 15:53
That craziness was tied to the goofiness of the army.

The challenge of the army was playing around unexpected behaviour of your units (almost all units of other armies flee, that doesn't count). Even those actions had benefit (gork/mork walks with us), were neutral (giant falling) or were bad for you (animosity rabbles).

Skaven "craziness" was a risk vs reward thing. O&G "craziness" was just pure randomness within certain elements of your army.

This is not a failure in application (8th), but a failure in concept.

Ronin[XiC]
10-05-2016, 16:44
Mmh.. I don't agree with you at all.

O&G were never defined by their "unexpected behaviour". That's like your opinion man.

Asensur
10-05-2016, 17:25
;7626981']Mmh.. I don't agree with you at all.

O&G were never defined by their "unexpected behaviour". That's like your opinion man.

If you take the "unexpected behaviour" from the orcs & goblins they are not different from Lizardmen.

Orcs=Saurus
Goblins=Skinks
Trolls=Kroxigors
Giants/Warmachines=Monsters
Frog fatties being the only different thing.

What do the orcs & goblins have that no other army has?
D6 movement/attacks? Chaos/skavens have it.
Brutality? Beastmen have it.

Orcs & Goblins are the goofy army, that is the difference from others races.
Skaven and undead armies can fall apart also, but the reasons are different in each case. Skaven falling apart is associated with massification and greed in dice rolling. Undead is associated with magic power. O&G is associated with fighting (animosity does not trigger in close combat) and randomness bits with wacky effects.

As I said earlier there is nothing that reflects that.

Ronin[XiC]
10-05-2016, 17:31
Saurus = Chaos Warriors= Grave Guard= Temple Guard
Skinks = harpies = Ghouls = Carrions
Trolls= Trolls = Varghuls = Ushabti
Monsters=Monsters = Monsters= monsters

WOW All armies have more or less access to hard hitters, to monsters, to monstrous inf and smaller troops.

MY O&G never were goofy, maybe yours were. Mine were brutal savages from the mountains.

Dosiere
10-05-2016, 17:50
Looks pretty solid. I took a look at the revised Empire book and I like what I see, especially with the state troops.

GrandmasterWang
10-05-2016, 17:59
This is a system made only for the competitive player, which fails in introducing her/him within the old world.

In defence of the 9th Age (i prefer 8th Edition) the system cannot actually introduce her/him to the 'old world' for copyright reasons. This is why they have changed all the names and removed the WHFB special characters. The developers of the 9th age really don't want to have any legal issues with GW while they work on their fan project.

I completely agree with you on falling giants. I saw falling giants and wondering which way they would fall as something that was very iconic 'Warhammer' falling giants were in the Warhammer when i was just a kid and stayed all the way till i was an adult.



;7626924']
8th O&G was a denying army to the extreme. Max artillery, max fanatics, lots of diverters and one BIG unit of Savage orcs will all charactesr inside.

Your experience with O & G in 8th edition was very very different from mine. I encountered all manner of varied O & G armies (yes some even included giants!) .. and even fielded a couple. I played against pure Orc armies (no fanatics), pure melee armies (no artillery) and pure gobbo armies (no savage orcs). While i have seen hordes of Savage orcs i have never seen one with ALL the army characters inside... (9th age actually supports an Orc character star more than 8th by removing animosity the way it was). Not everyone is a min/maxer and my experience was that O & G attracted less of these types of players than most other armies due to their unpredictability, low leadership and goofy elements ;)

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

GrandmasterWang
10-05-2016, 18:05
;7627011']
Skinks = harpies = Ghouls = Carrions


?

You definately lost me with that particular comparison. Carrion are flying 2 wounded undead monstrous infantry vultures who served the tomb kings..... not sure how they = Skinks?

Maybe you should have used skeletons instead?


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Lord Dan
10-05-2016, 19:16
I put it on my ereader, but I can't change the font size. It would be nice if it could be put into ePub format. This would allow the font size to be changed, and the table of contents could be made clickable to take the reader directly to a given page

I'll pass this along to the formatting team.

Waagh Rider
10-05-2016, 19:48
Your experience with O & G in 8th edition was very very different from mine. I encountered all manner of varied O & G armies (yes some even included giants!) .. and even fielded a couple. I played against pure Orc armies (no fanatics), pure melee armies (no artillery) and pure gobbo armies (no savage orcs). While i have seen hordes of Savage orcs i have never seen one with ALL the army characters inside... (9th age actually supports an Orc character star more than 8th by removing animosity the way it was). Not everyone is a min/maxer and my experience was that O & G attracted less of these types of players than most other armies due to their unpredictability, low leadership and goofy elements ;)


The build he was referring to was the 'optimum' one favoured by cookie cutter tournament weenies. Despite the fluff of the army, it turns out that the 'optimum' build for O&G was a defensive one, that sat back and pelted you while the Savage Orc horde hung back until you were 50% of what you started with. Then said tournament weenies would send them in, wheezing and chortling about their superior tactics. I only played against this once, with my O&G army (Black Orcs! I had Black Orcs! What a doofus eh?) and once was enough for me....

Ronin[XiC]
10-05-2016, 19:59
Army role

Fast, skrimishing, distrupting units.

Doesnt matter what form they take. Their role on the battlefield is the same.




The build he was referring to was the 'optimum' one favoured by cookie cutter tournament weenies. Despite the fluff of the army, it turns out that the 'optimum' build for O&G was a defensive one, that sat back and pelted you while the Savage Orc horde hung back until you were 50% of what you started with. Then said tournament weenies would send them in, wheezing and chortling about their superior tactics. I only played against this once, with my O&G army (Black Orcs! I had Black Orcs! What a doofus eh?) and once was enough for me....



And wouldn't it be nice tohave an updated armybook that not only limits these "weenies" but also grants yourblack orcs a distinctive role?

Waagh Rider
10-05-2016, 23:08
;7627106']Army role


And wouldn't it be nice tohave an updated armybook that not only limits these "weenies" but also grants yourblack orcs a distinctive role?

Yes. But it's called Kings of War 2nd edition....

I appreciate what the 9th Agers are trying to do, I really do. My post on a different thread may have given the wrong impression, I have no hostility toward it at all.
It's just not for me. Too much has been changed and the end result is a game that isn't Warhammer. Take out all the random wackiness that characterized a lot of Warhammer and you have a nice game that i'm sure is enjoyable. But 6th ed WFB, widely agreed to be a very balanced edition, had more wackiness than 9th age! KoW also is balanced and has no random wackiness. So now I have to make a decision between two non-wacky games. One is supported by a company that produces nice glossy books, releases whole armies of miniatures, has other games for me to explore and wants to fill that GW shaped hole in my life. The other....doesnt. But i'm sure it's a great game for those who always wanted Warhammer to be that way, and i'm sure they'll expand it as much as fan made rulesets can be expanded etc.

So good luck with it!

Tokamak
10-05-2016, 23:29
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Balancing by merely dissolving parts on each end of the equation is weak.

That's also why End Time is so amazing. GW wasn't afraid of putting things into overdrive. And it still worked! Amazing.

Drakkar du Chaos
11-05-2016, 10:22
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Balancing by merely dissolving parts on each end of the equation is weak.

That's also why End Time is so amazing. GW wasn't afraid of putting things into overdrive. And it still worked! Amazing.

You cannot be serious.

Lord Dan
11-05-2016, 14:51
You cannot be serious.

Apparently he is.

Skargit Crookfang
11-05-2016, 19:08
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Balancing by merely dissolving parts on each end of the equation is weak.

That's also why End Time is so amazing. GW wasn't afraid of putting things into overdrive. And it still worked! Amazing.

It did?

I guess I can see how some folks would dig the 5000 power dice ET: Khaine games... but they really turned me off. I'm not a fan of the level of extreme randomness/auto-win that magic was in 8th and was even less so in ET. Really like how toned down magic is in 9th...and even then, I use 3 Change Harbs and 2 conclaves of Horrors... so it's not like I'm magic-light.

GrandmasterWang
12-05-2016, 03:16
It did?

I guess I can see how some folks would dig the 5000 power dice ET: Khaine games... but they really turned me off. I'm not a fan of the level of extreme randomness/auto-win that magic was in 8th and was even less so in ET. Really like how toned down magic is in 9th...and even then, I use 3 Change Harbs and 2 conclaves of Horrors... so it's not like I'm magic-light.
The magic change of ET: Khaine was the worst thing about it. I like the new ET units and additions for the most but not the magic.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Ayin
12-05-2016, 17:27
Apparently he is.

There are all types.

Teurastaja
13-05-2016, 12:31
I'm really enjoying 9th Age so far. VC book is great. All units seem to be viable and bloodlines are back. I love it.

8th ed. won't change. Ever. I enjoyed it but it wasn't THAT good. I don't see a point in playing something that won't evolve.

Alltaken
13-05-2016, 18:35
If you take the "unexpected behaviour" from the orcs & goblins they are not different from Lizardmen.

Orcs=Saurus
Goblins=Skinks
Trolls=Kroxigors
Giants/Warmachines=Monsters
Frog fatties being the only different thing.

What do the orcs & goblins have that no other army has?
D6 movement/attacks? Chaos/skavens have it.
Brutality? Beastmen have it.

Orcs & Goblins are the goofy army, that is the difference from others races.


Lotl botl, tiq taq to, ixty bixy and grimlok want a word with you.


Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

the gribbly
14-05-2016, 16:47
I've faced 9th age OnGs a couple times now and I gotta say the army has plenty of character without the built in 'goofy' auto lose. And for the record I am a casual player not a tourney player anymore. Sure I have a few good memorable moments from those type of things like my buddy's giant falling and taking the last wound from my TMA after an epic 5 round combat. But watching your opponents army self destruct out of nowhere was never fun man. Not for either player.

Arduhn
14-05-2016, 22:54
I tried out a game using empire vs my friend who had wood elves.

Overall I liked it. It felt like warhammer, but with all the little bugs fixed. I like that Grand Masters can ride Demigryphs now. I like that witch hunters can get mounts. There are many examples of this kind of thing, where it was clear the 8th Ed book writer just couldn't be bothered to put in obvious things, or left stuff out because there wasn't a model for it.

On the other hand, I don't like the fact that Demigryphs don't have barding, or even the option for barding. The model clearly has barding...I get that maybe they didn't want them to be so good or whatever, but I'd rather just pay more points and have the rules reflect what's actually on the model.

They made the right move with pistoliers in the other direction. They're clearly wearing heavy armour, so they get heavy armour.

That aside, this has inspired me to do some conversion work (need a mounted witch hunter), and painting, which is nice, because I haven't felt that urge much since AoS dropped.

Folomo
15-05-2016, 00:04
Thats the biggest problem I have with T9A. So many interesting options that I have to paint all my army now, not leave 1/2 of it unpainted gathering dust :D

Greyshadow
15-05-2016, 09:07
Sincere congratulations to the 9th Age team. Huge challenge to do something like this and by all accounts people are getting a lot of enjoyment out of it. Will have to give it a go at some stage.

Giladisb
15-05-2016, 13:11
It is great read to read these posts.

Thanks guys :)

Soulsmith
15-05-2016, 13:52
Honestly, I haven't tried 9th age, and to be honest, I have had little interest in playing large games since 6th. For that reason and financial reasons, balanced AoS suits me better. But I am not here to cause a debate, rather just congratulate the 9th age team for doing something really productive and awesome to keep their preferred method of play alive and running. Far better than turning continued mourning for whfb into trolling of people who do enjoy AoS.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

Teurastaja
15-05-2016, 14:38
When we'll see the rules for 9th Age Warbands and Skirmish? :D

Giladisb
15-05-2016, 15:39
When we'll see the rules for 9th Age Warbands and Skirmish? :D

Currently the team will focus on producing introduction rules for beginners, so sometime after that when we switch focus.

Arduhn
17-05-2016, 19:45
Just remembered another thing that came up in the battle I played. The steam tank crew now has a repeater gun instead of a repeater pistol. I don't understand why that change was made...it gives the gun a longer range, but takes away quick to fire, and reduces the crew attacks in combat. Also, can it shoot when the tank moves? I'm not sure how chariots work with moving and shooting for the crew.

theunwantedbeing
17-05-2016, 20:43
Just remembered another thing that came up in the battle I played. The steam tank crew now has a repeater gun instead of a repeater pistol. I don't understand why that change was made...it gives the gun a longer range, but takes away quick to fire, and reduces the crew attacks in combat. Also, can it shoot when the tank moves? I'm not sure how chariots work with moving and shooting for the crew.

Yes it can move and shoot.

They changed it because the temptation to open the hatch and unload a repeating pistol into the enemy at point blank range was getting a lot of tank commanders needlessly killed, something that stopped happening when they swapped it for a repeating gun. This is also why steam tanks are now 0-1.

Teurastaja
17-05-2016, 20:49
http://goo.gl/pB2gqi Sylvan Elves! :D

Arduhn
18-05-2016, 08:15
Yes it can move and shoot.

They changed it because the temptation to open the hatch and unload a repeating pistol into the enemy at point blank range was getting a lot of tank commanders needlessly killed, something that stopped happening when they swapped it for a repeating gun. This is also why steam tanks are now 0-1.

Does it suffer -1 to hit when moving?

I'm guessing you're joking about the tank commander getting killed...I just don't like when the model doesn't match the rules personally. Maybe it doesn't need to always be able to stand and shoot, and 1 extra WS and S 3 attack makes no difference really, but both of those things make so little difference that I can't see a reason to arbitrarily change the commander's weapon. It makes me assume that the person or people who decided on that change did so by accident, like maybe they thought the commander had a repeater handgun. To be fair, his pistol is very large, so I could see why they would make that mistake.

theunwantedbeing
18-05-2016, 10:57
Does it suffer -1 to hit when moving?

Yes there is a -1 to hit when moving and shooting.
You suffer a further -1 to hit (-2 in total before other modifiers) due to the Unwieldy special rule of the Repeater Gun.

Firing the Steam Gun when moving is just the normal -1 to hit modifier.

Arduhn
18-05-2016, 16:58
Oh man, I want to like 9th age. I really do want to like it, but things like this just make me scratch my head.

Like, when the 8th edition empire book came out, and I saw what they did with the mortar, I wanted to take a sharpie and redact any mention of mortars from the book.

So, if the tank moves, the engineer needs 6 to hit with 1 shot, or 7 to hit with 3 shots, and that's before any other modifiers for range, or cover...why? Were those 3 S4 armour piercing shots overpowered if the tank could move and shoot?

That aside, the steam gun is -1 to hit when moving? Do you mean the steam cannon? The steam gun is a template weapon, isn't it?

Anyway, the steam tank lost 3 wounds, 3 strength on the cannon and went from D6 to D3 multiple wounds, the steam gun is now one use only...it did go down 20 points, and it doesn't rely on generating steam points, and it won't just sit there in the opponent's turn, but...I think I just won't bother with it if I play 9th age.

Looks like I'll be shelving the Demigryphs and the steam tank, but at least I can use mortars and pistoliers again.

theunwantedbeing
18-05-2016, 17:41
So, if the tank moves, the engineer needs 6 to hit with 1 shot, or 7 to hit with 3 shots
Not quite.
Bs4 so 3+ to hit to start with, -1 for moving, -1 for Unwieldy and -1 for Multiple shots, so 6+ when firing multiple shots (7+ at long range).


That aside, the steam gun is -1 to hit when moving? Do you mean the steam cannon? The steam gun is a template weapon, isn't it?
Yes the main gun is -1 to hit when you move and shoot.
Bs4 cannon as that now uses ballistic skill (although cannons do ignore cover modifiers and get +1 vs large targets).
It's a little odd that it doesn't get to count as Ordnance to do D3+1(D3+2 vs fliers) wounds.

The "steam gun" is a template weapon, one use only that does 2D6 hits, 6" range if you shoot with it.

Ayin
19-05-2016, 14:27
Anyway, the steam tank lost 3 wounds, 3 strength on the cannon and went from D6 to D3 multiple wounds, the steam gun is now one use only...it did go down 20 points, and it doesn't rely on generating steam points, and it won't just sit there in the opponent's turn, but...I think I just won't bother with it if I play 9th age.

Looks like I'll be shelving the Demigryphs and the steam tank, but at least I can use mortars and pistoliers again.

That's cool. Looks like it's not an auto-include choice in your armies (but it will doubtless show up in a lot of competitive lists in the future), which seems pretty much "mission accomplished".

Arduhn
19-05-2016, 17:28
In the past I took the steam tank really for one reason; it was 250 points that was easy to get painted, and I was going to a tournament. After that I used it because it was already painted.

I think I could accept all the other changes if the commander had a repeater pistol, or even just options for his weapon. I really do think that giving him a repeater handgun instead was just a mistake. Is there any other justification? Is there like a "designers' notes" or something?

Demigryphs are in a similar boat. They have a good points to painting effort ratio. They were also really good though, and I could see why they needed a bit of a nerf. It just bothers me that the best thing the 9th age crew could come up with was to take away their barding.

Now, I know this isn't actually Warhammer, and some people might be using alternative models. I actually have a friend who's doing A Middenheim themed army, and is using wolves instead of Demigryphs. However, I'm using Demigryph models, and they have barding. Why can't it even be an option?

And what about the full size griffon? It can't get the option for barding?

I like that they've added options to other things. Like the witch hunter, pistoliers, greatswords, etc., so why not do the same for Demigryphs, and Griffons, and the steam tank?

How about a steam tank without a steam gun, and just a cannon, like the old-school one. Maybe it would have reduced wounds or something.

I don't mean to knock what the 9th age crew has done. I just think there are a few rough edges that could be smoothed.

Vazalaar
19-05-2016, 17:41
What is your opinion about the +1 attack for Knightly orders?

Arduhn
19-05-2016, 18:11
I like it. I tend to use my knights to fill core points, and this will probably be more necessary now, as I intend to take greatswords and flagellants, so it's unlikely I'll use the special Knights, but it's better than stubborn for a shock unit, I think.

I definitely like the changes to the huntsmen (Rangers), militia (pistol infantry, yes!), and greatswords/guard (reiksguard foot are back).

Arrahed
19-05-2016, 18:20
In the past I took the steam tank really for one reason; it was 250 points that was easy to get painted, and I was going to a tournament. After that I used it because it was already painted.

I think I could accept all the other changes if the commander had a repeater pistol, or even just options for his weapon. I really do think that giving him a repeater handgun instead was just a mistake. Is there any other justification? Is there like a "designers' notes" or something?

Demigryphs are in a similar boat. They have a good points to painting effort ratio. They were also really good though, and I could see why they needed a bit of a nerf. It just bothers me that the best thing the 9th age crew could come up with was to take away their barding.

Now, I know this isn't actually Warhammer, and some people might be using alternative models. I actually have a friend who's doing A Middenheim themed army, and is using wolves instead of Demigryphs. However, I'm using Demigryph models, and they have barding. Why can't it even be an option?

And what about the full size griffon? It can't get the option for barding?

I like that they've added options to other things. Like the witch hunter, pistoliers, greatswords, etc., so why not do the same for Demigryphs, and Griffons, and the steam tank?

How about a steam tank without a steam gun, and just a cannon, like the old-school one. Maybe it would have reduced wounds or something.

I don't mean to knock what the 9th age crew has done. I just think there are a few rough edges that could be smoothed.
I think there were designer notes for most army books. I am not 100% there was one for the Empire. Especially for that specific change. I believe it was from 0.99.0 to 0.99.4 but I might be mistaken. Could be 0.11.xx to 0.99.0 as well.

Arduhn
19-05-2016, 18:53
I just started paying attention to the 9th age stuff recently (I was sort of on a break from wargaming after AoS dropped), so I'm not sure where to find those different versions. Maybe I'll start looking into it. I wouldn't mind getting involved in the project actually. I'm not much of an artist, and I'm more of a casual gamer than a competitive one, but I'm a halfway decent writer. Maybe I could write some fluff.

Vazalaar
19-05-2016, 19:22
I like it. I tend to use my knights to fill core points, and this will probably be more necessary now, as I intend to take greatswords and flagellants, so it's unlikely I'll use the special Knights, but it's better than stubborn for a shock unit, I think.

I definitely like the changes to the huntsmen (Rangers), militia (pistol infantry, yes!), and greatswords/guard (reiksguard foot are back).

Hmm, as an Empire player I would prefer that it stayed at one attack. It makes no sense that they are better than Imperial Cavalry or have more attacks than all KoE knights, except Grail Knights. It also breaks the immersion that a knight from the order of the sun has the exact same stats, except -1 attack in comparison with a knight of order x mounted on a horse.. and this for the sole reason that two attacks would be OTT for a knight on a Demigryph.

I really wonder what the reason was for the extra attack for knightly orders.. .

My favorite EoS unit are the Reiters.

Arduhn
19-05-2016, 19:29
Yeah, fair enough, I see your point. Like I said, I never use those special knights (reiksguard/Knightly Orders). I guess it's a bit lazy. They could do something better, like a special rule, or something like that. Or just not have that choice full stop. Instead they could do old Knightly Orders with different orders having different special rules. Then they could have the S4 knights (inner circle) move to special, but with one unit as core if the general is a grand master. I dunno, just brainstorming.

Ayin
19-05-2016, 22:08
Demigryphs are in a similar boat. They have a good points to painting effort ratio. They were also really good though, and I could see why they needed a bit of a nerf. It just bothers me that the best thing the 9th age crew could come up with was to take away their barding.

If you investigate into similar units across armies in 9th, you'll see that all MC are capped at a 2+ (and some have an optional 3+), which helps differentiate them from 1+ armour save cavalry in the same list (one has resilience of wounds, the other of armour) and goes some way to giving them different strengths and weaknesses, which allows them to fulfill different roles. The problem with MC in 8th wasn't just that they were stupid-include, it was that they filled the exact role of Heavy Cavalry.

Ayin
19-05-2016, 22:10
I like it. I tend to use my knights to fill core points, and this will probably be more necessary now, as I intend to take greatswords and flagellants, so it's unlikely I'll use the special Knights, but it's better than stubborn for a shock unit, I think.

I definitely like the changes to the huntsmen (Rangers), militia (pistol infantry, yes!), and greatswords/guard (reiksguard foot are back).

It really does give Knight armies a good unit in Special. Stubborn Knights were a gimmicky choice (and part of the design goal of 9th has clearly been to significantly reduce the number of plain-Stubborn units) in 8th, but actually improved shock cav could have a place in those lists.

And huzzah militia with pistols! The Dogs of War Duelists rise again!

Ayin
19-05-2016, 22:12
I really wonder what the reason was for the extra attack for knightly orders.. .

My favorite EoS unit are the Reiters.

To make them anywhere near a useful choice.

And Reiters are indeed awesome. Finally those 20 Pistolier models can see some play and not be a terrible choice, and my DoW Light Cav can hit the table without their spears counting as Pistols.

Folomo
19-05-2016, 22:53
It really does give Knight armies a good unit in Special. Stubborn Knights were a gimmicky choice (and part of the design goal of 9th has clearly been to significantly reduce the number of plain-Stubborn units) in 8th, but actually improved shock cav could have a place in those lists.

And huzzah militia with pistols! The Dogs of War Duelists rise again!

Not called Dogs of war anymore, but I am not sure their current name can be revealed yet.

theunwantedbeing
19-05-2016, 23:23
I really wonder what the reason was for the extra attack for knightly orders.. .

To make them better because they're not noticeably more useful than the core knights.

Huntsmen for a ballistic skill boost and free multiple shots(2) for no real reason.
Pistoliers and Outriders both got a price drop, Bs boost for the pistoliers and a freebie uber first turn go first damage effect for no real reason, plus they get 2 attacks now you can gain the extra hand weapon bonus while mounted.
Greatswords got a massive buff and a huge price drop for no real reason.
And so on....

They'll claim it was to make units usable again but mostly it's just to buff their stuff now they have an opportunity.

Ayin
19-05-2016, 23:37
Not called Dogs of war anymore, but I am not sure their current name can be revealed yet.

Even though I recently traded Dan the last of my true Regiments of Renown models in the form of Ricco's Republican Guard I'm waiting excitedly. I'm pretty sure I'm going to run my Japanese based army on EoS and am likely going to trade or sell the rest of my Empire (a lot converted into DoW styled units), but Dogs of War have a special place in my heart, being a favourite of mine in 6th and playing them through both 7th and 8th.

Arduhn
20-05-2016, 00:12
So now there are 3 cav units with a 1+ save for empire, and they all fill the same role. Why is it only the monstrous cav that can't have a 1+ save anymore? They already had a different role from Knights. They cause fear and continue to do damage after the first round, but don't have any static combat res when compared to a big knight unit with lances.

Now we have three units that have the exact same equipment. Is there a huge difference role-wise between Elector Cavalry (terrible name btw, why not use a generic name like the infantry?), Imperial Cavalry, and Knightly Orders? Each one hits a bit harder than the last, but otherwise they're very samey.

I guess if I want to use Demigryphs I'll have to cut off their barding and sculpt them to be naked? There's no room to budge on that rule or what?

Ayin
20-05-2016, 03:40
I'm going to take your post in sections.


So now there are 3 cav units with a 1+ save for empire, and they all fill the same role.

No.

There are two units of cav with a 1+ save in the Empire army, and they fill significantly different roles.

One unit is the Electoral Cavalry (which, if your army contains a specific Lord choice, can be upgraded to have +1S), which fills the role of being a Core mounted unit. That's actually a significantly different role than that of the Knightly Orders.



Why is it only the monstrous cav that can't have a 1+ save anymore?

Design decision. Most MC, especially Demis, were default choices in 8th because of just how much better they were than nearly anything else in the list for their points. That change of 1 point of armour significantly effects them (thus the knee-jerk compaining from nearly every army with them that goes away after some time on the table).



They already had a different role from Knights. They cause fear and continue to do damage after the first round, but don't have any static combat res when compared to a big knight unit with lances.

That's not a different role. They do greater damage than Knights on the first round, and CONTINUE to do more damage in the later rounds, while also causing Fear, being more resilient, losing fewer attacks/wound, ect. That's just doing the same job better. Also, Knights static CR was basically useless with the exception of being able to break Steadfast on units that only had two ranks left as long as the Knights still had 10 models. There was no comparison in 8th, the only thing that gave Knights time on the table was Core points, and the ability to hide characters.



Now we have three units that have the exact same equipment. Is there a huge difference role-wise between Elector Cavalry (terrible name btw, why not use a generic name like the infantry?), Imperial Cavalry, and Knightly Orders? Each one hits a bit harder than the last, but otherwise they're very samey.

Yes, there is a huge difference.

One is a 1 attack, WS3, I3, S3 unit (which can be upgraded to S4 if a specific Lord is included) which is Core, and one is a 2 attack, WS4, I4, S4 unit (which will be Stubborn if joined by that character, or the general) which is Special.



I guess if I want to use Demigryphs I'll have to cut off their barding and sculpt them to be naked? There's no room to budge on that rule or what?

You can do whatever you want. You can have the Knights carrying the chickens for all it matters (I'd support you on that). Or you can accept that rules are mechanical representations of unit concepts, and that Demi's are considered to be more resilient than Knights, which is not wholly dependent on the mechanic of armour savings throws and instead is the result of an interaction between various unit stats and game mechanics.

Arduhn
20-05-2016, 04:15
So the 3 different horse cav choices (it's 3, come on, they even have different names) are significantly different in role, but a monstrous cav unit was not different in role because it also had barding? Make up your mind...

Saying "design decision" is a cop-out. Yeah, lots of people took demis in 8th. Yeah, they were a great choice, almost auto include. However, I still saw a lot of people taking Knights as well. Because they had different roles. (Never once saw reiksguard though) As you said, one was a core cav unit, the other was a more powerful special choice.

Furthermore, even with barding you won't see as many Demigryphs in 9th age. Why? They're rare now, so they compete with the stank, and the carts, and are more limited by game size.

Core Knights were good for filling core points, and bunkering characters. Demigryphs were good because they caused/were immune to fear, couldn't be stomped, and could continue to do damage after the initial charge.

Just for argument's sake, let's say you took the Demigryph Knights straight out of the 8th edition book and popped them into rare, with no changes, in the current book.

The cost of 3 demis with full command is about the same as 10 Elector Cavalry with lances and command. Are they significantly different units? The main rulebook changes make them even more different than Knights and demis were in 8th. Now those 10 elector cav can hit a flank, and cancel ranks and steadfast. Even without doing any damage, that could easily be enough to break a unit. The Demigryphs can't do that, but they could charge in against a unit of ogres and grind them down over a few turns; any lance/horse cav would be hard pressed to do that.

Vazalaar
20-05-2016, 07:43
To make them anywhere near a useful choice.

And Reiters are indeed awesome. Finally those 20 Pistolier models can see some play and not be a terrible choice, and my DoW Light Cav can hit the table without their spears counting as Pistols.

ok, so Knightly orders get +1 attack so they can be a useful choice? By doing so, EoS knightly orders are one of the few mounted units where the rider has two base attacks! It seems wrong from a fluff/immersion view that an EoS knight has two base attacks... . I.e Knights of Ryma (Dragon Princes) also a Special choice, losed their two base attacks and have now only 1 attack... . Ok, for 5 points per model extra they can get Devasting Charge.. .

I see no reason why a human, non character model should have two base attacks... . I mean an army that is about knights "Kingdom of Equitaine" the only knights that have two base attacks are the Knights of the Grail.. which are basically boosted humans.. and are a rare choice.. .

There is zero reason to give a regular human knight two base attacks and when the same knight is mounted on a demigryph his extra attack magically vanishes.. .

To make them better because they're not noticeably more useful than the core knights.

Huntsmen for a ballistic skill boost and free multiple shots(2) for no real reason.
Pistoliers and Outriders both got a price drop, Bs boost for the pistoliers and a freebie uber first turn go first damage effect for no real reason, plus they get 2 attacks now you can gain the extra hand weapon bonus while mounted.
Greatswords got a massive buff and a huge price drop for no real reason.
And so on....

They'll claim it was to make units usable again but mostly it's just to buff their stuff now they have an opportunity.

My two 8th Edition armies are Empire and WoC and when I am looking at the EoS armylist I can only conclude that one or more members of the rules comite plays EoS. It's insane what the army received compared with other armylists.

Arrahed
20-05-2016, 08:55
I just started paying attention to the 9th age stuff recently (I was sort of on a break from wargaming after AoS dropped), so I'm not sure where to find those different versions. Maybe I'll start looking into it. I wouldn't mind getting involved in the project actually. I'm not much of an artist, and I'm more of a casual gamer than a competitive one, but I'm a halfway decent writer. Maybe I could write some fluff.

The only thing I could dig out was this:
http://www.the-ninth-age.com/blog/index.php?entry/237-sneak-peak-at-upcoming-changes-to-empire-of-sonnstahl-army-book/
Not very satisfying, I know.
There is probably a very detailed explanation in the Forums somewhere but the Threat discussion the nerfs to the Steam Tank is so long that its a miracle their servers don't crash. I don't really want to read through all of that. :)

Arduhn
20-05-2016, 09:45
I actually registered for the forums and found a thread for asking questions. I asked about a few things.

http://www.the-ninth-age.com/index.php?thread/8628-f-a-q-empire-of-sonnstahl/&pageNo=3

(Apparently you have to register to even see that thread...)

The response about the steam tank commander was essentially "his weapon didn't change, it's always been a repeater handgun, right?" :p
So I'm guessing that will be changed back to repeater pistol. If that's fixed (it seems obvious it was just an error), I think I can live with the rest of the steam tank changes. It may see use from time to time, but won't be auto-include, which is actually good.

It also looks like there might be wiggle room on the barding for Demigryphs. I suggested they keep them M7 base, so they'd lose swiftstride if they take barding. This would make the barding option more of a dilemma.

Axel
21-05-2016, 16:34
No pikes?

A missed opportunity...

Folomo
21-05-2016, 16:50
Those are for another army (in process) :)

Lord Dan
21-05-2016, 17:57
No pikes?

A missed opportunity...
As has been mentioned, they'll be coming in another army book that is rather near and dear to my heart.

Axel
21-05-2016, 19:43
I wish the pikes would be an option for the "imperial" troops, too, not just the mercenaries. On the other hand - who cares what label the rules put on my army :-)
Awaiting the pikes...

Lord Dan
21-05-2016, 21:31
I wish the pikes would be an option for the "imperial" troops, too, not just the mercenaries. On the other hand - who cares what label the rules put on my army :-)
Awaiting the pikes...
Well, if they'd done that there'd be even less reason to make a standalone mercenary army. As it stands the Empire of Sonnstahl list can proxy just about everything from the DoW list other than Ogres and Giants, and with the new rules for spears (AP1, lethal strike against cavalry) you basically already have pikes that fight in one less rank.

Arduhn
21-05-2016, 21:41
I'm super excited for Mercenaries. I have several of the old regiments of renown that I'd love to field. I also have some ogres and giants... And halflings. I hope they'll be in there.

Lord Dan
21-05-2016, 21:48
I'm super excited for Mercenaries. I have several of the old regiments of renown that I'd love to field. I also have some ogres and giants... And halflings. I hope they'll be in there.
I'm confident they'll be in there.

I can say that the secret working name they've selected for faction is absolutely awesome, so it bodes well for the book's creative direction.

AverageBoss
21-05-2016, 22:30
I can field most of my armies with 9th age. However they moved too much stuff around with my VCs, so can't really play with those. That makes me a bit sad tbh.

Axel
22-05-2016, 10:23
As it stands the Empire of Sonnstahl list can proxy just about everything from the DoW list other than Ogres and Giants, and with the new rules for spears (AP1, lethal strike against cavalry) you basically already have pikes that fight in one less rank.

I want my pikes to resemble the ***** in the late 15th and early 16th century - the era that the original GW Empire based upon. Where all heavy battle infantry was swapped to pikes with a sprinkling of helbards and greatswords and fought in massed ranks - rarely did real battles look more like the GW tabletop battles.

That said, I would have loved to see pikes (which were described as used in several BL books for the Empire) to show up with the Sonnstahl armies - but as long as I can create my mixture of artillery, Gensdarmes and pikes with some Stradiots and arquebus to fight other fantasy armies I am happy. I might even game WFB (9th age) again :-)

Lord Dan
22-05-2016, 19:00
I can field most of my armies with 9th age. However they moved too much stuff around with my VCs, so can't really play with those. That makes me a bit sad tbh.

How so?

They brought back 6th edition bloodlines, made BSB's actually worth taking, changed crumble so that it's better with steadfast, made raising troops more streamlined, made the choice between skeletons/ghouls/zombies an actual difficult one, beefed up the monsters (S6 Vargulfs with D3 stomps...ugggghhh), gave characters like necromancers and wight kings a distinct role, and introduced some really terrifying bloodline powers.

I played against two vastly different VC lists last week and me and my opponent had an absolute blast.

Folomo
22-05-2016, 19:52
T9A did limit the vampire blender-lord(s) build that every net-list was using, so that is something that changed a lot.

Lord Dan
22-05-2016, 20:15
T9A did limit the vampire blender-lord(s) build that every net-list was using, so that is something that changed a lot.
Well, of course they did. They toned down Terrorgheists, too. But then they also took out unkillable Nurgle Daemon Lords and the Banner of the World Dragon, things which no one could honestly say were good for the game.

So yeah, they may have taken out some broken stuff, but I'd argue that between the overall balance for the meta and the many additions they've made to the VC book itself (hey, look, Zombies aren't inexplicably the worst tarpit in the game anymore!) the army ends up being a lot better off and a whole lot more fun to play.

AverageBoss
23-05-2016, 03:16
The list I ran was:

LORD
Nothing actually...

HERO
2x Necromancers
1x Wight King

CORE
30x Skeletons
40x Ghouls
5x Wolves

SPECIAL
1x Spirit Host
5x Hex Wraiths
6x Vargheists
2x Morghasts
10x Black Knights

RARE
1x Terrorgheist
1x Mortis Engine

Now all forms of Wraith and both Morghasts are Rare choices, meaning my Rare section is very overloaded.

But as I said its the only one of my 4 armies that did not remain intact. However it was my favorite of the 4.

Lord Dan
23-05-2016, 03:31
You'll find that rarely will builds that worked well in 8th edition port over and play the same in The 9th Age, anyway.

Are you limited in options by the models you own?

AverageBoss
23-05-2016, 04:21
That is exactly the case. Besides 5 more wolves, 5 custom Blood Knights (dragon princes with heads from different vampires), and an Arkham model I picked up just to have one, those are all the models I own.

My Dark Elves, Ogres, and Warriors all transferred over quite well though. My Dark Elf list is actually 100% the same model wise between the two games.

Yowzo
23-05-2016, 08:22
That said, I would have loved to see pikes (which were described as used in several BL books for the Empire) to show up with the Sonnstahl armies - but as long as I can create my mixture of artillery, Gensdarmes and pikes with some Stradiots and arquebus to fight other fantasy armies I am happy. I might even game WFB (9th age) again :-)

I think I read somewhere that pikes were kept away from Empire for the DoW army which will appear sometime in the future.

jirgaS
25-05-2016, 15:00
Empire had pikes as an option for imperial guard units in earlier draft but sadly those were removed. Reasoning is that they are reserved for the DOW army. I can live with that but would like to see pikes in all human armies actually. But that's minor grief. I love the system and every game that I've lost so far has been caused due to my bad decisions during the game.

Asmodios
25-05-2016, 16:39
Empire had pikes as an option for imperial guard units in earlier draft but sadly those were removed. Reasoning is that they are reserved for the DOW army. I can live with that but would like to see pikes in all human armies actually. But that's minor grief. I love the system and every game that I've lost so far has been caused due to my bad decisions during the game.
How close were the games you played? Every game i have played or watched has been a minor victory or a draw. Not sure if its just my group or if people are finding this to be the common outcome. But so far all of our 9th age games are coming down to a scrap for points turn 5 and 6 and i couldn't be happier with the balance.

Lord Dan
25-05-2016, 19:52
How close were the games you played? Every game i have played or watched has been a minor victory or a draw. Not sure if its just my group or if people are finding this to be the common outcome. But so far all of our 9th age games are coming down to a scrap for points turn 5 and 6 and i couldn't be happier with the balance.

We're finding the same thing.

Arduhn
25-05-2016, 20:47
I've only played one game so far. It was close until the last turn when some units broke, etc. The end result was a solid loss for me, but it could have gone any which way until the end.

Asmodios
25-05-2016, 20:52
Glad to see its not just my gaming group. To me there isn't anything more fun then a game going to the last turn without a defined winner. Put this balance together with the variety of different lists I'm seeing and 9th age is offering the most enjoyable warhammer experience i have ever had.

Vazalaar
26-05-2016, 19:11
I wonder what GW thinks about 9th Age. If you like the rules or not, you can't deny that it is a succes story... My hope is that they atleast try to bring back the old world through Forgeworld/Specialist games with the occasional resin mini.

Kyriakin
26-05-2016, 19:27
I wonder what GW thinks about 9th Age. If you like the rules or not, you can't deny that it is a succes story... My hope is that they atleast try to bring back the old world through Forgeworld/Specialist games with the occasional resin mini.
I think the best way to bring back the Old World is through Warmaster at ForgeWorld.

Full-size WHFB would be too "big" a commitment to bring back fully, and might lead to a watered-down range.

Vazalaar
26-05-2016, 20:46
I think the best way to bring back the Old World is through Warmaster at ForgeWorld.

Full-size WHFB would be too "big" a commitment to bring back fully, and might lead to a watered-down range.

Hmm, I spend more time painting, than playing so for me anything smaller than 28mm isn't very interesting. The smallest what I would go is 20mm - 1/72, but I assume that scale is to big for warmaster.. .

I hope that when Specialist games does Mordheim, that it will be situated in the old world, so we atleast can use those miniatures for 8th edition / 9th age.

Axel
26-05-2016, 22:35
Empire had pikes as an option for imperial guard units in earlier draft but sadly those were removed. Reasoning is that they are reserved for the DOW army.

Thats dissapointing, as it also makes no real sense. The Empire is shaped after the very model of pike-wielding units. I just hope I can build a typical Empire army using DOW, or I just have to introduce pikes into the Empire with my local gaming group. The Landsknecht style simply looks wrong when they run around with spears... and pikes should not be the defining element of DOW, but rather the kit-like combination of very specific and different mercenary units upon a core of humans.

But I have to introduce house-rules anyway, if only to include the Halfing rooster cavalry (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/584137481/tag-28mm-halfling-militia-rooster-rider-miniatures). And of course Imperial Dwarfs...

Vazalaar
26-05-2016, 22:42
Thats dissapointing, as it also makes no real sense. The Empire is shaped after the very model of pike-wielding units. I just hope I can build a typical Empire army using DOW, or I just have to introduce pikes into the Empire with my local gaming group. The Landsknecht style simply looks wrong when they run around with spears... and pikes should not be the defining element of DOW, but rather the kit-like combination of very specific and different mercenary units upon a core of humans.

But I have to introduce house-rules anyway, if only to include the Halfing rooster cavalry (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/584137481/tag-28mm-halfling-militia-rooster-rider-miniatures). And of course Imperial Dwarfs...

I agree. I hope that 9th Age will base the DoW army on this fantastic DoW armylist (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_DcPz0zAHPjYzFEenBOY1hRVWM/view?pref=2&pli=1) done by Furion for 8th edition... . It's very clever designed.
(download it, if you have problems viewing it.)

Yowzo
27-05-2016, 08:49
I agree. I hope that 9th Age will base the DoW army on this fantastic DoW armylist (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_DcPz0zAHPjYzFEenBOY1hRVWM/view?pref=2&pli=1) done by Furion for 8th edition... . It's very clever designed.
(download it, if you have problems viewing it.)

Furion offered himself to write the book so I wouldn't be surprised it ends up being very similar.

Axel
27-05-2016, 10:11
Furion offered himself to write the book so I wouldn't be surprised it ends up being very similar.

Sounds good to me. Perhaps - if it includes Halflings and Dwarfs and Ogres in mercenary garb - I may have to leave the service of the Empire and let my folks fight for those with the best offer...

Folomo
27-05-2016, 14:31
Sounds good to me. Perhaps - if it includes Halflings and Dwarfs and Ogres in mercenary garb - I may have to leave the service of the Empire and let my folks fight for those with the best offer...

Thats the spirit of a good mercenary XD

vaneheart
28-05-2016, 09:30
The ninth age seems pretty fun so far. A lot more toned down to a degree. I was a little sad that there aren't any options for chaos ogres/"wasteland ogres" in the Warriors of the Dark Gods list, but I'll live. I'm trying to convince more people in my area to give it a shot. My friend who plays Beastmen was a little underwhelmed by the Beast Herds list, but I don't think he'll be happy until he can take dragon ogres, trolls, ogres and the like again (like in the Hordes of Chaos/Beasts of Chaos days). :-P

To be fair, that's not really Ninth Age's fault. :-)

Marshal_Loss
01-06-2016, 04:27
Played a game and really enjoyed it.

Forgive me for not knowing, but what are Once-Chosen representing? Those infantry from the End Times on the larger bases, except actually MI?

Yowzo
01-06-2016, 15:00
Played a game and really enjoyed it.

Forgive me for not knowing, but what are Once-Chosen representing? Those infantry from the End Times on the larger bases, except actually MI?

Since there are no official models anything chaos-y and infantre-y that goes in a 40mm does the trick.

But sure the designers were probably thinking of blightkings and the khorne ET things.

The profile also works for chaos ogres if you have them.

Vazalaar
01-06-2016, 18:02
Yes, it represents in one way the ET models (Blightkings, skullreapers, wrathmongers). Personnaly I would have preferred the ET profiles, but with another name / point change.

Now it feels bland in comparison with the Blightkings profile and Wrathmongers profile. I also don't think the change to monstrous infantry was needed.. .

Anyway, for me as a Chaos player, the whole WDG armylist feels bland and doesn't reflect the fickle nature of Chaos at all. I prefer 8th edition + ET units. AFAIK the 9th Age WDG team admitted that their armybook is rather bland / immersionless so hopefully it will have a nice update after september.